re: Sugar Bowl will be site for SEC/Big XII "Champions Bowl"

quote:

---

In my view giving the little 12 a bone like this is a mistake... they are the new wac and should be treated that way.

The SEC should not legitimize a conference filled with our old foes.

---

Why? It is worth $80mil/yr... the same as the Rose Bowl. No other conference tie-in would have brought that kind of money and power to the table. Slive is a sly bastard. Don't sell him short into thinking that he's done anything to "help out" your previous conference. He's helping the SEC. And here is why...

We shook hands with the Big12 and then went directly behind their back and claimed a piece of the tie-in for the Orange Bowl vs the ACC champ, which will be worth $55mil/yr. The agreement states that it takes the ACC champ vs the highest ranked team available between Notre Dame, the SEC, and the B1G. Of course, the Pac12 and Big12 are pissed about this, because it all-but-guarantees that we will make more money than them most bowl seasons.

Now for my personal speculation about how this ends up. The other 3 rumored "tie-in" games will almost assuredly be what was previously known as the Fiesta, Cotton, and Peach Bowls, in which the SEC has 2 pre-existing tie-ins, the Big12 had 2, and the ACC had 1. