Realization of what the bowls are

UNT90 · December 12, 2013

After looking at the bowl line up and seeing 6 out of 35 bowls that have big 5 vs non big 5 matchups, it is becoming painfully obvious that unless we go undefeated, we will never play a big 5 team in a bowl. Ever.

It's a club. It's a monopoly. It's illegal. But everyone puts up with it because the NCAA throws just barely enough bones to the non big 5 to keep them on the leash.

I wish someone had the stones to file an anti-trust suit. No one does. Welcome to modern day 'Merca.

drex · December 12, 2013

Be not your heart troubled...relish the fact that we play college football, not semi-pro football masqueraded as college football.

meanrob · December 12, 2013

The bowls are exhibitions, not a test/wish to see how your team would go up against another team.

That's like suing the NIT for not playing a P5 in the first round. Not gonna happen.

untjim1995 · December 12, 2013

After looking at the bowl line up and seeing 6 out of 35 bowls that have big 5 vs non big 5 matchups, it is becoming painfully obvious that unless we go undefeated, we will never play a big 5 team in a bowl. Ever.
It's a club. It's a monopoly. It's illegal. But everyone puts up with it because the NCAA throws just barely enough bones to the non big 5 to keep them on the leash.
I wish someone had the stones to file an anti-trust suit. No one does. Welcome to modern day 'Merca.

The AQs have so much power that an anti-trust lawsuit would just get beaten anyway. Those schools' alumni control the legislative and judicial positions in their states and in DC. The money they get from this monopoly is sickening, which is why they'll never let it go.

I'm with drex. We play true amateur sports at the non-AQ level. We aren't an NFL or NBA lite school. Very soon, this whole AQ break off will make this all more apparent. Whether it's with the NCAA or not is the question. Look, when the Big XII eventually folds, you are gonna have 4 Super Conferences, probably with 16-18 teams a piece. Those of left behind will combine with the FCS schools and have our own separate division. It's what the BCS media wants and it's what the AQ schools want. And, to me, the sadder part of all this will be when those schools leave and create their own March Madness and College World Series.

It's tough for us, since we really never got a chance--a true chance--to be a player in an AQ league (or historical peer, like the SWC). We never tasted what it must of been like to get huge attendance by hosting UT, A&M, Tech, OU, Arky, etc... But schools like SMU, UH, and Rice must feel like they have been castrated. And I bet TCU falls into that same category again too, when the big XII falls apart. The only schools in that league that are certain to get into another AQ league are Texas, OU, and KU. Who else gets left behind is going to be amazingly brutal. And they won't be able to do anything about it.

vpackrats · December 12, 2013

After looking at the bowl line up and seeing 6 out of 35 bowls that have big 5 vs non big 5 matchups, it is becoming painfully obvious that unless we go undefeated, we will never play a big 5 team in a bowl. Ever.
It's a club. It's a monopoly. It's illegal. But everyone puts up with it because the NCAA throws just barely enough bones to the non big 5 to keep them on the leash.
I wish someone had the stones to file an anti-trust suit. No one does. Welcome to modern day 'Merca.

Um, you're forgetting the FACT that we would have played a Big 10 school in the HOD in a regular year. They were contractually bound to supply us with a team (# of teams permitting of course). Last time I checked, the Big 10 is a big 5 conference. But, as has been stated previously, due to a confluence of events ranging from the Big 10 getting 2 BCS bowl teams, to Penn State being on probation, to not enough teams being bowl eligible, they were unable to fulfill their committment to the HOD. No conspiracy here.

GangGreen · December 12, 2013

Those schools' alumni control the legislative and judicial positions in their states and in DC.

Shoot, and all this time I thought it was those dadgum masons.

UNT90 · December 12, 2013

The bowls are exhibitions, not a test/wish to see how your team would go up against another team.
That's like suing the NIT for not playing a P5 in the first round. Not gonna happen.

The bowls are also money.

