So you're saying CUSA internally ranks who's got hierarchy over who when it comes down to the order of who gets invited?

The bowl reps ultimately decide who they want/invite right?

Say hypothetically CUSA has 5 bowl tie ins (Bowls A-E) but CUSA has 6 eligible teams...USM, LT, UNT, WKU, MARSHALL, and FIU. Let's say USM wins champ game and FIU is the loser of the champ game. What if:

USM "chooses" bowl A
Bowl B wants and extends invite to UNT
Bowl C wants and extends invite to WKU
Bowl D wants and extends invite to Marshall
Bowl E wants and extends invite to LT

CUSA runner up FIU is left out.

Does the conference have the legal authority to FORCE one of the bowls (Bowl B-E) to extend an invite to conference runner up FIU EVEN if the bowl reps don't want them (be it due to proximity, school brand, whatever)????

*Let's also assume that the schools (not including USM) all bhave similar W/L records and are well above .500

(11-30-2017 10:21 PM)usmbacker Wrote:  C-USA Bowl Projections: New destinations for Southern Miss, FAU and North Texas

Quote: Armed Forces Bowl (Dec. 23) — La. Tech (6-6) vs. Army (8-3) — Louisiana Tech fans have traveled well to the DFW area and I’m sure bowl officials have taken note of that.

Read more here: http://www.sunherald.com/sports/college/...rylink=cpy

The AFB is a very good bowl game (was #3 overall last year), and is probably better than we deserve this year. Also, Army is probably a team that LA Tech matches up with very well this year. I like it.

(11-30-2017 11:27 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 11:20 PM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 11:10 PM)TTT Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 10:58 PM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 10:41 PM)EagNBran Wrote:  Champ does get first pick. It’s been that way since we lost the Liberty Bowl. But they have first choice of the bowls allotted to us. Since Indy technically isn’t a normal bowl of ours, I don’t think the champ could choose them unless Indy wanted them.

If that’s the case it seems our primary bowls should get the top teams in the conference and our secondary bowls should have to take what’s left over. That would stink to have a primary tie-in and get stuck with a 6-6 team while a bowl that only had a secondary tie-in got an 8 or 9 win team.

I don't think so. If some outside bowl wants a certain school, its kinda unfair to MAKE a school turn down a bowl because their primary tie-ins haven't been filled yet. Also, bowls aren't selected based on location right?

If USM is by some chance invited to an outside bowl we should have the freedom to accept WITHOUT some conference mandate saying something like "you can only accept an outside bowl if all other conferences primary ties are filled".

Actually we can’t fill secondary bowls until we fill our primary. The only reason we can fill secondary bowls this year is because we have more than enough teams to fill our bowls. Is it right for a primary tie-in to get a lesser team? We do use location to some extent. But let’s say armed forces wants UNT. But UNT doesn’t want to play army so they want frisco. Armed forces who has the primary deal with the conference (though it was traded from HOD) gets stuck with 6-6 UTSA while a bowl that didn’t have a primary agreement gets the better team. I would not be happy if I were Armed Forces/HOD and would think twice about signing a primary deal with the conference if they’re going to give a secondary bowls a higher pick.

This makes sense to me. If a bowl is cool enough to guarantee us a spot, they should get our best teams before secondary bowls do, assuming they want them. In theory though, a CUSA team going to a non-guarantee bowl should help the conference because it opens up a guarantee spot for us.

Here's the thing. CUSA's best teams should go to the best bowls that they can possibly go to. If CUSA knows prior to bowl selection, that we will have all primary bowls filled regardless of how it's shuffled, AND they know prior to bowl selections what secondary bowls CUSA will be sending teams to... well, now you've got a better bowl in the picture which the conference KNOWS will be sending teams to. Conference officials should THEN be fair and reshuffle who's "better" or "lesser" (how, who knows) and THEN put the conference's best teams in the best bowls.

The bottom line is a #9 or #10 team in CUSA should not be rewarded with a better bowl than the #2,3,4 team in the conference just because of logistics. There's got to be some FAIR common sense when deciding who goes where. That's my point.

(11-30-2017 11:56 PM)TTT Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 11:27 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 11:20 PM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 11:10 PM)TTT Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 10:58 PM)Saint Greg Wrote:  If that’s the case it seems our primary bowls should get the top teams in the conference and our secondary bowls should have to take what’s left over. That would stink to have a primary tie-in and get stuck with a 6-6 team while a bowl that only had a secondary tie-in got an 8 or 9 win team.

