BREAKING NEWS

[BULLO12]

Clemson and South Carolina have announced that they will not accept bowl bids this year because of the brawl at the end of this past Saturday's game.

This is a self imposed punishment by both schools.  Details later as they develop.

Back to your regularly scheduled reading and posting.

Not sure where this belongs so I posted it here....since South Carolina was one of our opponents.

Clemson, S. Carolina not bowling after brawl

 

Associated Press

COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) - Clemson and South Carolina will not accept bowl bids, punishment for players who brawled toward the end of Saturday's game.

South Carolina athletic director Mike McGee said Monday that the Gamecocks' actions on the field were not consistent with the values and ethics of the school.

"This decision will have a significant financial impact on USC athletics. We will also lose a month of prebowl practice," McGee said. "It was a decision that had to be made."

The brawl, which broke out with about six minutes left in the game, started when Tigers defensive lineman Bobby Williamson took down South Carolina quarterback Syvelle Newton and appeared to linger too long on top of him.

South Carolina coach Lou Holtz, in his last game after a 33-year career, and Clemson coach Tommy Bowden tried to break up the brawl. Eventually, security and police officers were needed to restore order. Clemson won 29-7.

[E.T.]

I applaud them ... would hope USF would do the same.

Go BULLS !!!

[Bobcat99]

This has led to projections of 5-6 MAC teams in bowl games.

This sucks, because last year, the strongest the MAC has ever been in football, we got two. This year, the MAC is terrible in football, and we're going to get five or six.

What a wonderful year for all three of my alma maters to suck the big one and not manage to be bowl eligible. gahh.

[Ricky the Bull]

A bowl loss (and the extra cash) is better than no bowl at all.

[Markeymark]

A bowl loss (and the extra cash) is better than no bowl at all.

But when a 6-win team goes to a bottom-tier bowl with a .75 mil payout, and then has to share that revenue with other teams in the conference, and you consider the costs of travel, etc., you aren't really looking at much in the way of a profit. A lot of schools are known to lose money from these low-paying bowl games and are only in it for the prestige and Clemson/USC aren't going to add any prestige on the heels of a 6-win season.

[Jim Johnson]

But when a 6-win team goes to a bottom-tier bowl with a .75 mil payout, and then has to share that revenue with other teams in the conference, and you consider the costs of travel, etc., you aren't really looking at much in the way of a profit. A lot of schools are known to lose money from these low-paying bowl games and are only in it for the prestige and Clemson/USC aren't going to add any prestige on the heels of a 6-win season.

Mark -- You are probably right about the profit... but I don't think the payout is split evenly among the teams and conference... I think the teams playing get a larger share, and the rest is divided among the remaining teams and the conference...

I could be wrong, so if someone could clarify this I would appreciate it.

[bulls96go]

A bowl loss (and the extra cash) is better than no bowl at all.

but you pre-empt the kiss of death by thr ncaa!

[bulls96go]

will this change spurriors decision?

[smazza]

we won't win  the last 2 games so why all the fuss

[goodknightfl]

ET all levitt and usf would do is give players a group hug...LOL