2012-2013 Bowl Thread

[BishopMVP]

Originally Posted by Young Drachma

There's TONS of conflicting information out there about how bowl money gets divided, but this article (From 2006) is pretty good.

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sport...-payouts_x.htm

So based on that, the money isn't actually divided evenly among the conferences (which didn't make any sense how it kept reading in so many articles) but rather, the leagues have to sit down and negotiate the pie akin to playoff shares. So the MAC and NIU should do all right in that instance or at least, break even.

Originally Posted by PurdueBrad

My understanding is that the MAC gets and splits half of the team's bowl payout among the conference schools and the team gets the other half which is a massive windfall if that holds here.

Thanks for the additional info... we're trying to figure this stuff out as UMass fans and it doesn't seem like there is definitive info out there. Can't even tell with 100% certainty that UMass won't get a share of the MAC money (we shouldn't, but we did get a share of Temple's exit fee to the Big East). Considering how many professors are agitating about a 700,000 shortfall in year one of our FBS transition, an unexpected windfall would be very nice.

[Matthean]

Louisiana Tech Bulldogs, 9-3, turns down bid, won't go to bowl game - ESPN

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I thought you were saying that playing the games at home sites would increase the revenue. My bad, totally misunderstood.

It actually is more profitable to play a home game. On average BCS schools are losing $330k playing in BCS games. That includes money that the conference uses to help subsidize the trips. Major schools like Florida can make $5 million or so for a home game against almost anyone. Both schools would be better off finding a way to split the gate and taking their share of the TV money. Not to mention that it'd be a boom for the college towns and not some random city.

[cuervo72]

Maybe UF should just skip their bowl and invite La Tech over.

[RainMaker]

The NCAA does provide aggregate data on costs of playing in bowls. And public schools have all this information free for people to see. The conference split might be more secretive, but if public schools are involved, it'll be in there.

Regardless of how it's split, it's not a profitable venture on average. Pretty ridiculous for a postseason in a major sport.

Originally Posted by PurdueBrad

NIU lost money on all their MAC bowl appearances, usually around $150,000 to $250,000 per year. However, the Orange Bowl has a $17,000,000 per team payout (of which $8,500,000 goes to the conference) so NIU should come out of this ahead actually, even after travel and ticket costs. I also know that NIU will travel very well for this. We have a lot of bandwagon jumpers here as well as suburbanites that will jump in the Florida in January trip. I would guess that NIU will sell 85% of their ticket allotment at minimum. They should be good.

The bigger problem for NIU is that the MAC schedule, needing to play on weird nights just to get seen on TV will actually be made worse by this I believe. I think ESPN will want more weeknight games involving NIU so they're going to continue to play bizarre nights, short weeks, bad kick-off times (the Toledo game was an 8:20 local time kickoff even though it was a home game), etc.

I also agree that this will scare teams off from facing an NIU. They've made a lot of their name by hanging with the middle-of-the-road BCS teams or beating them (see my Boilermakers a couple years back and likely next year) and I think these kills their ability to schedule those teams, outside of the MAC-B1G tie-in and I'm not sure it'll ever be in the best interest of the good mid-majors to play each other early (i.e. a Boise State-NIU matchup).

BCS Bowls lose schools more money on average (about a $200k difference) . NIU's losses seem just above the average for non-BCS bowls. Not sure why they'd suddenly do better in a BCS one.

I understand the optimism, but it's not just about travelling well. You have to buy the tickets through the school at a premium. Going down to Florida and getting your tickets directly through the Orange Bowl for cheaper hurts the schools. Another bullshit trick they pull is they force schools to rent out blocks of rooms in advance at insane prices. If the schools don't sell those to alumni/students, they have to eat those costs too. It's a huge scam where non-profits bilk schools and alumni.

Maybe NIU will do better than most schools, but remember schools like UConn and Virginia Tech have lost millions in this arrangement. Even Oklahoma can't break even without the conference pitching in a million or two to cover expenses. The school will lose money, likely a lot of it.

[molson]

Originally Posted by Matthean

Louisiana Tech Bulldogs, 9-3, turns down bid, won't go to bowl game - ESPN

So the 3rd place team in a conference with 1 bowl-tie in was holding out for something better and then pouted and went home when asked to make a decision?

