Topcard91 Wrote:To continue the thread that is obviously keeping all of our minds occupied during the off season.

People continue to say that Memphis and the Liberty Bowl are some how connected. I did the math over on the C-USA board and here is how it stands. The Liberty Bowl does NOT want Memphis in its bowl game. It will cost the sponsers/city about $4,000,000 if the Tigers were in the game.

Link

http://www.ncaabbs.com/forums/cusa/phpbb...1&start=50


This was the math problem.

Quote:AND why would a bowl want a local team so they can cut all of those numbers in half. Having Memphis in that Bowl would cut $2,000,000 from the local economy just from hotels(10,000 rooms/$100 per room/2 people per room/2 nights). Probably another $2,000,000 from restaurants(20,000/$50 per day/2 days). These are very conservative numbers. Most people would be there into a 3rd day.

To make up that $4,000,000 shortfall the Liberty Bowl would have to sell a additional 100,000 tickets @ $40 each. Since the bowl averages over 40,000 every year. Memphis Tiger fans would have to guarantee that game has over 140,000 fans!!!

Do you all see the math problem here. NO businessman in Memphis, if they are REALLY a businessman, is going to piss away $4,000,000 a year just to keep the University of Memphis happy.

If someone has a problem with the math just let me know.

Plus there is a idea that Memphis has this major market which if you look at the City of Memphis website, their MSA (Metro Stats Area???) is at 1.3 million people. This covers parts of TN, MS, and Arkansas. If you took the same sq. miles as the Memphis MSA, placed it over Greenville, NC, the population would be 1.7 million people with higher annual incomes and higher educational levels. So Greenville's MSA will give you more people with more money!!!

All that being said if the Big East was going to add a 9th member, it would be UCF. The BE powers seem to like the hulking Florida schools.

If the Liberty Bowl was solely motiviated by money as per your post, I don't think Liberty Bowl would have invited CUSA in the first place. The Liberty could have invited Big 12, Big 10, or ACC. It seems to me the Liberty Bowl folks and the city of Memphis went out of their way to be supportive the U of Memphis. For this reason, I think Liberty would invite U of Memphis in a heartbeat if the Tigers were elgible. So I do think the Liberty Bowl is connected to Memphis Tigers.

On the other hand, there are probably some limits to this relationship, for example, the BE could not get its #4 team accepted into Liberty. Whether Memphis is in BE or not, the BE would have to commit a #3 (currently committed to Meineke) to have Liberty Bowl spot.

Another example is that Liberty Bowl likes SEC but refused to take SEC #7 and that is how the MWC vs CUSA matchup came to be.

And, as I posted previously, I could see Memphis in BE for football with Liberty not taking BE as a host conference but putting in a provision allowing Memphis U to appear in the Liberty.

I am pleased with CUSA's performance and attendance so far with the Liberty. Compared to historical attendance averages, the Liberty Bowl with CUSA/SEC had done well.

Krocker Krapp Wrote:

Maize Wrote:Coog you FINALLY make a point that has some merit. You are right, once we go down the Playoff road there will be no turning back and that is a good thing.

Yes, it is good to be on the other sides of the tracks but contrary to popular belief on the C-USA Boards UC, UofL and USF fans do feel for the programs that are now shut out of the process.

That could be some of the reason why you see so many Big East expansion threads on this board started by us. Maybe it is a hidden desire to help out our former conference mates.

I would love to see this one day, a 16 Team Playoff with the 11 Conference Champs getting a automatic bid with 5 At Large Teams. First round games would be at the higher seed home site and the rest would be at Bowl Sites.

This annoys me. Several months ago, I made that point in a thread, and certain posters practically tried to crucify me for suggesting such a thing. You were not one of those people but why are you able to so easily admit this while some parties resort to making pretentious excuses and slamming other schools instead? We should all just realize that certain CUSA members have certain lobbies in the Big East and, ultimately, that could end up being a huge reason why no changes ever end up taking place.

