What does this mean to the MAC Bowl Committments?

[Falcon137]

... you have a MUCH lower chance of being mugged in Mobile than Washington D.C.

Where in DC do you go? I feel safe walking through pretty much any part of the city at any time these days. I will prob. never go to Mobile I would make a trip to DC every year.

[MACMAN]

Greatfully the total number of Bowls will be shrinking. I have heard by as much as a 1/3 but most by a 1/4.

[FortWayneFalcon]

I would have no disappointment in losing the GMAC because other options would likely open up. That stadium in Mobile is no great monument to football, and to say the least it needs a major facelift. Had a good time in Mobile a couple of times, but if I don't make it thier again any time soon it will be no big loss for me.... or the MAC.

[tekekini]

No one will want to sponsor any meaningless bowl game anymore when they can get their name on as part of a play off game. This all means no bowl games for mid major teams.

So why do entities sponsor bowl games now that are meaningless and not part of the BCS championship series?

Do you think Mienke, GMAC, San Diego County Federal Credit Union, Emerald Nuts, etc are really sitting there thinking, 'Well we sponsored a crappy mediocre bowl game before this 12 team playoff thing came around, but now that there is a playoff it just doesn't make sense for us to do that anymore even though we would still get the exact same teams to come play in it'?

Those sponsors will now have playoff games to sponsor in place of those meaningless bowl games. If you want a12 team playoff (since you used that example) that would be 11 games that need sponsors. 5 BCS sponsors and 6 other bowl sponsors.

that means 6 less bowl games so 12 less teams get bowl games. Guess what...Those 6 bowl games are probably going to include ALL of the bowl games that the MAC is affiliated with. Capital one , Meinke, Mastercard , etc.. will move into the 6 additional playoff game spots that need sponors...everyone else will move up to a better bowl and the poor old MAC goes with at least one less bowl if not all of them.

I am sure Meinke would rather sponsor a first round playoff game then a "craptastic" (as someone called it) bowl game.

[moneymaker02]

The ACC is a joke of a football conference. They only wish they had the BCS success of the WAC/Mountain West.

That doesn't make any sense. The ACC went 4-6 in bowl games last year, the big 10 went 1-6, the WAC went 1-4 and the MWC went 3-2.

Bowls Wins Losses Ties Win %
SEC 358 182 164 12 .525
Pac-10 203 105 95 3 .525
Big Ten 231 113 115 3 .496
ACC 275 142 128 5 .525
Big 12 311 148 159 4 .482
Big East 102 48 52 2 .480


If you go by all time winning percentage the ACC is tied for first out of the major conferences. While the big10 and the big east are the only two conferences with losing records in bowl games.

[Ydfalcon]

No one will want to sponsor any meaningless bowl game anymore when they can get their name on as part of a play off game. This all means no bowl games for mid major teams.

So why do entities sponsor bowl games now that are meaningless and not part of the BCS championship series?

Do you think Mienke, GMAC, San Diego County Federal Credit Union, Emerald Nuts, etc are really sitting there thinking, 'Well we sponsored a crappy mediocre bowl game before this 12 team playoff thing came around, but now that there is a playoff it just doesn't make sense for us to do that anymore even though we would still get the exact same teams to come play in it'?

Those sponsors will now have playoff games to sponsor in place of those meaningless bowl games. If you want a12 team playoff (since you used that example) that would be 11 games that need sponsors. 5 BCS sponsors and 6 other bowl sponsors.

that means 6 less bowl games so 12 less teams get bowl games. Guess what...Those 6 bowl games are probably going to include ALL of the bowl games that the MAC is affiliated with. Capital one , Meinke, Mastercard , etc.. will move into the 6 additional playoff game spots that need sponors...everyone else will move up to a better bowl and the poor old MAC goes with at least one less bowl if not all of them.

I am sure Meinke would rather sponsor a first round playoff game then a "craptastic" (as someone called it) bowl game.

You really don't know how corporate sponsorships work do you? There are still countless smaller companies that would love to get their name tied to anything that more than a handful of people will watch. By which I mean, more than one or two households. The "smaller" bowl games would not go un-sponsored.

[tekekini]

No one will want to sponsor any meaningless bowl game anymore when they can get their name on as part of a play off game. This all means no bowl games for mid major teams.