Very important element.

UNT90 · December 12, 2013

Um, you're forgetting the FACT that we would have played a Big 10 school in the HOD in a regular year. They were contractually bound to supply us with a team (# of teams permitting of course). Last time I checked, the Big 10 is a big 5 conference. But, as has been stated previously, due to a confluence of events ranging from the Big 10 getting 2 BCS bowl teams, to Penn State being on probation, to not enough teams being bowl eligible, they were unable to fulfill their committment to the HOD. No conspiracy here.

Seriously?

They would have traded our of the HOD to fade another Big 5 in another bowl. College football is good Ike boy system to its core. The exact type of system anti trust laws were made to dismantle.

greenminer · December 12, 2013

Um, you're forgetting the FACT that we would have played a Big 10 school in the HOD in a regular year. They were contractually bound to supply us with a team (# of teams permitting of course). Last time I checked, the Big 10 is a big 5 conference. But, as has been stated previously, due to a confluence of events ranging from the Big 10 getting 2 BCS bowl teams, to Penn State being on probation, to not enough teams being bowl eligible, they were unable to fulfill their committment to the HOD. No conspiracy here.

Not sure, but based on what I read this is not entirely true. Next in line after the B10 was the ACC and it was no secret that BC lobbied hard to get in.

This was very much about ESPN owning the bowl and wanting fewer viewers taken away from the other games being played that day.

The bowls are exhibitions, not a test/wish to see how your team would go up against another team.
That's like suing the NIT for not playing a P5 in the first round. Not gonna happen.

I think the bigger picture here is money. March Madness isn't a great analogy because the payout is the same as long as you're in a round, regardless if your opponent is Kentucky or IUPUI. To the contrary, there is a huge amount of money being distributed around the BCS system and the AQs do not like sharing it with a non-AQ opponent.

I read a few years ago that the NCAA makes 99% of its profits via March Madness. All this money floating around for BCS football goes straight to the conferences and their schools.. There is little-to-no incentive for them to care what the NCAA as a governing body thinks about how they treat the non-AQs.

Sometimes I think the lack of respect is recipricol: the NCAA does not care about the AQ vs. non-AQ.

I threw a few references to old articles I faintly remember reading. Someone correct me if I am in error. I just want people to realize the biggest crime in the BCS picture is not who got left out of what bowls, but the manipulation of millions and millions of dollars to keep it out of non-AQ hands.

meanrob · December 12, 2013

Good luck on suing because a 7-5 Sun Belt team played a 7-5 Mac team in the Go Daddy bowl instead of the SEC team its fans wanted. That suit wouldn't last two seconds.

I didn't use March Madness, I said NIT. You can't sue the HOD bowl because you don't like your opponent just like you can't sue the NIT. If you don't like the set-up, then don't accept the invite. They're both exhibitions.

greenminer · December 12, 2013

I didn't use March Madness, I said NIT. You can't sue the HOD bowl because you don't like your opponent just like you can't sue the NIT. If you don't like the set-up, then don't accept the invite. They're both exhibitions.

I said March Madness as an umbrella term to include any NCAA post season, so my bad.

This is the last comment I'll make about any suing, because it won't happen anyways: the schools would not sue the bowl (for reasons you said), they would sue the NCAA or BCS as a whole. I think that is what UNT90 was referring to.

Mean_Green09 · December 12, 2013

2 of those 6 matchups involve teams from CUSA

Edited December 12, 2013 by Mean_Green09

UNTflyer · December 12, 2013

All this money floating around for BCS football goes straight to the conferences and their schools..

Actually, most of the money goes to the Bowl Committees, and their board members. And their annual "meetings" on Caribbean islands.

The Sugar Bowl paid $1.1 million to its Chief Executive and his two aides. That's downright criminal.

meanrob · December 12, 2013

Access to the BCS/playoff and not liking how the rest of the bowl matchups are set are completely different conversations.

