I think the article slightly overstates how dark it is for you guys. Just because the P5 conferences will run out of bowl-eligibles at some point. Figure a P5 conference can reliably send 2/3 of their teams to bowls. That's 7 for the Big 12, 8 for the PAC, 9 for the Big Ten and SEC, and 10 for ACC+ND.

Think about the Independence Bowl.

They'd like a Big 12 tie in, right? But Big 12 is already lined up with the CFP, Alamo, Russell(Orlando II), Meineke(Houston), BWW (Arizona) and Liberty, plus the HEart of Dallas, kind of. That's 6-7 commitments already. So you're looking at the Big 12 having 8 bowl eligible teams, maybe 9 to send one to the Independence Bowl.

How about the SEC? CFP, Cap One(Citrus), Outback, Gator, Music City, Belk, Liberty, Houston makes 8. SEC #9/14, if they don't have a second team in the CFP bowls--or a third SEC team making it #11. Plus I think Silve said they'd like to keep Birmingham.

Big Ten? CFP, Cap One, Outback, Gator/Music City, Pinstripe, Detroit, Kraft, Holiday makes 8. So #9/14, if they don't have a second team in the CFP Bowls. EDIT: Oh, yeah, and wasn't the Big Ten supposed to be part-time in the Heart of Dallas Bowl?

PAC? CFP, Alamo, Holiday, Kraft, Las Vegas (vs MWC), BWW(ARizona), Sun makes 7. So you're looking at PAC #8/12, again if they don't have a second team in the CFP Bowls.

ACC? CFP, Russell Athletic, Gator/MC, Pinstripe, Sun, Belk are set, so that's 6/15. The ACC is short on bowls. Even if they get a P5 tie-in for the Independence Bowl, it's basically a part-time one. Maybe they get two P5 tie-ins, so the bowl is pretty much covered. But they still need to play someone in the Military Bowl, and I don't see Navy getting locked out of a bowl in their own stadium. The ACC plus Notre Dame basically needs 10 bowls, the way I figure it.

I don't see any way that part-time slots from the Big Ten, SEC and PAC, and a "reach" slot from the Big 12, fills the ACC's dance card.

EDIT: I just realized the math on the CFP: There are 11 spots essentially for 5 conferences. So you pencil in all 5 power conferences for 2 CFP teams each, and adjust the numbers above. The ACC needs dance partners.

It's time for lawsuits from the group of 5!

(06-11-2013 10:48 AM)Bull Wrote:  Beyond question, we must have 1, hopefully 2, bowl tie in against P5. I don't care about the rest. If the cUSA can do this with the HOD bowl, why can't we?

Unless there is literally some 'smoke filled room' conspiracy to freeze us out, at least one or two of these 5 conferences should grant us a tie in. Like they really care where their .500 team plays???

Wow, the split is happening, and there seems to be NOTHING we can do about it. We are now division II. This has been the plan all along I guess, but I thought they would all 'play nice' and we'd get a bowl or two. Seems like we're the threat, and this they are really, really trying to freeze us out. Maybe that's why a bowl with cUSA is not a big deal to them... but they really don't want to lose to US. Too embarassing.

Which is why I still think my idea to leverage a St. Louis Bowl spot again the #1 MAC would be a good idea. The AAC, MAC, St. Louis Bowl, and Liberty Bowl should be able to work out a split tie-in between the Big 12 /SEC to secure a Win-Win-Win-Win for all involved.

Those who shot down the idea are losing sight that without added leverage, the AAC doesn't seem to be in a position to negotiate a favorable outcome. It may not work, but there is nothing to lose at this point.

(06-11-2013 10:44 AM)Tigers2B1 Wrote:  Just another step in an eventual total breakaway by the P5.

If things shake out as McMurphy indicates, it's hard to argue that an effective split from the G5 has not been engineered. It's also hard to argue that no collusion exists.

(06-11-2013 11:26 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 10:44 AM)Tigers2B1 Wrote:  Just another step in an eventual total breakaway by the P5.