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by molson

So the 3rd place team in a conference with 1 bowl-tie in was holding out for something better and then pouted and went home when asked to make a decision?

Well and their game was against another Louisiana team, in-state. I guess they figured it was better to just not bother. Seems odd, but I can't say I don't blame them for not getting all up for Louisiana-Lafayette in Shreveport in December.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by molson

So the 3rd place team in a conference with 1 bowl-tie in was holding out for something better and then pouted and went home when asked to make a decision?

Yep.

[PurdueBrad]

Originally Posted by molson

So the 3rd place team in a conference with 1 bowl-tie in was holding out for something better and then pouted and went home when asked to make a decision?

That's kind of where I am here. Every article seems to have a bit of a slant that we should, for some reason, feel bad for them. I don't, they made a choice and they have to live with that choice.

[molson]

I peaked in at a La Tech message board (which exists), and man, they're pissed (at the school).

[Matthean]

2012-13 bowl schedule - ESPN

[tarcone]

Iowa was terrible and beat No. Illinois. Shouldnt that make FSU about a 35 point favorite.

[cuervo72]

Originally Posted by Young Drachma

Well and their game was against another Louisiana team, in-state. I guess they figured it was better to just not bother. Seems odd, but I can't say I don't blame them for not getting all up for Louisiana-Lafayette in Shreveport in December.

And that's why there are too many bowls. Who cares about that game other than people in a couple of pockets in Louisiana?

[Ben E Lou]

SUGAR: #2 Bama vs. #1 ND
ORANGE: #5 Kansas State vs. #3 Florida
ROSE: #6 Stanford vs. #16 Nebraska
COTTON: #9 Texas A&M vs. #7 UGA
FIESTA: #8 LSU vs. #4 Oregon
PEACH: #10 South Carolina vs. #11 Oklahoma

smh

[Izulde]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

What is the exposure really going to do? I don't think they're going to start stealing talent from the Big 10 anytime soon. One game isn't going to get teams to come to DeKalb or pay huge television rights. If anything it'll get some schools to avoid them more.

It's fun for the school I'm sure but having to dish out $3-4 million to play in this game when your football budget is only $7 million is a big hit.

You're thinking too small. It's not that it's going to be a huge boost to the football program overall - it's that it's going to be a huge boost to the university overall.

For example, when George Mason went to the Final Four, their applications for admission the next year went up something ridiculous like 300%.

[Julio Riddols]

Wait.. Why does it cost teams to go to these bowl games?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Julio Riddols

Wait.. Why does it cost teams to go to these bowl games?

Ever tried to haul that many people over that distance? And put them up & feed them for how many days? At rates negotiating & contracted by the bowl ($150-$300 per room per night, with over 100 rooms required in some cases). And then there's the revenue sharing that the conferences redistribute to the non-bowl teams . And then there's the mandatory ticket purchases by the schools.

Here's an article from last year that goes into some of the details, with quite a few examples.
Schools find BCS bowl games can cost big money – USATODAY.com

[Buccaneer]

And as RainMaker alluded to, some of the bowls are very czar-like, purposely running scams to line their own pockets at the expense of the schools and fans.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Julio Riddols

Wait.. Why does it cost teams to go to these bowl games?

A very expensive middleman. They are basically scams to line the pockets of some well-connected businessmen masquerading as non-profits.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by Izulde

You're thinking too small. It's not that it's going to be a huge boost to the football program overall - it's that it's going to be a huge boost to the university overall.

For example, when George Mason went to the Final Four, their applications for admission the next year went up something ridiculous like 300%.

People watch the Final Four, they don't watch the Orange Bowl anymore. Game gets clobbered by some preseason NFL games. They'd be better off spending the millions on a Super Bowl ad, people watch that.

[Galaxy]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

What is the exposure really going to do? I don't think they're going to start stealing talent from the Big 10 anytime soon. One game isn't going to get teams to come to DeKalb or pay huge television rights. If anything it'll get some schools to avoid them more.

It's fun for the school I'm sure but having to dish out $3-4 million to play in this game when your football budget is only $7 million is a big hit.

