(10-10-2013 06:27 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Actually there is a good deal wrong with this. The Armed Forces is only 3x for the American and they'll play either Army (2014) or the XII (2016, 2018). The Marlins bowl is the only one of the bottom 3 that the American will be in every year and we don't know who the opponent will be, but it will be a rotation among the rest of the G5.

Look for independent Army and BYU in the Marlins Bowl too. They have lost access to the Kraft and Armed Forces Bowls after 2014. The only current options on the table are one year in the Vegas Bowl, the Poinsettia Bowl, the Little Ceasar when that is settled, and these G5 bowls.

Army - 2013 / Poinsettia and 2014 / Armed Forces.
BYU - 2013 / Kraft, 2014 / ?, 2015 / Poinsettia, 2016-2019 / one more year in the Poinsettia.

Army needs bowls for 2015 - 2019 - need 5 bowls.

BYU needs bowls for 2014 and 3 years between 2016 and 2019 - need 4 bowl opportunities between 2014 and 2019.

Mia bowl really needs a BYU tie in.

(10-10-2013 07:37 PM)ShoreBuc Wrote:  

(10-10-2013 04:54 PM)b0ndsj0ns Wrote:  That's a steaming pile.

Considering the new AAC does not have a single marquee program that the networks or Bowl games are excited about not to mention not a single huge travelling fan base....we have to take what we can get. When you have life time mediocre programs and fan bases that are doing well to bring 10k-15k to a bowl game and that is the solid fan bases in the new AAC, we have nothing to biatch about. Only thing left to do is just keep chopping wood and grow the AAC. It was never going to be simply given to us, we have to go out and earn it the hard way.

Thing is, there is no modern example of a conference ever 'growing'. Conferences are what they are, from the git.

Now a school's athletic program? That can grow, and the school can get promoted to better conferences as a result. But that's a something a school can do, not a conference.

(10-10-2013 08:55 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  That bowl lineup still blows.

Yep, no way to put lipstick on this pig. Saying "well, it's the best we could hope for", even if true, sure doesn't.

(10-10-2013 09:00 PM)First Mate Wrote:  

(10-10-2013 08:55 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  That bowl lineup still blows.

All the bowls outside of the BCS bowls are meaningless. If our champ gets the access bowl most years, which I expect to happen, all these other bowls will be afterthoughts anyway. If we win no one will care.

If all bowls outside of the BCS are meaningless, than why does the SEC bother to sign with the Cap One bowl?

If winning a BCS bowl is all that matters and will build the conference, how come that didn't happen when the Big East won its BCS bowls?

Conference building = sand castle building.

(10-10-2013 10:21 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(10-10-2013 09:32 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  

(10-10-2013 09:04 PM)rath v2.0 Wrote:  Not meaningless at all.

And this most years thing is nowhere near a guarantee from what I see from our current and future conference mates.

HMM starting in 2014, the top P5 Conference Non Access Bowl gane is about equivalent to the Entire AAC bowl payout combined. That goes for most of the G5, but they were already use to that scenario.

It's great to be on the right side of the fence isn't it Wolpfacker? More BCS welfare for you guys. I look forward watching ECU smack you clowns around in November.

I be lying if I stated we weren't glad about being in the ACC, I call it more cartel than welfare. I fully expect ECU to be the favorite in our game. ECU is playing the best football in NC right now. Believe it or not, I always thought ECU should have been in the ACC before any Big East school, but the ACC was never going to let that happen. ECU reminds me of the Joe Peci character in Good Fellas, perfect wise guy but never allowed to enter "The Made Club". I hope you can get into the B12 if they expand, team wise I have you all in the top 3.

(10-10-2013 05:50 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Hasn't got a damn thing to do with the teams or how good they are. It's got a lot more to do with the fan bases in this conference. When you have multiple schools that can't draw 30K and others that can't draw 20K sometimes this is what you get.

Not only did you hit the nail on the head, but the negative "not good enough" reactions expressed in this thread are indicative of the very essence of one of our fundamental weaknesses. Our fans' attitudes are analogous to a high school drop-out biatching because he only makes $12 an hour, but refuses to apply himself and take advantage of the opportunities which exist in a free nation.

(10-11-2013 07:15 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yep, no way to put lipstick on this pig.

