In looking at who's likely to fill their bowls, who isn't, and who's likely to be looking for at-large spots, my numbers show that

1. The Big 12 isn't going to fill its spot in the Cactus Bowl vs the PAC
2. The PAC is likely to have a team looking for an at-large
3. The MWC, who is listed as the backup for the Cactus, doesn't have an extra team.

In this brave new world of wheeling-and-dealing for bowl spots (the AAC trading its spot in the Bahamas to CUSA so they can slide BYU into Miami Beach) I wonder if the MWC trades its Hawaii Bowl spot to the PAC, so they can free up a team to go to the Cactus Bowl.

The Hawaii Bowl is less attractive to the MWC this year with Hawaii not bowl-eligible. MWC teams go to Hawaii plenty, so it's not as attractive a trip as it might be for a PAC team.

For the PAC, they get a better opponent (Boise State or Colorado STate) in the Cactus Bowl than they'd otherwise get, and the last bowl-eligible PAC team is going to Hawaii instead of the ARmed Forces or Heart of Dallas Bowls.

Am I missing something?

Quite possible. I've read that ESPN sometimes brokers these kind of swaps.

(11-17-2014 06:53 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  In looking at who's likely to fill their bowls, who isn't, and who's likely to be looking for at-large spots, my numbers show that

1. The Big 12 isn't going to fill its spot in the Cactus Bowl vs the PAC
2. The PAC is likely to have a team looking for an at-large
3. The MWC, who is listed as the backup for the Cactus, doesn't have an extra team.

In this brave new world of wheeling-and-dealing for bowl spots (the AAC trading its spot in the Bahamas to CUSA so they can slide BYU into Miami Beach) I wonder if the MWC trades its Hawaii Bowl spot to the PAC, so they can free up a team to go to the Cactus Bowl.

The Hawaii Bowl is less attractive to the MWC this year with Hawaii not bowl-eligible. MWC teams go to Hawaii plenty, so it's not as attractive a trip as it might be for a PAC team.

For the PAC, they get a better opponent (Boise State or Colorado STate) in the Cactus Bowl than they'd otherwise get, and the last bowl-eligible PAC team is going to Hawaii instead of the Armed Forces or Heart of Dallas Bowls.

Am I missing something?

Isn't it possible that the MWC will have a team available to fill a backup spot? They have, I believe, six primary tie-ins and have five teams already eligible (AFA, CSU, Boise, Utah St and Nevada). San Diego St needs one more win and Wyoming and Fresno need two more.

(11-17-2014 07:55 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 06:53 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  In looking at who's likely to fill their bowls, who isn't, and who's likely to be looking for at-large spots, my numbers show that

1. The Big 12 isn't going to fill its spot in the Cactus Bowl vs the PAC
2. The PAC is likely to have a team looking for an at-large
3. The MWC, who is listed as the backup for the Cactus, doesn't have an extra team.

In this brave new world of wheeling-and-dealing for bowl spots (the AAC trading its spot in the Bahamas to CUSA so they can slide BYU into Miami Beach) I wonder if the MWC trades its Hawaii Bowl spot to the PAC, so they can free up a team to go to the Cactus Bowl.

The Hawaii Bowl is less attractive to the MWC this year with Hawaii not bowl-eligible. MWC teams go to Hawaii plenty, so it's not as attractive a trip as it might be for a PAC team.

For the PAC, they get a better opponent (Boise State or Colorado STate) in the Cactus Bowl than they'd otherwise get, and the last bowl-eligible PAC team is going to Hawaii instead of the Armed Forces or Heart of Dallas Bowls.

Am I missing something?

Isn't it possible that the MWC will have a team available to fill a backup spot? They have, I believe, six primary tie-ins and have five teams already eligible (AFA, CSU, Boise, Utah St and Nevada). San Diego St needs one more win and Wyoming and Fresno need two more.

IT's possible, but pretty unlikely that Wyoming or Fresno get to 6 wins.

Wyoming would have to beat Boise STate(8-2) and New Mexico(3-7), Fresno State would have to beat Nevada (6-4) and Hawaii(3-8).

My understanding is that the cactus bowl is going to pick an aac team to play against the pac12 team, also why would they give up the armed forces bowl against a competitive aac team in order to send a team to a less prestigious Hawaii bowl?

(11-17-2014 08:19 PM)tigersmoke1 Wrote:  My understanding is that the cactus bowl is going to pick an aac team to play against the pac12 team, also why would they give up the armed forces bowl against a competitive aac team in order to send a team to a less prestigious Hawaii bowl?

As far as I can tell, the Mountain West is the primary backup to the Cactus Bowl (formerly Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl) https://www.fiestabowl.org/media-room/ne...ership.php

I'm not sure where you get the information that they're picking an AAC team. (Although if my bowl numbers are right, and they don't make a deal like the one I'm suggesting/predicting, the MWC won't be able to fill the Cactus Bowl, and they might well pick an at-large AAC team over a Sun Belt or MAC team.)

