http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...es-sources

If McMurphy is to be believed:

1) AAC getting froze out of bowls against "P5".
2) Aresco bowl can't get a "P5" opponent.
3) Any new bowls we create will be against "G5".
4) Liberty may not be a viable option. Looking at "P5 vs P5"
5) According to McMurphy, we are a "smaller conference". Whatever "smaller conference" is.
6) UCF bowl being considered, but will be against Sun Belt, MAC, or CUSA.
7) LA bowl might pitt AAC against MWC.
8) The independence and Military bowls (thought to be a lock for AAC) might be out also.

Bad to worse...yes this deserved it's own thread.

....reading some of the comments on ESPN it would seem that even P5 fans are unhappy about the monopoly on bowls.

We go from one problem to another. It used to be we couldn't get into BCS bowls without a miracle, now we can't even play the Pizza Bowl without a miracle.

Welcome to the G5 Neighborhood folks

Wow, not sure what he could control but the Aresco tenure has been below average at best. The TV exposure is all we have and to me that is just ESPN using the conference to fill up time on their numerous networks.

I'll wait until getting mad again, but this is grim stuff. At this point it's just about having something semi respectable for our champ/best team not in the access bowl to go to and after that it's pretty much all going to be trash.

There will always be spots to fill in those p5 bowls

Stop melting

(06-11-2013 10:28 AM)panicstricken Wrote:  There will always be spots to fill in those p5 bowls

Stop melting

Oh sure there will be, but is the only way to ensure the champ of this league gets anything respectable is to play the fill in missing spots game? I understand that for everyone else that's a good option, but this league can't sign 1 bowl for it's champ that's worth anything?

(06-11-2013 10:28 AM)panicstricken Wrote:  There will always be spots to fill in those p5 bowls

Stop melting

Which is why we need to stop creating trash bowls that we have tie-ins for. We need to work on back up slots for the P5 bowls instead or our teams are gonna be playing some Sun Belt team because we have a contractual obligation.

(06-11-2013 10:31 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(06-11-2013 10:28 AM)panicstricken Wrote:  There will always be spots to fill in those p5 bowls

Stop melting

Which is why we need to stop creating trash bowls that we have tie-ins for. We need to work on back up slots for the P5 bowls instead or our teams are gonna be playing some Sun Belt team because we have a contractual obligation.

Exactly, I cease to see the point of creating bowls to play those conferences. If all this conference can sign is those type of tie ins then the league needs as much flexibility as possible to get out of them when something actually worth going to is open.

As I've been saying for a while, backup contracts are our best available avenue into P5 bowl games. The AAC can sign all the ties it wants to with trash bowls vs the G5 and I won't care as long as they leave us an exit clause allowing us to jump to backup slots in better P5 bowls when they become available. Essentially, we would simply write our tie ins to treat openings in P5 bowls like BCS games.

Bonds, you've mentioned it before, but the idea of securing one good bowl for our champ and perhaps one more for the #2 then just play filler for the spots the P5 can't fill is sounding like the best route. I wouldn't sign any quarantees and I imagine these "small" bowls would rather have their choice of match ups anyway to create the best game possible.

Id be surprised if we didnt end up with the Liberty Bowl

Tulsa has played two BÇS teams in Bowl games in the last decade. Its not the end of the world.

MWC teams are fine with me. Hawaii and Ft Worth are good bowls.

(06-11-2013 10:32 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  As I've been saying for a while, backup contracts are our best available avenue into P5 bowl games. The AAC can sign all the ties it wants to with trash bowls vs the G5 and I won't care as long as they leave us an exit clause allowing us to jump to backup slots in better P5 bowls when they become available. Essentially, we would simply write our tie ins to treat openings in P5 bowls like BCS games.

You've been the sole voice of reason in the bowl meltdown on the board

If the American doesn't create the Bowls, then other G5 conferences will.

So are you willing to let your 5th place team not go to a Bowl and watch CUSA play the SBC in a Bowl game?

The reality if you are an ECU fan is that you will likely end up playing ODU, Charlotte, App or Georgia State at some point in a Bowl game...and if you are a Houston fan you will end up playing UTSA, UTEP, North Texas or Texas State...it is what it is.

Personally I would rather play a regional opponent than a non regional one from say, the MAC. And I would rather have a Bowl game and the two weeks of practices that come with it, than not have one.