You seem to know a lot about lipstick. Is that you in the red dress leaning against the wall?

(10-11-2013 08:52 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(10-10-2013 05:50 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Hasn't got a damn thing to do with the teams or how good they are. It's got a lot more to do with the fan bases in this conference. When you have multiple schools that can't draw 30K and others that can't draw 20K sometimes this is what you get.

Not only did you hit the nail on the head, but the negative "not good enough" reactions expressed in this thread are indicative of the very essence of one of our fundamental weaknesses. Our fans' attitudes are analogous to a high school drop-out biatching because he only makes $12 an hour, but refuses to apply himself and take advantage of the opportunities which exist in a free nation.

Why anyone thinks fans of AAC programs should be happy and satisfied with this line up is beyond me. It's one thing to expect fans to understand the situation that caused our bowl line up. That said, its entirely unreasonable to expect fans to believe the line up is wonderful. A starving N Korean can be taught to fully understand the economics of thier situation. It's asking a bit much to expect them to be happy about it.

(10-11-2013 08:57 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 07:15 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Yep, no way to put lipstick on this pig.

You seem to know a lot about lipstick. Is that you in the red dress leaning against the wall?

shots fired

(10-11-2013 09:13 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 08:52 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(10-10-2013 05:50 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Hasn't got a damn thing to do with the teams or how good they are. It's got a lot more to do with the fan bases in this conference. When you have multiple schools that can't draw 30K and others that can't draw 20K sometimes this is what you get.

Not only did you hit the nail on the head, but the negative "not good enough" reactions expressed in this thread are indicative of the very essence of one of our fundamental weaknesses. Our fans' attitudes are analogous to a high school drop-out biatching because he only makes $12 an hour, but refuses to apply himself and take advantage of the opportunities which exist in a free nation.

Why anyone thinks fans of AAC programs should be happy and satisfied with this line up is beyond me. It's one thing to expect fans to understand the situation that caused our bowl line up. That said, its entirely unreasonable to expect fans to believe the line up is wonderful. A starving N Korean can be taught to fully understand the economics of thier situation. It's asking a bit much to expect them to be happy about it.

2 completely different things. One is not being happy with the lineup. That's understandable.

Two is comprehending why the lineup isn't all that great. Some of you just refuse to see why that is the case. The AAC is a collection of commuter schools, small private schools, young fanbases and a flagship that didn't bring to the Fiesta Bowl. The blame is squarely in our own courts, not some vast "Aresco failure"/Bowl/P5 conspiracy. FFS people face the reality within your own athletic departments / fan base commitments and quit putting the ******* blame on others. A few schools in this conference don't draw flies and others only draw well (+30K) when they're "winning". Sick of hearing "we draw well when we win." EVERY school in the country does that so it's not like that's the measure of a good fan base.

(10-11-2013 03:15 AM)panite Wrote:  

(10-10-2013 06:27 PM)CommuterBob Wrote:  Actually there is a good deal wrong with this. The Armed Forces is only 3x for the American and they'll play either Army (2014) or the XII (2016, 2018). The Marlins bowl is the only one of the bottom 3 that the American will be in every year and we don't know who the opponent will be, but it will be a rotation among the rest of the G5.

Look for independent Army and BYU in the Marlins Bowl too. They have lost access to the Kraft and Armed Forces Bowls after 2014. The only current options on the table are one year in the Vegas Bowl, the Poinsettia Bowl, the Little Ceasar when that is settled, and these G5 bowls.

Army - 2013 / Poinsettia and 2014 / Armed Forces.
BYU - 2013 / Kraft, 2014 / ?, 2015 / Poinsettia, 2016-2019 / one more year in the Poinsettia.

Army needs bowls for 2015 - 2019 - need 5 bowls.

BYU needs bowls for 2014 and 3 years between 2016 and 2019 - need 4 bowl opportunities between 2014 and 2019.

Perhaps as backups. I don't see the Sunbelt or MAC giving up slots for Indys. I'd love to have BYU in the rotation, but do you really think any G5 conference would give up a slot for BYU? Maybe ESPN makes it happen, but there would be little motivation for any individual G5 conference to give up a slot.

(10-10-2013 05:16 PM)aTxTIGER Wrote:  Is it really better than the CUSA lineup? Looks fairly similar.

