Bad News for Tech and Good News for the Sunbelt

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3500305
The Sunbelt announced contracts to place teams in St. Petersburg, Birmingham, and Shreveport in the event that the SEC, Big 12, CUSA, or Big East conferences are unable to fulfill their contracts with a bowl eligible team. Why is this bad, it means that if Tech is bowl eligible to play in one of these regional bowls (Independence Bowl) and the Sunbelt also had an eligible team (say ULL) this bowls would have to choose the sunbelt team. While I certainly have nothing against Boise, New Mexico, or Hawaii these bowls are not assessable to a majority of Tech fans. That is why it is important to have regional tie-ins and the ability of fans to drive to their destination. Tech would have 5 times as many fans at a bowl game in Birmingham or Texas, than Boise and 15 times as many fans for a game in Shreveport.
It is also important when considering that for the past three years the current WAC alignment has produced 4 bowl eligible teams; it is likely that the WAC will continue to produce 4 or 5 bowl eligible teams each year. The last three years the WAC has been fortunate to have two BCS teams and a team picked up by the Liberty Bowl, allowing all bowl eligible teams postseason play. The WAC will need at least one pickup this year to keep that steak alive or a Bowl eligible team for the WAC will be setting at home.
Currently, these secondary contracts would not enable a team from the Sunbelt to jump a 7-5 from another conference. That could be important if the WAC were able to get 4 teams to 7-5.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaseyDawg

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3500305
The Sunbelt announced contracts to place teams in St. Petersburg, Birmingham, and Shreveport in the event that the SEC, Big 12, CUSA, or Big East conferences are unable to fulfill their contracts with a bowl eligible team. Why is this bad, it means that if Tech is bowl eligible to play in one of these regional bowls (Independence Bowl) and the Sunbelt also had an eligible team (say ULL) this bowls would have to choose the sunbelt team. While I certainly have nothing against Boise, New Mexico, or Hawaii these bowls are not assessable to a majority of Tech fans. That is why it is important to have regional tie-ins and the ability of fans to drive to their destination. Tech is likely to take 5 times as many people to a bowl game in Birmingham or Texas, than Boise and 10-15 times as many fans for a game in Shreveport.
It is also important when considering that for the past three years the current WAC alignment has produced 4 bowl eligible teams; it is likely that the WAC will continue to produce 4 or 5 bowl eligible teams each year. The last three years the WAC has been fortunate to have two BCS teams and a team picked up by the Liberty Bowl so that all bowl eligible teams were able to play. The WAC will need at least one pickup this year to keep that steak alive or otherwise a Bowl eligible team for the WAC will be setting at home.
Currently, these secondary contracts would not enable a team from the Sunbelt to jump a 7-5 from another conference. That could be important if the WAC were able to get 4 teams to 7-5.

---

If a 7-5 Sun Belt team happened, would anyone really know?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juice752

If a 7-5 Sun Belt team happened, would anyone really know?

---

You can bet that if both Tech and ULL were setting at 6-6 or 7-5 at the end of this season, and Birmingham or Shreveport had an opening you would know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaseyDawg

You can bet that if both Tech and ULL were setting at 6-6 or 7-5 at the end of this season, and Birmingham or Shreveport had an opening you would know.

---

Odds are tough that the 7-5 Sun Belt team is Troy and is the conference champ.

All that said there is no reason why Benson didn't set up a deal that puts Tech in Indy Bowl if we are eligible and they need a team. Of course leave a loophole for the seasons we go to a BCS bowl...

Woohoo Troy, FAU, and one other Sunbelt team might possibly get to go to bowl games, if the superior conferences can't fill their obligations, and as long as they have a 7-5 team or their isn't a 7-5 team anywhere else in the country, and the moon has to be in exact alignment w/ the 4th moon of Jupiter while Hillary and Obama make love on the Declaration of Independence and.....

Two 7-5 teams from the SunBelt? The conference champ still goes to the NO Bowl right? So for this contract to kick in the SunBelt would need two 7-5 teams and, of course, the SEC or Big12 would have to no make their quota. That's asking for a lot to happen, but, hey, it's an insurance policy just in case it does happen.
The fact is that I don't see two Belt teams being at least 7-5 (unless wins start to count as double)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juice752

All that said there is no reason why Benson didn't set up a deal that puts Tech in Indy Bowl if we are eligible and they need a team. Of course leave a loophole for the seasons we go to a BCS bowl...