Actually Maize, we are in a pretty good position. College football is all about confrences and bowls. Win your league and go to a bowl....there really isn't much more to it when you think about it. That what we did last year and Louisville as well. The BCS money would be nice but its only a small portion of an athletic budget, somewhat less than 10% at most.
CUSA has enough decent bowls for most of our teams who qualify.

Tallgrass Wrote:

Topcard91 Wrote:To continue the thread that is obviously keeping all of our minds occupied during the off season.

People continue to say that Memphis and the Liberty Bowl are some how connected. I did the math over on the C-USA board and here is how it stands. The Liberty Bowl does NOT want Memphis in its bowl game. It will cost the sponsers/city about $4,000,000 if the Tigers were in the game.

Link

http://www.ncaabbs.com/forums/cusa/phpbb...1&start=50


This was the math problem.

Quote:AND why would a bowl want a local team so they can cut all of those numbers in half. Having Memphis in that Bowl would cut $2,000,000 from the local economy just from hotels(10,000 rooms/$100 per room/2 people per room/2 nights). Probably another $2,000,000 from restaurants(20,000/$50 per day/2 days). These are very conservative numbers. Most people would be there into a 3rd day.

To make up that $4,000,000 shortfall the Liberty Bowl would have to sell a additional 100,000 tickets @ $40 each. Since the bowl averages over 40,000 every year. Memphis Tiger fans would have to guarantee that game has over 140,000 fans!!!

Do you all see the math problem here. NO businessman in Memphis, if they are REALLY a businessman, is going to piss away $4,000,000 a year just to keep the University of Memphis happy.

If someone has a problem with the math just let me know.

Plus there is a idea that Memphis has this major market which if you look at the City of Memphis website, their MSA (Metro Stats Area???) is at 1.3 million people. This covers parts of TN, MS, and Arkansas. If you took the same sq. miles as the Memphis MSA, placed it over Greenville, NC, the population would be 1.7 million people with higher annual incomes and higher educational levels. So Greenville's MSA will give you more people with more money!!!

All that being said if the Big East was going to add a 9th member, it would be UCF. The BE powers seem to like the hulking Florida schools.

If the Liberty Bowl was solely motiviated by money as per your post, I don't think Liberty Bowl would have invited CUSA in the first place. The Liberty could have invited Big 12, Big 10, or ACC. It seems to me the Liberty Bowl folks and the city of Memphis went out of their way to be supportive the U of Memphis. For this reason, I think Liberty would invite U of Memphis in a heartbeat if the Tigers were elgible. So I do think the Liberty Bowl is connected to Memphis Tigers.

On the other hand, there are probably some limits to this relationship, for example, the BE could not get its #4 team accepted into Liberty. Whether Memphis is in BE or not, the BE would have to commit a #3 (currently committed to Meineke) to have Liberty Bowl spot.

Another example is that Liberty Bowl likes SEC but refused to take SEC #7 and that is how the MWC vs CUSA matchup came to be.

And, as I posted previously, I could see Memphis in BE for football with Liberty not taking BE as a host conference but putting in a provision allowing Memphis U to appear in the Liberty.

I am pleased with CUSA's performance and attendance so far with the Liberty. Compared to historical attendance averages, the Liberty Bowl with CUSA/SEC had done well.

If liberty had #3 in the BE which its payout would currently demand they would be insane to include a memphis provision. They would have had top 15 rutgers this past season and in their lucky years when Notre Dame mooches a bowl they'd get the BE #2. Recent history says they'd get pretty darn good profile out of the BE #3/2 teams.

Now where did it say that the cotton bowl was going to dump either side for no one. It say that it wants to be included with the roatation of the NC game and nothing else. That is all that means and nothing else. First of all, the sec can go deep with that line up at bowls with alot more people than most. The bowls people know this and that why most want to side with them. The big 12 people also know that too and will not mess with the tradition of that bowl either. As far as changing bowls, not unless there are big benefits. For example, I could see the acc dropping the poinsetta bowl for the tampa bowl even if it had a smaller payout because of travel expense. But the big 12 would not drop the idependence for tampa bowl with that same payout for the acc because it would cost them more to travel, There would be no benefit for it. The largest stike against the big east is one thing- not enough team that travel like louisville or W Virginia. That's all. They are a strong conference but might need a little help with schedule but those are minor compared to the other.

