No other real details are being released other than the fact the group has submitted their bid to the NCAA-despite pretty much knowing the conferences involved, the date, tv deal and even SBC/AAC being officially members of the bowl will not be announced until the NCAA decides to accepts the bid.

The group indicated they hope to have official word in May.

Glad to hear it for the SBC!

If they met the deadline and have a tv partner, then this should be a done deal.

And I think for all the whining that has come from certain AAC members, this bowl will prove to be a huge success. The Camellia Bowl certainly exceeded my expectations in year one.

Been trying to dig around and can't get anything confirmed in terms of if all the "necessary" components are in place (specifically TV deal). However I would think SURELY they wouldn't have submitted a bid without "all their ducks" lined up in a row, ready to go.

(04-01-2015 02:36 PM)RamblinRedWolf44 Wrote:  Been trying to dig around and can't get anything confirmed in terms of if all the "necessary" components are in place (specifically TV deal). However I would think SURELY they wouldn't have submitted a bid without "all their ducks" lined up in a row, ready to go.

Former UALR AD Chris Peterson is the bowl director. Wanna bank on SURELY?

(04-01-2015 02:30 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  If they met the deadline and have a tv partner, then this should be a done deal.

And I think for all the whining that has come from certain AAC members, this bowl will prove to be a huge success. The Camellia Bowl certainly exceeded my expectations in year one.

It will be a success and those whiners will be tickled to have a bowl game when their turn comes around. I guarantee that few if any of them have been to LR in years if at all. We will show them a good time and they will leave fat, hungover and happy save for the beating they take on the field.

Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyESPN · 16m16 minutes ago
Austin, Little Rock, Tucson & Orlando applied for new bowls, sources told @ESPN. If approved, 43 bowls this year

(04-01-2015 03:51 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyESPN · 16m16 minutes ago
Austin, Little Rock, Tucson & Orlando applied for new bowls, sources told @ESPN. If approved, 43 bowls this year

Hell, surely even WE can make our way into one of those . . . . Surely? ?

Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyESPN · 9m9 minutes ago
Proposed new bowls: Austin (AAC vs. C-USA), Tucson (MWC vs. C-USA), Orlando (AAC vs. SB), Little Rock (AAC vs. SB)

(04-01-2015 03:53 PM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 03:51 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyESPN · 16m16 minutes ago
Austin, Little Rock, Tucson & Orlando applied for new bowls, sources told @ESPN. If approved, 43 bowls this year

Hell, surely even WE can make our way into one of those . . . . Surely? ?

Yeah they are going to have to put some waivers in place in case all can't get filled.

(04-01-2015 04:03 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyESPN · 9m9 minutes ago
Proposed new bowls: Austin (AAC vs. C-USA), Tucson (MWC vs. C-USA), Orlando (AAC vs. SB), Little Rock (AAC vs. SB)

If approved, the one in Austin will be SWEET, unfortunately . . . No SBC tie in . . .

(04-01-2015 04:06 PM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 04:03 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyESPN · 9m9 minutes ago
Proposed new bowls: Austin (AAC vs. C-USA), Tucson (MWC vs. C-USA), Orlando (AAC vs. SB), Little Rock (AAC vs. SB)

If approved, the one in Austin will be SWEET, unfortunately . . . No SBC tie in . . .

May go unfilled some years so you may get in that way. Sure they'd absolutely love to have a TX St in their bowl.

Wonder if the NCAA will approve all three? I know it has been apply and approve but 8 more teams really seems stretching it.

(04-01-2015 04:25 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Wonder if the NCAA will approve all three? I know it has been apply and approve but 8 more teams really seems stretching it.

I think these are potential replacements for some of the ill conceived bowls in far flung destinations. Sooner or later, without ratings, tickets sold or hotels booked those bowls in the Bahamas and Hawaii will die.

(04-01-2015 04:25 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Wonder if the NCAA will approve all three? I know it has been apply and approve but 8 more teams really seems stretching it.

McMurphy stated they were likely to all get approved. All they need for approval is a TV partner and conference tie ins.

(04-01-2015 04:34 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 04:25 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Wonder if the NCAA will approve all three? I know it has been apply and approve but 8 more teams really seems stretching it.

I think these are potential replacements for some of the ill conceived bowls in far flung destinations. Sooner or later, without ratings, tickets sold or hotels booked those bowls in the Bahamas and Hawaii will die.

Yup

(04-01-2015 04:54 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 04:25 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Wonder if the NCAA will approve all three? I know it has been apply and approve but 8 more teams really seems stretching it.

McMurphy stated they were likely to all get approved. All they need for approval is a TV partner and conference tie ins.

The part that worries me is if the NCAA questions the AAC not being able to fill 9 tie ins out of 12 teams.

(04-01-2015 04:06 PM)Bobcat87 Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 04:03 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Brett McMurphy ‏@McMurphyESPN · 9m9 minutes ago
Proposed new bowls: Austin (AAC vs. C-USA), Tucson (MWC vs. C-USA), Orlando (AAC vs. SB), Little Rock (AAC vs. SB)

If approved, the one in Austin will be SWEET, unfortunately . . . No SBC tie in . . .

Yeah, I would think Texas St would be the "go to" backup if available.

(04-01-2015 05:38 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 04:54 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 04:25 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Wonder if the NCAA will approve all three? I know it has been apply and approve but 8 more teams really seems stretching it.

McMurphy stated they were likely to all get approved. All they need for approval is a TV partner and conference tie ins.

The part that worries me is if the NCAA questions the AAC not being able to fill 9 tie ins out of 12 teams.

Yeah---Common sense says the AAC filling 9 and 10 bowls a season is a long shot. That said, I'm not so sure common sense really factors into the new bowl qualification system anymore.

(04-01-2015 06:49 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 05:38 PM)ValleyBoy Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 04:54 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(04-01-2015 04:25 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  Wonder if the NCAA will approve all three? I know it has been apply and approve but 8 more teams really seems stretching it.

McMurphy stated they were likely to all get approved. All they need for approval is a TV partner and conference tie ins.

The part that worries me is if the NCAA questions the AAC not being able to fill 9 tie ins out of 12 teams.

Yeah---Common sense says the AAC filling 9 and 10 bowls a season is a long shot. That said, I'm not so sure common sense really factors into the new bowl qualification system anymore.

AC, with AAC saying they want to basically have P5 and BYU in Miami, it seems it would be more like 7-8 a year since they be selling the other G5 slot. Seems like Aresco could sell that with 12 teams. I just wish the AAC would cut a deal with the ACC to play opposite of the St. Pete bowl years and BYU for the other years to finish out this six year cycle. Seems like win/win for everyone.