The PAC wouldn't be "giving up" the Armed Forces Bowl, exactly--they don't have a contract with the AFB. But a PAC team would be the most attractive at-large by far, and so would have their pick of the Heart of Dallas or Armed Forces Bowls, the bowls besides the Cactus likely to be scrambling to fill spots.

As for "a competitive AAC team", I tend to think that the PAC would see the quality of opponent as pretty much a wash--Houston in the Armed Forces Bowl, Rice in the HEart of Dallas Bowl, UAB in Hawaii. They're all nondescript G5 teams, and whether they're 6-6 or 8-4 doesn't matter too much, it's still embarrassing if you lose to them and finish 6-7.

Oh, and there's no way that the Hawaii Bowl is less prestigious than the Armed Forces Bowl.

I was under the impression the PAC was not a big fan of the Hawaii bowl. Couldnt they have had that tie in already if they wanted it?

(11-17-2014 08:54 PM)solohawks Wrote:  I was under the impression the PAC was not a big fan of the Hawaii bowl. Couldnt they have had that tie in already if they wanted it?

Sure. But it's a choice between
the Cactus Bowl vs Colorado State and the Hawaii Bowl vs UAB and
the Cactus Bowl vs Toledo and the Armed Forces Bowl vs Houston.

I think that the Hawaii trip would be a plus. But I could be wrong.

Really? You really think that there is anyway in hades that a 3+ million$ bowl is going to pick a mac team over say ecu or cincy or memphis or even ucf? As of right now the mwc doesn't have any extra teams to cover the backup spot. Am I missing something or are you just kinda wishful thinking?

(11-17-2014 09:14 PM)tigersmoke1 Wrote:  Really? You really think that there is anyway in hades that a 3+ million$ bowl is going to pick a mac team over say ecu or cincy or memphis or even ucf? As of right now the mwc doesn't have any extra teams to cover the backup spot. Am I missing something or are you just kinda wishful thinking?

True, the AAC looks like it will have an at-large available. So make that

Quote:the Cactus Bowl vs Colorado State and the Hawaii Bowl vs UAB and
the Cactus Bowl vs Temple and the Armed Forces Bowl vs Houston.

The MW will fulfilled the Cactus Bowl if available. The MW #2 team will take the spot left by the PAC-12 or Big 12. If there is any bowl the MW won't fulfill it'll be the lower one like the Potato Bowl.

If the MW goes to the Access Bowl the MW will be short 1 team currently. After the Access Bowl, the Cactus bowl will get the #2 MW team if either the PAC or Big 12 doesn't fulfill. After that, the Vegas bowl gets first pick and then the others are fulfilled by matchups.

The MW has 8 bowls signed on, but only 6 at a time.
This year: Vegas, Poinsettia, New Mexico, New Orleans, Hawaii and Potato.

Pac doesn't seem to mind the Hawaii, Oregon State played there last year.

(11-17-2014 09:26 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  The MW will fulfilled the Cactus Bowl if available. The MW #2 team will take the spot left by the PAC-12 or Big 12. If there is any bowl the MW won't fulfill it'll be the lower one like the Potato Bowl.

Oh, if the MWC contracts are set up that Cactus has priority over the Potato or New Mexico Bowl, then you don't need to wheel and deal.

(11-17-2014 09:31 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 09:26 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  The MW will fulfilled the Cactus Bowl if available. The MW #2 team will take the spot left by the PAC-12 or Big 12. If there is any bowl the MW won't fulfill it'll be the lower one like the Potato Bowl.

Oh, if the MWC contracts are set up that Cactus has priority over the Potato or New Mexico Bowl, then you don't need to wheel and deal.

Yep. The MW is the primary backup and the MW will fulfill the bowl before any other bowl.
This new era is a bit confusing with multiple bowl arrangements and the rotation for a few of these conferences.

(11-17-2014 09:35 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 09:31 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 09:26 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  The MW will fulfilled the Cactus Bowl if available. The MW #2 team will take the spot left by the PAC-12 or Big 12. If there is any bowl the MW won't fulfill it'll be the lower one like the Potato Bowl.

Oh, if the MWC contracts are set up that Cactus has priority over the Potato or New Mexico Bowl, then you don't need to wheel and deal.

Yep. The MW is the primary backup and the MW will fulfill the bowl before any other bowl.
This new era is a bit confusing with multiple bowl arrangements and the rotation for a few of these conferences.

It's also a new wrinkle for lower-FBS conferences having backup contracts that take priority over their primary contracts with lesser bowls.

Don't see how you can cover a backup spot until you have covered your primaries. There is a reason most media outlets are predicting an aac school in that bowl. I think the mwc has to figure out how to get another team eligible. Primary contracts do mean something just as backup contracts mean something. The potato bowl will enforce their contract with the mwc just as the mwc would enforce it's backup contract if a 6th team becomes eligible.

