A Second Bowl For The Sun Belt ?

MeanGreen61 · May 2, 2008

Several vague mentions and rumors of a 2nd bowl for the Sun Belt in 2009 have been seen on other sites. WW is also alledged to have mentioned a possible 2nd Belt bowl in 2009 at the conference basketball tournament. True ? False ? Just internet talk ? Wishful thinking ? Put me down as one who is sceptical & will only beleive it with an official announcement. A lot of bowl wheelin' & dealin' has been goin' on recently with not one Belt mention. Water supposedly has some extra bucks to use because of the 2 NCAA tourney teams.

Is Waters really going after a 2nd bowl or it just more talk ?

Edited May 2, 2008 by MeanGreen61

UNTflyer · May 2, 2008

Something needs to be done. The Sun Belt is the ONLY conference to have fewer than THREE teams in a bowl game.

Hook 'em & Go Green · May 2, 2008

With the Big East getting a tie-in for their #7 team in an 8-team conference, I would bet they can't fill all of those slots this fall. The SEC may not be able to fill down to #9 in the PapaJohns.com Bowl in Birmingham either, especially if two SEC make the BCS. I would bet the Sun Belt gets the runner up in the PapaJohns.com Bowl or in the new St. Petersburg Bowl in Florida. With 68 teams out of 120 now going bowling this fall, I think 3 Sun Belt teams in bowls this season would not be out of the realm of possibility. I sure hope the Mean Green can turn things around in my last fall as a grad student. I'd like to watch them play in a bowl and then watch the Horns play in the BCS! That would be sweet for me personally!

KAjunRaider · May 2, 2008

With the Big East getting a tie-in for their #7 team in an 8-team conference, I would bet they can't fill all of those slots this fall. The SEC may not be able to fill down to #9 in the PapaJohns.com Bowl in Birmingham either, especially if two SEC make the BCS. I would bet the Sun Belt gets the runner up in the PapaJohns.com Bowl or in the new St. Petersburg Bowl in Florida. With 68 teams out of 120 now going bowling this fall, I think 3 Sun Belt teams in bowls this season would not be out of the realm of possibility. I sure hope the Mean Green can turn things around in my last fall as a grad student. I'd like to watch them play in a bowl and then watch the Horns play in the BCS! That would be sweet for me personally!

Another thing that hurts us, and is rarely mentioned, is the secondary tie-ins to Bowls. We do not even have a "secondary" bowl, in circumstances where a conference with the main tie-in doesn't have an eligible team to place in the particular bowl.

No wonder we're perceived as the bottom rung of the ladder in 1-A football.

Arkstfan · May 2, 2008

Another thing that hurts us, and is rarely mentioned, is the secondary tie-ins to Bowls. We do not even have a "secondary" bowl, in circumstances where a conference with the main tie-in doesn't have an eligible team to place in the particular bowl.
No wonder we're perceived as the bottom rung of the ladder in 1-A football.

Those aren't permitted under NCAA rules.

greenminer · May 2, 2008

Those aren't permitted under NCAA rules.

hmm :blink: . I've read countless times over the years about bowls having contracts with multiple conferences to the effect of "if XX-ranked team isn't available [by eligible wins or already selected to a bigger bowl] then they can pick what's left from XX conference".

Heck, Sun Bowl has a clause in its contract to bypass the first selection by choice if they don't like the matchup although this is a case I think where they have to stay within the same conference?. For example, this year's Sun Bowl matchup:

As per the Sun Bowl's contract with the Pacific 10 Conference, the selection committee invoked its option to bypass the No. 3 team in the conference, Oregon State, to prevent the same school from traveling to El Paso two years in a row.
Oregon State defeated Missouri in a 39-38 thriller in last year's edition of the Sun Bowl.
"That's pretty much it. They were here last year, and I think it's better for the city and I think it's better for the football team," said Bernie Olivas, executive director of the Sun Bowl Association. "That's the reason we had it in the contract with the Big 12 and the Big East, was to keep the same teams from coming back, and here we are in the same situation with the Pac-10."

eptimes

I've never heard of your said rule, but maybe there's something there I'm not aware of. My Sun Bowl example is kind of moot since it looks like they stayed in the same conference, but I vaguely recall they have switched conference picks before. could be wrong...

