http://ajerseyguy.com/?p=1633

Sounds like they are finally realizing the SEC/B10/ND slot might not be as peachy as first expected, with all the other top notch bowls available, and the possibility that BYU, UL, Boise, others available they now want to open it up to best available for any conference....

Yes its still ACC owned and probably more their call, but the Orange Bowl officials are not signing the deal just yet.

Orange Bowl is a crap bowl with a crap rating, do we really want to be associated with this POS bowl?

The ACC will resist adding a BE team as much as possible, because, as they have clearly shown more than once, they are our enemy.

(09-20-2012 11:43 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  http://ajerseyguy.com/?p=1633

Sounds like they are finally realizing the SEC/B10/ND slot might not be as peachy as first expected, with all the other top notch bowls available, and the possibility that BYU, UL, Boise, others available they now want to open it up to best available for any conference....

Yes its still ACC owned and probably more their call, but the Orange Bowl officials are not signing the deal just yet.

That's a nice spin on that from ajerseyguy, although "flexibility" has never been a term that has been used in favor of the Big East or anyone outside of the Contract Conferences when it comes from bowls. "Flexibility" usually means, "If Big Ten #2 happens to be 9-3 Indiana, we'd rather take top 6 Texas or USC instead." To be honest, the Orange Bowl should be thanking their lucky stars that they got the tie-in that they have. They're not in a position to be complaining whatsoever compared to the access bowls.

(09-20-2012 11:59 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 11:43 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  http://ajerseyguy.com/?p=1633

Sounds like they are finally realizing the SEC/B10/ND slot might not be as peachy as first expected, with all the other top notch bowls available, and the possibility that BYU, UL, Boise, others available they now want to open it up to best available for any conference....

Yes its still ACC owned and probably more their call, but the Orange Bowl officials are not signing the deal just yet.

That's a nice spin on that from ajerseyguy, although "flexibility" has never been a term that has been used in favor of the Big East or anyone outside of the Contract Conferences when it comes from bowls. "Flexibility" usually means, "If Big Ten #2 happens to be 9-3 Indiana, we'd rather take top 6 Texas or USC instead." To be honest, the Orange Bowl should be thanking their lucky stars that they got the tie-in that they have. They're not in a position to be complaining whatsoever compared to the access bowls.

How is this spin?

"The Big East champion has basically lost its seat at the BCS table, unless the champion can also post credentials which meet minimum BCS standards, which means a ranking in the Top 12 of the final polls and even that may be shaky."

"But it also wants some wiggle room– let’s say that in a Cinderella type season a Louisville or Central Florida has a 12-0 record and is ranked No. 5–outside of the Final Four mix–and the best record from the Big Ten and SEC representative and Notre Dame is a 3 loss team."

This is spin?

Help me understand where AJG is blowing smoke by saying that the BE access is goone unless they go undefeated or that the OB would be interested in a BE if it has a "CINDERELLA" season.

(09-20-2012 11:59 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 11:43 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  http://ajerseyguy.com/?p=1633

Sounds like they are finally realizing the SEC/B10/ND slot might not be as peachy as first expected, with all the other top notch bowls available, and the possibility that BYU, UL, Boise, others available they now want to open it up to best available for any conference....

Yes its still ACC owned and probably more their call, but the Orange Bowl officials are not signing the deal just yet.

That's a nice spin on that from ajerseyguy, although "flexibility" has never been a term that has been used in favor of the Big East or anyone outside of the Contract Conferences when it comes from bowls. "Flexibility" usually means, "If Big Ten #2 happens to be 9-3 Indiana, we'd rather take top 6 Texas or USC instead." To be honest, the Orange Bowl should be thanking their lucky stars that they got the tie-in that they have. They're not in a position to be complaining whatsoever compared to the access bowls.

It is unreal how quickly you swoop down on these types of threads.

Do you have a Green Lantern type ring or something?

