(07-24-2013 02:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:32 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The Marlins Bowl would be the same tier as the Military Bowl (AAC #3-6).

That is not what was reported earlier. Our #3-6 were supposedly the Military Bowl, Beef, B'Ham and New Orleans or Hawaii, perhaps, but not the Marlins Park game.

I got the impression that was just supposition. The Aresco Bowl likely wasnt named since it officially doesn't even exist. My guess is the whole game plan might change if we don't get the Liberty. Hard to tell. The Big12 being considered in the Marlins Bowl was news to me.

Probably. Nothing is definite. But it was definitely reported that way, more than once, I think. But nothing has ever been said about the Marlins Park bowl being in that tier. I take it that is just your personal assumption.

And, Armed Forces will likely be in the mix, somewhere.

Better take what you can get and there is still a decent bowl line up to be had with the Liberty possibly gone. Might still have part time access to the Liberty yet anyway.

Military ACC
Aresco - Big 10 / B-12 / possible PAC-12
Armed Forces - 3 out 6 years B-10 -don't know the other 3 years
Meinke Texas Bowl still open verses the B-12
Independence - ACC or SEC
Hawaii bowl already affiliated - MWC
Beef O'Brady Bowl - 3 of 6 years with ACC -already done
BBVA / Alabama - SEC
New Orleans mentioned with CUSA or the Sunbelt
Poinsettia rotation with Army and BYU against the MWC is still an option with Navy coming on board too.

Is the MAC Little Ceasar's Bowl still looking for a home (St Louis) or is that now the Detroit Bowl minus the MAC.

Christmas Bowl in LA still hanging out there too.

Nail a combination of those Bowls above especially with the P-5 teams along with Playoff access and the american is still head and shoulders above the rest of the G-5 conferences in the post season.

(07-24-2013 02:32 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The Marlins Bowl would be the same tier as the Military Bowl (AAC #3-6).

That is not what was reported earlier. Our #3-6 were supposedly the Military Bowl, Beef, B'Ham and New Orleans or Hawaii, perhaps, but not the Marlins Park game.

Yeah but I think that's when it was believed the Liberty was going to be the number 1 bowl. That's done now so honestly there aren't going to be 2 bowls signed that will be better than the Military Bowl. There aren't options left.

(07-24-2013 02:48 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:32 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The Marlins Bowl would be the same tier as the Military Bowl (AAC #3-6).

That is not what was reported earlier. Our #3-6 were supposedly the Military Bowl, Beef, B'Ham and New Orleans or Hawaii, perhaps, but not the Marlins Park game.

Yeah but I think that's when it was believed the Liberty was going to be the number 1 bowl. That's done now so honestly there aren't going to be 2 bowls signed that will be better than the Military Bowl. There aren't options left.

Probably true, but that was not the point I was debating. It was whether the Marlins Park bowl is in the #3-6 tier. I say no, b/c there are other bowls we can get that are more likely. The Marlins Park bowl will still likely be our #1 or #2 bowl, or won't happen.

(07-24-2013 02:51 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:48 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:32 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The Marlins Bowl would be the same tier as the Military Bowl (AAC #3-6).

That is not what was reported earlier. Our #3-6 were supposedly the Military Bowl, Beef, B'Ham and New Orleans or Hawaii, perhaps, but not the Marlins Park game.

Yeah but I think that's when it was believed the Liberty was going to be the number 1 bowl. That's done now so honestly there aren't going to be 2 bowls signed that will be better than the Military Bowl. There aren't options left.

Probably true, but that was not the point I was debating. It was whether the Marlins Park bowl is in the #3-6 tier. I say no, b/c there are other bowls we can get that are more likely. The Marlins Park bowl will still likely be our #1 or #2 bowl, or won't happen.

Well from now on I'm going to work under the assumption that if Aresco says it then the opposite is true. He says the Marlins bowl is close and likely to happen so I'll go with nowhere near close and no chance it happens.

Love the location of the venue - Miami, but does anyone else see football games being played in baseball dirt?

If this is just going to be the AAC vs C-USA, then it should be called 'Merica Bowl.

(07-24-2013 01:54 PM)E2THEX Wrote:  http://www.sun-sentinel.com/sports/fau-o...6527.story

not holding my breath about the AAC playing a "P5" team in one of these two bowl games...

(07-24-2013 02:41 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:33 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  Is the SEC still aligned with the B'ham bowl? I thought I read they pulled out.

I recall somebody reporting that, but al.com had a story saying the opposite, that the SEC was not going to abandon B'Ham. But lately, the B'Ham bowl has not been listed in articles about SEC bowls.

al.com had reported as recently as two weeks ago that the SEC was keen on keeping the bowl, but that the American's involvement with it was shaky.

(07-24-2013 03:09 PM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  If this is just going to be the AAC vs C-USA, then it should be called 'Merica Bowl.

There is no point in creating a bowl for that match up. I wouldn't even watch that game.

(07-24-2013 03:25 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 03:09 PM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  If this is just going to be the AAC vs C-USA, then it should be called 'Merica Bowl.

There is no point in creating a bowl for that match up. I wouldn't even watch that game.

Who do you think is going to be the back-up? Anything from the Cartel past #7 (read: it will actually be #9 at best) will never be in a bowl.

(07-24-2013 03:28 PM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 03:25 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 03:09 PM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  If this is just going to be the AAC vs C-USA, then it should be called 'Merica Bowl.

There is no point in creating a bowl for that match up. I wouldn't even watch that game.