You're looking at it wrong. Exposure to recruit students/applicants, faculty, and raise funding. It's a golden branding tool for the university.

UConn, Hawaii, and Boise State and TCU are great examples.

http://www.hawaiibusiness.com/Hawaii...e-Colt-Effect/

TCU has become a very competitive school to get into now-especially from out-of-state students:

http://www.star-telegram.com/2011/06...rest-from.html
http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2011/01/13/t...ter-rose-bowl/

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

People watch the Final Four, they don't watch the Orange Bowl anymore. Game gets clobbered by some preseason NFL games. They'd be better off spending the millions on a Super Bowl ad, people watch that.

I'll get off your lawn, sorry.

[Matthean]

Originally Posted by Galaxy

You're looking at it wrong. Exposure to recruit students/applicants, faculty, and raise funding. It's a golden branding tool for the university.

More practice and an extra game as well. If you have a young team it can be beneficial for them. It's always a nice reward for seniors.

[Young Drachma]

Louisiana Tech won't play in bowl despite 9-3 record; Karl Malone rips school - Yahoo! Sports

It was only a few weeks ago that Louisiana Tech was 9-1 and considered a dark horse for the Orange Bowl that will be hosting MAC champion Northern Illinois on Jan. 1. Now, after two close losses to WAC champion Utah State and upstart San Jose State, Tech apparently isn't going anywhere.

Several media outlets reported the Independence Bowl invited Louisiana Tech to Shreveport, but athletic director Bruce Van De Velde turned it down. A rumored reason was because of an aversion to a possible matchup with Louisiana-Monroe.

The two schools have a complex relationship and it's easy to infer Tech did not want to entertain the idea of a showdown for bragging rights. But Louisiana Tech released a statement denying the school had rejected an "official invitation."

"Contrary to media reports, at no time did I, our head coach or a member of our administration turn down an official invitation to any bowl game," Van De Velde said in the statement. "In consultation with our coach and our university president, we asked Independence Bowl officials for more time to make a decision until we could properly consider all postseason options that were available to Louisiana Tech. Unfortunately, we were not afforded that time and the decision was made to rescind the offer."

Some more detail on this whole joke, adding credence that La. Tech just didn't want to get in a situation where they might lose to ULM. (Not Lafayette my bad.) in-state for whatever reason, but now that they're headed to C-USA (with five bowl tie-ins) they won't get stuck playing in the hometown toilet bowl anymore is their logic.

Plus, I bet they had someone like Rainmaker in the athletic department who figured the money they'd lose on playing in-state to a school they consider inferior could be better spent on a tv ad during an NFL playoff game.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

People watch the Final Four, they don't watch the Orange Bowl anymore.

Being stuck with the ACC isn't helping matters, not when Miami & FSU are both down. Haven't had FSU in the Orange since 05-06, hasn't been Miami.

And the matchups have often been the worst of the lot (rank = BCS final)
2012: #15 vs #23 (Clemson-WVU) 5.3 rtg (overnights were a 4.5)
2011: #4 vs #13 (Stanford-VaTech) 6.75 rtg
2010: #9 vs #10 (Iowa-GT) 6.80 rtg
2009: #12 vs #19 (Cincy-VaTech) 5.40 rtg
2008: #3 vs #8 (Kansas-VaTech) 7.40 rtg

They'd be better off spending the millions on a Super Bowl ad, people watch that.

Don't get too carried away, even last year's major dropoff for the Orange Bowl had a higher rating than everything on TV last week except 4 shows. And because of frequency/repetition, the 5 spots in a BCS game (about 600k per vs $3m+ for SB) are probably a better deal for most advertisers. And the bowl games are more targeted as well, fewer casual viewers, unless you've got a product that's genuinely A18+ (instead of being male-centric or whatever)

[Matthean]

"consider all options"

As in, to play in the one bowl game or not.