If things shake out as McMurphy indicates, it's hard to argue that an effective split from the G5 has not been engineered. It's also hard to argue that no collusion exists.

Time for an Official Investigation.

(06-11-2013 10:48 AM)Bull Wrote:  Beyond question, we must have 1, hopefully 2, bowl tie in against P5. I don't care about the rest. If the cUSA can do this with the HOD bowl, why can't we?

Unless there is literally some 'smoke filled room' conspiracy to freeze us out, at least one or two of these 5 conferences should grant us a tie in. Like they really care where their .500 team plays???

Wow, the split is happening, and there seems to be NOTHING we can do about it. We are now division II. This has been the plan all along I guess, but I thought they would all 'play nice' and we'd get a bowl or two. Seems like we're the threat, and this they are really, really trying to freeze us out. Maybe that's why a bowl with cUSA is not a big deal to them... but they really don't want to lose to US. Too embarassing.

Apparently there is, and they don't want any of their teams playing AAC...if McMurphy is to be believed

If they don't play GOF OOC, then there is no way they get 2/3 of their teams bowl eligible. By definition, they get about 50%. Is that why they are still signing OOC H-H series with us, but not playing us in bowl games? They need the extra wins, but won't risk an embarassing loss in a bowl game, one that might elevate our stature a bit?

This is pretty much what I knew would happen. We need to stop wasting time trying to beg the P5 for a game for our champ and set up a game with the MWC in Texas. Our number 1 or 2 vs their number 1 or 2. It's the only chance for an even respectable match up for our champ. Everyone needs to just accept the reality. Hope for the access spot for our champ in most years and send our runner up to play Boise St.

(06-11-2013 12:04 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  This is pretty much what I knew would happen. We need to stop wasting time trying to beg the P5 for a game for our champ and set up a game with the MWC in Texas. Our number 1 or 2 vs their number 1 or 2. It's the only chance for an even respectable match up for our champ. Everyone needs to just accept the reality. Hope for the access spot for our champ in most years and send our runner up to play Boise St.

You gotta convince them to do that, and they'd likely rather keep playing a PAC opponent as their top bowl, like most of us would rather play a P5 opponent for our top bowl. It appears they are in no danger of losing the Vegas Bowl, so they have a game in a very good destination against a P5 team. Good luck convincing them that they should send their champ to play us instead.

(06-11-2013 12:04 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  This is pretty much what I knew would happen. We need to stop wasting time trying to beg the P5 for a game for our champ and set up a game with the MWC in Texas. Our number 1 or 2 vs their number 1 or 2. It's the only chance for an even respectable match up for our champ. Everyone needs to just accept the reality. Hope for the access spot for our champ in most years and send our runner up to play Boise St.

2 weeks ago I would have said no way, but this is looking better and better every minute.

(06-11-2013 12:12 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 12:04 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  This is pretty much what I knew would happen. We need to stop wasting time trying to beg the P5 for a game for our champ and set up a game with the MWC in Texas. Our number 1 or 2 vs their number 1 or 2. It's the only chance for an even respectable match up for our champ. Everyone needs to just accept the reality. Hope for the access spot for our champ in most years and send our runner up to play Boise St.

You gotta convince them to do that, and they'd likely rather keep playing a PAC opponent as their top bowl, like most of us would rather play a P5 opponent for our top bowl. It appears they are in no danger of losing the Vegas Bowl, so they have a game in a very good destination against a P5 team. Good luck convincing them that they should send their champ to play us instead.

That is the challenge. It hasn't been made any easier by trying to portray our conference as superior to theirs. I think that they can be made to understand that it is beneficial to them for their champ or runner up being able to play the highest quality opponent available, which will almost undoubtedly be the champ or runner up from the AAC.

Bottom line, AAC and MWC need to work with each other to try to keep the profile of at least these two leagues above the other G5 leagues. We need a scheduling alliance in football and a challenge in hoops. Build a rivalry that will be noticed and discussed nationally.