I agree... we need more MWC match ups...the new sunbelt really really blows and we have three possible bowl games against them? wow.

The only upside is on a good year we could have 3 bowl games against the "P5". In a great year we could even have 4.. (BCS)



By the way using the term P5 makes me want to

(10-11-2013 08:52 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(10-10-2013 05:50 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Hasn't got a damn thing to do with the teams or how good they are. It's got a lot more to do with the fan bases in this conference. When you have multiple schools that can't draw 30K and others that can't draw 20K sometimes this is what you get.

Not only did you hit the nail on the head, but the negative "not good enough" reactions expressed in this thread are indicative of the very essence of one of our fundamental weaknesses.

Our conference is not made any weaker at all by the fans of conference members thinking negative thoughts about the conference. Those thoughts are a reflection of the fact that our conference is weak, not a cause of it. That's because conference strength is strictly a function of the strength of its members. If Alabama, Notre Dame, and Texas suddenly replaced Memphis, Tulsa, and Tulane in the AAC, the AAC would suddenly become a far more powerful conference even if fans of all the schools continued to think it was weak.

Thus, your attitude seems to be akin to that of superstitious fans who think that if they hold their lucky teddy bear during the game, their team will win.

(10-11-2013 09:36 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 09:13 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 08:52 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(10-10-2013 05:50 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Hasn't got a damn thing to do with the teams or how good they are. It's got a lot more to do with the fan bases in this conference. When you have multiple schools that can't draw 30K and others that can't draw 20K sometimes this is what you get.

Not only did you hit the nail on the head, but the negative "not good enough" reactions expressed in this thread are indicative of the very essence of one of our fundamental weaknesses. Our fans' attitudes are analogous to a high school drop-out biatching because he only makes $12 an hour, but refuses to apply himself and take advantage of the opportunities which exist in a free nation.

Why anyone thinks fans of AAC programs should be happy and satisfied with this line up is beyond me. It's one thing to expect fans to understand the situation that caused our bowl line up. That said, its entirely unreasonable to expect fans to believe the line up is wonderful. A starving N Korean can be taught to fully understand the economics of thier situation. It's asking a bit much to expect them to be happy about it.

2 completely different things. One is not being happy with the lineup. That's understandable.

Two is comprehending why the lineup isn't all that great. Some of you just refuse to see why that is the case. The AAC is a collection of commuter schools, small private schools, young fanbases and a flagship that didn't bring to the Fiesta Bowl. The blame is squarely in our own courts, not some vast "Aresco failure"/Bowl/P5 conspiracy.

One reason there is a failure to comprehend the sorriness of the media money and bowl lineup is that so many fans, particularly those of new schools, vastly overestimated the appeal of their schools. E.g., last year, this board was swamped by fans of schools like Memphis and Houston who went on and on about how the "Big East" was actually stronger and more valuable now that they had replaced the likes of Pitt and Syracuse. It was crazy, but it was the consensus view around here, believe it or not, and so only now is some semblance of reality sinking in.

That said, don't let Aresco off the hook. His sunshine blowing and spin-doctoring certainly did raise expectations on both the media and bowl fronts. I mean, just read this Aresco craptastic description of the new bowl deals:

"..... ESPN has established some of the most attractive bowl games in the nation," said Aresco. "These bowls allow us to play outstanding teams and they will also annually reward our student-athletes and coaches with memorable postseason experiences. Our fans will enjoy these great destinations and a national television audience will enjoy watching these compelling bowl games."

"These games provide our conference with the opportunity to face top competition in desirable locations, which has been our stated goal as we assemble our postseason lineup," said Senior Associate Commissioner Nick Carparelli.

We're going to play "outstanding teams" in "compelling bowl games" like the Beefy Bowl and Marlins Bowl and the Military Bowl? Good Lord.

So he contributed to the sense of dashed expectations.

I see you conveniently chopped off the portion of my post that addressed why the upper tier bowls (ie, higher payout needing higher revenues) don't want to align with us. Typical bull I've come to expect from you.

(10-11-2013 10:02 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Thus, your attitude seems to be akin to that of superstitious fans who think that if they hold their lucky teddy bear during the game, their team will win.

That **** works bro.

