http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoot...ls/predictions
NOLA Bowl vs ULL, really? Effing L! why do these people get so stuck on wanting make us play ULx'es in post season! My choice would be for HoD vs. B10.
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoot...ls/predictions
NOLA Bowl vs ULL, really? Effing L! why do these people get so stuck on wanting make us play ULx'es in post season! My choice would be for HoD vs. B10.
Also, why does the Military Bowl have an At-Large, CUSA should try to pick that up, especially with the ODU/UNCC coming in I'd think they'd do well in that market.
It is actually supposed to be a Big 12 tie-in for 2013, but the Big 12 has dropped to 10 members since the agreement was signed in 2009 so the Big 12 may have had to drop it. The Big 12 hasn't released their official bowl line-up for next season yet, but the ACC release didn't mention an opponent so it very well may be an at-large spot. Several sites still list it as a primary C-USA tie-in, but that is incorrect as it is a C-USA secondary tie-in along with the Armed Forces Bowl, which means BVDV was incorrect in his open letter when he mentioned C-USA having 6 tie-ins. I also don't think C-USA is allowed more than 5 primary tie-ins due to the 4-year rolling bowl eligibility average for the new membership. The MAC is definitely able to sign additional bowl agreements for next season, and the Belch is allowed one additional tie-in. The Military Bowl is wisely not signing with either the MAC or the Belch because they know those conferences will have available teams if necessary. The Military Bowl might as well take their chances in hopes of landing more prestigious leftover at-large team.
http://www.militarybowl.org/eagleban...for-2010-2013/
The Military Bowl will likely be ACC vs. Big Ten/American in the future.
2013-14 C-USA Bowl Games
Last edited by Dawg06; 05-09-2013 at 01:43 PM.
I'm not exactly sure, but Benson has mentioned it several times. It's to prevent conferences from signing more bowl agreements than they are able to fill on average. Conferences are supposedly only allowed as many primary tie-ins as their 4-year average of bowl eligibility/bowl appearances/winning seasons by the conference's membership for that year. He's mentioned all three, but I think bowl eligibility is what is used. I'm not sure about rounding.
Don't get your hopes up about 5 tie-ins for 2014.
New member here. I am amazed that some of you think that staying at home last postseason somehow beats going to NOLA with our 40k closest friends to Paint the Quarter Red! I certainly hope the dawgs get bowl-eligible this season and we meet up. Should be a good one. Good luck to yall.
Geaux Cajuns!
I'll be honest..I don't care what bowl we go to. As long as we go (cough cough) and more importantly, win!
The season isn't even close to starting, why worry about these "predictions" by now? They are never right!
We have a secondary tie in with the Military and Arm Forces Bowls. They just do that so guys like us will read and talk about it. There are prolly 6-7 projected bowl eligible teams in CUSA next season and I hope we play in either the Liberty or HOD. That being said, we won't say no to any bowl, even if I means having to beat up on ULLLLLLL.
I hate to tell y'all, but NO Bowl is a CUSA bowl and it makes a lot of sense for us to go there. Banowsky makes the call.
It also makes a lot of sense for us to go to HoD.
Ruston-NOLA ~300 miles
Ruston-Dallas ~250 miles
Why would Banowsky reward ECU with a Jan 1st bowl, they're leaving CUSA send them to the lackluster NOLA Bowl.
Ultimately it'll come down to who is getting the most press, I think if we were in this position last year we would have been in HoD in a second.
I'll tell ya one d*mn thing..... If we don't accept the first invite to a bowl we are offered then I'm going to be pi$$ed!!!!!!!!!!!