ESPN's Andrea Adelson got a much more detailed answer on bowls from Aresco. Still lots of questions, but there are some interesting tidbits in the article and we get a much better sense of what he was alluding to in yesterdays Houston Chronicle quote. He said we will be making some announcements in 2-4 weeks.

On Bowls.

The league is working hard to finalize its bowl lineup, which will look different beginning in 2014. The league will no longer have tie-ins to the New Era Pinstripe Bowl, Belk Bowl or Russell Athletic Bowl. Aresco said that the league is working on continuing its tie-ins with the Beef 'O' Brady's Bowl in St. Petersburg, Fla., the BBVA Compass Bowl in Birmingham, Ala., and the Liberty Bowl in Memphis. He also added that the league has been in discussions about a bowl game in Texas, New Orleans, perhaps the Military Bowl in Washington, D.C., and occasionally in Hawaii (that bowl has a tie-in with Conference USA that ends this season).

Mike Aresco has been a tireless cheerleader for the American Athletic Conference as the old Big East assumes its new identity.
As for opponents, Aresco expects to continue to play the SEC in Birmingham. The Liberty could feature the Big 12, as could the Texas Bowl game. The league wants to keep playing the ACC as well. Aresco also mentioned there have been preliminary discussions about playing the Pac-12 in the new South Florida bowl game the American wants to create, and to play in Marlins Park.



http://espn.go.com/blog/bigeast/post/_/i...e-american

Sounds like she's just rehashing the Chronicle article. Doubt she spent too much time on this.

(06-28-2013 11:16 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  Sounds like she's just rehashing the Chronicle article. Doubt she spent too much time on this.

Nope. The New Orleans Bowl wasn't mentioned in yesterdays article. The Pac-12 was not linked to the Marlins Bowl either. He also has never mentioned "at large" bids---which is a little troublesome. That may indicate he may be expecting to not have enough permanent ties to cover us in some years. This article also ties the so called 2nd bowl game vs the Big-12 to a Texas location.

(06-28-2013 11:20 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:16 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  Sounds like she's just rehashing the Chronicle article. Doubt she spent too much time on this.

Nope. The New Orleans Bowl wasn't mentioned in yesterdays article. The Pac-12 was not linked to the Marlins Bowl either. He also has never mentioned "at large" bids---which is a little troublesome. That may indicate he may be expecting to not have enough permanent ties to cover us in some years. This article also ties the so called 2nd bowl game vs the Big-12 to a Texas location.

If the New Orleans bowl is still linked to the Sun Belt I have no interest in it.

(06-28-2013 11:25 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:20 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:16 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  Sounds like she's just rehashing the Chronicle article. Doubt she spent too much time on this.

Nope. The New Orleans Bowl wasn't mentioned in yesterdays article. The Pac-12 was not linked to the Marlins Bowl either. He also has never mentioned "at large" bids---which is a little troublesome. That may indicate he may be expecting to not have enough permanent ties to cover us in some years. This article also ties the so called 2nd bowl game vs the Big-12 to a Texas location.

If the New Orleans bowl is still linked to the Sun Belt I have no interest in it.

Im ok with it if we are not sending a top team to it. If its against the Sunbelt champ, Id be quite happy with the bowl as a destination for a low to mid-tier AAC team. The bottom of our line-up may as well be in fun locations, because its probably not going to be filled with marquee opponents.

(06-28-2013 11:25 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  If the New Orleans bowl is still linked to the Sun Belt I have no interest in it.

No problem. I have enough interest in it for the BOTH of us. Fun days in New Orleans capped with Tiger football against ANYBODY (especially a conference champ) is always exciting to me.

(06-28-2013 11:28 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:25 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  If the New Orleans bowl is still linked to the Sun Belt I have no interest in it.

No problem. I have enough interest in it for the BOTH of us. Fun days in New Orleans capped with Tiger football against ANYBODY (especially a conference champ) is always exciting to me.

'
See--thats the way I see it. Hell, I'd go to New Orleans even if no football game was there. This just gives me a great excuse.

Look, I don't want this as our #1 game or anything---but as a lower selection bowl, I think New Orleans great. If its vs the Sunbelt champ, its gets even better.

(06-28-2013 11:25 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:20 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:16 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  Sounds like she's just rehashing the Chronicle article. Doubt she spent too much time on this.

Nope. The New Orleans Bowl wasn't mentioned in yesterdays article. The Pac-12 was not linked to the Marlins Bowl either. He also has never mentioned "at large" bids---which is a little troublesome. That may indicate he may be expecting to not have enough permanent ties to cover us in some years. This article also ties the so called 2nd bowl game vs the Big-12 to a Texas location.