L-yes Wrote:

Tallgrass Wrote:

Topcard91 Wrote:To continue the thread that is obviously keeping all of our minds occupied during the off season.

People continue to say that Memphis and the Liberty Bowl are some how connected. I did the math over on the C-USA board and here is how it stands. The Liberty Bowl does NOT want Memphis in its bowl game. It will cost the sponsers/city about $4,000,000 if the Tigers were in the game.

Link

http://www.ncaabbs.com/forums/cusa/phpbb...1&start=50


This was the math problem.

Quote:AND why would a bowl want a local team so they can cut all of those numbers in half. Having Memphis in that Bowl would cut $2,000,000 from the local economy just from hotels(10,000 rooms/$100 per room/2 people per room/2 nights). Probably another $2,000,000 from restaurants(20,000/$50 per day/2 days). These are very conservative numbers. Most people would be there into a 3rd day.

To make up that $4,000,000 shortfall the Liberty Bowl would have to sell a additional 100,000 tickets @ $40 each. Since the bowl averages over 40,000 every year. Memphis Tiger fans would have to guarantee that game has over 140,000 fans!!!

Do you all see the math problem here. NO businessman in Memphis, if they are REALLY a businessman, is going to piss away $4,000,000 a year just to keep the University of Memphis happy.

If someone has a problem with the math just let me know.

Plus there is a idea that Memphis has this major market which if you look at the City of Memphis website, their MSA (Metro Stats Area???) is at 1.3 million people. This covers parts of TN, MS, and Arkansas. If you took the same sq. miles as the Memphis MSA, placed it over Greenville, NC, the population would be 1.7 million people with higher annual incomes and higher educational levels. So Greenville's MSA will give you more people with more money!!!

All that being said if the Big East was going to add a 9th member, it would be UCF. The BE powers seem to like the hulking Florida schools.

If the Liberty Bowl was solely motiviated by money as per your post, I don't think Liberty Bowl would have invited CUSA in the first place. The Liberty could have invited Big 12, Big 10, or ACC. It seems to me the Liberty Bowl folks and the city of Memphis went out of their way to be supportive the U of Memphis. For this reason, I think Liberty would invite U of Memphis in a heartbeat if the Tigers were elgible. So I do think the Liberty Bowl is connected to Memphis Tigers.

On the other hand, there are probably some limits to this relationship, for example, the BE could not get its #4 team accepted into Liberty. Whether Memphis is in BE or not, the BE would have to commit a #3 (currently committed to Meineke) to have Liberty Bowl spot.

Another example is that Liberty Bowl likes SEC but refused to take SEC #7 and that is how the MWC vs CUSA matchup came to be.

And, as I posted previously, I could see Memphis in BE for football with Liberty not taking BE as a host conference but putting in a provision allowing Memphis U to appear in the Liberty.

I am pleased with CUSA's performance and attendance so far with the Liberty. Compared to historical attendance averages, the Liberty Bowl with CUSA/SEC had done well.

If liberty had #3 in the BE which its payout would currently demand they would be insane to include a memphis provision. They would have had top 15 rutgers this past season and in their lucky years when Notre Dame mooches a bowl they'd get the BE #2. Recent history says they'd get pretty darn good profile out of the BE #3/2 teams.

They had the Big East before and were not happy with it.

L-yes Wrote:

Tallgrass Wrote:

Topcard91 Wrote:To continue the thread that is obviously keeping all of our minds occupied during the off season.

People continue to say that Memphis and the Liberty Bowl are some how connected. I did the math over on the C-USA board and here is how it stands. The Liberty Bowl does NOT want Memphis in its bowl game. It will cost the sponsers/city about $4,000,000 if the Tigers were in the game.

Link

http://www.ncaabbs.com/forums/cusa/phpbb...1&start=50


This was the math problem.

