CSNbbs

in place for the MAC. I hope Cryst is working on it as we speak. The MAC needs more then 2 bowls. C-USA is not a better football conference then the MAC and they have 5 bowl tie-ins. Time for the MAC to take some of those Bowl tie-ins away from C-USA

CUSA

location, location, location

When Louisville and Cincy bolt for the Big East, C-USA can't possibly keep 5 bowl bids.

rocketfootball Wrote:When Louisville and Cincy bolt for the Big East, C-USA can't possibly keep 5 bowl bids.

location, location,location

I would hope we could pick up a bowl or two, but its not a DUN DEAL.

:rolleyes: Whatever, just stop saying......

Location, Location, Location

rocketfootball Wrote::rolleyes: Whatever, just stop saying......

Location, Location, Location

P.S.

The commissioner of CUSA has to start selling real estate part-time. He knows that only location will save the value of his job.

Repeat after me. "Bowls have nothing to do with the quality of teams. They're about money."

Let's assume I'm a bowl organizer. Let's also assume that I have a choice between two teams. Team A went 10-2 and, in the process, defeated a BCS team and lost to another by only a few points. Team B is a BCS team that went 7-5, had a losing record in conference, and wouldn't be at 7-5 without some very lucky breaks. Team A averaged 18k in attendance while Team B averaged 70k. Team A is 900 miles away which makes it too far for a day trip for Team A's fans. Team B is 400 miles away. To a bowl organizer, this is a no-brainer. Team B gets the bid.

When bowl organizers see home attendance figures in the 15-20k range, that scares the hell out of them considering that the allottment for teams is generally about 1/2 of that amount.

Now, some of you may argue that it doesn't matter if you don't sell the tickets because the school is obligated to buy it. That's true enough. But, bowls are initiated, for the most part, by local organizers in an effort to get out of town folks to spend money in the town. There may be a corporate name attached to the bowl but it's the local organizers that sought out the corporation for the advertising revenue in the first place. Even if the bowl doesn't lose money, if it doesn't draw in fans to spend their $$$, the bowl will soon have different management.

Short of lining up more bowl deals (and the MAC may get to 3 in the near future once C-USA loses their most prominent members), the best thing to do is exactly what our teams are doing......BEAT THE BCS BOYZ! Why? Cause if you lay losses on them then they'll potentially have less bowl eligible teams.....that's why it's just as important to beat the Northwestern's (2-2 now) so that they don't get bowl eligible. If the big conferences come up short, then this could be the year we land a 3rd bowl team.

Unfortunately, we leave the Motor City in a bit of a pickle when we beat Big Ten schools.

Not that I'm *that* worried about it.

But it does look like the Big Ten may not have seven .500 teams, doesn't it?

MAKO Wrote:When bowl organizers see home attendance figures in the 15-20k range, that scares the hell out of them considering that the allottment for teams is generally about 1/2 of that amount. 

yadda yadda yadda

That's all fine and good...until you look at the numbers. Sugar Bowl, NYD 1998: Fla St sent about 6K fans, Ohio St about the same.

Liberty Bowl c. 1996- Stanfraud sent 3 K to Memphis.

LV Bowl, 1998. 6-5 UNC (the team that Miami (OH) beat) sends less than 3 K to Sin City.

The argument is that fans in the home stadium translates to travelling fans. The reality is that these fans have traveled and seen so many bowl games, that they aren't interested unless it's a BCS championship game.

Kansas St travels very well...you know why? Their fans are hungry for bowl games. Oh, BTW they've been snubbed by the BCS too, so the "traveling fans" argument is not quite so valid.

Wisconsin traveled very well to their Rose Bowls, particularly the first. You know why? Their fans are hungry for bowl games.

Can you think of a conference hungrier for bowl games than the MAC? Miami (OH), Toledo, BG, W. Michigan...their fans have been hungry for bowl games for a long time. Give them a good bowl (not Shreveport or even Memphis (sorry Elvis)) and I'd bet they'd come. In droves.

CUSA also offers huge minimum ticket-buy guarantees to its bowls. In other words, they take the financial risk of unsold tickets off the bowl organizers' hands and effectively kick-back the bowl payout if the seats don't sell.

This has been a common practice in recent years. Clemson got the Humanitarian Bowl a couple of years ago over UCLA. The organizers offered UCLA first, but UCLA wouldn't meet their conditions for a minimum ticket buy. Clemson, OTOH, was willing to take an estimated $300,000 loss to get the game.

If you look closely at the conference revenue figures that GreenSteve is so fond of throwing around as proof of the MAC's suckage, you'd see that CUSA actually reported *less* than $750,000 of bowl revenue. In other words, they "collect" five payouts and then flush all the money back in travel and ticket guarantees. They can afford it because (a) they get more basketball revenue than we do (if you look at the revenue numbers closely, it's really a hoops league) and (B) they charge their members over $5 million a year in dues.

Without those other sources of revenue, well, I've heard that the WAC is losing money hand-over-fist at the Silicon Valley Bowl and may pull the plug on it.