(10-10-2013 04:04 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  According to ESPN.......
1. Military vs ACC #7
2. BBVA vs SEC #11
3. Beef 'O' Brady vs CUSA 3 years/ACC #10 3 years
4. Armed Forces vs CUSA 3 years/Big 12 #7 or #8 2 years
5. Hawaii vs MWC (3 years)
6. Bahama's vs CUSA/MWC/MAC/SunBelt
7. Boca Raton vs CUSA/MAC/SunBelt
8. Marlins vs CUSA/SunBelt

The ESPN article didn't mention anything at all about the HOD bowl. I also am guessing on how high the picks will be with the Big 12/ACC/SEC based on their other signed bowl agreements.

BBVA is not agains SEC #11, unless SEC puts 3 teams in CFP. BBVA has 8th selection after the CFP.

Has it been announced that Beef O Brady is definitely against ACC #10?

Could play Army 1X in the AFB.

Boca is only against CUSA and MAC, not Sun Belt.

(10-11-2013 10:28 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  I see you conveniently chopped off the portion of my post that addressed why the upper tier bowls (ie, higher payout needing higher revenues) don't want to align with us. Typical bull I've come to expect from you.

I chopped it because it wasn't relevant to the part of your post I was replying to. FWIW, why would I disagree with your claim that higher-payout bowls require higher revenue? That's obvious.

(10-11-2013 10:07 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 09:36 AM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 09:13 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(10-11-2013 08:52 AM)Gray Avenger Wrote:  

(10-10-2013 05:50 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Hasn't got a damn thing to do with the teams or how good they are. It's got a lot more to do with the fan bases in this conference. When you have multiple schools that can't draw 30K and others that can't draw 20K sometimes this is what you get.

Not only did you hit the nail on the head, but the negative "not good enough" reactions expressed in this thread are indicative of the very essence of one of our fundamental weaknesses. Our fans' attitudes are analogous to a high school drop-out biatching because he only makes $12 an hour, but refuses to apply himself and take advantage of the opportunities which exist in a free nation.

Why anyone thinks fans of AAC programs should be happy and satisfied with this line up is beyond me. It's one thing to expect fans to understand the situation that caused our bowl line up. That said, its entirely unreasonable to expect fans to believe the line up is wonderful. A starving N Korean can be taught to fully understand the economics of thier situation. It's asking a bit much to expect them to be happy about it.

2 completely different things. One is not being happy with the lineup. That's understandable.

Two is comprehending why the lineup isn't all that great. Some of you just refuse to see why that is the case. The AAC is a collection of commuter schools, small private schools, young fanbases and a flagship that didn't bring to the Fiesta Bowl. The blame is squarely in our own courts, not some vast "Aresco failure"/Bowl/P5 conspiracy.

One reason there is a failure to comprehend the sorriness of the media money and bowl lineup is that so many fans, particularly those of new schools, vastly overestimated the appeal of their schools. E.g., last year, this board was swamped by fans of schools like Memphis and Houston who went on and on about how the "Big East" was actually stronger and more valuable now that they had replaced the likes of Pitt and Syracuse. It was crazy, but it was the consensus view around here, believe it or not, and so only now is some semblance of reality sinking in.

That said, don't let Aresco off the hook. His sunshine blowing and spin-doctoring certainly did raise expectations on both the media and bowl fronts. I mean, just read this Aresco craptastic description of the new bowl deals:

"..... ESPN has established some of the most attractive bowl games in the nation," said Aresco. "These bowls allow us to play outstanding teams and they will also annually reward our student-athletes and coaches with memorable postseason experiences. Our fans will enjoy these great destinations and a national television audience will enjoy watching these compelling bowl games."

"These games provide our conference with the opportunity to face top competition in desirable locations, which has been our stated goal as we assemble our postseason lineup," said Senior Associate Commissioner Nick Carparelli.

We're going to play "outstanding teams" in "compelling bowl games" like the Beefy Bowl and Marlins Bowl and the Military Bowl? Good Lord.

So he contributed to the sense of dashed expectations.

LOL was he supposed to say something like "The bowls that we've got are pure crap. We've done the best we can and have continually talked to the P5 teams but they really just don't want to validate our conference by playing more bowls against us. Sorry for the crappy bowl schedule everyone!":lmfao: