If UCF is set to go to the Sugar Bowl and Fresno to the Fiesta Bowl- would the SEC tell the Sugar to NOT select a SEC team as a replacement for Alabama?

This way-
Title- Alabama vs Florida St
Orange- Clemson vs SEC team
Sugar- Oregon or Big Ten team vs UCF
Fiesta Baylor vs Fresno
Rose- Ohio St vs Stanford

it would make a ton of sense for the SEC to do that.

I don't think so. The Sugar Bowl is as much a part of SEC culture now as the conference championship game in Atlanta. Plus, with the new agreement for the Big 12/SEC game to be held at the Sugar Bowl for the foreseeable future, it is not worth jumping out just this year.

(11-14-2013 12:00 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  I don't think so. The Sugar Bowl is as much a part of SEC culture now as the conference championship game in Atlanta. Plus, with the new agreement for the Big 12/SEC game to be held at the Sugar Bowl for the foreseeable future, it is not worth jumping out just this year.

I'd agree with you a lot. However, playing UCF for the SEC doesn't do anything.

Also just a thought- the team in the Sugar could instead of Oregon be Oklahoma. That would help the Big 12 out- getting them a 2nd team in while SEC still gets 2 teams in.

(11-14-2013 12:05 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 12:00 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  I don't think so. The Sugar Bowl is as much a part of SEC culture now as the conference championship game in Atlanta. Plus, with the new agreement for the Big 12/SEC game to be held at the Sugar Bowl for the foreseeable future, it is not worth jumping out just this year.

I'd agree with you a lot. However, playing UCF for the SEC doesn't do anything.

Also just a thought- the team in the Sugar could instead of Oregon be Oklahoma. That would help the Big 12 out- getting them a 2nd team in while SEC still gets 2 teams in.

Georgia has played Hawaii and Alabama has played Utah in recent Sugar Bowls... I don't think it is that big of a deal to them. Besides, the OP suggested moving to the Orange Bowl to play Clemson. That is definitely a bigger program, but Georgia and South Carolina already play them this season. It is not as though it would be to compete with a rare opponent.

It is more about all of the major SEC brass and people who annually drop a lot of money going to the Sugar Bowl year in and year out. The SEC and the people living in that footprint often plan well in advance for events in New Orleans surrounding the game regardless of which SEC team is playing in it. This is akin to if the Big 10 would have to play San Diego State or some other highly ranked G5 team in the Rose Bowl because of how the national championship race played out for the PAC. I bet Ohio State would still go to the Rose Bowl instead of another premier bowl because of history and all the other factors surrounding the annual game.

UCF lower by a decent margin to either Hawaii or Utah.

Georgia has zero chance to be in the sugar bowl. South Carolina has a chance but to do that they would have to beat Clemson. I think the SEC team will wind up being a 10-2 Auburn team or a 10-2 Texas A&M team. Either one(especially A&M) would be a rare opponent.

(11-14-2013 01:47 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  It is more about all of the major SEC brass and people who annually drop a lot of money going to the Sugar Bowl year in and year out. The SEC and the people living in that footprint often plan well in advance for events in New Orleans surrounding the game regardless of which SEC team is playing in it. This is akin to if the Big 10 would have to play San Diego State or some other highly ranked G5 team in the Rose Bowl because of how the national championship race played out for the PAC. I bet Ohio State would still go to the Rose Bowl instead of another premier bowl because of history and all the other factors surrounding the annual game.

That's already happened. Wisconsin played TCU in the Rose Bowl the year that Oregon played Auburn in the BCS title game. Wisconsin didn't complain about going to the Rose Bowl that year.

(11-14-2013 02:19 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 01:47 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  It is more about all of the major SEC brass and people who annually drop a lot of money going to the Sugar Bowl year in and year out. The SEC and the people living in that footprint often plan well in advance for events in New Orleans surrounding the game regardless of which SEC team is playing in it. This is akin to if the Big 10 would have to play San Diego State or some other highly ranked G5 team in the Rose Bowl because of how the national championship race played out for the PAC. I bet Ohio State would still go to the Rose Bowl instead of another premier bowl because of history and all the other factors surrounding the annual game.

That's already happened. Wisconsin played TCU in the Rose Bowl the year that Oregon played Auburn in the BCS title game. Wisconsin didn't complain about going to the Rose Bowl that year.

OK, good example, Wedge. As with those Hawaii and Utah games in the Sugar Bowl, TCU was a top 5 or 6 team when they played in that game, which is of course better than where UCF is expected to finish. The point is, though, that the PAC and B1G care more about playing in the Rose Bowl when possible than who they play in the game. The same goes for the SEC in the Sugar Bowl.

(11-14-2013 02:22 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 02:19 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(11-14-2013 01:47 PM)bigblueblindness Wrote:  It is more about all of the major SEC brass and people who annually drop a lot of money going to the Sugar Bowl year in and year out. The SEC and the people living in that footprint often plan well in advance for events in New Orleans surrounding the game regardless of which SEC team is playing in it. This is akin to if the Big 10 would have to play San Diego State or some other highly ranked G5 team in the Rose Bowl because of how the national championship race played out for the PAC. I bet Ohio State would still go to the Rose Bowl instead of another premier bowl because of history and all the other factors surrounding the annual game.

That's already happened. Wisconsin played TCU in the Rose Bowl the year that Oregon played Auburn in the BCS title game. Wisconsin didn't complain about going to the Rose Bowl that year.

OK, good example, Wedge. As with those Hawaii and Utah games in the Sugar Bowl, TCU was a top 5 or 6 team when they played in that game, which is of course better than where UCF is expected to finish. The point is, though, that the PAC and B1G care more about playing in the Rose Bowl when possible than who they play in the game. The same goes for the SEC in the Sugar Bowl.

We'll see for sure- but just saying, it wouldn't be the biggest shock in the world if they did that. Also would allow the Sugar to select potentially a Oklahoma team to guarantee SEC and Big 12 with 2 BCS spots- something that would be great for the Sugar going forward.

Texas A&M fans really want a Sugar Bowl...and they would travel/televise well. No way SEC turns down a Sugar Bowl. It would be akin to the PAC turning it's back on the Rose Bowl.

It might be a coin flip as to whether A&M or Auburn is ranked higher in the BCS, especially if Alabama doesn't blow out Auburn. Beating Missouri will help A&M, but will it be enough?

(11-14-2013 06:21 PM)chargeradio Wrote:  It might be a coin flip as to whether A&M or Auburn is ranked higher in the BCS, especially if Alabama doesn't blow out Auburn. Beating Missouri will help A&M, but will it be enough?

I'm not so sure A&M is a slam dunk over Missouri. The Tigers hold an edge on them in the last three meetings.

(11-14-2013 05:51 PM)LSUtah Wrote:  Texas A&M fans really want a Sugar Bowl...and they would travel/televise well. No way SEC turns down a Sugar Bowl. It would be akin to the PAC turning it's back on the Rose Bowl.

I don't think it would be like the Pac turning it's back on the Rose Bowl at all. It's more like- they get absolutely no value playing UCF in the Sugar, while they would get a ton of value playing a top 5 potentially Clemson team.

I don't think it happens, but if it did happen, wouldn't shock me one bit.