Quote:AND why would a bowl want a local team so they can cut all of those numbers in half. Having Memphis in that Bowl would cut $2,000,000 from the local economy just from hotels(10,000 rooms/$100 per room/2 people per room/2 nights). Probably another $2,000,000 from restaurants(20,000/$50 per day/2 days). These are very conservative numbers. Most people would be there into a 3rd day.

To make up that $4,000,000 shortfall the Liberty Bowl would have to sell a additional 100,000 tickets @ $40 each. Since the bowl averages over 40,000 every year. Memphis Tiger fans would have to guarantee that game has over 140,000 fans!!!

Do you all see the math problem here. NO businessman in Memphis, if they are REALLY a businessman, is going to piss away $4,000,000 a year just to keep the University of Memphis happy.

If someone has a problem with the math just let me know.

Plus there is a idea that Memphis has this major market which if you look at the City of Memphis website, their MSA (Metro Stats Area???) is at 1.3 million people. This covers parts of TN, MS, and Arkansas. If you took the same sq. miles as the Memphis MSA, placed it over Greenville, NC, the population would be 1.7 million people with higher annual incomes and higher educational levels. So Greenville's MSA will give you more people with more money!!!

All that being said if the Big East was going to add a 9th member, it would be UCF. The BE powers seem to like the hulking Florida schools.

If the Liberty Bowl was solely motiviated by money as per your post, I don't think Liberty Bowl would have invited CUSA in the first place. The Liberty could have invited Big 12, Big 10, or ACC. It seems to me the Liberty Bowl folks and the city of Memphis went out of their way to be supportive the U of Memphis. For this reason, I think Liberty would invite U of Memphis in a heartbeat if the Tigers were elgible. So I do think the Liberty Bowl is connected to Memphis Tigers.

On the other hand, there are probably some limits to this relationship, for example, the BE could not get its #4 team accepted into Liberty. Whether Memphis is in BE or not, the BE would have to commit a #3 (currently committed to Meineke) to have Liberty Bowl spot.

Another example is that Liberty Bowl likes SEC but refused to take SEC #7 and that is how the MWC vs CUSA matchup came to be.

And, as I posted previously, I could see Memphis in BE for football with Liberty not taking BE as a host conference but putting in a provision allowing Memphis U to appear in the Liberty.

I am pleased with CUSA's performance and attendance so far with the Liberty. Compared to historical attendance averages, the Liberty Bowl with CUSA/SEC had done well.

If liberty had #3 in the BE which its payout would currently demand they would be insane to include a memphis provision. They would have had top 15 rutgers this past season and in their lucky years when Notre Dame mooches a bowl they'd get the BE #2. Recent history says they'd get pretty darn good profile out of the BE #3/2 teams.

The Liberty Bowl would love to have Louisville or West Virginia. However, none of the other Big East schools are particularly attractive to the Liberty Bowl.

I don't think there was ever talk of the Liberty getting Big East #2. I think it was always Big East #3.

Tallgrass, you might need to know that several team in the big east has played in the liberty bowl at philly and Memphis. It came to Memphis from philly and yes, Memphis Tigers are reason for the CUSA affilation too. Believe that or not! As someone pointed out, if not for Memphis, then why would they be with CUSA anyways? CUSA was never out of the talks, it was who will we(usa) be playing. Ecthart(or something like that) said on a local talk show, that they had calls from all of the other conference on the day that the decision was made to dump the MWC was annouced. Also that CUSA was never excluded from the bowl or being replace either.

TexanMark Wrote:

CyberBull Wrote:

TexanMark Wrote:UCF would bring a secend tier bowl game (3rd tier at worst).

What bowl game would they deliver?

Capital One Bowl? - no way
Champs Bowl? - it will be hard to steal this game from the ACC

IMO, its doubtful that Orlando would even think that they can support a third bowl game.

Instead, the BigEast has already publically stated that will investigate a bowl game in the Tampa Bay area, which will likely mean USF will play a large role in getting such a game off the ground.

UCF if in the Big East could possibly deliver an oncampus bowl game in their stadium if the Champs can't be delivered. I'd love to see: BCS, Gator, Muffler, St Pete or Tampa, Orlando (Champs or UCF) and maybe Toronto.

Don't be so sure the Big East can't get a part of the Champs bowl.

If the BE got the champs bowl it wont be from the ACC... it would be from the big 12. I think the BE getting champs with or without UCF is a real real long shot.

L-yes Wrote:There may not be a more irrelevant BCS program in the country.

What the hell do you call, UNC, Wake, Duke, and NC State.

Seriously do you see a Tennesse or a Florida or Miami or Florida State we are competing with in our state? It's like having 4 Kentucky's hell App State is better than Duke.

The Cotton Bowl starts at 11AM because of SEC rules which state no two SEC can be in two different bowls and on tv at the same time. I think SEC plays Big 10 in a very nice Floirda Bowl that the Cotton Bowl/Big 12 have to accomodate. SEC is going to have to make some decisions/accomodations as Big 12/Cotton Bowl won't tolerate that in the future with the new domed Cotton Bowl.

gdayre Wrote:Now where did it say that the cotton bowl was going to dump either side for no one. It say that it wants to be included with the roatation of the NC game and nothing else. That is all that means and nothing else. First of all, the sec can go deep with that line up at bowls with alot more people than most. The bowls people know this and that why most want to side with them. The big 12 people also know that too and will not mess with the tradition of that bowl either. As far as changing bowls, not unless there are big benefits. For example, I could see the acc dropping the poinsetta bowl for the tampa bowl even if it had a smaller payout because of travel expense. But the big 12 would not drop the idependence for tampa bowl with that same payout for the acc because it would cost them more to travel, There would be no benefit for it. The largest stike against the big east is one thing- not enough team that travel like louisville or W Virginia. That's all. They are a strong conference but might need a little help with schedule but those are minor compared to the other.

What you all are forgetting is that C-USA teams have historically brought huge numbers of fans and MWC did not. Plus the Liberty Bowl is right in the middle of C-USA and not a bad trip for any team. AND they get the #1 pick from C-USA. They fully realize that the #4 pick from the BE is a crap shoot when it comes to travelling fans. After WVU and UL, nobody knows. They know Pitt, Syracuse, UConn, and Cincy will not bring anyone. USF is still questionable at best unless they give away tickets. Rutgers is a recent phenom. Would Rutgers take a bunch of fans if they were 7-5 and 4th in the Big East??

They know that ECU, USM, and Memphis will bring over 15,000 people. Even Houston took over 10,000.

So the Liberty Bowl did in fact look at the dollar signs. If the BE #4 would make them more money, they would be all over it. Even the Meineke Bowl with BE#3 backed away for a year. Why would anyone think that the Big East #4 would do better.

Topcard91 Wrote:What you all are forgetting is that C-USA teams have historically brought huge numbers of fans and MWC did not. Plus the Liberty Bowl is right in the middle of C-USA and not a bad trip for any team. AND they get the #1 pick from C-USA. They fully realize that the #4 pick from the BE is a crap shoot when it comes to travelling fans. After WVU and UL, nobody knows. They know Pitt, Syracuse, UConn, and Cincy will not bring anyone. USF is still questionable at best unless they give away tickets. Rutgers is a recent phenom. Would Rutgers take a bunch of fans if they were 7-5 and 4th in the Big East??

They know that ECU, USM, and Memphis will bring over 15,000 people. Even Houston took over 10,000.

So the Liberty Bowl did in fact look at the dollar signs. If the BE #4 would make them more money, they would be all over it. Even the Meineke Bowl with BE#3 backed away for a year. Why would anyone think that the Big East #4 would do better.

That's not the full situation. The Charlotte Bowl only backed away to sign a 1 year deal with Navy because the Big East told them they were getting the 4th team, and that the league was giving #3 to Houston last season. That is no longer the case.

As for the bowl in general, the Liberty topic really is not worth arguing over. Its crystal clear to Memphis fans and most Big East & CUSA fans I sense, that the Liberty follows the University of Memphis, with the only exception being if they were able to ensure a nice BCS v. BCS matchup when Memphis was a member of neither league. That isn't even a guaranteed thing though. It doesn't follow ECU, USM, or Houston. Those schools might bring fans, but that isn't the main issue. If Memphis is no longer in CUSA, CUSA has a 0.1% chance at retaining the bowl. Its nearly that simple.