If the New Orleans bowl is still linked to the Sun Belt I have no interest in it.

I think it'd be fine if it was something like AAC #6/7 vs. SBC #1.

new orleans is awesome and i'd go there any day of the week. Didn't the ragin cajuns put 40k there two years in a row?

Also, call me pessimistic but SBC#1 would probably put a beating on AAC #6/7. That'd be great for our image...

(06-28-2013 11:55 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  new orleans is awesome and i'd go there any day of the week. Didn't the ragin cajuns put 40k there two years in a row?

Also, call me pessimistic but SBC#1 would probably put a beating on AAC #6/7. That'd be great for our image...

If they are guaranteeing their champ then we'd probably send a 4-6 type pick. This year that could very well be a Houston, SMU, or UCF type team. I think our representative would be just fine.

(06-28-2013 11:55 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Also, call me pessimistic but SBC#1 would probably put a beating on AAC #6/7. That'd be great for our image...

I don't think it would hurt. The Sunbelt is now known to produce some strong champions and the public would know that that they only beat a lower-ranked AAC team. Besides, while parity is going to be problematic for the AAC in some ways, our lower-ranked teams will generally be pretty dang good in bowl games.

(06-28-2013 11:59 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:55 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Also, call me pessimistic but SBC#1 would probably put a beating on AAC #6/7. That'd be great for our image...

I don't think it would hurt. The Sunbelt is now known to produce some pretty strong teams and the public would know that that they only beat a lower-ranked AAC team.

you are giving an awful lot of credit to the general public. When UCF beat a crappy UGA team in the liberty bowl, pretty much everyone considered it a tremendous upset and thought down on uga about the game.

(06-28-2013 12:03 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:59 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:55 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Also, call me pessimistic but SBC#1 would probably put a beating on AAC #6/7. That'd be great for our image...

I don't think it would hurt. The Sunbelt is now known to produce some pretty strong teams and the public would know that that they only beat a lower-ranked AAC team.

you are giving an awful lot of credit to the general public. When UCF beat a crappy UGA team in the liberty bowl, pretty much everyone considered it a tremendous upset and thought down on uga about the game.

Well, if UCF is afraid to play the Sunbelt champ, perhaps the New Orleans Bowl contract can give them an out.

(06-28-2013 12:07 PM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 12:03 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:59 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:55 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Also, call me pessimistic but SBC#1 would probably put a beating on AAC #6/7. That'd be great for our image...

I don't think it would hurt. The Sunbelt is now known to produce some pretty strong teams and the public would know that that they only beat a lower-ranked AAC team.

you are giving an awful lot of credit to the general public. When UCF beat a crappy UGA team in the liberty bowl, pretty much everyone considered it a tremendous upset and thought down on uga about the game.

Well, if UCF is afraid to play the Sunbelt champ, perhaps the New Orleans Bowl contract can give them an out.

im sure UCF itself isn't afraid to play anyone, I am just saying our 6/7th place team would probably lose to the sun belt champ more often than not, and that it would result in a negative look on the conference.

(06-28-2013 12:03 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:59 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:55 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Also, call me pessimistic but SBC#1 would probably put a beating on AAC #6/7. That'd be great for our image...

I don't think it would hurt. The Sunbelt is now known to produce some pretty strong teams and the public would know that that they only beat a lower-ranked AAC team.

you are giving an awful lot of credit to the general public. When UCF beat a crappy UGA team in the liberty bowl, pretty much everyone considered it a tremendous upset and thought down on uga about the game.

And you are putting too much emphasis on one win. Has that UCF win over Georgia changed the publics opinion on UCF and Georgia? The answer is no they are still looked at as a power school with top 10 potential ,UCF still looked an outsider that might be able to upset a P5 team once in awhile.

It's the same way USF is looked at even after beating Notre Dame,Miami,Florida State, Clemsom and Auburn. We are still not looked anywhere close to being on par with them.

(06-28-2013 12:09 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 12:03 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:59 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:55 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Also, call me pessimistic but SBC#1 would probably put a beating on AAC #6/7. That'd be great for our image...

I don't think it would hurt. The Sunbelt is now known to produce some pretty strong teams and the public would know that that they only beat a lower-ranked AAC team.

you are giving an awful lot of credit to the general public. When UCF beat a crappy UGA team in the liberty bowl, pretty much everyone considered it a tremendous upset and thought down on uga about the game.