[RainMaker]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

Don't get too carried away, even last year's major dropoff for the Orange Bowl had a higher rating than everything on TV last week except 4 shows. And because of frequency/repetition, the 5 spots in a BCS game (about 600k per vs $3m+ for SB) are probably a better deal for most advertisers. And the bowl games are more targeted as well, fewer casual viewers, unless you've got a product that's genuinely A18+ (instead of being male-centric or whatever)

I wasn't serious about the Super Bowl ad. I just don't buy that this one bowl game will magically turn the fortunes of NIU around. Cases like Hawaii and Boise State were a bit different since these teams were followed from the start of the season. They had Heisman candidates to follow as well. I doubt many people were talking about NIU over the last few months. Heck, even the people I know who went to NIU were kind of shocked that their team had a shot at a BCS game going into the week.

And yes the ratings beat out an episode of The Voice or whatever is atop the charts. But it's still not that big. Like I said, there were a bunch of NFL preseason games that beat out last season's Orange Bowl. And I don't know how much intrigue a FSU-NIU matchup really has to boost it.

I'm also not saying they shouldn't go or that it's not a good thing for the program. Just that I don't think it's going to provide this boom that so many people think.

[Young Drachma]

I don't think anyone is saying it's going to turn NIU into U of I or anything. But it helps. Full stop.

[RainMaker]

Is there a chance that LA Techs decision was financially motivated? I know the state has been cutting funding to universities and a big chunk of their athletic department budget is taxpayer subsidized.

Is there a chance they were looking for better terms from the bowl? Or maybe this decision came from higher up? Having taxpayers pay for a bunch of unused seats at a crappy bowl game might not go over well with the public when schools like them are fighting so hard to keep funding.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

SUGAR: #2 Bama vs. #1 ND
ORANGE: #5 Kansas State vs. #3 Florida
ROSE: #6 Stanford vs. #16 Nebraska
COTTON: #9 Texas A&M vs. #7 UGA
FIESTA: #8 LSU vs. #4 Oregon
PEACH: #10 South Carolina vs. #11 Oklahoma

smh

whut?

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by RainMaker

Is there a chance that LA Techs decision was financially motivated? I know the state has been cutting funding to universities and a big chunk of their athletic department budget is taxpayer subsidized.

Is there a chance they were looking for better terms from the bowl? Or maybe this decision came from higher up? Having taxpayers pay for a bunch of unused seats at a crappy bowl game might not go over well with the public when schools like them are fighting so hard to keep funding.

This is what I was thinking, honestly. But some people were saying that Mizzou
(Ping: MBBF) went there recently and turned a profit and that with it being a bus ride for both teams, that there'd be no reason for them not to go and at least break even. But given the shady economics of these exercises and not having any clue about either fan base...I can't say definitively.

Also, it's worth noting that La Tech. had already played in Shreveport this year at some point, though I didn't even check their schedule to corroborate this. Of course, that's not necessarily a reason not to play an extra game.

I think it sounds like, from the coach and others, that the A.D. got caught with his pants down, that he didn't expect a 9-3 team (even from the WAC) to be shut out COMPLETELY and his power-play failed. It'd be different if it only the Idaho Potato Bowl where you know they'd take a loss financially.

But an in-state bowl that's likely to have a decent amount of interest in-state with a bus trip seems unlikely to be the time to become a paragon of fiscal responsibility. Or else, frankly, he'd have said so. That argument would've been better received (by certain people...and likely the media) than just saying "we didn't think this would happen and the Independence Bowl acted quickly."

There's no negotiating bowl terms to be more favorable. What's more favorable than "you're in-state. C'mon down." They didn't want to play ULM and lose, according to the article I posted earlier. Seems like as good a reason as any to punt and hope for something else. But he played chicken and lost.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

whut?

I think it was part of the whole "too many bowls" meme and a hearkening back to the days of January 1st bowls with a list of what it might have looked like if we still had the old system.

[M GO BLUE!!!]

Looks like LA Tech's decision may have been based on a grudge against LA-Monrow.

Louisiana Tech refuses to play former rival Louisiana-Monroe in Independence Bowl - SBNation.com

While being interviewed for a story in September, Louisiana-Monroe athletic director Bobby Staub acknowledged a current stalemate between the two programs -- after Louisiana Tech refused to play the Warhawks (formerly Indians) in football, ULM prohibited all of its scholarship sports from scheduling the Bulldogs.

[Buccaneer]

Originally Posted by Young Drachma

I think it was part of the whole "too many bowls" meme and a hearkening back to the days of January 1st bowls with a list of what it might have looked like if we still had the old system.

