Well according to the RGJ they gave a scenerio where the WAC ADs would pick what teams go to what bowls.

I think the example they used if Fresno, Boise and NEvada all tied for the WAC title, the tiebreakers would all be 1-1 and such. Then WAC Ads would get together and chose which teams would go to what bowl game. This is just after two tiebreakers. It could come down to that in some of these.

Quote: The problem with the Hawaii bowl is this, it only works well if Hawaii is in it.

It will be ok. Attendance in the old Aloha/Oahu Bowls when Hawaii didn't play was in the low 20k mark. (Depending on the teams) That's not great mind you, but Hawaii should be able to keep the bowl afloat.

The Sponsors (i.e. ESPN Regional) have plans for the Hawaii Bowl. With the PAC-10 affiliation starting next year...the bowl will only get stronger.

Nothing against C-USA, but the PAC-10 will bring much more clout to the Bowl along with more "fan" support.

The year 2006 is going to be a very good year for the WAC...and we all know why.

The icing on the cake is if Benson can gain the WAC another Bowl tie-in.

Two is not enough for the WAC who will start producing 5 or 6 Bowl eligible teams starting next year.

jediwarrior Wrote:With the PAC-10 affiliation starting next year...the bowl will only get stronger.

What is the deal with Pac-10 affiliation anyway? I thought the HB was getting a Pac-10 team next year, but then going back to a multi-year agreement with CUSA. A long-term arrangement with the Pac-10 would definitely be better, but would probably be tough to get, and the Pac-10 is often unable to fill all of their bowl slots. I could understand playing it safe with a CUSA agreement (to avoid scrambling for a mid-level MAC team). It's too bad that petty jealousy prevents the WAC and MWC from agreeing to two matchups (Hawaii and Poinsettia, for example).

As for my above

Quote:I don't see how LT has an edge over Nevada.

I have to chalk that up to brainlock. I was looking at it only in terms of LaTech and Nevada winning out. Prior to last night, LaTech controlled their destiny because they still play Boise and Fresno, but Nevada needed someone to beat Boise. Now that Fresno did that, LaTech and Nevada are in the same (hypothetical) boat. A win by either team over Fresno would be a monumental upset, of course, but stranger things have happened, right?

I was wondering the same thing with the whole Pac-10 thing but maybe they want to see what that does with attendance. Pac-10 played in the Aloha Bowl if I remember correctly.

I think WAC will have 4 bowl eligible teams. Now an interesting scenrio that someone mentioned had Boise playing at home, Fresno going to the Liberty Bowl, LT going to New Orleans Bowla nd NEvad to Hawaii bowl.

I would love to see a matchup of Fresno State and UTEP in the Liberty bowl. UTEP is going to roll over the rest of CUSA and Fresno State should win out too.

Although I think there is a 99% chance it will be TCU and UTEP.

And no WAC team will replace the Sun Belt team in the NO Bowl. I believe the Sun Belt can get a waiver if their champ does not have a winning record.

The Sun Belt can get a waiver if their conference champ has a losing record? That's messed up...What are they still doing in 1-A...NCAA has some balls to tell schools that their names are offensive when they don't know $hit...

aggiefansince83 Wrote:I would love to see a matchup of Fresno State and UTEP in the Liberty bowl. UTEP is going to roll over the rest of CUSA and Fresno State should win out too.

Although I think there is a 99% chance it will be TCU and UTEP.

And no WAC team will replace the Sun Belt team in the NO Bowl. I believe the Sun Belt can get a waiver if their champ does not have a winning record.

I can't stress this enough...... while UTEP would love to play in the Liberty Bowl, the Miners have NO DESIRE to play a MWC school. Why? There is nothing to be gained by beating them, and everything to be lost by losing to them. They have no television market (excluding San Diego) and no national press (including San Diego)... in essence a BCS conference team, with a larger televison audience, would be preferable to a MWC champion.
:saber: :saber: :saber: :saber: :saber:
:saber: :saber: :saber: :saber: :saber:

aggiefansince83 Wrote:I would love to see a matchup of Fresno State and UTEP in the Liberty bowl. UTEP is going to roll over the rest of CUSA and Fresno State should win out too.

Although I think there is a 99% chance it will be TCU and UTEP.

And no WAC team will replace the Sun Belt team in the NO Bowl. I believe the Sun Belt can get a waiver if their champ does not have a winning record.

What I am thinking is that I don't know if C-USA will fill all their bowl slots and one of them is NO Bowl. I was thinking if C-USA doesn't fill that one, they could go after LT to put them in that bowl game.

However yes NCAA has given Sun Belt a waiver before with North Texas being 5-6 a few years ago