Our new rivals.

[Joe]

Ya, but they are guarenteed money.

[Knight_Light]

gee 8 (teams) -1 (us) equals 7 (games), I'd have never figured that out...  

You're still missing the point...  It does NO benefit for USF to schedule a home and home against a non-bcs opponent.  The only time you schedule a non-BCS team  is to fill an early-home tune up game slot, and you get just about as much credit for beating a I-AA team.  

It's just not a good idea to try and schedule a home-and-home series with a Non-BCS team.  It's really not a good idea to make a rivalrly with one.

   

Who says it has to be a "rivalry"?

It could just be "another" game on the schedule which year in and year out is the highest attended home game.

With 4 other non-conf opportunities to play BCS Teams (which USF will never do), USF has plenty of room to play "just a game" with that other school up I-4.

Oh...and it will do very well at the gate too.

Game doesn't have to have a name...all it has to do is make $$$$.

Oh...and it will give most Bull Fans their first ever opportunity to see the Bulls play on the ROAD.

Till this Bowl Game..USF Athletics largest ever travel party for USF was less then 2,000. (Bowl Game will now be the largest USF Road Crowd)

Having a game 75 miles, where almost any fan who wants to go can...goes a long way in building a fan base...finding new ones (heck, some like to go on road trips more then home games!), and might help push those to take more road trips in the future.

Just guess which game next year will have the most USF "Traveling" Fans:

USF at Louisville?

USF at Cincinnati?

USF at West Virginia?

USF at UCF?

Answer that question...and that's why the game makes sense (even without a "name").

KL

[Triple B]

Who says it has to be a "rivalry"?

EA Sports

It could just be "another" game on the schedule which year in and year out is the highest attended home game.

With 4 other non-conf opportunities to play BCS Teams (which USF will never do), USF has plenty of room to play "just a game" with that other school up I-4.

Oh...and it will do very well at the gate too.

Game doesn't have to have a name...all it has to do is make $$$$.

Oh...and it will give most Bull Fans their first ever opportunity to see the Bulls play on the ROAD.

Till this Bowl Game..USF Athletics largest ever travel party for USF was less then 2,000. (Bowl Game will now be the largest USF Road Crowd)

Having a game 75 miles, where almost any fan who wants to go can...goes a long way in building a fan base...finding new ones (heck, some like to go on road trips more then home games!), and might help push those to take more road trips in the future.

Just guess which game next year will have the most USF "Traveling" Fans:

USF at Louisville?

USF at Cincinnati?

USF at West Virginia?

USF at UCF?

Answer that question...and that's why the game makes sense (even without a "name").

KL

One of your more level headed posts .....

TB

[Joe]

EA Sports

I think the bias there is the fact that most of Tiburon, who makes EA Sports football games, went to UF, UCF, and USF.

[SCMountaineer]

PS - Starting next year the team with the highest BCS ranking from CUSA, MWC, WAC, and to a much less extent MAC and SUNBELT get a BCS bid. If next years rules were in effect today TCU would get the bid, Utah wwould have gotten in last year (which they did) and Miami (OH) the year before. So there is a BCS opening for lower conference teams.

I don't think that is true.   I  think a non-BCS team still has to be ranked 12th or higher in the BCS standings before they would get an at-large bid.  But, no automatic bid.  Only after the conferences have been evaluated in 2007 will it be determined whether there will be 5, 6, or 7 autobids.  I think there will still be 6 but after the MWC's performance, I'm not sure there will a 7th.  All in the MWC but TCU finished with at least 5 losses.

As for UCF being a rival.  It would be a natural rival but won't happen until UCF gets competitive in the game.  I think your biggest rival is going to emerge within the conference.

[Joe]

Yes they automattically qualify:

"In addition, one conference champion from among Conference USA, Mid-American, Mountain West, Sun Belt, and Western Athletic Conferences will automatically qualify to play in a BCS bowl if it is: (1) ranked among the top 12 teams in the final BCS Standings; or (2) ranked among the top 16 teams in the final BCS Standings and ranked higher than the champion of one of the conferences whose champion has an annual automatic berth in a BCS bowl.

TCU finished 10-1 and ranked 14th in the BC, However, FSU is in the BCS ranked 23rd. Therefore TCU would get an autobid under next year's process.

[SCMountaineer]

Yes they automattically qualify:

"In addition, one conference champion from among Conference USA, Mid-American, Mountain West, Sun Belt, and Western Athletic Conferences will automatically qualify to play in a BCS bowl if it is: (1) ranked among the top 12 teams in the final BCS Standings; or (2) ranked among the top 16 teams in the final BCS Standings and ranked higher than the champion of one of the conferences whose champion has an annual automatic berth in a BCS bowl.

TCU finished 10-1 and ranked 14th in the BC, However, FSU is in the BCS ranked 23rd. Therefore TCU would get an autobid under next year's process.

True but it is still an at-large bid, not to be confused with an auto-bid.  Also, it only qualifies them for selection but doesn't guarantee a selection.  The conference champion of a BCS conference still has that guarantee.  The bottom line is that the bowls run the show and it is highly questionable that TCU would've gotten a BCS bowl the way things played out this year.  If you leave out Oregon, how do you include a TCU?  In any case, if this scenario played out, it wouldn't bode well for the BCS.

[Joe]

No SC if you do finish in those critera your guarenteed a bid. It was the settlement on the BCS antitrust suit. If they made it so they could be picked we'd have serious problems again. BCS expert Brad Edwards said on Saturday that if the rules were in place the last 3 years Miami, Utah, and TCU would be playing in the bowl before the national title game (their resolution to the possibility of bad attendance).

[SCMountaineer]

Sorry, that's news to me.  Actually, in spite of Brad Edwards, I'm still not buying it.  All I see on http://www.bcsfootball.org/index2.cfm?page=structure is what your wrote.  That they are "automatically qualified for a BCS game".  I don't see where they're guaranteed a game.  The only change I see is the second qualification involving BCS league champions.  Not trying to be argumentative.  I just see what I see.  I admit the possibility I am wrong and it wouldn't be the first time.   ;D

[Triple B]

Sorry, that's news to me.  Actually, in spite of Brad Edwards, I'm still not buying it.  All I see on http://www.bcsfootball.org/index2.cfm?page=structure is what your wrote.  That they are "automatically qualified for a BCS game".  I don't see where they're guaranteed a game.  The only change I see is the second qualification involving BCS league champions.  Not trying to be argumentative.  I just see what I see.  I admit the possibility I am wrong and it wouldn't be the first time.   ;D

To me, "automatically qualified for a BCS game" means they are playing in a BCS game.

And reading that again, it still pisses me off that Notre Dame gets $1.3 million no matter how crappy a season they have ....