(05-16-2017 03:00 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-16-2017 02:09 PM)LostInSpace Wrote:  

(05-16-2017 12:10 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Most G5 v P5 bowls exist for a reason. Largely, that reason is a good easy to reach location for the P5 that's sending a team to the bowl. I think you have done a good job of explaining why the St Pete, Birmingham, Ft Worth, and HOD make sense for the P5's that play in them. I also think some of the points you make would tend to push those bowls in the AAC direction. I would also think that these P5's would probably lean toward playing more recognizable G5 names like SMU, Houston, Tulsa, Memphis, Cinci, Tulane, and Navy.

I hope you're right about the factors favoring the AAC. I agree, but ultimately time will tell.

I wonder if there will be any chance to bring PAC 12 pick #8 into the rotation with the Frisco Bowl. The PAC 12 has sent teams to Ft Worth and HOD in the past. There will be years where they won't have an eligible team but it would at least give them a secure spot within reasonable travel distance in years that they do have an eligible team.

Truth be told---the conventional wisdom for the Pac12 would be to do what the rest of the P5 does. Just like you outlined, the other P5's have their low end bowl games in convenient places in their footprint. The Pac12 needs a western bowl that's in a nice location within driving distance of several schools. In other words, make it a cheap attractive destination for the 6-6/7-5 type school that will be heading there. A MW opponent would be the logical choice---but if the Pac-12 is tired playing mostly MW G5's-----Im sure the AAC would be more than willing to tie themselves to any bowl with a possible P5 opponent.

The PAC already has the Las Vegas and Cactus bowls for this very purpose. And, the Northwest contingency isn't within driving distance to anywhere except Boise. And, I don't just see the PAC aligning with that bowl. So, the team and fans are flying to the bowl regardless. I do think they should revive the Los Angeles "Christmas" bowl idea.

In 2015, there were 10 bowl-eligible PAC teams, with no CFP selection, so only 7 spots for PAC. This is when Arizona played in the New Mexico bowl, Cal played in the Armed Forces, and Washington played in the Heart of Dallas. Still, the power brokers found landing spots for all 10 PAC schools, so I don't think they have much of a problem.

With Washington in the CFP and only 6 bowl eligible teams, the PAC failed to fill either the Las Vegas or Cactus bowl last year.

6 and 10 bowl-eligible teams are unusual seasons, so it's funny that the PAC's experience has seen the extreme outliers the last two post-seasons.

(05-16-2017 11:20 AM)LostInSpace Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 07:35 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  AC,
Your logic makes sense. But remember, the ACC plays in El Paso vs the PAC 12. I would not see multiple games, but I do see the ACC wanting to get a game in the Dallas area. Logical, it would be against the B12 not the B10, why I think they make a play for HOD. Also, it takes from CUSA not the AAC. If they fail, as I stated, I could see Frisco replace St. Pete vs AAC. I do think the ACC and B10 will try to make Military happen in the next cycle. I think that could move to Mid-Tier with lower tier being
Frisco vs AAC
Indy vs MWC
Detroit vs B10

There is no chance that the B10 is giving up slot #7 Foster Farms against the PAC 12 to play what would be a 4th game against the ACC in some years at the Military Bowl. I'm skeptical that they'd be willing to send pick #8 to Annapolis. Similarly, the Military Bowl is not severing its relationships with Navy, the other service academies and Northrop Grumman to have, at best, a shot at the B10's next to last bowl eligible team. Navy / Northrop >>>> Rutgers, finding a new title sponsor and a new venue.

The Sun Bowl has strong local support and a guaranteed decent PAC 12 team to anchor attendance. HOD has neither and is played in a much larger stadium.

Regardless, the B12 is not abandoning the Armed Forces Bowl founded and hosted by a conference member featuring well attended games against service academies to play in a largely empty Cotton Bowl against ACC 10/11. There's also the fact that B12 has never had enough bowl eligible teams to fill its slot in the AFB which means the ACC would most likely be sending a 6-6 team to play a G5 in a location ridiculously outside the conference footprint.

