(12-08-2016 04:29 PM)Louisiana99 Wrote:  

(12-08-2016 04:21 PM)AtlantaJag Wrote:  

(12-08-2016 04:13 PM)CajunAmos Wrote:  

(12-08-2016 03:49 PM)AtlantaJag Wrote:  I'm not sure why Tom's proposal is being shouted down so vociferously. It would put the conference's best teams in the most visible bowls every year and that should benefit the conference as a whole (if those teams pull their weight). Non-SBC college football fans/viewers are much more likely to form their impressions from the on-the-field performances of the teams and not if there are a couple of thousand extra spectators in the stands

Yep, I agree. It's in the conferences best interest to have their top finished team play the #6 team in CUSA (who was rated lower than the SBC) instead of the #2 team from the MAC (rated higher than the SBC). Makes perfect sense to me. I agree, and I'm ready to head to Orlando.

For football fans that love in the south, a win over USM means a lot more than a win over a MAC team, whether or not the reality is the MAC team is better. It's the old perception versus reality thing. SDSU is a better team than Mississippi State, but it's the USA over MSU win that most people remember.

Except when conferences are ranked at the end of the season and you get money based on where the conference finishes. There is no perception about the payout we receive as a conference the higher we finish. If we make smart financial decisions now then maybe one day soon we won't have to worry about the financial consequence of making bad decisions like other conferences can that have been around forever and have money coming in from everywhere...we don't.

Thanks for the 1 OOC FBS win in 3 years. So I'm wondering why ULL feels entitled to a top 3 bowl based upon that.