Maybe it's time for Group of 5 fans to boycott P5 games, bowls and advertisers/sponsors that have shut out the Group of 5. Get a big facebook/twitter campaign going to let those advertisers/sponsors know how Group of 5 fans feel about the bowl situation.

(06-11-2013 12:18 PM)EZ rider Wrote:  Maybe it's time for Group of 5 fans to boycott P5 games, bowls and advertisers/sponsors that have shut out the Group of 5. Get a big facebook/twitter campaign going to let those advertisers/sponsors know how Group of 5 fans feel about the bowl situation.

It only takes one member of a board like this to start the campaign.

(06-11-2013 12:18 PM)EZ rider Wrote:  Maybe it's time for Group of 5 fans to boycott P5 games, bowls and advertisers/sponsors that have shut out the Group of 5. Get a big facebook/twitter campaign going to let those advertisers/sponsors know how Group of 5 fans feel about the bowl situation.

I know I'm in the minority, but I already do. If it's not UConn related, I'm not too interested. I'll be watching hours of AAC football and hoops, just like I used to do with the BE (and I will learn to like it).

(06-11-2013 12:12 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 12:04 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  This is pretty much what I knew would happen. We need to stop wasting time trying to beg the P5 for a game for our champ and set up a game with the MWC in Texas. Our number 1 or 2 vs their number 1 or 2. It's the only chance for an even respectable match up for our champ. Everyone needs to just accept the reality. Hope for the access spot for our champ in most years and send our runner up to play Boise St.

You gotta convince them to do that, and they'd likely rather keep playing a PAC opponent as their top bowl, like most of us would rather play a P5 opponent for our top bowl. It appears they are in no danger of losing the Vegas Bowl, so they have a game in a very good destination against a P5 team. Good luck convincing them that they should send their champ to play us instead.

That is why we screwed up not getting UNLV on board in the AAC.

(06-11-2013 12:18 PM)EZ rider Wrote:  Maybe it's time for Group of 5 fans to boycott P5 games, bowls and advertisers/sponsors that have shut out the Group of 5. Get a big facebook/twitter campaign going to let those advertisers/sponsors know how Group of 5 fans feel about the bowl situation.

Not gonna happen, the G5 schools depend on the P5 for their biggest gates and/or payouts.

This is a supply and demand issue above all else. There could be some minor manipulation but the bowls and TV execs have spoken and we are not valued. Gonna have to accept that fate and the BCS money will only continue to widen the gap. The only fight left is amongst ourselves for one of the few remaining golden tickets.

(06-11-2013 12:17 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 12:12 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 12:04 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  This is pretty much what I knew would happen. We need to stop wasting time trying to beg the P5 for a game for our champ and set up a game with the MWC in Texas. Our number 1 or 2 vs their number 1 or 2. It's the only chance for an even respectable match up for our champ. Everyone needs to just accept the reality. Hope for the access spot for our champ in most years and send our runner up to play Boise St.

You gotta convince them to do that, and they'd likely rather keep playing a PAC opponent as their top bowl, like most of us would rather play a P5 opponent for our top bowl. It appears they are in no danger of losing the Vegas Bowl, so they have a game in a very good destination against a P5 team. Good luck convincing them that they should send their champ to play us instead.

That is the challenge. It hasn't been made any easier by trying to portray our conference as superior to theirs. I think that they can be made to understand that it is beneficial to them for their champ or runner up being able to play the highest quality opponent available, which will almost undoubtedly be the champ or runner up from the AAC.

Bottom line, AAC and MWC need to work with each other to try to keep the profile of at least these two leagues above the other G5 leagues. We need a scheduling alliance in football and a challenge in hoops. Build a rivalry that will be noticed and discussed nationally.