Meme?? There ARE too many bowls and the old system would have produced fewer but better quality games concentrated in a shorter, yet intense time frame.

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

Meme?? There ARE too many bowls and the old system would have produced fewer but better quality games concentrated in a shorter, yet intense time frame.

I'm pro-freedom and pro-bowls. If someone wants to up the money to sponsor one, the more, the merrier. If people hate them, just don't watch. They're better than re-runs of poker in late December on ESPN, I figure.

I don't get to glorified exhibition season and decided that they're the worst thing about college football. Far worse stuff.

[Ben E Lou]

I don't care how many bowls there are. I'm fine with a bunch of them. Let the littles play one another in December as often as they want. Just saying that the new system is producing worse matchups and unworthy teams like Northern Illinois in places they shouldn't be. Give me the six games above (which would have been produced pretty much like that but with perhaps slight variation) and let whoever cares about NIU masturbate to their bowl on 12/29 while I go do something else.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

Just saying that the new system is producing worse matchups and unworthy teams like Northern Illinois in places they shouldn't be.

I don't think you can really blame "the system" for NIU's presence in the Orange Bowl though, none of the powers that be seem likely to want them there any more than you do.

Blame Congress, maybe Orrin Hatch in particular.

[Ben E Lou]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I don't think you can really blame "the system" for NIU's presence in the Orange Bowl though, none of the powers that be seem likely to want them there any more than you do.

Blame Congress, maybe Orrin Hatch in particular.

Heh.

But on "the system"...no way the Orange Bowl invites NIU to play the Big 8 champs (or Big 12 or whatever).

[cuervo72]

I'm actually with you guys in NIU.

[Passacaglia]

So why do you have two SEC teams playing each other?

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

So why do you have two SEC teams playing each other?

I suspect he went pre-realignment there, at least to a certain extent.

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by JonInMiddleGA

I suspect he went pre-realignment there, at least to a certain extent.

Kinda fuzzy with the realignment philosophy, since he has Nebraska in the Rose Bowl.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by Passacaglia

Kinda fuzzy with the realignment philosophy, since he has Nebraska in the Rose Bowl.

Hrm. Maybe it's an SEC team as an at-large vs an SEC team with a contract bid. Those two didn't play each other in the regular season so it isn't a rematch AND it gives the bowl a local team with the at-large.

[sterlingice]

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

SUGAR: #2 Bama vs. #1 ND
ORANGE: #5 Kansas State vs. #3 Florida
ROSE: #6 Stanford vs. #16 Nebraska
COTTON: #9 Texas A&M vs. #7 UGA
FIESTA: #8 LSU vs. #4 Oregon
PEACH: #10 South Carolina vs. #11 Oklahoma

smh

Originally Posted by Ben E Lou

I don't care how many bowls there are. I'm fine with a bunch of them. Let the littles play one another in December as often as they want. Just saying that the new system is producing worse matchups and unworthy teams like Northern Illinois in places they shouldn't be. Give me the six games above (which would have been produced pretty much like that but with perhaps slight variation) and let whoever cares about NIU masturbate to their bowl on 12/29 while I go do something else.

Wait? So, a pair of SEC teams in the Cotton and an SEC team pretty much in every bowl. Pass.

SI

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by sterlingice

Wait? So, a pair of SEC teams in the Cotton and an SEC team pretty much in every bowl. Pass.

That's kind of what logically happens in the top bowls when 6 of the top 10 teams are in the same conference. Any other conference is free to achieve the same level of dominance.

[Buccaneer]

Same level of pay and corruption.

[MrBug708]

Playing less games helps too

[mauchow]

The only BCS Bowl game that has a spread less than a touchdown is the Rose Bowl. The rest of the BCS Bowls are nearly double digits. Ouch.

[gstelmack]

The spreads won't matter nearly as much as the month off for both teams

[Matthean]

First time they have had three teams ranked this low as well, so that's part of it as well. I'm partly surprised the Oregon/KSU game isn't closer though. I'm pretty sure I would take the points for ND. 'Bama never seems to match it's mentality with it's physical ability. Irish have a good enough run defense to make it interesting.