And you are putting too much emphasis on one win. Has that UCF win over Georgia changed the publics opinion on UCF and Georgia? The answer is no they are still looked at as a power school with top 10 potential ,UCF still looked an outsider that might be able to upset a P5 team once in awhile.

It's the same way USF is looked at even after beating Notre Dame,Miami,Florida State, Clemsom and Auburn. We are still not looked anywhere close to being on par with them.

Unfortunately, teams in AAC are more closely associated with the sun belt than with SEC powers. Our reputation won't be that fullproof. Start piling up losses to sun belt champs and it won't help.

(06-28-2013 12:15 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 12:09 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 12:03 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:59 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:55 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  Also, call me pessimistic but SBC#1 would probably put a beating on AAC #6/7. That'd be great for our image...

I don't think it would hurt. The Sunbelt is now known to produce some pretty strong teams and the public would know that that they only beat a lower-ranked AAC team.

you are giving an awful lot of credit to the general public. When UCF beat a crappy UGA team in the liberty bowl, pretty much everyone considered it a tremendous upset and thought down on uga about the game.

And you are putting too much emphasis on one win. Has that UCF win over Georgia changed the publics opinion on UCF and Georgia? The answer is no they are still looked at as a power school with top 10 potential ,UCF still looked an outsider that might be able to upset a P5 team once in awhile.

It's the same way USF is looked at even after beating Notre Dame,Miami,Florida State, Clemsom and Auburn. We are still not looked anywhere close to being on par with them.

Unfortunately, teams in AAC are more closely associated with the sun belt than with SEC powers. Our reputation won't be that fullproof. Start piling up losses to sun belt champs and it won't help.

However, turning this into a serious discussion; doesn't participating in the NO bowl beat having bowl eligible teams not participating in post season at all?

That's the most embarrassing situation of all, isn't it?

(06-28-2013 12:27 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  doesn't participating in the NO bowl beat having bowl eligible teams not participating in post season at all?

That's the most embarrassing situation of all, isn't it?

Yes, without a doubt. And, as a Memphis fan for 45 years, I can attest to the fact that it HURTS. I suffered that experience too many times.

(06-28-2013 12:27 PM)oldtiger Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 12:15 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 12:09 PM)Cubanbull Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 12:03 PM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  

(06-28-2013 11:59 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  I don't think it would hurt. The Sunbelt is now known to produce some pretty strong teams and the public would know that that they only beat a lower-ranked AAC team.

you are giving an awful lot of credit to the general public. When UCF beat a crappy UGA team in the liberty bowl, pretty much everyone considered it a tremendous upset and thought down on uga about the game.

And you are putting too much emphasis on one win. Has that UCF win over Georgia changed the publics opinion on UCF and Georgia? The answer is no they are still looked at as a power school with top 10 potential ,UCF still looked an outsider that might be able to upset a P5 team once in awhile.

It's the same way USF is looked at even after beating Notre Dame,Miami,Florida State, Clemsom and Auburn. We are still not looked anywhere close to being on par with them.

Unfortunately, teams in AAC are more closely associated with the sun belt than with SEC powers. Our reputation won't be that fullproof. Start piling up losses to sun belt champs and it won't help.

However, turning this into a serious discussion; doesn't participating in the NO bowl beat having bowl eligible teams not participating in post season at all?

That's the most embarrassing situation of all, isn't it?

Which is where I thought this article was very interesting in that it for the first time he seems to say we could end up with no more than the current 5 ties and being part of the "at large" pool could be part of our bowl future. Ive never heard him say that before. That could mean he doesn't think we will land more than 5 bowls--or it could mean he thinks we'd be better off trying to grab vacant P-5 slots in better bowls by allowing some teams the "at large" or backup option.

Aresco hopes to have more bowl tie-ins than the current five, though he also acknowledged the league may be in a good position to receive at-large bids, too. He hopes to have some announcements in the next two to four weeks.

(06-28-2013 11:55 AM)Knights_of_UCF Wrote:  new orleans is awesome and i'd go there any day of the week. Didn't the ragin cajuns put 40k there two years in a row?

Also, call me pessimistic but SBC#1 would probably put a beating on AAC #6/7. That'd be great for our image...

Pessimistic or not, SBC#1 will not put a beating on AMERICAN #6/7... Actually, that statement is quite funny... You see, SBC's #1-3 will have a cakewalk in their conference, while AAC's #7-12 (2015) wouldn't, huge difference.