The AAC has touted its great P5 opportunites but as we have learned most of it is going be part of the "bowl pool" which now includes PAC, XII, ACC and SEC.

Is the MAC lineup that far behind in quality at this point? AAC has two solid ties to the ACC but in marginal venues (Navy Stadium, Fenway Park) while the MAC has one against the higher profile B1G in an NFL stadium.

Considering the MAC can only sign 6 (4 solid commits) and had a split tie with Frisco/Boca for 2014-19 plus agreeing to play in Myrtle 4 years its plausible they will follow the AAC design.

Annual Appearances

Quick Lane Bowl presented by Ford Motor Company (Detroit, Michigan)
Nova Home Loans Arizona Bowl (Tucson, Arizona)
Makers Wanted Bahamas Bowl (Nassau, Bahamas)
Famous Idaho Potato Bowl (Boise, Idaho)

Two Selections Annually From the Following

Birmingham Bowl (Birmingham, Alabama)
Bad Boy Mowers Gasparilla Bowl (Tampa, Florida)
SERVPRO First Responder Bowl (Dallas, Texas)
Cheribundi Boca Raton Bowl (Boca Raton, Florida)
Frisco Bowl (Frisco, Texas)
AutoNation Cure Bowl (Orlando, Florida)
Myrtle Beach Bowl (Myrtle Beach, South Carolina)
New Mexico Bowl (Albuquerque, New Mexico)

Current 2019 AAC lineup:

Birmingham Bowl versus SEC
Gasparilla Bowl versus Conference USA
Frisco Bowl versus Sun Belt
Military Bowl versus ACC
Hawaii Bowl vs BYU (rotates with Armed Forces Bowl vs Big 12)
Boca Raton Bowl versus MAC
New Orleans Bowl versus Conference USA
Cure Bowl versus Sun Belt

Current 2019 MAC lineup:

Dollar General Bowl versus SBC
Camelia Bowl versus SBC
Famous Idaho Potato Bowl versus MWC
Boca Raton Bowl versus AAC
Bahamas Bowl versus CUSA

In 2019 it is definitely a weaker lineup for the MAC when the AAC has seven bowl games with SEC, ACC ties and BYU. MAC is routinely pummeled in the two Alabama bowls against the SBC.

CUSA looks like its going to have step in and fill the void of the MAC in Alabama and also fill the void in Shreveport, a location nobody wants.

Who could have thought it would be the MAC with its putrid record in bowl games and not the AAC who was going to upgrade its 2020-2025 lineup the most?

Wow...

(07-17-2019 08:09 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  The AAC has touted its great P5 opportunites but as we have learned most of it is going be part of the "bowl pool" which now includes PAC, XII, ACC and SEC.

Interesting that, sorry to divert attention, only the B1G isn't involved in the bowl pool. Did the B1G do this by design or did ESPN not invite them?

(07-17-2019 08:45 PM)Rube Dali Wrote:  

(07-17-2019 08:09 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  The AAC has touted its great P5 opportunites but as we have learned most of it is going be part of the "bowl pool" which now includes PAC, XII, ACC and SEC.

Interesting that, sorry to divert attention, only the B1G isn't involved in the bowl pool. Did the B1G do this by design or did ESPN not invite them?

From the P5 perspective the bowl pool is for losers.

Its for when you can't fill your contracted slots with enough bowl eligible teams. The AAC is well on its way to not meeting its 7 contracts by reducing its FB membership to 11 and placing most years in the NY6.

The B1G signed a sensible lineup for what it normally has eligible and didn't need it.

The AAC isn't looking good at all in terms of these Bowl announcements.

The AAC also has a number of schools that aren't pulling their weight in football. The Bowl announcements seem to be recognizing that weakness. And these weaker schools are becoming a drag against the stronger schools.

I'm talking specifically about Tulane, Tulsa, SMU, ECU and Temple. Tulane and Tulsa bring very little. SMU is decent at football but doesn't really have a fanbase. ECU is starting to go down the Southern Miss path: once good but football incompetence getting them viewed more as an irrelevant regional school. Temple needs an on-campus football stadium.

If I am Cincinnati, Memphis, Houston, UCF and South Florida - I'm increasingly uneasy about the AAC's football future. Navy will be fine regardless. The first 5, however, may need some better company in the longer-term.

The MAC is taking the Sunbelt spot in the Arizona bowl so there is that. Have to wonder if they don’t renew the Potato Bowl if taking the AZ bowl. Potato bowl might be out of luck unless BYU is tied to it.

This article talks about the Arizona Bowl becoming a "second" MWC-MAC bowl game which I thought was logical as a deal for giving the MAC a second one in Arizona.

https://www.hustlebelt.com/2019/3/5/1825...-bowl-espn

But....with the recent ACC, AAC and Independence Bowl new that has come out maybe the MAC would ditch it, sign with Mobile or Montgomery and force CUSA to take it.

Another possibility for the MAC has occurred to me.