St. Pete may be played on a horrible date and time, but its an actual warm weather tourist destination in driveable / cheap flight distance of the ACC's members. Trading a G5 game there for one in DFW is insane.

I honestly don't see the Big12 ever filling either the HOD or the Armed Forces. The haven't filled either since the latest deal. They are pick 7 in a 10 team league and if they make the playoff it would be 8th. May fill it once over a 6 year cycle if they are lucky. I feel like those bowls may try to lock down other leagues but we shall see. I do think between the two bowls the American will either get one or split them equally over the next cycle. I don't see them going after both or landing both.

(05-16-2017 11:20 AM)LostInSpace Wrote:  

(05-15-2017 07:35 PM)msm96wolf Wrote:  AC,
Your logic makes sense. But remember, the ACC plays in El Paso vs the PAC 12. I would not see multiple games, but I do see the ACC wanting to get a game in the Dallas area. Logical, it would be against the B12 not the B10, why I think they make a play for HOD. Also, it takes from CUSA not the AAC. If they fail, as I stated, I could see Frisco replace St. Pete vs AAC. I do think the ACC and B10 will try to make Military happen in the next cycle. I think that could move to Mid-Tier with lower tier being
Frisco vs AAC
Indy vs MWC
Detroit vs B10

There is no chance that the B10 is giving up slot #7 Foster Farms against the PAC 12 to play what would be a 4th game against the ACC in some years at the Military Bowl. I'm skeptical that they'd be willing to send pick #8 to Annapolis. Similarly, the Military Bowl is not severing its relationships with Navy, the other service academies and Northrop Grumman to have, at best, a shot at the B10's next to last bowl eligible team. Navy / Northrop >>>> Rutgers, finding a new title sponsor and a new venue.

The Sun Bowl has strong local support and a guaranteed decent PAC 12 team to anchor attendance. HOD has neither and is played in a much larger stadium.

Regardless, the B12 is not abandoning the Armed Forces Bowl founded and hosted by a conference member featuring well attended games against service academies to play in a largely empty Cotton Bowl against ACC 10/11. There's also the fact that B12 has never had enough bowl eligible teams to fill its slot in the AFB which means the ACC would most likely be sending a 6-6 team to play a G5 in a location ridiculously outside the conference footprint.

St. Pete may be played on a horrible date and time, but its an actual warm weather tourist destination in driveable / cheap flight distance of the ACC's members. Trading a G5 game there for one in DFW is insane.

I guess we will know after the 2018 season, I will just be happy to be around to find out.

(05-13-2017 09:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:59 AM)fanhood Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/user-97592162/int...pson-51217

Go to the 11 minute mark. Craig Thompson (MWC Commissioner) wants to contract with ESPN to be the other conference in the Frisco Bowl. This would be a good move for both conferences.

Thompson says the spot will be "coveted" and fought over between the MW, MAC, and BYU.

I'm always amazed when conference commissions don't know the details of things that are a major portion of thier job. The Frisco Bowl has the old Miami Bowl ties and is part of the G5 bowl pool--so it has the AAC vs a rotating G5 tie. It's not "empty" on one side.

The other thing that I was struck by in the interview is the one item that typically dominates AAC interviews with Aresco (almost to the point of obsession) was largely ignored in this interview. These guys didn't ask Thompson a single question about the expectations for the next MW media deal---even though it was clear the commissioner was actually willing by to talk about the subject--having just emerged from a meeting where he said the TV deal "dominated" most of the meeting. So, these two hosts, in thier infinite wisdom, choose to not ask a single follow up question to see what these media discussions, that dominated the AD meetings, might mean for the future MW TV deal. I guess the next deal is not something that commands much interest for these radio hosts---despite it being directly related to schools dropping or adding sports---something they did mention.

http://www.fbschedules.com/2017/05/frisc...each-bowl/

Well if this article is correct, the MW Commissioner was correct. We'll be vying for the at-large spot and probably along with BYU or CUSA.