To take another example, you can't possibly tell me with a straight face that UC did anything other than hemmorhage cash on its trip to the New Orleans Bowl. Was that worth it to allow 2,000 of your die-hard supporters to see their team get its ****** kicked by North Texas while your hoops team was playing on ESPN at the very same time? I guess they think so, but I can see rational university administrators going the other way on that issue.

Schadenfreude Wrote:Unfortunately, we leave the Motor City in a bit of a pickle when we beat Big Ten schools.

Not that I'm *that* worried about it.

But it does look like the Big Ten may not have seven .500 teams, doesn't it?

I agree, but how's this: Notre Dame in the MCB.

The Irish aren't keen on it I know, but frankly, it would probably be good for them, and obviously you couldn't do better for the MCB.

I'd cut off my left pinky to see BG vs ND in the MCB. (Seriously, who uses their pinky? and my left hand is messed up after my accident anyway...well maybe my left index finger, that's the one that got shattered.)

DrTorch Wrote:

Schadenfreude Wrote:Unfortunately, we leave the Motor City in a bit of a pickle when we beat Big Ten schools.

Not that I'm *that* worried about it.

But it does look like the Big Ten may not have seven .500 teams,  doesn't it?

I agree, but how's this: Notre Dame in the MCB.

The Irish aren't keen on it I know, but frankly, it would probably be good for them, and obviously you couldn't do better for the MCB.

I'd cut off my left pinky to see BG vs ND in the MCB. (Seriously, who uses their pinky? and my left hand is messed up after my accident anyway...well maybe my left index finger, that's the one that got shattered.)

Hey now, wait your turn!

We've been trying to get them to play us in Chicago for two decades.

In all seriousness, the MCB is probably the ONLY way any MAC team will ever get a matchup w them.

I agree w Torch the MAC is going to have several attractive bowl options this year, and I genuinely believe we will get our first at-large invite this year.

We're DEFINITELY hungry for a bowl berth, and I'm sure BG and Miami are, as well.

Zero chance for ND to have a bowl-eligible team this year if you look at their schedule. They may not get 4 wins, let alone 6!

Flying Corn Wrote:We're DEFINITELY hungry for a bowl berth, and I'm sure BG and Miami are, as well.

Very hungry!! But I learned my lesson from last yr. Talking about BG in bowls after 4 or 5 weeks and we ended up sitting home.

I will take the wait and see approach cuz this MAC title chase is gonna be a war!!!

But it looks very good for the MAC this yr. 'Bout time the respect starts to filter our way.

GO BG!! GO MAC!!!

axeme Wrote: Zero chance for ND to have a bowl-eligible team this year if you look at their schedule. They may not get 4 wins, let alone 6!

Whoa. I don't like the Irish, but w/ this schedule:

Sat, Sep 27 at Purdue 3:30 pm --
Sat, Oct 11 at Pittsburgh TBA --
Sat, Oct 18 USC 2:30 pm --
Sat, Oct 25 at Boston College TBA --
Sat, Nov 1 Florida State 2:30 pm --
Sat, Nov 8 Navy 2:30 pm --
Sat, Nov 15 Brigham Young 2:30 pm --
Sat, Nov 29 at Stanford 8:00 pm --
Sat, Dec 6 at Syracuse

Those last 4 games are definitely win-able, and an upset over Purdue, Pitt or BC is not impossible for ND. I wouldn't count them out yet.

As for the Big 10, I checked and they could get 7 bowl eligible pretty easily. Ill, Ind and N'W aren't likely, but one or both of PSU and MSU will get 6 wins, and that will give them 7 teams. An upset by N'W could get them to 6 wins too.

DrTorch Wrote:

Schadenfreude Wrote:Unfortunately, we leave the Motor City in a bit of a pickle when we beat Big Ten schools.

Not that I'm *that* worried about it.

But it does look like the Big Ten may not have seven .500 teams,  doesn't it?

I agree, but how's this: Notre Dame in the MCB.

The Irish aren't keen on it I know, but frankly, it would probably be good for them, and obviously you couldn't do better for the MCB.

I'd cut off my left pinky to see BG vs ND in the MCB. (Seriously, who uses their pinky? and my left hand is messed up after my accident anyway...well maybe my left index finger, that's the one that got shattered.)

:angel: Dr. Torch and Fly Corn,,,,,I have a hard time believe the Fighting Irish would have big enough nads to play u guys n the MCB. They would decline.

The bowls, especially the smaller ones, figure to sell more tickets locally than to travelling teams and they have to have a matchup that their local public will find attractive. Also, TV viewers have to want to watch it.

Like it or not, MAC teams don't have nearly the fan base OR the public clout and that's why we are where we are. You can't really force people to buy tickets to something they don't want to watch (unless you're talking about a bowl contractually forcing a participating team to buy a certain number of tickets).

So, how do MAC teams make themselves more attractive?

HuskieDan Wrote:So, how do MAC teams make themselves more attractive?

Here's Toledo's answer:

DrTorch Wrote:

HuskieDan Wrote:So, how do MAC teams make themselves more attractive?

Here's Toledo's answer:

Egads, I didn't need to see that!!

First I've ever wished we had a "I'm jabbing out my own eyeballs" emoticon.