The lineup will not look good, but besides pulling a rabbit out of a hat, there is not much anyone can do. Maybe the best is the MWC champ playing the American Champ in LA around New Years Day. Of course it will probably be a 2nd place team in there, but Boise State v Cincinnati is not THAT bad a deal.

Just another step in an eventual total breakaway by the P5.

(06-11-2013 10:43 AM)panicstricken Wrote:  Id be surprised if we didnt end up with the Liberty Bowl

Tulsa has played two BÇS teams in Bowl games in the last decade. Its not the end of the world.

MWC teams are fine with me. Hawaii and Ft Worth are good bowls.

Right now I'd be surprised if we did end up with the Liberty. If the league gets the Liberty and the Military then really everything else is just filler anyway so that's fine create whatever.

Beyond question, we must have 1, hopefully 2, bowl tie in against P5. I don't care about the rest. If the cUSA can do this with the HOD bowl, why can't we?

Unless there is literally some 'smoke filled room' conspiracy to freeze us out, at least one or two of these 5 conferences should grant us a tie in. Like they really care where their .500 team plays???

Wow, the split is happening, and there seems to be NOTHING we can do about it. We are now division II. This has been the plan all along I guess, but I thought they would all 'play nice' and we'd get a bowl or two. Seems like we're the threat, and this they are really, really trying to freeze us out. Maybe that's why a bowl with cUSA is not a big deal to them... but they really don't want to lose to US. Too embarassing.

(06-11-2013 10:13 AM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  http://espn.go.com/college-football/stor...es-sources

If McMurphy is to be believed:

1) AAC getting froze out of bowls against "P5".
2) Aresco bowl can't get a "P5" opponent.
3) Any new bowls we create will be against "G5".
4) Liberty may not be a viable option. Looking at "P5 vs P5"
5) According to McMurphy, we are a "smaller conference". Whatever "smaller conference" is.
6) UCF bowl being considered, but will be against Sun Belt, MAC, or CUSA.
7) LA bowl might pitt AAC against MWC.
8) The independence and Military bowls (thought to be a lock for AAC) might be out also.

Bad to worse...yes this deserved it's own thread.

Total crap by the P5...Personally I would love to go to a game at Trop Field/UCF and see ACC vs AAC.

(06-11-2013 10:48 AM)Bull Wrote:  Beyond question, we must have 1, hopefully 2, bowl tie in against P5. I don't care about the rest. If the cUSA can do this with the HOD bowl, why can't we?

Unless there is literally some 'smoke filled room' conspiracy to freeze us out, at least one or two of these 5 conferences should grant us a tie in. Like they really care where their .500 team plays???

Wow, the split is happening, and there seems to be NOTHING we can do about it. We are now division II. This has been the plan all along I guess, but I thought they would all 'play nice' and we'd get a bowl or two. Seems like we're the threat, and this they are really, really trying to freeze us out. Maybe that's why a bowl with cUSA is not a big deal to them... but they really don't want to lose to US. Too embarassing.

It became obvious to me they wanted to separate completely when they pitted Boise against TCU when they were both Non-AQ for the BCS game. Literally did not want to play an 11 or 12 win non-aq in a game.

(06-11-2013 10:26 AM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  I'll wait until getting mad again, but this is grim stuff. At this point it's just about having something semi respectable for our champ/best team not in the access bowl to go to and after that it's pretty much all going to be trash.

This is why I have believed and continue to believe that blaming Aresco for our current bowl situation is unfair. 

It's quite obvious that the "Power5" are conspiring to eliminate the supposed "Gang of 5" out of bigtime football. Hence there is nothing ANY commissioner from the MWC or AAC can do until the P5 have had taken the bowl games their membership deem most appealing.

The article speculates that there could be at least 20 P5vP5 bowl games. The remaining 12 bowl games would be Go5vGo5.....but will they really be 12 bowl games? Without the chance of a P5 opponent I can't see many of these games being sustainable longterm. Especially as the moral of the Go5's fanbase continues to erode....how many fans will want to travel and spend several thousand dollars to watch their team play a SBC team in a baseball stadium right around XMAS time? 


IMO, Aresco has to leverage his relationships in the business to secure a good home for our champion and runner-up. Other than that, I am beginning to like the idea of keeping our options open for our #3, #4 and #5. Anything beyond 5 teams I wouldn't worry about it.