Quote:
>>>>> 1) BCS (Orange)
>>>>> 2) Chick-Fil-A vs. SEC
>>>>> 3) Champs Sports vs. Big East/Notre Dame
>>>>> 4) Sun vs. PAC-10 <-- Loser of ACC title game cannot slide past this bowl
>>>>> 5) Meineke vs. Big East
>>>>> 6) Music City vs. SEC
>>>>> 7) Independence vs. MWC
>>>>> 8) EagleBank vs. C-USA (2010), Navy (2011), Army (2012) and Big 12 (2013)
>>>>> http://SportToday.org/
>>>> Tie-ins suck.
>>> Yeah, but they are better than the previous free-for-all.
>> i much prefer the free-for-all. added some e***ment to the process.
>> you could go ... anywhere.
> I agree with you but it's like an arms race. There are plenty of
> bowls for everyone and everyone would probably be better off, or just
> as well off, with a free for all. But who's going to be the first to
> give up their tie-ins?
obviously the SEC and Big 10 won't, because they have the best tie-ins.
And the conferences like tie-ins because what university presidents
crave is "revenue certainty". That makes budgeting and complying with
all the silly government regulations (title ix, ADA, etc.) much easier.
They can actually plan on building a stupid $10 million "women's
softball stadium" and such without having to worry that it depends on
their team or some other's in their conference having a good year on the
field.
--
10 years from now we'll still be on top.
- p. diddy, 1997
by