Ehhhh...I'm over it. If we have a number 6 Big East champ, we would be getting a BCS Bowl anyway-I'd prefer not to get stuck playing the ACC. Thanks for nothing Orange.

Lets see if we can get a tie-in with that new 7th BCS Bowl. I'd rather play pretty much any power conference other than the ACC.

(09-20-2012 12:25 PM)FULL_MONTY Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 11:59 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 11:43 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  http://ajerseyguy.com/?p=1633

Sounds like they are finally realizing the SEC/B10/ND slot might not be as peachy as first expected, with all the other top notch bowls available, and the possibility that BYU, UL, Boise, others available they now want to open it up to best available for any conference....

Yes its still ACC owned and probably more their call, but the Orange Bowl officials are not signing the deal just yet.

That's a nice spin on that from ajerseyguy, although "flexibility" has never been a term that has been used in favor of the Big East or anyone outside of the Contract Conferences when it comes from bowls. "Flexibility" usually means, "If Big Ten #2 happens to be 9-3 Indiana, we'd rather take top 6 Texas or USC instead." To be honest, the Orange Bowl should be thanking their lucky stars that they got the tie-in that they have. They're not in a position to be complaining whatsoever compared to the access bowls.

How is this spin?

"The Big East champion has basically lost its seat at the BCS table, unless the champion can also post credentials which meet minimum BCS standards, which means a ranking in the Top 12 of the final polls and even that may be shaky."

"But it also wants some wiggle room– let’s say that in a Cinderella type season a Louisville or Central Florida has a 12-0 record and is ranked No. 5–outside of the Final Four mix–and the best record from the Big Ten and SEC representative and Notre Dame is a 3 loss team."

This is spin?

Help me understand where AJG is blowing smoke by saying that the BE access is goone unless they go undefeated or that the OB would be interested in a BE if it has a "CINDERELLA" season.

All you had to do is see who was calling it "spin" (Frank The Tank) to realize it was just another cheap shot at a well-known journalistic who dared to post an opposing view to Frank's...hence why Frank called it spin.

Bottom line, Mark's column was anything but spin and spoke about the fact that the Orange Bowl WANTS OPTIONS...as in some years, there are much better options (especially in regards to ticket sales) than getting "stuck" with the #3 or #4 team from the Big Ten/SEC...as many #3 and #4 teams in past Citrus Bowls or Outback bowls haven't sold out their past bowl allotments...let alone some bad ticket sales by some ACC teams in recent Orange Bowl Games (Va Tech and Clemson could barely sell 1/2 their Orange Bowl allotments).

That's spin?

Only to a certain few...and we all know why.

(09-20-2012 12:29 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Ehhhh...I'm over it. If we have a number 6 Big East champ, we would be getting a BCS Bowl anyway-I'd prefer not to get stuck playing the ACC Thanks for nothing Orange. Lets see if we can get a tie-in with that new 7th BCS Bowl. I'd rather play pretty much any power conference other than the ACC.

+1. Please get us away from playing the ACC in any top bowl match up. You get no credit for beat the crap out of the ACC anyway. You can drop 70 on their champ and they are still the "power" conference according to ESPiN.

(09-20-2012 12:31 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 12:25 PM)FULL_MONTY Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 11:59 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 11:43 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  http://ajerseyguy.com/?p=1633

Sounds like they are finally realizing the SEC/B10/ND slot might not be as peachy as first expected, with all the other top notch bowls available, and the possibility that BYU, UL, Boise, others available they now want to open it up to best available for any conference....

Yes its still ACC owned and probably more their call, but the Orange Bowl officials are not signing the deal just yet.

That's a nice spin on that from ajerseyguy, although "flexibility" has never been a term that has been used in favor of the Big East or anyone outside of the Contract Conferences when it comes from bowls. "Flexibility" usually means, "If Big Ten #2 happens to be 9-3 Indiana, we'd rather take top 6 Texas or USC instead." To be honest, the Orange Bowl should be thanking their lucky stars that they got the tie-in that they have. They're not in a position to be complaining whatsoever compared to the access bowls.

