This is just occurring to them now.

http://ncaabbs.com/showthread.php?tid=54...pid7337478

One thing I'm noting is since the Hawaii Bowl is moving from WAC to MWC starting next year the WAC will be down to only 1 tie-in for 2012, the Potato bowl.

With the WAC bringing 2 new schools on board for 2012 and the MAC adding UMass I wonder what the chances are of the MAC starting a game in San Antonio with the WAC next year?

The WAC could probably talk the NCAA into certifying a second game for the conference with 7 members for next season. The MWC and CUSA can't qualify for any more bowls. The Sun Belt can but again its the Sun Belt and can't provide as much competition as the MAC on a yearly basis.

(12-22-2011 02:59 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  I wonder what the chances are of the MAC starting a game in San Antonio with the WAC next year?

I hope it happens.

Would the Potato still be WAC v MAC? And would that help or hurt the chances of the MAC getting the other bid in San Antonio?

If the WAC was not interested in another WAC v MAC bowl, I would hope that the MAC does what needs to be done to ensure that the WAC v MAC game takes place in San Antonio. If we have to trade the Idaho for San Antonio so be it.

(12-22-2011 10:39 AM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(12-22-2011 02:59 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  I wonder what the chances are of the MAC starting a game in San Antonio with the WAC next year?

I hope it happens.

Would the Potato still be WAC v MAC? And would that help or hurt the chances of the MAC getting the other bid in San Antonio?

If the WAC was not interested in another WAC v MAC bowl, I would hope that the MAC does what needs to be done to ensure that the WAC v MAC game takes place in San Antonio. If we have to trade the Idaho for San Antonio so be it.

I think it would be okay to have both the Potato and San Antonio games for a 2 year cycle then relinquish the Potato in 2014.

There might be room for 2 new bowls with 4 new FBS schools next season (UTSA, TX State, USA, UMass). The MAC could also start a new game in Miami with the Sun Belt as host.

Or....it might make sense for that game in San Antonio to simply be SBC vs. WAC with both conferences needing a third game. That might make more sense for the WAC to partner with the SBC given that the SBC averaged 23,000 per home football contest last season.

(12-22-2011 01:37 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(12-22-2011 10:39 AM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(12-22-2011 02:59 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  I wonder what the chances are of the MAC starting a game in San Antonio with the WAC next year?

I hope it happens.

Would the Potato still be WAC v MAC? And would that help or hurt the chances of the MAC getting the other bid in San Antonio?

If the WAC was not interested in another WAC v MAC bowl, I would hope that the MAC does what needs to be done to ensure that the WAC v MAC game takes place in San Antonio. If we have to trade the Idaho for San Antonio so be it.

I think it would be okay to have both the Potato and San Antonio games for a 2 year cycle then relinquish the Potato in 2014.

There might be room for 2 new bowls with 4 new FBS schools next season (UTSA, TX State, USA, UMass). The MAC could also start a new game in Miami with the Sun Belt as host.

Or....it might make sense for that game in San Antonio to simply be SBC vs. WAC with both conferences needing a third game. That might make more sense for the WAC to partner with the SBC given that the SBC averaged 23,000 per home football contest last season.

No, let the SBC have Idaho.

San Antonio should be WAC v MAC, champs preferably.

MAC ≫ SBC, no matter what they'd like to think. MAC deserves the better bowl. I don't think that the SBC would travel any better to SA than the MAC, necessarily. I would go every year if NIU was there (very, very likely ).

(12-22-2011 01:41 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(12-22-2011 01:37 PM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  

(12-22-2011 10:39 AM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(12-22-2011 02:59 AM)Louis Kitton Wrote:  I wonder what the chances are of the MAC starting a game in San Antonio with the WAC next year?

I hope it happens.

Would the Potato still be WAC v MAC? And would that help or hurt the chances of the MAC getting the other bid in San Antonio?

If the WAC was not interested in another WAC v MAC bowl, I would hope that the MAC does what needs to be done to ensure that the WAC v MAC game takes place in San Antonio. If we have to trade the Idaho for San Antonio so be it.

I think it would be okay to have both the Potato and San Antonio games for a 2 year cycle then relinquish the Potato in 2014.

There might be room for 2 new bowls with 4 new FBS schools next season (UTSA, TX State, USA, UMass). The MAC could also start a new game in Miami with the Sun Belt as host.

Or....it might make sense for that game in San Antonio to simply be SBC vs. WAC with both conferences needing a third game. That might make more sense for the WAC to partner with the SBC given that the SBC averaged 23,000 per home football contest last season.

No, let the SBC have Idaho.

San Antonio should be WAC v MAC, champs preferably.

MAC ≫ SBC, no matter what they'd like to think. MAC deserves the better bowl. I don't think that the SBC would travel any better to SA than the MAC, necessarily. I would go every year if NIU was there (very, very likely ).

The MAC is under contract with the Idaho game for 2 more seasons.

The WAC has 1 bowl next year. The SBC has only 2 bowls (New Orleans, Go Daddy). With the WAC upgrading 2 FCS schools and the SBC upgrading 1 it makes a lot of sense to have the two lowest rated conferences square off against each other in San Antonio.

The circumstances don't look favorable for the MAC in San Antonio. The MAC could try to instead start a bowl game in Boston against the ACC and offer the SBC a backup to the game.