Edited May 2, 2008 by greenminer

Eagle1855 · May 3, 2008

I've never heard of your said rule, but maybe there's something there I'm not aware of. My Sun Bowl example is kind of moot since it looks like they stayed in the same conference, but I vaguely recall they have switched conference picks before. could be wrong...

I'm absolutely certain you might be right...maybe.

greenminer · May 3, 2008

I'm absolutely certain you might be right...maybe.

I heart you. I think.

Arkstfan · May 6, 2008

While you can certainly have a wink-wink-nod-nod agreement that you'll take a team from another league, you cannot use that agreement to take a 6-6 team over a 7-5.

The Sun Bowl deal they have to designate the conferences before the season starts that they can take a 6-6 from but they pick so high up the order that it doesn't matter.

KAjunRaider · May 6, 2008

While you can certainly have a wink-wink-nod-nod agreement that you'll take a team from another league, you cannot use that agreement to take a 6-6 team over a 7-5.
The Sun Bowl deal they have to designate the conferences before the season starts that they can take a 6-6 from but they pick so high up the order that it doesn't matter.

But it seems as if the SBC at 6-6 will always sit home, while other conferences have a shot (if no 7-5 teams available).

2nd SBC Bowl tie-in would allow for a 6-6 team, instead of an Coosa or MAC 6-6 team. We need to be able to offer this to our recruits.

A 2nd SBC Bowl tie-in is a "must".

stebo · May 6, 2008

With a secondary bowl, Troy would have gotten a bid last year most likely. But really that is only the 3rd time that a team with a winning record has been left home. There was MTSU in year 1, NMSU had a 7-5 season one year, and then Troy last year. 6-6 teams from the Belt don't need to be bowling, that is silly. I am guessing that the talks have always been outweighed by money and this won't be an issue after we start getting our NCAA credits next year. We might be one year away from a second bowl but I think there will be one by 2009.

GrandGreen · May 6, 2008

Apparently, most conferences have arrangements to in effect buy their way into multiple bowl games. I can't fault the Belt too much for not spending money that is not available. It is also amusing that many Belt fans for example think the Belt is entitled to more bowl games, yet there or many of those same fans that want to get rid of CUSU and get a barely eligible name conference opponent for the NO bowl. My concern right now would be more of being sure that the Belt retains the NO Bowl with the contract I think expiring after 2009. IMO, it is by far the best bowl arrangement that the Belt could get.

Arkstfan · May 7, 2008

I know you guys were too giddy in 2001 to pay attention to the MT situation that year but the commissioner worked with the commissioners of the MWC and WAC and had a deal cut to get MT in a bowl.

The WAC had more eligible teams than they had bowls. Silicon wanted Fresno, Humanitarian wanted Boise but La.Tech was in first and had to be placed in one of the two. The deal cut was this:

Louisiana Tech would be shifted to the New Orleans Bowl and face UNT.

Colorado State would be shifted from New Orleans to the Silicon and face Fresno.

Boise would get to stay home for the Humanitarian and MT would go to Boise.

Louisiana Tech vetoed the deal. They didn't want to play a team from the Sun Belt especially one with a losing record. So Silicon locked in Fresno who had the better overall record but had tied with Boise (Boise held the tie-breaker though). Tech got shipped to Boise. Those two games put their open slots up for bid and Michigan State went to the Silicon and Clemson went to the Humanitarian. Ole Miss who had a better record than Clemson or Michigan State was also bidding for the slots but dropped out of the bidding when the minimum guarantee from the schools hit $500,000.

If La.Tech hadn't thrown Boise State under the bus (apparently Clemson was driving the bus because it ran over Tech) the WAC would have had a three bowl season and the Sun Belt would have had a two bowl season. That would have meant that in 3 of the 5 times that the Sun Belt had an extra team with 7 or more wins that the 7 win team would have been placed.

I think 2009 and 2010 could be very interesting because now the Sun Belt has some disposable income to buy its way into games and contracts are starting to expire.