How is this spin?

"The Big East champion has basically lost its seat at the BCS table, unless the champion can also post credentials which meet minimum BCS standards, which means a ranking in the Top 12 of the final polls and even that may be shaky."

"But it also wants some wiggle room– let’s say that in a Cinderella type season a Louisville or Central Florida has a 12-0 record and is ranked No. 5–outside of the Final Four mix–and the best record from the Big Ten and SEC representative and Notre Dame is a 3 loss team."

This is spin?

Help me understand where AJG is blowing smoke by saying that the BE access is goone unless they go undefeated or that the OB would be interested in a BE if it has a "CINDERELLA" season.

All you had to do is see who was calling it "spin" (Frank The Tank) to realize it was just another cheap shot at a well-known journalistic who dared to post an opposing view to Frank's...hence why Frank called it spin.

bottom line, Mark's column was anything but spin and spoke about the fact that the Orange Bowl WANTS OPTIONS.

That's spin?

Only to a certain few...and we all know why.

For the record, Mark is an excellent reporter who has a long track record on BE related news.

Some of you are finally realizing Frank for what he is. Like I said many times, he is softer version of Quo and he is a huge B1G snob.

(09-20-2012 12:35 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 12:31 PM)KnightLight Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 12:25 PM)FULL_MONTY Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 11:59 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 11:43 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  http://ajerseyguy.com/?p=1633

Sounds like they are finally realizing the SEC/B10/ND slot might not be as peachy as first expected, with all the other top notch bowls available, and the possibility that BYU, UL, Boise, others available they now want to open it up to best available for any conference....

Yes its still ACC owned and probably more their call, but the Orange Bowl officials are not signing the deal just yet.

That's a nice spin on that from ajerseyguy, although "flexibility" has never been a term that has been used in favor of the Big East or anyone outside of the Contract Conferences when it comes from bowls. "Flexibility" usually means, "If Big Ten #2 happens to be 9-3 Indiana, we'd rather take top 6 Texas or USC instead." To be honest, the Orange Bowl should be thanking their lucky stars that they got the tie-in that they have. They're not in a position to be complaining whatsoever compared to the access bowls.

How is this spin?

"The Big East champion has basically lost its seat at the BCS table, unless the champion can also post credentials which meet minimum BCS standards, which means a ranking in the Top 12 of the final polls and even that may be shaky."

"But it also wants some wiggle room– let’s say that in a Cinderella type season a Louisville or Central Florida has a 12-0 record and is ranked No. 5–outside of the Final Four mix–and the best record from the Big Ten and SEC representative and Notre Dame is a 3 loss team."

This is spin?

Help me understand where AJG is blowing smoke by saying that the BE access is goone unless they go undefeated or that the OB would be interested in a BE if it has a "CINDERELLA" season.

All you had to do is see who was calling it "spin" (Frank The Tank) to realize it was just another cheap shot at a well-known journalistic who dared to post an opposing view to Frank's...hence why Frank called it spin.

bottom line, Mark's column was anything but spin and spoke about the fact that the Orange Bowl WANTS OPTIONS.

That's spin?

Only to a certain few...and we all know why.

For the record, Mark is an excellent reporter who has a long track record on BE related news.

Some of you are finally realizing Frank for what he is. Like I said many times, he is softer version of Quo and he is a huge B1G snob.

Its starting to look like Mark will be the reporter of record for the Big East going forward.

(09-20-2012 12:33 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 12:29 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Ehhhh...I'm over it. If we have a number 6 Big East champ, we would be getting a BCS Bowl anyway-I'd prefer not to get stuck playing the ACC Thanks for nothing Orange. Lets see if we can get a tie-in with that new 7th BCS Bowl. I'd rather play pretty much any power conference other than the ACC.

+1. Please get us away from playing the ACC in any top bowl match up. You get no credit for beat the crap out of the ACC anyway. You can drop 70 on their champ and they are still the "power" conference according to ESPiN.