I don't think so. If some outside bowl wants a certain school, its kinda unfair to MAKE a school turn down a bowl because their primary tie-ins haven't been filled yet. Also, bowls aren't selected based on location right?

If USM is by some chance invited to an outside bowl we should have the freedom to accept WITHOUT some conference mandate saying something like "you can only accept an outside bowl if all other conferences primary ties are filled".

Actually we can’t fill secondary bowls until we fill our primary. The only reason we can fill secondary bowls this year is because we have more than enough teams to fill our bowls. Is it right for a primary tie-in to get a lesser team? We do use location to some extent. But let’s say armed forces wants UNT. But UNT doesn’t want to play army so they want frisco. Armed forces who has the primary deal with the conference (though it was traded from HOD) gets stuck with 6-6 UTSA while a bowl that didn’t have a primary agreement gets the better team. I would not be happy if I were Armed Forces/HOD and would think twice about signing a primary deal with the conference if they’re going to give a secondary bowls a higher pick.

This makes sense to me. If a bowl is cool enough to guarantee us a spot, they should get our best teams before secondary bowls do, assuming they want them. In theory though, a CUSA team going to a non-guarantee bowl should help the conference because it opens up a guarantee spot for us.

Here's the thing. CUSA's best teams should go to the best bowls that they can possibly go to. If CUSA knows prior to bowl selection, that we will have all primary bowls filled regardless of how it's shuffled, AND they know prior to bowl selections what secondary bowls CUSA will be sending teams to... well, now you've got a better bowl in the picture which the conference KNOWS will be sending teams to. Conference officials should THEN be fair and reshuffle who's "better" or "lesser" (how, who knows) and THEN put the conference's best teams in the best bowls.

The bottom line is a #9 or #10 team in CUSA should not be rewarded with a better bowl than the #2,3,4 team in the conference just because of logistics. There's got to be some FAIR common sense when deciding who goes where. That's my point.

Our tie-ins aren’t built that way. Champ chooses their destination and all other bowls are equal. This gives our bowl partners reassurance the conference will match up the best available team. More art than science but works for CUSA.

To think WKU goes to Frisco before UTSA is comical.

60% UTSA lands the Armed Forces Bowl vs Army
30% UTSA lands the Frisco Bowl vs SMU
10% UTSA lands NM Bowl vs Fresno/San Diego St.
0% chance we stay home

(11-30-2017 11:16 PM)TTT Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 11:06 PM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 11:01 PM)TTT Wrote:  ^ that was going to be my next question

As I said earlier, historically If UTEP or UTSA were to win CUSA and they "chose" one of the Florida bowls because of the opponent AND both F_U schools are bowl eligible....you KNOW they want them.... so are the bowl reps really at the mercy of "whoever wins the champ". I could see a situation where they say "um, no. We don't want UTEP. We want F_I". So here's the million dollar question: are cusa-tied bowls LEGALLY obligated to extend invites to whomever the conf champ is (regardless of where they are located) upon request???

I think behind closed doors, the conference tells UTEP they need to take a bowl in Texas or New Mexico and publicly they say that’s what they wanted. I still don’t believe Marshall wanted northern Illinois over Illinois the year they beat us in the championship game.

If that's true, Marshall fans should be pissed if they, being CONFERENCE CHAMPS, are forced/told where they are going bowling.

Again, this is another reason why CUSA needs leadership that's got the cajones (no pun intended) to hammer this out.There's absolutely no reason for there to be THIS much ambiguity with our conference bowls. This is why I created a bowl discussion thread a few weeks ago asking all the way-ifs/whos/whens/buts. There isn't anything official/legal on CUSA's website that answers these questions. Is this type of transparency that hard??? #firejudy

What's worse is that our coach and AD told us that they wanted the best opponent available and that was NIU. Which technically may have been correct, but for all intents and purposes, Illinois was the best team out there as it gave us a chance to beat a P5 convincingly in a year we had not played one. Total **** show. But I think the real reason was they wanted a regional school in the HoD and were afraid MU wouldn't being enough peeps. Playing Illinois would have had Herd fans crawling out of the woodwork, smelling blood in the water.

(11-30-2017 11:38 PM)TTT Wrote:  So you're saying CUSA internally ranks who's got hierarchy over who when it comes down to the order of who gets invited?

The bowl reps ultimately decide who they want/invite right?