So it sounds like since this is a new bowl, the ties the Miami Bowl had are now void. The AAC was the recipient of being the anchor to the Frisco bowl like our Poinsettia Bowl.

Frisco Bowl. Wednesday Dec 20 7pm CST.

(05-23-2017 04:53 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 09:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:59 AM)fanhood Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/user-97592162/int...pson-51217

Go to the 11 minute mark. Craig Thompson (MWC Commissioner) wants to contract with ESPN to be the other conference in the Frisco Bowl. This would be a good move for both conferences.

Thompson says the spot will be "coveted" and fought over between the MW, MAC, and BYU.

I'm always amazed when conference commissions don't know the details of things that are a major portion of thier job. The Frisco Bowl has the old Miami Bowl ties and is part of the G5 bowl pool--so it has the AAC vs a rotating G5 tie. It's not "empty" on one side.

The other thing that I was struck by in the interview is the one item that typically dominates AAC interviews with Aresco (almost to the point of obsession) was largely ignored in this interview. These guys didn't ask Thompson a single question about the expectations for the next MW media deal---even though it was clear the commissioner was actually willing by to talk about the subject--having just emerged from a meeting where he said the TV deal "dominated" most of the meeting. So, these two hosts, in thier infinite wisdom, choose to not ask a single follow up question to see what these media discussions, that dominated the AD meetings, might mean for the future MW TV deal. I guess the next deal is not something that commands much interest for these radio hosts---despite it being directly related to schools dropping or adding sports---something they did mention.

http://www.fbschedules.com/2017/05/frisc...each-bowl/

Well if this article is correct, the MW Commissioner was correct. We'll be vying for the at-large spot and probably along with BYU or CUSA.

So it sounds like since this is a new bowl, the ties the Miami Bowl had are now void. The AAC was the recipient of being the anchor to the Frisco bowl like our Poinsettia Bowl.

Frisco Bowl. Wednesday Dec 20 7pm CST.

Its a misnomer to refer to this as a "new" bowl. Its not a new bowl. There is moratorium on new bowls. Its really more of a reboot. It just changed owners and locations---which means a new name--but it's effectively just the Miami Beach Bowl "under new management". Like I said, its basically just a ESPN reboot. The bowl always had some flexibility written into its deal with the G5 pool. That's how we ended up with BYU in year one instead of CUSA.

The most interesting thing in the article is the bowl now has an exponentially better time slot. Four days before Christmas at 8pm. Gone are the 2 days before Christmas at 2 in the afternoon on a work day time slots. It probably would still be a AAC owned bowl had it received slotting like that in its first 3 years.

(05-23-2017 05:01 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-23-2017 04:53 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 09:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:59 AM)fanhood Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/user-97592162/int...pson-51217

Go to the 11 minute mark. Craig Thompson (MWC Commissioner) wants to contract with ESPN to be the other conference in the Frisco Bowl. This would be a good move for both conferences.

Thompson says the spot will be "coveted" and fought over between the MW, MAC, and BYU.

I'm always amazed when conference commissions don't know the details of things that are a major portion of thier job. The Frisco Bowl has the old Miami Bowl ties and is part of the G5 bowl pool--so it has the AAC vs a rotating G5 tie. It's not "empty" on one side.

The other thing that I was struck by in the interview is the one item that typically dominates AAC interviews with Aresco (almost to the point of obsession) was largely ignored in this interview. These guys didn't ask Thompson a single question about the expectations for the next MW media deal---even though it was clear the commissioner was actually willing by to talk about the subject--having just emerged from a meeting where he said the TV deal "dominated" most of the meeting. So, these two hosts, in thier infinite wisdom, choose to not ask a single follow up question to see what these media discussions, that dominated the AD meetings, might mean for the future MW TV deal. I guess the next deal is not something that commands much interest for these radio hosts---despite it being directly related to schools dropping or adding sports---something they did mention.

http://www.fbschedules.com/2017/05/frisc...each-bowl/

Well if this article is correct, the MW Commissioner was correct. We'll be vying for the at-large spot and probably along with BYU or CUSA.