TexanMark Wrote:

CyberBull Wrote:

TexanMark Wrote:UCF would bring a secend tier bowl game (3rd tier at worst).

What bowl game would they deliver?

Capital One Bowl? - no way
Champs Bowl? - it will be hard to steal this game from the ACC

IMO, its doubtful that Orlando would even think that they can support a third bowl game.

Instead, the BigEast has already publically stated that will investigate a bowl game in the Tampa Bay area, which will likely mean USF will play a large role in getting such a game off the ground.

I think the BE FB Conf should add UCF, Memphis and ECU FB only, because thier BB is Not strong yet. They should split from the Non FB schools in 2010. Leave the 12th open for ND.

Sad to say this will never happen because Mike Trangese is a Providence die hard, he is content with what the Conference is...........

I'm afraid it will

UCF if in the Big East could possibly deliver an oncampus bowl game in their stadium if the Champs can't be delivered. I'd love to see: BCS, Gator, Muffler, St Pete or Tampa, Orlando (Champs or UCF) and maybe Toronto.

Don't be so sure the Big East can't get a part of the Champs bowl.

TopCoog Wrote:

Krocker Krapp Wrote:

Maize Wrote:Coog you FINALLY make a point that has some merit. You are right, once we go down the Playoff road there will be no turning back and that is a good thing.

Yes, it is good to be on the other sides of the tracks but contrary to popular belief on the C-USA Boards UC, UofL and USF fans do feel for the programs that are now shut out of the process.

That could be some of the reason why you see so many Big East expansion threads on this board started by us. Maybe it is a hidden desire to help out our former conference mates.

I would love to see this one day, a 16 Team Playoff with the 11 Conference Champs getting a automatic bid with 5 At Large Teams. First round games would be at the higher seed home site and the rest would be at Bowl Sites.

This annoys me. Several months ago, I made that point in a thread, and certain posters practically tried to crucify me for suggesting such a thing. You were not one of those people but why are you able to so easily admit this while some parties resort to making pretentious excuses and slamming other schools instead? We should all just realize that certain CUSA members have certain lobbies in the Big East and, ultimately, that could end up being a huge reason why no changes ever end up taking place.

Actually Maize, we are in a pretty good position. College football is all about confrences and bowls. Win your league and go to a bowl....there really isn't much more to it when you think about it. That what we did last year and Louisville as well. The BCS money would be nice but its only a small portion of an athletic budget, somewhat less than 10% at most.
CUSA has enough decent bowls for most of our teams who qualify.

Both BE and CUSA exceeded expections; the BE especially so and it started with West Va whipping Georgia in Sugar Bowl. BE started with historical relationships with some very good bowls plus the Notre Dame card to play. And another strong card with basketball.

For CUSA, the road has been a longer bumpier road to travel just to get started in the race. Just to get CUSA-12 organized was quite a job...and then go into bowl and tv negotiations. Football was thought capable of being a good confernce but our basketball sucks to no end and the basketball portion of the CUSA contract is almost nonexistant if it weren't for Memphis. Given expectations, I am satisfied where we are. CUSA has enough positives with the tv deal and bowls tie ins that CUSA has a strong enough foundation to prove itself...and hopefully better the tv and bowls in the next round of negotiations.

Tallgrass Wrote:

TopCoog Wrote:

Krocker Krapp Wrote:

Maize Wrote:Coog you FINALLY make a point that has some merit. You are right, once we go down the Playoff road there will be no turning back and that is a good thing.

Yes, it is good to be on the other sides of the tracks but contrary to popular belief on the C-USA Boards UC, UofL and USF fans do feel for the programs that are now shut out of the process.

That could be some of the reason why you see so many Big East expansion threads on this board started by us. Maybe it is a hidden desire to help out our former conference mates.

I would love to see this one day, a 16 Team Playoff with the 11 Conference Champs getting a automatic bid with 5 At Large Teams. First round games would be at the higher seed home site and the rest would be at Bowl Sites.