Say hypothetically CUSA has 5 bowl tie ins (Bowls A-E) but CUSA has 6 eligible teams...USM, LT, UNT, WKU, MARSHALL, and FIU. Let's say USM wins champ game and FIU is the loser of the champ game. What if:

USM "chooses" bowl A
Bowl B wants and extends invite to UNT
Bowl C wants and extends invite to WKU
Bowl D wants and extends invite to Marshall
Bowl E wants and extends invite to LT

CUSA runner up FIU is left out.

Does the conference have the legal authority to FORCE one of the bowls (Bowl B-E) to extend an invite to conference runner up FIU EVEN if the bowl reps don't want them (be it due to proximity, school brand, whatever)????

*Let's also assume that the schools (not including USM) all bhave similar W/L records and are well above .500

7-win teams are placed before 6-win teams. I think a Florida bowl would want FIU. And I think the conference Works with the schools and the bowls to try to make everyone happy.

(12-01-2017 04:00 AM)MUther Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 11:16 PM)TTT Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 11:06 PM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 11:01 PM)TTT Wrote:  ^ that was going to be my next question

As I said earlier, historically If UTEP or UTSA were to win CUSA and they "chose" one of the Florida bowls because of the opponent AND both F_U schools are bowl eligible....you KNOW they want them.... so are the bowl reps really at the mercy of "whoever wins the champ". I could see a situation where they say "um, no. We don't want UTEP. We want F_I". So here's the million dollar question: are cusa-tied bowls LEGALLY obligated to extend invites to whomever the conf champ is (regardless of where they are located) upon request???

I think behind closed doors, the conference tells UTEP they need to take a bowl in Texas or New Mexico and publicly they say that’s what they wanted. I still don’t believe Marshall wanted northern Illinois over Illinois the year they beat us in the championship game.

If that's true, Marshall fans should be pissed if they, being CONFERENCE CHAMPS, are forced/told where they are going bowling.

Again, this is another reason why CUSA needs leadership that's got the cajones (no pun intended) to hammer this out.There's absolutely no reason for there to be THIS much ambiguity with our conference bowls. This is why I created a bowl discussion thread a few weeks ago asking all the way-ifs/whos/whens/buts. There isn't anything official/legal on CUSA's website that answers these questions. Is this type of transparency that hard??? #firejudy

What's worse is that our coach and AD told us that they wanted the best opponent available and that was NIU. Which technically may have been correct, but for all intents and purposes, Illinois was the best team out there as it gave us a chance to beat a P5 convincingly in a year we had not played one. Total **** show. But I think the real reason was they wanted a regional school in the HoD and were afraid MU wouldn't being enough peeps. Playing Illinois would have had Herd fans crawling out of the woodwork, smelling blood in the water.

I think it was going to be tough for Marshall. It was noon the day after Christmas. Your fans would basically have to spend Christmas in dallas. I don’t know about you, but that wouldn’t fly in my family. We had our normal Christmas and drove over the next morning. If roles were reversed and it were Tech wanting to be in a Florida Bowl the morning after Christmas...I’d be watching on tv.

Doesn't ESPN own most of the bowls anyway? They are working behind the scenes to get the best matchups they can so the ratings are good.

I am hearing only way WKU is going bowling is Cure Bowl in Orlando against a Sun Belt team.....This bowl would not be bad for WKU and looks like could be against someone we may have a chance to win against....Not bad also to be one of the first bowl games so season is over quickly haha.....

(12-01-2017 08:24 AM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  I am hearing only way WKU is going bowling is Cure Bowl in Orlando against a Sun Belt team.....This bowl would not be bad for WKU and looks like could be against someone we may have a chance to win against....

At 6-6 pretty much anything is good. For Tech there’s been some talk about Frisco vs SMU...but I’d love to be in armed forces again if UNT doesn’t want to a rematch with Army. Saturday afternoon in Ft Worth against 8-9 win Army? Sign me up.

(12-01-2017 08:35 AM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(12-01-2017 08:24 AM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  I am hearing only way WKU is going bowling is Cure Bowl in Orlando against a Sun Belt team.....This bowl would not be bad for WKU and looks like could be against someone we may have a chance to win against....

At 6-6 pretty much anything is good. For Tech there’s been some talk about Frisco vs SMU...but I’d love to be in armed forces again if UNT doesn’t want to a rematch with Army. Saturday afternoon in Ft Worth against 8-9 win Army? Sign me up.