+2 You guys nailed it. BTW, if Houston would up being in the 7-8 bowl 'BCS' mix, that would be a pretty nice centralized location for a BE tie in. I think I remember hearing that Reliant was going to make a strong push...

(09-20-2012 12:25 PM)FULL_MONTY Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 11:59 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 11:43 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  http://ajerseyguy.com/?p=1633

Sounds like they are finally realizing the SEC/B10/ND slot might not be as peachy as first expected, with all the other top notch bowls available, and the possibility that BYU, UL, Boise, others available they now want to open it up to best available for any conference....

Yes its still ACC owned and probably more their call, but the Orange Bowl officials are not signing the deal just yet.

That's a nice spin on that from ajerseyguy, although "flexibility" has never been a term that has been used in favor of the Big East or anyone outside of the Contract Conferences when it comes from bowls. "Flexibility" usually means, "If Big Ten #2 happens to be 9-3 Indiana, we'd rather take top 6 Texas or USC instead." To be honest, the Orange Bowl should be thanking their lucky stars that they got the tie-in that they have. They're not in a position to be complaining whatsoever compared to the access bowls.

How is this spin?

"The Big East champion has basically lost its seat at the BCS table, unless the champion can also post credentials which meet minimum BCS standards, which means a ranking in the Top 12 of the final polls and even that may be shaky."

"But it also wants some wiggle room– let’s say that in a Cinderella type season a Louisville or Central Florida has a 12-0 record and is ranked No. 5–outside of the Final Four mix–and the best record from the Big Ten and SEC representative and Notre Dame is a 3 loss team."

This is spin?

Help me understand where AJG is blowing smoke by saying that the BE access is goone unless they go undefeated or that the OB would be interested in a BE if it has a "CINDERELLA" season.

OK, if "spin" is too harsh, then it's speculation. The Orange Bowl wants options, which isn't a surprise. The speculation is implying that the Orange Bowl would take a Big East team over the B1G/SEC/ND selection. We have already seen this story with our own eyes: a #3-ranked undefeated Cincinnati team was picked last in the BCS selection order in 2009 and, just last year, a #8-ranked Boise State team got passed over for mediocre Michigan and Virginia Tech squads that were ranked in the double digits. I have no issue with Mark's reporting skills overall. It's just that this particular portion of it is completely speculation.

So, yes, in theory, the Orange Bowl could select a Big East school as an option. However, I find it hard to believe that people are believing/hoping that the Orange Bowl would actually exercise that option or if what they care about is a Big East (or non-AQ) inclusion at all. Wake me up when a 2 or 3-loss Notre Dame/Ohio State/Florida team ever actually gets passed over by a top bowl (or even a 3-loss Wisconsin/South Carolina-type team) for anyone other than a Texas/Oklahoma/USC-type that's higher-ranked. The only thing that's worth anything is if there's a stipulation that the Orange Bowl *has* to take a top 6 Big East squad over a lower-ranked SEC/ND/B1G team. Then that's actually worth something to the Big East. Otherwise, it's just an open-ended access bowl slot that is subject to the discretion of the bowl (and the Big East does NOT want things being up to the discretion of the bowl - it needs to be "we're ranked #6, so we MUST go here" as opposed to "call me maybe").

(09-20-2012 01:13 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 12:25 PM)FULL_MONTY Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 11:59 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 11:43 AM)dgrace4cards Wrote:  http://ajerseyguy.com/?p=1633

Sounds like they are finally realizing the SEC/B10/ND slot might not be as peachy as first expected, with all the other top notch bowls available, and the possibility that BYU, UL, Boise, others available they now want to open it up to best available for any conference....

Yes its still ACC owned and probably more their call, but the Orange Bowl officials are not signing the deal just yet.