(11-17-2014 08:35 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  

(11-17-2014 08:19 PM)tigersmoke1 Wrote:  My understanding is that the cactus bowl is going to pick an aac team to play against the pac12 team, also why would they give up the armed forces bowl against a competitive aac team in order to send a team to a less prestigious Hawaii bowl?

As far as I can tell, the Mountain West is the primary backup to the Cactus Bowl (formerly Buffalo Wild Wings Bowl) https://www.fiestabowl.org/media-room/ne...ership.php

I'm not sure where you get the information that they're picking an AAC team. (Although if my bowl numbers are right, and they don't make a deal like the one I'm suggesting/predicting, the MWC won't be able to fill the Cactus Bowl, and they might well pick an at-large AAC team over a Sun Belt or MAC team.)

The PAC wouldn't be "giving up" the Armed Forces Bowl, exactly--they don't have a contract with the AFB. But a PAC team would be the most attractive at-large by far, and so would have their pick of the Heart of Dallas or Armed Forces Bowls, the bowls besides the Cactus likely to be scrambling to fill spots.

As for "a competitive AAC team", I tend to think that the PAC would see the quality of opponent as pretty much a wash--Houston in the Armed Forces Bowl, Rice in the HEart of Dallas Bowl, UAB in Hawaii. They're all nondescript G5 teams, and whether they're 6-6 or 8-4 doesn't matter too much, it's still embarrassing if you lose to them and finish 6-7.

Oh, and there's no way that the Hawaii Bowl is less prestigious than the Armed Forces Bowl.

The Hawaii Bowl is one of the least prestigious bowls out there. It exist primarily to give Hawaii a place to go when they are bowl eligible. The Ft Worth bowl has ties to the Big12 and Big10. Granted, niether is the Rose Bowl, but there is a difference.

(11-17-2014 09:14 PM)tigersmoke1 Wrote:  Really? You really think that there is anyway in hades that a 3+ million$ bowl is going to pick a mac team over say ecu or cincy or memphis or even ucf? As of right now the mwc doesn't have any extra teams to cover the backup spot. Am I missing something or are you just kinda wishful thinking?

Actually the #1 and #2 picks from the AAC are not tied to any bowl. The AAC has 5 ties and will likely have 6 bowl teams. They can send thier #1 pick to the Caxtus bowl (as that bowl is probably better than any other bowl on the AAC list). So the Pac12 could get ECU, UCF, or maybe Cinci as options.

(11-17-2014 09:48 PM)tigersmoke1 Wrote:  Don't see how you can cover a backup spot until you have covered your primaries.

You can if you write the contracts that way. Just like the CFB bowls take priority, if you write the contracts that way, your best or second-best team can go to the Cactus and move everyone else up. The details are important.

Quote:There is a reason most media outlets are predicting an aac school in that bowl.

Because journalists pay less attention to these things than we do, and those projections are put together in an afternoon and then never thought about again?

(11-18-2014 12:51 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The Hawaii Bowl is one of the least prestigious bowls out there. It exist primarily to give Hawaii a place to go when they are bowl eligible. The Ft Worth bowl has ties to the Big12 and Big10. Granted, niether is the Rose Bowl, but there is a difference.

In the last bowl cycle, Hawaii had a better pick from CUSA than the Armed Forces Bowl did. CUSA runner-ups played there pretty often. They've had Notre Dame and a couple of PAC teams play there. Maybe I'm confused in teh back of my head associating the Hawaii Bowls with the older bowls in Hawaii that went under, but I think of the Hawaii Bowl as being fairly long-established rather than one that started 10 years ago. (OTOH, the Hawaii fans are apparently hostile and unwelcoming, according to ECU fans).

For comparison, the Armed Forces Bowl has had a good sprinking of the service academies, BYU, CAl, Kansas, and TCU and UTah when they were in the MWC. (AFB has B1G and XII part-time tie ins, but we'll see if those ever get filled).

There will be a clearer picture after this weekend. B10 can still get Michigan to be the 10th team. NW or Illni could be 11th, with NW the best shot. SEC should get UF and SC get their 6th wins this weekend making 10. Tenn finishes with with Vandy which should be 11. If Ark and/or KY pull an upset, the could 12 and 13. In addition, I think the MWC has done like the AAC, they can send a team to a backup bowl over an existing bowl. Maybe someone will confirm but I could see MWC take Cactus and leave Boise for an at large team.

This is the reason I love bowl season. Everyone complains there are too many until there is a chance they could get left home.

There could be some shuffling due to contract wording and bowl pools...especially among ESPN owned bowls. The Miami Bowl is unique in that the AAC can replace opponents from year to year if a "better" match up becomes available. The cost is a spot in one of their contracted bowls for that particular year (Bahamas this year). The replacement cannot come from their top 5 bowls. They may have gotten caught short this year. But, beginning next year, the AAC has more primary ties than they will likely fill. Before agreements were reached, it was rumored that the AAC was trying to get a PAC tie in for the Miami Bowl. Per this year's results, would they reconsider for the remaining contract period?