(10-13-2009 09:40 PM)Krocker Krapp Wrote:  

(10-13-2009 08:34 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  I really don't like the BE still having 2 bowls not vs bcs. But its mostly going to effect the 5 and 6 slot. I don't think those BE spots have been very stellar anyway.

That is why I have been saying that the Big East needs to invite Big 12 #8 to the St. Petersburg Bowl. In years where they are not eligible, we should have the same Notre Dame clause that the Yankee Bowl created, where they fill in if not already at the BCS or Champs Bowl.

Should the Fighting Irish not be available either, then the St. Petersburg Bowl can invite UCF, FAU, FIU, or whatever other leftover CUSA or Sun Belt team is available. The game would be improved most years and no worse off than what it is right now in a worst case scenario.

It doesn't look like there are many options left, but let's wait and see how it plays out. Still a chance there may be some movement in bottom of sec bowls.

(10-13-2009 08:34 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  I really don't like the BE still having 2 bowls not vs bcs. But its mostly going to effect the 5 and 6 slot. I don't think those BE spots have been very stellar anyway.

I kind of disagree here. The BE needs to win bowl games. This way the top 4 will play bcs guys and the odds of the #5 n 6 winning goes up by playing a Mac/Cusa/Sunbelt also ran. no one will remember who won what bowl in feb. But many will remember that BE went 4-2 in bowls as opposed to 3-3 or 2-4. These lower ranked bowls are for a bit of tv time, and 2 weeks practice. No more and no less. Usually a conf does well to break even $$ wise on any of them.

good points

(10-14-2009 03:31 AM)Hoquista Wrote:  What times are all these Jan 1st games going to start for the Big 10? Doesn't the Capital One and Outback have TV restrictions on them so that no other SEC or Big 10 team can play at those times?

Since the Gator Bowl is likely going to move under the ABC/ESPN umbrella, it's widely expected that the Capital One Bowl exclusivity window will be removed (the current rule is that neither a Big Ten nor an SEC team can be playing during the 2nd half of the Capital One Bowl, which is why you've seen the Outback and Cotton Bowls have 11 am ET/10 am CT start times in prior years). The carrot that will likely be offered to the Capital One Bowl in exchange for that concession is that it will end up being the only bowl game broadcast on ABC (remember that the Rose Bowl and other BCS bowl games are moving to ESPN next year). I'd anticipate that ABC, ESPN and ESPN2 will have the Capital One, Outback and Gator Bowls all starting at 1 pm ET/12 pm CT (even though that means these games are going head-to-head, it's probably still better than having a 10 am start time for viewers in the Midwest). I'm not sure where this new Dallas bowl game will go - it might be a candidate for ESPNU or NFL Network (I just can't see an over-the-air network having much interest in that game if a Big Ten team isn't going to be playing in it the majority of the time).

(10-14-2009 08:00 AM)goodknightfl Wrote:  

(10-13-2009 08:34 PM)TIGER-PAUL Wrote:  I really don't like the BE still having 2 bowls not vs bcs. But its mostly going to effect the 5 and 6 slot. I don't think those BE spots have been very stellar anyway.

I kind of disagree here. The BE needs to win bowl games. This way the top 4 will play bcs guys and the odds of the #5 n 6 winning goes up by playing a Mac/Cusa/Sunbelt also ran. no one will remember who won what bowl in feb. But many will remember that BE went 4-2 in bowls as opposed to 3-3 or 2-4. These lower ranked bowls are for a bit of tv time, and 2 weeks practice. No more and no less. Usually a conf does well to break even $$ wise on any of them.

I guess i disagree. We've tried to publicize our 12-4 bowl record over the past 3 years, but haven't gotten any traction with the fans/media, because the perception is that we play in rinky-dink bowls against lousy, mostly non-BCS competition.

We need to win our bowls, but the bowls have to have status and be against BCS competition.The yankee bowl at least is a step in that direction.

(10-13-2009 05:50 PM)ohio1317 Wrote:  I really wonder why the Big Ten #7 ended up in Texas and the Big 12 #7 ended up in New York. It seems that it would have made a whole lot more sense to reverse that. The Big East and Big Ten are the two conferences primarily in the north and it would have made sense for the two to meet in New York. I can come up with a couple of reasons that the Big 12 may not have ended up in the new Dallas bowl, but I can really only come up with two reasons the Big Ten isn't facing the Big East.

1. The Yankee Bowl (and possibly the Big East too) wanted to be guaranteed two BCS conference teams. When the Big Ten gets 2 BCS bids, it often doesn't have an 8th team. The Big 12 is much more likely to.

2. The Big Ten preferred the Dallas bowl for recruiting or the New Years Day prestige. Either way, I think it would be much better off against the Big East in New York.

Finally, I love New Year Day games and think ignoring their importance is bad, but 5 (and if the BCS bids happened to work out right one year possibly even 6) games on New Years for the Big Ten is more than even I want.