That's a nice spin on that from ajerseyguy, although "flexibility" has never been a term that has been used in favor of the Big East or anyone outside of the Contract Conferences when it comes from bowls. "Flexibility" usually means, "If Big Ten #2 happens to be 9-3 Indiana, we'd rather take top 6 Texas or USC instead." To be honest, the Orange Bowl should be thanking their lucky stars that they got the tie-in that they have. They're not in a position to be complaining whatsoever compared to the access bowls.

How is this spin?

"The Big East champion has basically lost its seat at the BCS table, unless the champion can also post credentials which meet minimum BCS standards, which means a ranking in the Top 12 of the final polls and even that may be shaky."

"But it also wants some wiggle room– let’s say that in a Cinderella type season a Louisville or Central Florida has a 12-0 record and is ranked No. 5–outside of the Final Four mix–and the best record from the Big Ten and SEC representative and Notre Dame is a 3 loss team."

This is spin?

Help me understand where AJG is blowing smoke by saying that the BE access is goone unless they go undefeated or that the OB would be interested in a BE if it has a "CINDERELLA" season.

OK, if "spin" is too harsh, then it's speculation. The Orange Bowl wants options, which isn't a surprise. The speculation is implying that the Orange Bowl would take a Big East team over the B1G/SEC/ND selection. We have already seen this story with our own eyes: a #3-ranked undefeated Cincinnati team was picked last in the BCS selection order in 2009 and, just last year, a #8-ranked Boise State team got passed over for mediocre Michigan and Virginia Tech squads that were ranked in the double digits. I have no issue with Mark's reporting skills overall. It's just that this particular portion of it is completely speculation.

So, yes, in theory, the Orange Bowl could select a Big East school as an option. However, I find it hard to believe that people are believing/hoping that the Orange Bowl would actually exercise that option or if what they care about is a Big East (or non-AQ) inclusion at all. Wake me up when a 2 or 3-loss Notre Dame/Ohio State/Florida team ever actually gets passed over by a top bowl (or even a 3-loss Wisconsin/South Carolina-type team) for anyone other than a Texas/Oklahoma/USC-type that's higher-ranked. The only thing that's worth anything is if there's a stipulation that the Orange Bowl *has* to take a top 6 Big East squad over a lower-ranked SEC/ND/B1G team. Then that's actually worth something to the Big East. Otherwise, it's just an open-ended access bowl slot that is subject to the discretion of the bowl (and the Big East does NOT want things being up to the discretion of the bowl).

So his wild speculation is that a BE team that had a Cinderella Season would be attractive to OB?

That is not wild, it is speculation, but not wild. Obviously the OB wants Options or Flexibility, it wouldn't seek it to just invite ND for which they already have a contractual right to invite.

Did AJG say that the BE was going to get a tie in or that the BE would be the pick de jour? No, he said that a CINDERELLA run by a BE team in an evironment where the other options were weak would make the BE attractive.

Not what I would call a great situation for the BE.

You came out swinging though, just very dismissive at the very notion. Why?

You did this yesterday as well when the conversation was about BC basketball being harmed by moving to the ACC. Yet you got on the soap box to extoll how any BE team would take an invite to the ACC even though that was not the topic. Any person can look at their performance and would concede to a certain degree that the move to the ACC for BC has not played out well between the lines.

Again, I ask why?[/b]

(09-20-2012 11:59 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  The ACC will resist adding a BE team as much as possible, because, as they have clearly shown more than once, they are our enemy.

Ain't nothing worse than having your champion's butt handed back to you on national television by a conference you look down your nose at and think is inferior.:patriot:

Playing the ACC in the OB isnt ideal....

(09-20-2012 11:59 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  The ACC will resist adding a BE team as much as possible, because, as they have clearly shown more than once, they are our enemy.

We are their enemy too,though we stupidly never act like it.

(09-20-2012 10:38 PM)fresco Wrote:  

(09-20-2012 11:59 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  The ACC will resist adding a BE team as much as possible, because, as they have clearly shown more than once, they are our enemy.

We are their enemy too,though we stupidly never act like it.

"we"????