UNTflyer · December 12, 2013

Good luck on suing because a 7-5 Sun Belt team played a 7-5 Mac team in the Go Daddy bowl instead of the SEC team its fans wanted. That suit wouldn't last two seconds.
I didn't use March Madness, I said NIT. You can't sue the HOD bowl because you don't like your opponent just like you can't sue the NIT. If you don't like the set-up, then don't accept the invite. They're both exhibitions.

I think when anyone talks of lawsuits, it is more along the vein of suing the Power 5 for anti-trust violations, or the NCAA for allowing conference realignment to go the way it did, which only served to consolidate power and money at the top.

Mean_Green09 · December 12, 2013

I look at it this way. We are a pretty unknown commodity at this point so it's going to take more winning and wins against AQs before we get those matchups we want. People have to want to see us play. Outside of Texas I don't think there are many people who know our brand and know about UNT football. I don't think many people flip through games on Saturday looking for UNT. So most of the writers that are outside the DFW area make their determinations about UNT football by looking at a box score same thing with college football fans. It's all a process that is going to take time. If UNT continues to do things the right way everything will take care of itself.

Censored by Laurie · December 12, 2013

After looking at the bowl line up and seeing 6 out of 35 bowls that have big 5 vs non big 5 matchups, it is becoming painfully obvious that unless we go undefeated, we will never play a big 5 team in a bowl. Ever.
It's a club. It's a monopoly. It's illegal. But everyone puts up with it because the NCAA throws just barely enough bones to the non big 5 to keep them on the leash.
I wish someone had the stones to file an anti-trust suit. No one does. Welcome to modern day 'Merca.

So...are you taking a principled stance and not attending?

meanrob · December 12, 2013

I think when anyone talks of lawsuits, it is more along the vein of suing the Power 5 for anti-trust violations, or the NCAA for allowing conference realignment to go the way it did, which only served to consolidate power and money at the top.

I just responded to the original post which talked about bowl matchups.

TheFranchise · December 12, 2013

I look at it this way. We are a pretty unknown commodity at this point so it's going to take more winning and wins against AQs before we get those matchups we want. People have to want to see us play. Outside of Texas I don't think there are many people who know our brand and know about UNT football. I don't think many people flip through games on Saturday looking for UNT. So most of the writers that are outside the DFW area make their determinations about UNT football by looking at a box score same thing with college football fans. It's all a process that is going to take time. If UNT continues to do things the right way everything will take care of itself.

Glad to see Jason Garrett frequents the boards . . .

I keed, I keed.

aztecskin · December 12, 2013

Actually, most of the money goes to the Bowl Committees, and their board members. And their annual "meetings" on Caribbean islands.

The Sugar Bowl paid $1.1 million to its Chief Executive and his two aides. That's downright criminal.

Anyone know a BCS Bowl looking for a new CE?

NM Green · December 12, 2013

It does take time to build a program for the haul and patience is necessary. When living in Las Vegas I could drag my friends to go see Boise state but they didn't give a flip about unlv. Boise built their brand by seizing opportunities on big stages and winning a lot of games. UNT almost did that at Georgia, yet we still built credibility by the looks of how many people still reference that 3 quarter performance but ultimate loss.

Our next opportunity is on a New Year's Day game them there is Texas and smu. The next three games are big in perception. Like Boise you build your reputation one w at a time and our next step in "the process" is a strong win over unlv.

GMG

UNTexas · December 12, 2013

There are a lot of people being followed by black helicopters on this thread.

oldguystudent · December 12, 2013

There have always been minor bowl games that nobody cared about.

I would really love the opportunity to see us beat up on the Indianas and Iowa States of the world. I never, ever, ever want us to be Alabama. It would cease to be entertainment for me at that point.

GrayEagle · December 12, 2013

If the AQs keep gaining more power there will not only be anti-trust suits but also suits to tax the Power 5 and associates and that will find favor with our federal government.