Who do you think is going to be the back-up? Anything from the Cartel past #7 (read: it will actually be #9 at best) will never be in a bowl.

My point is, we don't have to create a bowl to play CUSA. We can just sign on to an already existing one or go to Boca.

(07-24-2013 03:30 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 03:28 PM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 03:25 PM)NBPirate Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 03:09 PM)Lord2FLI Wrote:  If this is just going to be the AAC vs C-USA, then it should be called 'Merica Bowl.

There is no point in creating a bowl for that match up. I wouldn't even watch that game.

Who do you think is going to be the back-up? Anything from the Cartel past #7 (read: it will actually be #9 at best) will never be in a bowl.

My point is, we don't have to create a bowl to play CUSA. We can just sign on to an already existing one or go to Boca.

Oh I agree with that, I'm just saying no matter what Cartel conference signs on with it, anything past #7 is really just a slot for C-USA disguised by some clever phrasing.

Good times are ahead!!!

(07-24-2013 02:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The Marlins Bowl would be the same tier as the Military Bowl (AAC #3-6).

Only in Miami.

(07-24-2013 02:42 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:37 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:32 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  The Marlins Bowl would be the same tier as the Military Bowl (AAC #3-6).

That is not what was reported earlier. Our #3-6 were supposedly the Military Bowl, Beef, B'Ham and New Orleans or Hawaii, perhaps, but not the Marlins Park game.

I got the impression that was just supposition. The Aresco Bowl likely wasnt named since it officially doesn't even exist. My guess is the whole game plan might change if we don't get the Liberty. Hard to tell. The Big12 being considered in the Marlins Bowl was news to me.

Probably. Nothing is definite. But it was definitely reported that way, more than once, I think. But nothing has ever been said about the Marlins Park bowl being in that tier. I take it that is just your personal assumption.

And, Armed Forces will likely be in the mix, somewhere.

It's my personal assumption, but its based on the fact that the selection appears to be lower than the Military Bowl. My feeling is that the #1 and probably the #2 picks are not going to be tied to any bowl with an iffy (#8 or below) P5 pick. It just doesn't make sense. But--I don't have an article or anything to back it up. It's just my best edumacated guess.

(07-24-2013 02:09 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:06 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:04 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  What would be the highest possible matchup left from the B1G or Pac-12?

If it the PAC-12 #8/9.

I find it hard to believe we'd take such a low pick for our champion.

our #3-#6 would potentially be playing a better matchup in the Military Bowl against the ACC #7-#10 (Pitt, Syracuse, Duke, UNC etc).

A Pac #8 or #9 would be along the lines of ... WSU, Washington, Oregon State... if anything... no thanks.

I don't disagree with you but at least we've got a P5 opponent and if our champion beats the ever-loving hell out the opponent three years in a row then we'll move up in the pecking order.

The problem with the CUSA Champ vs. SEC #6-8 in the Liberty Bowl is that the SEC also ran won the first 4 in the contract causing the whole deal to be rethought. True the CUSA champ won the last two it played, but by then the die had been cast and we were down to a 6-6 SEC team from a 7-5 SEC team at that point.

Hopefully we can find a better match up for our champion though.

(07-24-2013 04:50 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:09 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:06 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:04 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  What would be the highest possible matchup left from the B1G or Pac-12?

If it the PAC-12 #8/9.

I find it hard to believe we'd take such a low pick for our champion.

our #3-#6 would potentially be playing a better matchup in the Military Bowl against the ACC #7-#10 (Pitt, Syracuse, Duke, UNC etc).

A Pac #8 or #9 would be along the lines of ... WSU, Washington, Oregon State... if anything... no thanks.

I don't disagree with you but at least we've got a P5 opponent and if our champion beats the ever-loving hell out the opponent three years in a row then we'll move up in the pecking order.
The problem with the CUSA Champ vs. SEC #6-8 in the Liberty Bowl is that the SEC also ran won the first 4 in the contract causing the whole deal to be rethought. True the CUSA champ won the last two it played, but by then the die had been cast and we were down to a 6-6 SEC team from a 7-5 SEC team at that point.

Hopefully we can find a better match up for our champion though.

Uhh..[regarding in bold]..no it won't. It didn't help the MW blowing out the PAC most of the time and in fact, it got us a worse PAC team.

(07-24-2013 04:59 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 04:50 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:09 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:06 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(07-24-2013 02:04 PM)Kruciff Wrote:  What would be the highest possible matchup left from the B1G or Pac-12?

If it the PAC-12 #8/9.

I find it hard to believe we'd take such a low pick for our champion.

our #3-#6 would potentially be playing a better matchup in the Military Bowl against the ACC #7-#10 (Pitt, Syracuse, Duke, UNC etc).

A Pac #8 or #9 would be along the lines of ... WSU, Washington, Oregon State... if anything... no thanks.

I don't disagree with you but at least we've got a P5 opponent and if our champion beats the ever-loving hell out the opponent three years in a row then we'll move up in the pecking order.
The problem with the CUSA Champ vs. SEC #6-8 in the Liberty Bowl is that the SEC also ran won the first 4 in the contract causing the whole deal to be rethought. True the CUSA champ won the last two it played, but by then the die had been cast and we were down to a 6-6 SEC team from a 7-5 SEC team at that point.

Hopefully we can find a better match up for our champion though.

Uhh..[regarding in bold]..no it won't. It didn't help the MW blowing out the PAC most of the time and in fact, it got us a worse PAC team.

Californians are a strange lot to be sure.