---

I thought that was the reason behind the possible trade w/ CUSA for the Mobile bowl,I think.

Degrade the Sunbelt all you want. Just don’t look at the standing for the last two seasons when the Sunbelt had two teams with at least 7 wins. Plus additional teams, ULM & ULL, at 6 wins and bowl eligible. With 7 conference games, soon to be 8, the Sunbelt should produce two teams with 7 wins each year.
These and other secondary contracts will help to determine which bowl eligible teams from the WAC, Mountain West, Sun Belt, and MAC replace teams from the ACC, Big East, CUSA, Big 12, Big 10, PAC 10, and SEC.
This is not meant to say that Tech should join the Sunbelt, I personally believe Tech in better off in the WAC and our long-term future will be with teams currently in CUSA. Tech’s potential far exceeds teams from the Sunbelt. But playing bowl games 1500 miles for Ruston, especially with openings much closer being filled by these secondary contracts, does not excite me.

Much ado about nothing, but it will almost certainly be big stuff on the not-a-Ruston-radio station today.

I think it's a good move by Wright Waters. It seems like there are 1 or 2 spots available every year. That's no guarantee that a Sun Belt school will be invited, but at least he's trying. That's more than we can say about our guy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CaseyDawg

Degrade the Sunbelt all you want. Just don’t look at the standing for the last two seasons when the Sunbelt had two teams with at least 7 wins. Plus additional teams, ULM & ULL, at 6 wins and bowl eligible. With 7 conference games, soon to be 8, the Sunbelt should produce two teams with 7 wins each year.
These and other secondary contracts will help to determine which bowl eligible teams from the WAC, Mountain West, Sun Belt, and MAC replace teams from the ACC, Big East, CUSA, Big 12, Big 10, PAC 10, and SEC.
This is not meant to say that Tech should join the Sunbelt, I personally believe Tech in better off in the WAC and our long-term future will be with teams currently in CUSA. Tech’s potential far exceeds teams from the Sunbelt. But playing bowl games 1500 miles for Ruston, especially with openings much closer being filled by these secondary contracts, does not excite me.

---

The Indy bowl will always have that 6-6 team BCS matchup so realistically, a belch team will never make it in. However, with belch teams knocking off BCS powers last year and Troy sitting at home, it makes sense to get into more bowl negotiations.

It would be a monumental failure if they weren't able to secure another spot.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by techfreak

Two 7-5 teams from the SunBelt? The conference champ still goes to the NO Bowl right? So for this contract to kick in the SunBelt would need two 7-5 teams and, of course, the SEC or Big12 would have to no make their quota. That's asking for a lot to happen, but, hey, it's an insurance policy just in case it does happen.
The fact is that I don't see two Belt teams being at least 7-5 (unless wins start to count as double)

---

From a post by Arkstfan
The NCAA is suppoesedly changing the rules so that a 6-6 under back-up contract is treated like a team under primary contract.

Last four years, two or more teams have been bowl eligible.

'07
FAU 7-5 (NO Bowl)
Troy 8-4
ULM 6-6

'06
Troy 8-4 (NO Bowl)
MTSU 7-5 (Motor City Bowl)
Arkansas State 6-6
UL-Lafayette 6-6

'05
Arkansas State 6-5 (NO Bowl)
UL-Lafayette 6-5

'04
North Texas 8-4 (NO Bowl)
Troy 8-4 (Silicon Valley Bowl)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Juice752

All that said there is no reason why Benson didn't set up a deal that puts Tech in Indy Bowl if we are eligible and they need a team. Of course leave a loophole for the seasons we go to a BCS bowl...

---

We need a contract like Hawaii has with its bowl. The Indy Bowl against a Big 12 or SEC team is a heck of alot better than sitting at home or watching the Humanitarian Bowl. I don't have the funds to go to Hawaii or Boise.

Don't be surprised if Sunbelt teams start to put MAC, CUSA or some kinda winnable games instead of travelling to Florida State or Auburn like in the old days. The long run possibilty of making a bowl game will build a fan base quicker than a 500K paycheck.