Bear Down Wildcats

Do we really need even yet more bowl games?

Tucson, Arizona, will apply for a new bowl game this season, while Little Rock, Arkansas, has "strong interest" in also adding a game, sources said Monday.

The working title for the Tucson bowl will be the Arizona Bowl and will be played at the University of Arizona. It will feature teams from the Mountain West and Conference USA in its debut season.

The Arizona Bowl likely will be played between Christmas and early January, said Alan Young, COO for the Arizona Sports and Entertainment Commission. Fox Sports or CBS Sports Network is the most likely candidate to televise the Arizona Bowl, sources said.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/sto ... bowl-games

Is there even enough teams to fill the bowls there are already going to be?

We don't need more bowl games, but with the stadium renovations and the weather here, Tucson should have one of them.
Look at some of the horrible locations now.

Attendance doesn't even matter anymore to ESPN. It's all about TV now.

There is a not a single football team in Conference USA or the Mountain West that would stir any interest in Tucson with the locals.

Get more turnout at McKale with some of those basketball teams though.


Just awful.

UAEebs86 wrote:We don't need more bowl games, but with the stadium renovations and the weather here, Tucson should have one of them.

Yes, absolutely. Never understood why places like Shreveport and Boise can have bowl games but Tucson couldn't.

Merkin wrote:There is a not a single football team in Conference USA or the Mountain West that would stir any interest in Tucson with the locals.

Get more turnout at McKale with some of those basketball teams though.

Just awful.

Acquire bowl game.
Insert mandatory ticket buys for teams that play in it.
People show up/people don't show up.
Profit.

Merkin wrote:Is there even enough teams to fill the bowls there are already going to be?

Well there are like 31 non playoff bowls. Also keep in mind there are like 12 more fcs teams than 10 years ago. Even now a good 4-5 6-6 teams don't go to bowls. Any more than 1-2 more bowls there will be 5-7 teams.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Merkin wrote:There is a not a single football team in Conference USA or the Mountain West that would stir any interest in Tucson with the locals.

Get more turnout at McKale with some of those basketball teams though.

Just awful.

Acquire bowl game.
Insert mandatory ticket buys for teams that play in it.
People show up/people don't show up.
Profit.

Hell I'd probably go. Bowl games are fun.

ASUHATER! wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Merkin wrote:There is a not a single football team in Conference USA or the Mountain West that would stir any interest in Tucson with the locals.

Get more turnout at McKale with some of those basketball teams though.

Just awful.

Acquire bowl game.
Insert mandatory ticket buys for teams that play in it.
People show up/people don't show up.
Profit.

Hell I'd probably go. Bowl games are fun.

I'm not against the idea. With mandatory ticket buys from the school, it's easy money, and a bowl game in Tucson is better than no bowl.

I'm all for a bowl game in Tucson, but there are way too many bowls. It's no longer a reward for having a good year. It's a reward for being mediocre.

I think if the story was that Tucson was getting a bowl and 7 other bowls were folding, this would be perfect.

I think it should be 7 wins against FBS teams minimum for eligibility.

azgreg wrote:I'm all for a bowl game in Tucson, but there are way too many bowls. It's no longer a reward for having a good year. It's a reward for being mediocre.

Been that way for 20 years now

azgreg wrote:I think it should be 7 wins against FBS teams minimum for eligibility.

If that were the case we would've only gone to 2-3 bowls since 2008 instead of 6. No thanks.

Arizona stadium could not even sell out when they had the Copper Bowl and UA was playing.

Remember all the empty seats on TV when the UA played in the Gilden New Mexico Bowl a few years back? Pretty sad looking.

UA lost money going, but thanks to the PAC's bowl sharing plan they made it up and then some due to Oregon and a couple other teams actually making money on their bowls.

ASUHATER! wrote:

azgreg wrote:I'm all for a bowl game in Tucson, but there are way too many bowls. It's no longer a reward for having a good year. It's a reward for being mediocre.

Been that way for 20 years now

So, many things that are wrong go on for a long time.

ASUHATER! wrote:

azgreg wrote:I think it should be 7 wins against FBS teams minimum for eligibility.

If that were the case we would've only gone to 2-3 bowls since 2008 instead of 6. No thanks.

So be it. Be better.

Imo its dumb to not want the team to have the bowl experience and money just because you think its a bad bowl and there's too many of them. I love seeing us play another game and get more experience and $.

When I was a kid growing up in MI it was the Rose Bowl or sit at home New Years day for the Big 10. UM v. tOSU really meant something. Bo v. Woody.

People swooned over Stoops getting to 3 straight bowl games, but now it's really no big deal. More like a 13th game now since you can schedule a FCS team every year now, instead of counting every 4 years.

ASUHATER! wrote:Imo its dumb to not want the team to have the bowl experience and money just because you think its a bad bowl and there's too many of them. I love seeing us play another game and get more experience and $.

Not a money issue, most teams lose money going to bowls.

Not after revenue sharing. More bowls means more money in the pot. I'm not in favor of anything worse than 6-6 in a bowl obviously but if you are a .500+ power Conference team you deserve to be in a postseason game.

ASUHATER! wrote:More bowls means more money in the pot.

Teams split revenue after expenses. If the PAC makes $30M in 2016/7 in Bowl Games, and the UA loses $1M playing the New Mexico Bowl, that leaves only $29M to split.

azgreg wrote:I'm all for a bowl game in Tucson, but there are way too many bowls. It's no longer a reward for having a good year. It's a reward for being mediocre.

That's why I don't care about bowl expansion. If Arizona isn't playing, I really couldn't care less what pair of 6-6 teams I'd be watching in the Tucson Bowl.

I wonder if this game will be owned by ESPN. They own a bunch of the bowls and these games exist for TV - looking at the stands it's obvious that it's not the ticket sales paying the bills. Even bad bowl games tend to pull decent audiences compared to other sporting events.

If you take it for what it is, and exhibition college football game to make money, another bowl game makes plenty of sense. If it doesn't make money for the parties involved, the bowl wont last long.

My goodness, business people trying to prove that Einstein's definition of insanity is 100% alive and well with a surefire business model that has already failed. Its a freaking money loser from the get go!

Trying to do the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Bring another meaningless watered-down bowl game to Tucson fits that bill to the “Tee”. No one and I mean no one, including the people of Tucson are going to go watch two 6-6 teams play a freaking crappy football game in Arizona Stadium at the end of the year.

Probably not even if the Cats were playing in it.

There's dumb, and then there is truly dumber, and this is one of those moments.

Gladiator Cat wrote:My goodness, business people trying to prove that Einstein's definition of insanity is 100% alive and well with a surefire business model that has already failed. Its a freaking money loser from the get go!

Trying to do the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Bring another meaningless watered-down bowl game to Tucson fits that bill to the “Tee”. No one and I mean no one, including the people of Tucson are going to go watch two 6-6 teams play a freaking crappy football game in Arizona Stadium at the end of the year.

Probably not even if the Cats were playing in it.

There's dumb, and then there is truly dumber, and this is one of those moments.

Almost no bowls lose money. They are all cash cows for those who run them. That's why they keep adding them.

ASUHATER! wrote: Almost no bowls lose money. They are all cash cows for those who run them. That's why they keep adding them.

And almost every athletic program loses money, and needs subsidies from the school to stay afloat. So in effect, these crappy bowls are pay to play. Similar to the CBI tourney in basketball.

GROUP OF FIVE
ATHLETIC DEPARTMENT DEFICITS
SCHOOL DEFICIT
UNLV $35.3 million
Houston $26.8 million
Air Force $26.0 million
Old Dominion $25.7 million
Massachusetts $25.0 million
UCF $23.6 million
Georgia State $23.1 million
Eastern Michigan $22.4 million
Buffalo $22.1 million
Western Michigan $21.3 million
San Diego State $21.2 million

ASUHATER! wrote:

Gladiator Cat wrote:My goodness, business people trying to prove that Einstein's definition of insanity is 100% alive and well with a surefire business model that has already failed. Its a freaking money loser from the get go!

Trying to do the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Bring another meaningless watered-down bowl game to Tucson fits that bill to the “Tee”. No one and I mean no one, including the people of Tucson are going to go watch two 6-6 teams play a freaking crappy football game in Arizona Stadium at the end of the year.

Probably not even if the Cats were playing in it.

There's dumb, and then there is truly dumber, and this is one of those moments.

Almost no bowls lose money. They are all cash cows for those who run them. That's why they keep adding them.

Yep. Teams have to buy and resell an allotment of tickets. The host couldn't care less how many people actually show because they make their money from the guaranteed buy. Arizona makes money even if 5 people show up. Thus, I am for the idea.

It is important to get that easy money. It subsidizes a lot of other things at the school. A bowl is pretty much automatic profit margin.

Chicat wrote:Never understood why places like Shreveport and Boise can have bowl games but Tucson couldn't.

Boise weather is typically awful during the Potato Bowl or whatever it is. Inversion, socked-in cold grey smut-filled sky, wet-cold, icy. I've lived here 20 years and I'd say the bowl game is of nominal local interest at best. I've been to the tent city at Bronco Stadium one time. It was cold and miserable. Never even went into the game.

Wish they could get back the "Copper Bowl" name.

This trend of (political geography) Bowl is lame.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

ASUHATER! wrote:

Gladiator Cat wrote:My goodness, business people trying to prove that Einstein's definition of insanity is 100% alive and well with a surefire business model that has already failed. Its a freaking money loser from the get go!

Trying to do the same thing over and over and expecting different results.

Bring another meaningless watered-down bowl game to Tucson fits that bill to the “Tee”. No one and I mean no one, including the people of Tucson are going to go watch two 6-6 teams play a freaking crappy football game in Arizona Stadium at the end of the year.

Probably not even if the Cats were playing in it.

There's dumb, and then there is truly dumber, and this is one of those moments.

Almost no bowls lose money. They are all cash cows for those who run them. That's why they keep adding them.

Yep. Teams have to buy and resell an allotment of tickets. The host couldn't care less how many people actually show because they make their money from the guaranteed buy. Arizona makes money even if 5 people show up. Thus, I am for the idea.

It is important to get that easy money. It subsidizes a lot of other things at the school. A bowl is pretty much automatic profit margin.

Then why did the Copper Bowl ultimately pull out of Tucson, no matter how many name changes it went through?

This is a decision that is not local and turns the bowl season into a kind of revolving door event for fans. Without local investment, the bowl represents Tucson in name only.

It's a lot different than 1998 now with tv contracts and espn owning bowls. They could put a bowl in Tucson that only averages 7000 in attendance and probably easily make a profit.