Like you, I'd take any bowl but if we have an oppurtunity to play in DFW I'd sign up in a second. Of most likely bowls for Tech I'd rank them
1. Frisco/Armed Forces
2. Indy
3. NOLA

Indy bowl would rise if we play FSU. IMO, playing Duke or BC will carry little weight with recruits regardless of ACC affiliation. We recruit against Army and SMU regularly.

Indy Bowl choses who they want from CUSA if indeed they choose from our league.

(12-01-2017 08:42 AM)Collin_Ellis Wrote:  

(12-01-2017 08:35 AM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(12-01-2017 08:24 AM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  I am hearing only way WKU is going bowling is Cure Bowl in Orlando against a Sun Belt team.....This bowl would not be bad for WKU and looks like could be against someone we may have a chance to win against....

At 6-6 pretty much anything is good. For Tech there’s been some talk about Frisco vs SMU...but I’d love to be in armed forces again if UNT doesn’t want to a rematch with Army. Saturday afternoon in Ft Worth against 8-9 win Army? Sign me up.

Like you, I'd take any bowl but if we have an oppurtunity to play in DFW I'd sign up in a second. Of most likely bowls for Tech I'd rank them
1. Frisco/Armed Forces
2. Indy
3. NOLA

Indy bowl would rise if we play FSU. IMO, playing Duke or BC will carry little weight with recruits regardless of ACC affiliation. We recruit against Army and SMU regularly.

And Frisco would be primetime...only game on TV. AF....Birmingham probably ends 30mins after Armed Forces starts and then it’s the only game on. Good exposure with both games. Indy Bowl we’d have the best turnout in the conference for a lunchtime weekday game. FSU would be exciting. I don’t know about someone like Boston college though.

(12-01-2017 09:00 AM)nastybunch Wrote:  Indy Bowl choses who they want from CUSA if indeed they choose from our league.

Dumb if true. No incentive for them to make us a primary on the next contract...and no incentive for our existing bowls to stick with us as primary.

(12-01-2017 09:11 AM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(12-01-2017 09:00 AM)nastybunch Wrote:  Indy Bowl choses who they want from CUSA if indeed they choose from our league.

Dumb if true. No incentive for them to make us a primary on the next contract...and no incentive for our existing bowls to stick with us as primary.

I think you're dead on here. Sound logic from the conference perspective.

Don't bite the hand that feeds you.

bowl selection is sausage-making. you can post links that purport to explain the process all you want, but I am pretty sure a lot of it goes on behind the scenes.

at this point in every season, all we have are rumors. but the rumors turn out to be true more than they aren't.

Indy is the only Bowl I can make this year. I would love to go, but I also understand if USM were the pick. Frisco would be my second choice and I feel that its gonna be a solid bowl for years to come. We did the Armed Forces Bowl thing against a Service Academy last year but beggars can't be choosers. I will take absolutely whatever WE can get. There is no ego here about where we are going as long as we get to go.

(12-01-2017 08:35 AM)Saint Greg Wrote:  

(12-01-2017 08:24 AM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  I am hearing only way WKU is going bowling is Cure Bowl in Orlando against a Sun Belt team.....This bowl would not be bad for WKU and looks like could be against someone we may have a chance to win against....

At 6-6 pretty much anything is good. For Tech there’s been some talk about Frisco vs SMU...but I’d love to be in armed forces again if UNT doesn’t want to a rematch with Army. Saturday afternoon in Ft Worth against 8-9 win Army? Sign me up.

Please take it. There's nothing I'd hate more than another game against Army. Three times in a year is already too much....I certainly don't want to make it four times.

(12-01-2017 09:40 AM)pilot172000 Wrote:  We did the Armed Forces Bowl thing against a Service Academy last year but beggars can't be choosers. I will take absolutely whatever WE can get. There is no ego here about where we are going as long as we get to go.

The Armed Forces Bowl against Army would be great for LA Tech. Much better than we deserve, frankly. A nationally televised game against a service academy, right in the middle of our recruiting patch. What's not to like? Oh....we went to the same bowl last year? So what? Maybe you missed the part where our team posted a 6-6 record this year. We'd be lucky to get invited to the Toilet Bowl this year.

(12-01-2017 09:32 AM)EagleX Wrote:  bowl selection is sausage-making. you can post links that purport to explain the process all you want, but I am pretty sure a lot of it goes on behind the scenes.

at this point in every season, all we have are rumors. but the rumors turn out to be true more than they aren't.

well......it is doe season