So why do entities sponsor bowl games now that are meaningless and not part of the BCS championship series?

Do you think Mienke, GMAC, San Diego County Federal Credit Union, Emerald Nuts, etc are really sitting there thinking, 'Well we sponsored a crappy mediocre bowl game before this 12 team playoff thing came around, but now that there is a playoff it just doesn't make sense for us to do that anymore even though we would still get the exact same teams to come play in it'?

Those sponsors will now have playoff games to sponsor in place of those meaningless bowl games. If you want a12 team playoff (since you used that example) that would be 11 games that need sponsors. 5 BCS sponsors and 6 other bowl sponsors.

that means 6 less bowl games so 12 less teams get bowl games. Guess what...Those 6 bowl games are probably going to include ALL of the bowl games that the MAC is affiliated with. Capital one , Meinke, Mastercard , etc.. will move into the 6 additional playoff game spots that need sponors...everyone else will move up to a better bowl and the poor old MAC goes with at least one less bowl if not all of them.

I am sure Meinke would rather sponsor a first round playoff game then a "craptastic" (as someone called it) bowl game.

You really don't know how corporate sponsorships work do you? There are still countless smaller companies that would love to get their name tied to anything that more than a handful of people will watch. By which I mean, more than one or two households. The "smaller" bowl games would not go un-sponsored.

Perhaps in a good economy...but that may be another 3 or 4 years down the road. In the meantime, the playoffs are implemented and the sponsorship isn't there so the bowls have already died.

do smaller companies who are cutting jobs have the money to spend for sponsorship for a game that will now mean absolutely nothing? If so, how do they justify it? sponsor a bowl game or keep jobs?

Even though the smaller bowls don't mean much now they still mean more than they will if they are not part of the playoffs.



Anyways...BACK to my original point...if you want a playoff...the MAC will not be included. The Mountain West, WAC or Sun Belt will not be included. Boise will have to join the Big 12 North, Utah will have to join the PAC 10 with BYU, TCU the Big Twelve South and Notre Dame the Big Ten so everyone has a conference championship game and these mid majors who have proven something can be playoff teams.

Everyone else is left out. Sorry.

Don't blame me...this is what would happen if a playoff was to be implemented.

BG would be better off dropping to Division II.

[Ydfalcon]

No one will want to sponsor any meaningless bowl game anymore when they can get their name on as part of a play off game. This all means no bowl games for mid major teams.

So why do entities sponsor bowl games now that are meaningless and not part of the BCS championship series?

Do you think Mienke, GMAC, San Diego County Federal Credit Union, Emerald Nuts, etc are really sitting there thinking, 'Well we sponsored a crappy mediocre bowl game before this 12 team playoff thing came around, but now that there is a playoff it just doesn't make sense for us to do that anymore even though we would still get the exact same teams to come play in it'?

Those sponsors will now have playoff games to sponsor in place of those meaningless bowl games. If you want a12 team playoff (since you used that example) that would be 11 games that need sponsors. 5 BCS sponsors and 6 other bowl sponsors.

that means 6 less bowl games so 12 less teams get bowl games. Guess what...Those 6 bowl games are probably going to include ALL of the bowl games that the MAC is affiliated with. Capital one , Meinke, Mastercard , etc.. will move into the 6 additional playoff game spots that need sponors...everyone else will move up to a better bowl and the poor old MAC goes with at least one less bowl if not all of them.

I am sure Meinke would rather sponsor a first round playoff game then a "craptastic" (as someone called it) bowl game.

You really don't know how corporate sponsorships work do you? There are still countless smaller companies that would love to get their name tied to anything that more than a handful of people will watch. By which I mean, more than one or two households. The "smaller" bowl games would not go un-sponsored.

Perhaps in a good economy...but that may be another 3 or 4 years down the road. In the meantime, the playoffs are implemented and the sponsorship isn't there so the bowls have already died.

do smaller companies who are cutting jobs have the money to spend for sponsorship for a game that will now mean absolutely nothing? If so, how do they justify it? sponsor a bowl game or keep jobs?

