I don't blame em. That's a good deal imo.
Didn't WRight Waters mention waiting around for the bowl contracts to run out and seeing if the bowl landscape would change before adding new bowls for the Sun Belt. Maybe this is part of it. ACC is supposedly looking to get out of the Mobile Bowl by next year in one article I read. Independence Bowl and Mobile Bowl coming the SBC's way? Plus I don't know whatever happened to the Bowl for the Cure, but weren't they supposed to try to get that going again for the next season?? Maybe arkstfan has some details.
If there aren't AT LEAST two bowl tie-ins for the Sun Belt next season, something is terribly wrong. It's prime time for it.
The Sun Belt already has a deal to be an alternate in this game, so perhaps SBC #1 or #2 could go here. The Texas schools looking to move up to FBS also have to feel good about this, because it gives the Sun Belt another reason to add them.
Could make for some interesting negotiations. If the belt can continue to show up and beat CUSA and MAC then you have a pretty good arguement for some of these bowls to pay attention.
(09-30-2009 10:31 PM)chargeradio Wrote: [ -> ]The Sun Belt already has a deal to be an alternate in this game, so perhaps SBC #1 or #2 could go here. The Texas schools looking to move up to FBS also have to feel good about this, because it gives the Sun Belt another reason to add them.
Nothing is guaranteed. Look at 2007 Troy. Or 2008 Louisiana.
The Independence Bowl committee believes it is too good for the scruffy little conferences.
Rumor is they are signing like ACC #13 or so vs. a western conference that doesn't have Boise as a member.
(10-01-2009 07:48 AM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ]Rumor is they are signing like ACC #13 or so vs. a western conference that doesn't have Boise as a member.
Independence Bowls days are numbered.
(09-30-2009 10:36 PM)CardinalBlackTrojan Wrote: [ -> ] (09-30-2009 10:31 PM)chargeradio Wrote: [ -> ]The Sun Belt already has a deal to be an alternate in this game, so perhaps SBC #1 or #2 could go here. The Texas schools looking to move up to FBS also have to feel good about this, because it gives the Sun Belt another reason to add them.
Nothing is guaranteed. Look at 2007 Troy. Or 2008 Louisiana.
Not a good comparison. At 8-4 Troy was truly a legit bowl team. At 6-6 ULL was really just so-so and many 6-6 teams don't go.
The Independence Bowl would not even exist if not for Arkansas State. Didn't notice ASU getting picked over NIU and their ass't AD who was former director of the I-Bowl.
Isn't one of your biggest fans (a State Farm agent that I've met) one of the board members for the I-Bowl? Bet he was ticked off, for sure.
(10-01-2009 01:50 PM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ]The Independence Bowl would not even exist if not for Arkansas State. Didn't notice ASU getting picked over NIU and their ass't AD who was former director of the I-Bowl.
If Wrong Waters isn't jumping on this right now, he should be fired.
(10-01-2009 06:47 PM)Cajunman02 Wrote: [ -> ]If Wrong Waters isn't jumping on this right now, he should be fired.
Don't worry, he will sign 15 more Memos of Understanding which are just about as legally binding as a ham sandwich.
Quote:The Independence Bowl committee believes it is too good for the scruffy little conferences.
That's an old attitude too..........In 1982 the I-Bowl could've matched 10-1 New Mexico and 10-1 Tulsa..............but instead 6-5 Wisconsin and 6-4-1 Kansas State got the invites..........It rained most of the day of the game and then it turned brutally cold..........and hardly anyone showed up..........Let's hear it for karma!
(10-01-2009 06:47 PM)Cajunman02 Wrote: [ -> ]If Wrong Waters isn't jumping on this right now, he should be fired.
The only thing he jumps all over is a jelly doughnut . . .
(10-01-2009 08:23 PM)Tuffguy21 Wrote: [ -> ] (10-01-2009 06:47 PM)Cajunman02 Wrote: [ -> ]If Wrong Waters isn't jumping on this right now, he should be fired.
Don't worry, he will sign 15 more Memos of Understanding which are just about as legally binding as a ham sandwich.
There is nothing to jump on the I bowl isn't interested in the Sun Belt, WAC, or C-USA. All three made offers and were deemed unworthy of that storied contest.
(10-03-2009 10:48 AM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ]There is nothing to jump on the I bowl isn't interested in the Sun Belt, WAC, or C-USA. All three made offers and were deemed unworthy of that storied contest.
BTW, that storied bowl in the 11th oldest bowl in the nation. And it is about to be announced that the ACC and MWC will be the new tie-ins starting 2010.
ACC #9 will be a dandy. How often have they qualified 9?
MWC #3 is usually a pretty good team but they better cross their fingers and hope they don't get a steady diet of San Diego State, UNLV, New Mexico, and Colorado State. They don't travel for nothing. Wyoming travels fairly well but a home sellout is 10% of the state coming to a game. BYU certainly travels though the casinos and bars will be seriously disappointed. I watched 7 BYU fans split a single Sprite in Memphis. TCU at least is close.
They had proposals from the WAC, Sun Belt, C-USA, and MAC and I understand passing on the MAC because they've not shown the ability to deliver ticket sales or TV in the south but why sign a long-shot deal with the ACC?
(10-07-2009 01:03 PM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ]ACC #9 will be a dandy. How often have they qualified 9?
MWC #3 is usually a pretty good team but they better cross their fingers and hope they don't get a steady diet of San Diego State, UNLV, New Mexico, and Colorado State. They don't travel for nothing. Wyoming travels fairly well but a home sellout is 10% of the state coming to a game. BYU certainly travels though the casinos and bars will be seriously disappointed. I watched 7 BYU fans split a single Sprite in Memphis. TCU at least is close.
They had proposals from the WAC, Sun Belt, C-USA, and MAC and I understand passing on the MAC because they've not shown the ability to deliver ticket sales or TV in the south but why sign a long-shot deal with the ACC?
Ten ACC qualifiers last year alone.
(10-07-2009 01:03 PM)arkstfan Wrote: [ -> ]ACC #9 will be a dandy. How often have they qualified 9?
MWC #3 is usually a pretty good team but they better cross their fingers and hope they don't get a steady diet of San Diego State, UNLV, New Mexico, and Colorado State. They don't travel for nothing. Wyoming travels fairly well but a home sellout is 10% of the state coming to a game. BYU certainly travels though the casinos and bars will be seriously disappointed. I watched 7 BYU fans split a single Sprite in Memphis. TCU at least is close.
They had proposals from the WAC, Sun Belt, C-USA, and MAC and I understand passing on the MAC because they've not shown the ability to deliver ticket sales or TV in the south but why sign a long-shot deal with the ACC?
Well, to answer your question, since 2004, they have qualified 9 or more once (last year). In 2004 (11 games) 7 tms , 2005 (11 games) 8 tms , 2006 (first year with 12 gmaes) 8 tms, 2007 8 tms, and 2009 10 tms.
It doesn't look good this year for the ACC as well. They are 21-13 OOC with a couple of bad losses to D1aa opponents. With the conference schedule now if full gear, those teams that didn't take care of their OOC schedule are going to be hard pressed. I bet 8 at the most but a good shot at only 7.