These are the games that we don't know about that are not in the pool:

Potato Bowl (MWC hosted)
Independence Bowl (???)
Camelia Bowl (SBC/MAC)
Mobile Bowl (SBC hosted)
Bahamas Bowl (CUSA/MAC)

What if CUSA worked out a deal to send a team to the Potato Bowl if the MWC will send a team to the Independence Bowl. This can work because CUSA (7) and MWC (6) have slots to fill.

The MAC then sticks with Montgomery which is on better financial footing and allows CUSA to fill Mobile. The last 2 selections for the MAC the go to the bowl pool.

That would give the MAC a bowl against the MWC, CUSA and SBC to go with the B1G in Detroit and slots to play major schools in the pool.

One note here. Quite often in the past the B1G has not sent a team to Quick Lane. It is at bottom of their list. Always seems to be open slots there


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

(07-18-2019 04:38 PM)indianasniff Wrote:  One note here. Quite often in the past the B1G has not sent a team to Quick Lane. It is at bottom of their list. Always seems to be open slots there

Yes ... ironically, the MAC was about as likely, if not more, to play a P5 school in the Detroit bowl when the Big Ten and ACC had the primaries and the MAC the common secondary ... but it looks better to have it down in the MAC gameday programs as a bowl against the Big Ten than to have it down in the gameday programs as a secondary tie-in.

(07-18-2019 08:26 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 04:38 PM)indianasniff Wrote:  One note here. Quite often in the past the B1G has not sent a team to Quick Lane. It is at bottom of their list. Always seems to be open slots there

Yes ... ironically, the MAC was about as likely, if not more, to play a P5 school in the Detroit bowl when the Big Ten and ACC had the primaries and the MAC the common secondary ... but it looks better to have it down in the MAC gameday programs as a bowl against the Big Ten than to have it down in the gameday programs as a secondary tie-in.

Aside from the fact that the MAC pick has never been deeper into the B1G lineup. When the MAC played the B1G before it was a 7th out of 11 picks.

This time its going to be 8th or 9th pick out of 14. Percentage wise it doesn't sound much better than 7th of 11 but its more the amount from the bottom of the standings (5 or 6) vs. 4 that makes a difference.

Its possible that if the B1G doesn't have enough qualifying teams it could always place a 5-7 Northwestern or Rutgers in the game as the eligibility rules sit today.

(07-18-2019 08:39 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 08:26 PM)BruceMcF Wrote:  

(07-18-2019 04:38 PM)indianasniff Wrote:  One note here. Quite often in the past the B1G has not sent a team to Quick Lane. It is at bottom of their list. Always seems to be open slots there

Yes ... ironically, the MAC was about as likely, if not more, to play a P5 school in the Detroit bowl when the Big Ten and ACC had the primaries and the MAC the common secondary ... but it looks better to have it down in the MAC gameday programs as a bowl against the Big Ten than to have it down in the gameday programs as a secondary tie-in.

Aside from the fact that the MAC pick has never been deeper into the B1G lineup. When the MAC played the B1G before it was a 7th out of 11 picks.

This time its going to be 8th or 9th pick out of 14. Percentage wise it doesn't sound much better than 7th of 11 but its more the amount from the bottom of the standings (5 or 6) vs. 4 that makes a difference.

No, that aspect makes zero difference ... nobody is going to say "why, they are going to play the 5th from the bottom Big Ten team, not the 4th from the bottom like they did that time in the 90s, what a step up!" ...

... if they go beyond, "the MAC is playing a Big Ten team", they are going to say, "they are playing the worst bowl eligible team from the Big Ten" ... just like in the two previous incarnations of the Detroit Bowl if the Big Ten and MAC happened to both be there.

But how many people go beyond that? And for the kind of people who do go beyond that, they are going to make up their own mind, anyway.

The fact that the plain schedule of the MAC bowls says, "versus Big Ten team": that's the benefit, right there.

Quote: Its possible that if the B1G doesn't have enough qualifying teams it could always place a 5-7 Northwestern or Rutgers in the game as the eligibility rules sit today.

Just as it would have been possible before that either the ACC or Big Ten placed a 5-7 team when the other didn't have a school to place in it, putting the MAC in as the back up. Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

MAC makes Detroit work
Boise vs MWC
Frisco has many options vs MAC
I thought Mobile pays well
Pac eventually takes Ariz

It does make a difference playing a P5 in a bowl when you are getting an 8th pick of 12 or 8th pick of 14.

The ACC has 15 teams so getting an 8th out 9th pick there is even better.

Better in the probability the said P5 will supply a team which is what I'm talking about.

(07-19-2019 03:30 PM)Kit-Cat Wrote:  It does make a difference playing a P5 in a bowl when you are getting an 8th pick of 12 or 8th pick of 14.

The ACC has 15 teams so getting an 8th out 9th pick there is even better.

Better in the probability the said P5 will supply a team which is what I'm talking about.

The status quo ante was the chance of EITHER but not BOTH of the ACC and Big Ten supplying a team to Detroit, which is a fairly similar chance of the MAC playing a P5 school, but doesn't look as impressive in the game program listing of the Bowl lineup.