So it sounds like since this is a new bowl, the ties the Miami Bowl had are now void. The AAC was the recipient of being the anchor to the Frisco bowl like our Poinsettia Bowl.

Frisco Bowl. Wednesday Dec 20 7pm CST.

Its a misnomer to refer to this as a "new" bowl. Its not a new bowl. There is moratorium on new bowls. Its really more of a reboot. It just changed owners and locations---which means a new name--but it's effectively just the Miami Beach Bowl "under new management". Like I said, its basically just a ESPN reboot. The bowl always had some flexibility written into its deal with the G5 pool. That's how we ended up with BYU in year one instead of CUSA.

The most interesting thing in the article is the bowl now has an exponentially better time slot. Four days before Christmas at 8pm. Gone are the 2 days before Christmas at 2 in the afternoon on a work day time slots. It probably would still be a AAC owned bowl had it received slotting like that in its first 3 years.

I agree the time slot of the originally Miami Beach Bowl was horrific. Had honestly no chance to survive.

There certainly was an opt out agreement with this bowl where it could seek a better opponent but this almost seems like it dropped out of the bowl pool all together. At least this now will likely have a better opponent than it would have likely gotten otherwise and the time slot should improve ratings as well.

My guess, BYU gets tie-in for Frisco in 2017 with MWC backup. BYU goes to Hawaii in 2019. 2018 will be interesting, I think there will be 2018 MWC will tie-in with Frisco and ESPN will try to get BYU into a MWC bowl as a backup. My guess Boise or Vegas for that year.

It's the Jerra Bowl

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N910A using Tapatalk

(05-23-2017 04:53 PM)MWC Tex Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 09:04 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(05-13-2017 07:59 AM)fanhood Wrote:  https://soundcloud.com/user-97592162/int...pson-51217

Go to the 11 minute mark. Craig Thompson (MWC Commissioner) wants to contract with ESPN to be the other conference in the Frisco Bowl. This would be a good move for both conferences.

Thompson says the spot will be "coveted" and fought over between the MW, MAC, and BYU.

I'm always amazed when conference commissions don't know the details of things that are a major portion of thier job. The Frisco Bowl has the old Miami Bowl ties and is part of the G5 bowl pool--so it has the AAC vs a rotating G5 tie. It's not "empty" on one side.

The other thing that I was struck by in the interview is the one item that typically dominates AAC interviews with Aresco (almost to the point of obsession) was largely ignored in this interview. These guys didn't ask Thompson a single question about the expectations for the next MW media deal---even though it was clear the commissioner was actually willing by to talk about the subject--having just emerged from a meeting where he said the TV deal "dominated" most of the meeting. So, these two hosts, in thier infinite wisdom, choose to not ask a single follow up question to see what these media discussions, that dominated the AD meetings, might mean for the future MW TV deal. I guess the next deal is not something that commands much interest for these radio hosts---despite it being directly related to schools dropping or adding sports---something they did mention.

http://www.fbschedules.com/2017/05/frisc...each-bowl/

Well if this article is correct, the MW Commissioner was correct. We'll be vying for the at-large spot and probably along with BYU or CUSA.

So it sounds like since this is a new bowl, the ties the Miami Bowl had are now void. The AAC was the recipient of being the anchor to the Frisco bowl like our Poinsettia Bowl.

Frisco Bowl. Wednesday Dec 20 7pm CST.

Makes sense. A MW or BYU tie-in is good for the American/MW/BYU.

(05-24-2017 08:50 PM)Native Georgian Wrote:  

(05-11-2017 11:49 AM)YNot Wrote:  New AAC-MWC Champions Bowl - rotates between Las Vegas and New Orleans (or you could do Vegas-Texas-Vegas-Florida). Post-Christmas.

I would prefer rotating between Las Vegas and Houston/Dallas, but whatever.