I kind of like the Boise bowl hook up....similar to Mobile with great local fans and support.

(12-22-2011 05:14 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote:  I kind of like the Boise bowl hook up....similar to Mobile with great local fans and support.

Yeah, the local support is great.

Keep it.

MAC Bowls:
- San Antonio
- Detroit
- Boise
- Mobile
- Puerto Rico

there won't be any new bowl games until older ones die, they can barely fill what they have now. Also, there are currently a couple of potential bowls already waiting in the wings, most notably the Cure Bowl which would take place at Brighthouse Stadium in Orlando.

They better not add anymore bowls, even when some go away. 70 bowls is way to ******* many. There should not be more that 50% of teams bowling. I don't care if the MAC loses a bowl game, get rid of some anyways.

In all honesty, it makes much more sense for SBC to gain a bowl in San Antonio than the MAC. The closest MAC school would be about 1200 miles away - 100 less than the furthest SBC school. In terms of performance, you won't get too much drop-off in either league. Both are about equal in terms of level of play (or so it appears). However, location is everything. If North Texas were to play in such a bowl, chances are no MAC team would come close to the number of fans they'd bring. IMO.

(12-22-2011 09:57 PM)mtsufan561 Wrote:  In all honesty, it makes much more sense for SBC to gain a bowl in San Antonio than the MAC. The closest MAC school would be about 1200 miles away - 100 less than the furthest SBC school. In terms of performance, you won't get too much drop-off in either league. Both are about equal in terms of level of play (or so it appears). However, location is everything. If North Texas were to play in such a bowl, chances are no MAC team would come close to the number of fans they'd bring. IMO.

+1

As a MAC fan I'm starting to get nervous about the next round of bowls. It would be a huge recruiting boost to the SBC if they can land San Antonio.

(12-22-2011 09:52 PM)mufanatehc Wrote:  there won't be any new bowl games until older ones die, they can barely fill what they have now. Also, there are currently a couple of potential bowls already waiting in the wings, most notably the Cure Bowl which would take place at Brighthouse Stadium in Orlando.

A third bowl in Orlando behind the Capital One and Champs Sports Bowl?

I doubt that will happen now that UCF is heading to the Big East.

If it does happen it has no chance of being a CUSA bowl now that the conference doesn't have a Florida presence.

(12-22-2011 09:57 PM)mtsufan561 Wrote:  In all honesty, it makes much more sense for SBC to gain a bowl in San Antonio than the MAC. The closest MAC school would be about 1200 miles away - 100 less than the furthest SBC school. In terms of performance, you won't get too much drop-off in either league. Both are about equal in terms of level of play (or so it appears). However, location is everything. If North Texas were to play in such a bowl, chances are no MAC team would come close to the number of fans they'd bring. IMO.

SBC teams don't travel to UNT games.

MAC teams would travel just as well as SBC teams to a San Antonio bowl and the chances are far better that the MAC can provide a competitive team.

Of course, if UTSA ends up in the SBC then both conferences can be represented.

(12-22-2011 06:02 PM)Howl-n-Prowl Wrote:  

(12-22-2011 05:14 PM)exCincy Kid Wrote:  I kind of like the Boise bowl hook up....similar to Mobile with great local fans and support.

Yeah, the local support is great.

Keep it.

MAC Bowls:
- San Antonio
- Detroit
- Boise
- Mobile
- Puerto Rico

I've always thought Puerto Rico or the us Virgin Islands would be kind of cool. If UB ever made a Bowl game there I could convince to wife to make a family vacation out of it... Detroit? not so much

(12-22-2011 09:55 PM)MidnightBlueGold Wrote:  They better not add anymore bowls, even when some go away. 70 bowls is way to ******* many. There should not be more that 50% of teams bowling. I don't care if the MAC loses a bowl game, get rid of some anyways.

Yeah, All 140 teams in bowls makes it hard to follow all of the games

The MAC needs another bowl in their region. We don't travel because we don't get the luxury of playing home games besides the LCB. Indi could hold one. IDC if the stadium looks empty. But there should be another place where a MAC team could bring 15k. That won't happen in Boise or Mobile.... The SBC gets Mobile, and NO, and this year St. Pete. Are you kidding me? 3 home games for gosh sake.

Bowls should feature big regional matchups. The attendance for a game between, say, Arkansas State and San Jose State would be pitiful compared to a game between stAte and a team like Southern Mississippi. I am always a proponent for regional bowl games. There would be some big-name matchups too, like perhaps SBC and MAC top level teams going head-to-head, like we've got at the GoDaddy.com Bowl, which I like to think of as the non-BCS BCS game.

(12-23-2011 10:33 PM)mtsufan561 Wrote:  Bowls should feature big regional matchups. The attendance for a game between, say, Arkansas State and San Jose State would be pitiful compared to a game between stAte and a team like Southern Mississippi. I am always a proponent for regional bowl games. There would be some big-name matchups too, like perhaps SBC and MAC top level teams going head-to-head, like we've got at the GoDaddy.com Bowl, which I like to think of as the non-BCS BCS game.

I like the godaddy, but it's an SBC home game. We need one more where we aren't the away team. More of an equal travel for both team would be nice. The Idaho bowl the WAC team is close, mobile is close for the opponent. LCB is close for us. One more tie in for a home game would be nice.