...Southern Miss." Per Jason Munz, USM beat writer.

https://amp.hattiesburgamerican.com/amp/890291001

But we all know a lot of things can change. I feel the Indy Bowl is a 50/50 chance for USM. Definitely will be an ACC opponent. Probably Duke, FSU, or Boston College. Whoever gets this bowl from CUSA be it us, LT, UTSA, UNT....we HAVE to win. Wins vs P5s carry a lot of weight going for improving CUSA's perception.

I'm making the trip if we secure that one......I'm beggin' for FSU in that match-up....

Like Munz said, I feel like it'd probably be Duke or Boston College. FSU has the brand name and they'd be on a 3 win streak (if they beat ULM this weekend) and that might get them in a "better" bowl.

Why wouldn't this bowl go to the CUSA champ?

It's funny. Southern Miss, LA Tech, UNT, UTSA & UAB all think they are going to play in this years Indy Bowl. Looks like the Indy Bowl did a great job of getting their bowl talked about this year.

Florida State is gonna end up somewhere other than Shreveport. I've seen on Twitter that everyone is expecting them to go to St. Pete. I really think the Indy Bowl is gonna come down to Tech or Southern Miss with North Texas going to Frisco.

(11-30-2017 09:10 PM)HogDawg Wrote:  It's funny. Southern Miss, LA Tech, UNT, UTSA & UAB all think they are going to play in this years Indy Bowl. Looks like the Indy Bowl did a great job of getting their bowl talked about this year.

What's so funny? An actual bowl rep spoke to our school saying they are very interested in us.

Question: so CUSA champ gets first pick right? What if the bowl reps don't want that school? Are they legally obligated to extend the offer? Or are they only legally obligated to extend the offer IF that bowl has an actual tie to the conference?

Hypothetically, say if one year UNCC won CUSA... and they "chose"the NM Bowl (for whatever reason)...can the reps say "Um, no. Sorry, we'd rather take (bowl eligible) UTEP instead".

Does the conference champ actually get the end-all be-all final-word choice? Or is it just a strong request, which could ultimately be denied?

(11-30-2017 09:38 PM)TTT Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:10 PM)HogDawg Wrote:  It's funny. Southern Miss, LA Tech, UNT, UTSA & UAB all think they are going to play in this years Indy Bowl. Looks like the Indy Bowl did a great job of getting their bowl talked about this year.

What's so funny? An actual bowl rep spoke to our school saying they are very interested in us.

Question: so CUSA champ gets first pick right? What if the bowl reps don't want that school? Are they legally obligated to extend the offer? Or are they only legally obligated to extend the offer IF that bowl has an actual tie to the conference?

Hypothetically, say if one year UNCC won CUSA... and they "chose"the NM Bowl (for whatever reason)...can the reps say "Um, no. Sorry, we'd rather take (bowl eligible) UTEP instead".

Does the conference champ actually get the end-all be-all final-word choice? Or is it just a strong request, which could ultimately be denied?

The conference champ gets to choose which bowl they want. According to Pattie Magee the two Florida schools want to stay close to home, while North Texas is interested in a "destination" bowl. In addition, in the pecking order of ACC bowls, FSU and the Indy Bowl are paired together. The St Pete Bowl will not have an ACC team. It will get an AAC and a CUSA team, probably USF and FIU. The Independence Bowl wants us and we want them. SMTTT

(11-30-2017 09:38 PM)TTT Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:10 PM)HogDawg Wrote:  It's funny. Southern Miss, LA Tech, UNT, UTSA & UAB all think they are going to play in this years Indy Bowl. Looks like the Indy Bowl did a great job of getting their bowl talked about this year.

What's so funny? An actual bowl rep spoke to our school saying they are very interested in us.

Question: so CUSA champ gets first pick right? What if the bowl reps don't want that school? Are they legally obligated to extend the offer? Or are they only legally obligated to extend the offer IF that bowl has an actual tie to the conference?

Hypothetically, say if one year UNCC won CUSA... and they "chose"the NM Bowl (for whatever reason)...can the reps say "Um, no. Sorry, we'd rather take (bowl eligible) UTEP instead".

Does the conference champ actually get the end-all be-all final-word choice? Or is it just a strong request, which could ultimately be denied?

You lost me at "bowl eligible UTEP".

(11-30-2017 09:51 PM)NueDaeEagle Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:38 PM)TTT Wrote:  

(11-30-2017 09:10 PM)HogDawg Wrote:  It's funny. Southern Miss, LA Tech, UNT, UTSA & UAB all think they are going to play in this years Indy Bowl. Looks like the Indy Bowl did a great job of getting their bowl talked about this year.

What's so funny? An actual bowl rep spoke to our school saying they are very interested in us.

Question: so CUSA champ gets first pick right? What if the bowl reps don't want that school? Are they legally obligated to extend the offer? Or are they only legally obligated to extend the offer IF that bowl has an actual tie to the conference?

Hypothetically, say if one year UNCC won CUSA... and they "chose"the NM Bowl (for whatever reason)...can the reps say "Um, no. Sorry, we'd rather take (bowl eligible) UTEP instead".

Does the conference champ actually get the end-all be-all final-word choice? Or is it just a strong request, which could ultimately be denied?

The conference champ gets to choose which bowl they want. According to Pattie Magee the two Florida schools want to stay close to home, while North Texas is interested in a "destination" bowl. In addition, in the pecking order of ACC bowls, FSU and the Indy Bowl are paired together. The St Pete Bowl will not have an ACC team. It will get an AAC and a CUSA team, probably USF and FIU. The Independence Bowl wants us and we want them. SMTTT

I'm fully aware that conference champ gets first choice. My question is are the bowls legally obligated to extend the offer to the champ?

C-USA Bowl Projections: New destinations for Southern Miss, FAU and North Texas

I don’t buy this “Champ gets first pick” stuff. The first time an eastern school wins and takes a bowl in Texas or a western school wins and takes a Florida bowl, I’ll believe it. Until then I believe the Champ gets first pick from the bowls in their region...or a bowl in nobody’s region (bahamas, Hawaii) if they want it.

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.

(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.

^ 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???

(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.

(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, after the champ "chooses", bowls are 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".

(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

(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.

(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.