The problem is the geography of the 2 leagues doesn't work to play a bowl game that will be well attended. Texas is the only place you can put it that's relatively close to both leagues, and even then likely the eastern teams in this league won't travel to that game. Other than Boise there's not a team I'm going to get super jacked up to see ECU play. Sure I'd rather play teams like Fresno, Nevada, Air Force, and Hawaii in principle, but the reality is it wouldn't be in a location convenient for ECU fans to get to and will be against teams that we have zero history or real reason or desire to play. This isn't meant to sound arrogant, because I'm pretty sure you could reverse this and a team like Nevada or Fresno wouldn't really give a damn about traveling to Texas to play ECU.

(06-11-2013 12:23 PM)KNIGHTTIME Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 12:12 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 12:04 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  This is pretty much what I knew would happen. We need to stop wasting time trying to beg the P5 for a game for our champ and set up a game with the MWC in Texas. Our number 1 or 2 vs their number 1 or 2. It's the only chance for an even respectable match up for our champ. Everyone needs to just accept the reality. Hope for the access spot for our champ in most years and send our runner up to play Boise St.

You gotta convince them to do that, and they'd likely rather keep playing a PAC opponent as their top bowl, like most of us would rather play a P5 opponent for our top bowl. It appears they are in no danger of losing the Vegas Bowl, so they have a game in a very good destination against a P5 team. Good luck convincing them that they should send their champ to play us instead.

That is why we screwed up not getting UNLV on board in the AAC.

I agree 100%. Should have gone all in with the western wing, but that is a different topic.

(06-11-2013 10:28 AM)panicstricken Wrote:  There will always be spots to fill in those p5 bowls

Stop melting

I agree.....the major thing is that AAC does not connect itself in bowl agreements with lower level conferences such as cusa, sunbelt, etc.
MWC and AAC need to work together in bowl agreements with each other and P5 conferences.

(06-11-2013 12:25 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 12:17 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 12:12 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 12:04 PM)HartfordHusky Wrote:  This is pretty much what I knew would happen. We need to stop wasting time trying to beg the P5 for a game for our champ and set up a game with the MWC in Texas. Our number 1 or 2 vs their number 1 or 2. It's the only chance for an even respectable match up for our champ. Everyone needs to just accept the reality. Hope for the access spot for our champ in most years and send our runner up to play Boise St.

You gotta convince them to do that, and they'd likely rather keep playing a PAC opponent as their top bowl, like most of us would rather play a P5 opponent for our top bowl. It appears they are in no danger of losing the Vegas Bowl, so they have a game in a very good destination against a P5 team. Good luck convincing them that they should send their champ to play us instead.

That is the challenge. It hasn't been made any easier by trying to portray our conference as superior to theirs. I think that they can be made to understand that it is beneficial to them for their champ or runner up being able to play the highest quality opponent available, which will almost undoubtedly be the champ or runner up from the AAC.

Bottom line, AAC and MWC need to work with each other to try to keep the profile of at least these two leagues above the other G5 leagues. We need a scheduling alliance in football and a challenge in hoops. Build a rivalry that will be noticed and discussed nationally.

The problem is the geography of the 2 leagues doesn't work to play a bowl game that will be well attended. Texas is the only place you can put it that's relatively close to both leagues, and even then likely the eastern teams in this league won't travel to that game. Other than Boise there's not a team I'm going to get super jacked up to see ECU play. Sure I'd rather play teams like Fresno, Nevada, Air Force, and Hawaii in principle, but the reality is it wouldn't be in a location convenient for ECU fans to get to and will be against teams that we have zero history or real reason or desire to play. This isn't meant to sound arrogant, because I'm pretty sure you could reverse this and a team like Nevada or Fresno wouldn't really give a damn about traveling to Texas to play ECU.

It's not a perfect solution but it's better than literally having nowhere to send our champ even remotely worth going to. It may already be too late and the best we can do is play the CUSA or MAC champ though, and just hope that a better spot invites our champ if we don't make the access bowl.

It sucks, but we can't force the P5 to give us a tie in. I'm pretty sure that our champ is going to get screwed, unless they make the access bowl or we have a deal with the only other decent conference in the G5. I honestly think those are the only options available right now.