This annoys me. Several months ago, I made that point in a thread, and certain posters practically tried to crucify me for suggesting such a thing. You were not one of those people but why are you able to so easily admit this while some parties resort to making pretentious excuses and slamming other schools instead? We should all just realize that certain CUSA members have certain lobbies in the Big East and, ultimately, that could end up being a huge reason why no changes ever end up taking place.

Actually Maize, we are in a pretty good position. College football is all about confrences and bowls. Win your league and go to a bowl....there really isn't much more to it when you think about it. That what we did last year and Louisville as well. The BCS money would be nice but its only a small portion of an athletic budget, somewhat less than 10% at most.
CUSA has enough decent bowls for most of our teams who qualify.

Both BE and CUSA exceeded expections; the BE especially so and it started with West Va whipping Georgia in Sugar Bowl. BE started with historical relationships with some very good bowls plus the Notre Dame card to play. And another strong card with basketball.

For CUSA, the road has been a longer bumpier road to travel just to get started in the race. Just to get CUSA-12 organized was quite a job...and then go into bowl and tv negotiations. Football was thought capable of being a good confernce but our basketball sucks to no end and the basketball portion of the CUSA contract is almost nonexistant if it weren't for Memphis. Given expectations, I am satisfied where we are. CUSA has enough positives with the tv deal and bowls tie ins that CUSA has a strong enough foundation to prove itself...and hopefully better the tv and bowls in the next round of negotiations.

You think we can get the schools that I mentioned???

gdayre Wrote:Tallgrass, you might need to know that several team in the big east has played in the liberty bowl at philly and Memphis. It came to Memphis from philly and yes, Memphis Tigers are reason for the CUSA affilation too. Believe that or not! As someone pointed out, if not for Memphis, then why would they be with CUSA anyways? CUSA was never out of the talks, it was who will we(usa) be playing. Ecthart(or something like that) said on a local talk show, that they had calls from all of the other conference on the day that the decision was made to dump the MWC was annouced. Also that CUSA was never excluded from the bowl or being replace either.

You are not hurting my feelings when you say CUSA has the Liberty because of Memphis Tigers. We in CUSA owe a lot to Memphis Tigers for Liberty, hosting the CUSA basketball tourney, and the Tigers long run in the NCAAs which other CUSA schools are aiming and emulating to better their basketball teams. No one school deserves a thank you from CUSA schools as they do to Memphis Tigers.

Thats bull and you know it tallgrass. The big 10 cant fill its bowls now as it is. If any changes are made, they would move the date and maybe the time, but they are not going to mess with tradition. Those bowls will try their hardest to keep cetain bowls traditional all they can. that's one. Also tallgrass, its the bowl that makes the changes not the conference anyways. I believe that, that decision is made by the bowl officials and not the conference.

The COTTON BOWL was once one of 4 premier bowls. It is now in a lower tier. I have seen nothing to indicate it will move to a higher tier again. Someone was asleep at the switch there.

The B12 is famous for supporting its top bowl only. In other words, when the B12 had the ORANGE as #1, it was well attended. The FIESTA is now its #1 and will be well attended. I'm not so sure that a second slot or any other lower one for the B12 will be guaranteed a good attendance. The B12 failed miserably in Houston when the team was an also ran that wasn't from the South Division.

The BIGEAST will have its choice of CUSA teams if it chooses to expand. The BCS is a strong draw, and the basketbal prestige also helps.

I am not very excited about the line-up of BIGEAST bowls. One of my misgivings relates to the conferences they matchup against. That's one reason I would like the Liberty Bowl: the SEC is an exciting matchup.

Jim

Jim
The Cotton Bowl is`planning on moving to the Cowboys new stadium with atht they want to upgrade and try to become a BCS Bowl and be part of the big bowl system.
The Orange Bowl almost lost their deal until they moved from the Orange Bowl to dolphin stadium that was a forced moved or they would have been demoted as the Cotton Bowl was.

COLLEGE FOOTBALL

Cotton Bowl moves; what about Texas-OU?
School officials say bowl game's decision won't affect future for Longhorns, Sooners