http://www.theacc.com/sports/m-footbl/sp...09aaa.html
Orange
Chick-Fil-A vs. SEC
Champs Sports vs. Big East/Notre Dame
Sun vs. PAC-10 <-- Loser of ACC title game cannot slide past this bowl
Meineke vs. Big East
Music City vs. SEC
Independence vs. MWC
EagleBank vs. C-USA (2010), Navy (2011), Army (2012) and Big 12 (2013)
What is stopping them from announcing the BE tie ins. We already know what they are going to be.
bcs
champs
mccb
yankee
pj.com
st pete/intl
Come on announce them already.
(11-05-2009 01:12 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote: [ -> ]What is stopping them from announcing the BE tie ins. We already know what they are going to be.
bcs
champs
mccb
yankee
pj.com
st pete/intl
Come on announce them already.
Papajohns.com and International may still be negotiating.
I don't know what intl is negotiating. Everyone knows they are moving down, after being replaced in #4 slot by Yankee.
I heard/read pj.com is trying to rotate among 7-9 in the SEC, so maybe that is the holdup. I hope it happens.
sec still working on music city, liberty, papa selections
Currently, the Music City and Liberty share the Nos. 6 and 7 picks. Under one scenario being seriously discussed, the Music City would pick No. 7 and the Liberty and Papajohns.com Bowl would share the 8 and 9 picks.
That doesn't sit well with the Liberty, which is the only SEC bowl not paired against a BCS opponent. Last year, there were no eligible SEC teams at 8 and 9 for the Independence, which is leaving after this season, and Papajohns.com bowls.
The Papajohns.com has been pushing to move up a slot. The Big East has strongly stated that playing a bowl in Birmingham makes sense if the SEC is the opponent. How the Big East feels about a shared 8/9 pick remains a question, too.
It's not clear what viable options, if any, the Liberty has if it's required to share with the Papajohns.com. Five of the Liberty's 10 most-attended games involve an SEC team, including the top three.
http://blog.al.com/solomon/2009/10/sec_i...l_cre.html
Maybe the Big East is considering keeping the International Bowl and dropping the St. Petersburg Bowl? While it seems unlikely on the surface, that could also be one of the hold-ups, in addition to hammering out the Music/Liberty/Papa situation. The opponents -- CUSA or the MAC -- are pretty much a wash.
(11-05-2009 08:45 PM)Krocker Krapp Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe the Big East is considering keeping the International Bowl and dropping the St. Petersburg Bowl? While it seems unlikely on the surface, that could also be one of the hold-ups, in addition to hammering out the Music/Liberty/Papa situation. The opponents -- CUSA or the MAC -- are pretty much a wash.
C-USA's press release said the Big East would be the St. Pete opponent, while in the same release it did not list the Liberty Bowl opponent. So I'd say its a safe bet that they have kept the St. Pete bowl.
(11-05-2009 10:16 PM)mattsarz Wrote: [ -> ]C-USA's press release said the Big East would be the St. Pete opponent, while in the same release it did not list the Liberty Bowl opponent. So I'd say its a safe bet that they have kept the St. Pete bowl.
I clearly said the Big East ditching St. Petersburg for Toronto seems unlikely but, nonetheless, it would be totally hilarious if CUSA signed the contract expecting a Big East opponent only to end up facing the Sun Belt instead.
I doubt that the St Pete bowl would sign the Sunbelt. No one wants to sign them to bowls, and more than likely the St pete bowl will always be a BE bowl, due to USF's location near the bowl.
(11-06-2009 10:23 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: [ -> ]i hate the acc
You should love the ACC. If it weren't for them, you'd still be in CUSA...
(11-06-2009 11:10 PM)bitcruncher Wrote: [ -> ] (11-06-2009 10:23 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: [ -> ]i hate the acc
You should love the ACC. If it weren't for them, you'd still be in CUSA...
lol....good point Bit
You guys ready to get your asses kicked next Friday night?
PS: yeah...drinking again. That damned American Honey by Wild Turkey is the ****...
If my @ss gets kicked, it's because I'm raising my feet to high when I walk. Those nervous twitches can be a b!tch...
(11-06-2009 11:15 PM)bitcruncher Wrote: [ -> ]If my @ss gets kicked, it's because I'm raising my feet to high when I walk. Those nervous twitches can be a b!tch...
:-)
All kidding aside. That game's going to be a barn burner. Y'all best be ready...
(11-06-2009 11:10 PM)bitcruncher Wrote: [ -> ]You should love the ACC. If it weren't for them, you'd still be in CUSA...
That's what I've always said.
You should love the ACC too Bit. If it weren't for them, you wouldn't have won two BE titles since 2005
I think we'd still have won The BEast with Miami, VT, and BC in the conference. And we'd have won 3 BEast titles, because UofL wouldn't have been around to win the conference in 2006. None of the 3 traitors would've been good enough to beat us that year...
Virginia Tech won the ACC in 2005, while also beating West Virginia in their final non-conference meeting, so you have to think they would have won the Big East that year. The Mountaineers probably would have won the league in 2006, but this presumes that Slaton wouldn't have had fumblitis against the Hocakes, which was the case in that year's Louisville game. West Virginia was better than all three defectors in 2007 so there is no doubt about that one. Last year was a toss-up at best when you consider that Cincinnati beat the Mountaineers but lost to Virginia Tech in the BCS. You can only assume two West Virginia titles, for certain, if there had been no ACC raid.
I didn't say 2005. I said 2006-2008...