I think that point #1 is much more likely to be the reason as opposed to point #2. If I'm running the Yankee Bowl, I probably want a Big Ten team over a Big 12 team in the New York City market, but I definitely don't want to be scrambling for a non-BCS team if the Big Ten can't fill this bowl slot (which has been the case more often than not). So, the only realistic option for the Yankee Bowl was Big Ten #6. That's really where your point #2 came in for the Big Ten - the conference was already committing Big Ten #6 to the Texas Bowl (reportedly vs. Big 12 #6) and the Texas location for recruits and alums was definitely an overriding factor for that bowl tie-in since it no longer has an Alamo Bowl tie-in. So, I think that the Big Ten would have definitely sent Big Ten #7 to the Yankee Bowl if offered, but the Yankee Bowl probably didn't want that since it's not a "safe" pick to be filled every year. Likewise, I believe the Yankee Bowl would've definitely taken Big Ten #6 over a Big 12 tie-in, but the Big Ten really didn't want that since it would be giving up a presence in Texas (once again, the Dallas bowl is really just a Pyrrhic tie-in that will be used rarely, while the Texas Bowl is a guaranteed game in that state every year).

I'm with you on the New Year's date, as well. While New Year's Day doesn't mean what it used to, I still think that the specific bowls currently played on that day - the Capital One, Outback and Gator - have some extra cache over the other non-BCS bowls, which gave some credence to the "prestige" of that date. Putting the Dallas bowl on that date cheapens that prestige angle - this game is much more suited to a slot on ESPN earlier in the holiday week.

seems like b10 wanted texas more than ny.

I would still think yankee would have taken b10 7/ND.

B10 has had 7,10,7 eligible.
B12 has had 9,8,7.

B10 8, B12 8, SEC 9, ACC 9 all definately appear longshots most years and would need back ups.

Two new bowl games with no TV rights...sounds like an opportunity for Versus to bid.

Matt, ignore this stuff. All the posts in every thread like this are made by a few agitators, acting like BEast fans afraid of the end of the world. This stupid thread, and all others like it are for morons. Besides the nuts in here, what TRUE BEast fan gives a F#CK???

Perhaps C-USA promised the new Dallas bowl that it would be taking the Liberty Bowl's place after the LB goes to the Big East with Memphis.

I seriously doubt that Jerry Jones will be satisfied with CUSA for very long...

bit, Why would Jerry Jones not be happy with CUSA? CUSA has a ton of teams nearby. Houston is getting close to the level of a TCU, Utah, or Boise State. SMU is improving with June Jones at the helm. If the bowl get's the #1 team in CUSA west each year, I suspect it will have good attendance and a pretty competitive high scoring team playing.

Obviously, you haven't thought about it, Brick. Jerry Jones didn't spend a billion bucks for a facility to house a 2nd rate bowl game. He wants the big time - and that's BCS...

This game's at the cotton bowl, Jerry has nothing to do with it at all

correct the old cotton bowl will be in Jerry's crib. the Dallas classic will be in The old Cotton bowl stadium.. #2 Cusa vs a #7 from big 10 should be a good game.

Quo, I think the BE has done just fine in the go round on bowls. BCS, Champs vs ACC, Charlotte vs Acc, Yankee vs Big 12. Those 4 game give BE chance to make some noise, the other 2 games don't matter much the are minor bowls that no one will remember 2 mos after they are over. Except players, and fans of teams involved.

(10-14-2009 12:48 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I seriously doubt that Jerry Jones will be satisfied with CUSA for very long...

I would agree. Jerry does everything big, all the time. CUSA isn't a BCS conference. Add to that they are the second or arguably in some cases the third best non-bcs conference. I just dont see that appealing to him long term. Will the big ten even have 8 bowl eligible teams consistently?

(10-14-2009 06:41 PM)shocknawe Wrote:  

(10-14-2009 12:48 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I seriously doubt that Jerry Jones will be satisfied with CUSA for very long...

I would agree. Jerry does everything big, all the time. CUSA isn't a BCS conference. Add to that they are the second or arguably in some cases the third best non-bcs conference. I just dont see that appealing to him long term. Will the big ten even have 8 bowl eligible teams consistently?

And why would Jerry Jones even be worried about this game? Do you even realize this new bowl game will be at the old Cotton Bowl in Dallas and not at the new Cowboys Stadium in Arlington, right?

I was reading The Dallas Morning News this morning and it said that Dallas businesses are behind this new bowl with a guaranteed payout of $1 million to each team.

If the game's at the old Cotton Bowl, then who cares? It's a mediocre bowl, and isn't BEast related...

(10-14-2009 06:58 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  

(10-14-2009 06:41 PM)shocknawe Wrote:  

(10-14-2009 12:48 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I seriously doubt that Jerry Jones will be satisfied with CUSA for very long...

I would agree. Jerry does everything big, all the time. CUSA isn't a BCS conference. Add to that they are the second or arguably in some cases the third best non-bcs conference. I just dont see that appealing to him long term. Will the big ten even have 8 bowl eligible teams consistently?

And why would Jerry Jones even be worried about this game? Do you even realize this new bowl game will be at the old Cotton Bowl in Dallas and not at the new Cowboys Stadium in Arlington, right?

I was reading The Dallas Morning News this morning and it said that Dallas businesses are behind this new bowl with a guaranteed payout of $1 million to each team.

They may be happy with the west texas bus league division of CUSA for a few years. The minute a team like ECU gets the bid it will kill the deal for lack of interest.

(10-14-2009 07:30 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  If the game's at the old Cotton Bowl, then who cares? It's a mediocre bowl, and isn't BEast related...

Then why reply to a thread you don't even care about?