Ah, but also, in a down economy, the bowl seeks sponsors to help with their costs. They would almost assuredly lower the "price" a company would have to pay to be the presenting sponsor. Besides the fact that nearly every event like this gives the presenting sponsor honors to whichever company donates the most. And even in down economies, some businesses, even smaller ones with smaller budgets overall, still prosper and are doing well enough to pay for advertising. Which is what sponsorship of events like this falls under. That may mean that we'd see teams playing in the "Bob's Insti-Prints & Copies Bowl," but like I said, there would still be sponsors. It's all about getting the company name out there and getting people to come in.

[FortWayneFalcon]

BG would be better off dropping to Division II.

And, how many other teams in D1 would be better off in D2?

[MarkL]

BG would be better off dropping to Division II.

Tekekini would be better by leaving in favor of bucknuts.com.

[bgsufalcon24]

The ACC is a joke of a football conference. They only wish they had the BCS success of the WAC/Mountain West.

That doesn't make any sense. The ACC went 4-6 in bowl games last year, the big 10 went 1-6, the WAC went 1-4 and the MWC went 3-2.

Bowls Wins Losses Ties Win %
SEC 358 182 164 12 .525
Pac-10 203 105 95 3 .525
Big Ten 231 113 115 3 .496
ACC 275 142 128 5 .525
Big 12 311 148 159 4 .482
Big East 102 48 52 2 .480


If you go by all time winning percentage the ACC is tied for first out of the major conferences. While the big10 and the big east are the only two conferences with losing records in bowl games.

Notice how I said BCS success not bowl game success. I don't care about all those other lame bowls.

[VDub26Falcon]

So, pretty much, this thread can be answered with one word??? Nothing.

Also, this is a serious question...Tek, I've always wondered where your handle came from. Is it your last name? Some tribute? I really am curious.

[MACMAN]

IF there is ever to be playoffs those playoffs MUST include each Conference Champion, anything short of that is further push of the confrence discrimination which says, why should BGSU or any school in any Conference EXCLUDED for no good reason STAY in D1. REally what is the point? What is the point to have a D1 football program, spend all the money, do all the travel, for NO CHANCE in EVER winning a National Title.
That said with the uncertin economic future and with all the trends and current direction of this administration to make it worse, Bowls will go away, schools will suffer in enrollment and Schools will make cuts.
The table is set for the BCS to spin off and creating a new tier of College football above D1. They need to they could expand their number of scholarship players and leave the rest of D1 to be D1, we could in turn reduce the number of scholarships and incorporate other cost saving measures and have an inclusive play off system, and be done with it. The time is ideal to make changes to the football world.

[NWLB]

IF there is ever to be playoffs those playoffs MUST include each Conference Champion, anything short of that is further push of the confrence discrimination which says, why should BGSU or any school in any Conference EXCLUDED for no good reason STAY in D1. REally what is the point? What is the point to have a D1 football program, spend all the money, do all the travel, for NO CHANCE in EVER winning a National Title.
That said with the uncertin economic future and with all the trends and current direction of this administration to make it worse, Bowls will go away, schools will suffer in enrollment and Schools will make cuts.
The table is set for the BCS to spin off and creating a new tier of College football above D1. They need to they could expand their number of scholarship players and leave the rest of D1 to be D1, we could in turn reduce the number of scholarships and incorporate other cost saving measures and have an inclusive play off system, and be done with it. The time is ideal to make changes to the football world.

Poppycock. Not every conference has a right to be in a playoff, it would let any two bit league to gloom a spot for the asking. That is a political argument intended to try to generate support among conference that simply don't have any hope to win, nor motivation to move away from bowls. If a national title was always, or is presently the only reason to be in a division, then there isn't a point for most teams in any conference to bother with the sport.

Extend the "why are we in 1A" argument to the logical end, then BGSU should drop football, and actually all sports save one. Because frankly only Hockey seems to have any hope of a actual title.

The only reason regular seasons, conference titles, and bowl titles are in any way being made out to mean nothing, has everything to do with the mentality that nothing short of a national title is worth playing for. Which is of course utterly stupid.

[BGSUVA]

1) ACC is dropping the Boise bowl, not DC (as far as I know)
2) who ever thinks DC is safe (Having never been to Boise) I'm guessing you have never been to a concert at the 9:30 club...don't go there by yoursel, and definately do not leave by yourself
3) playoff >>>> bowls that mean absolutely nothing.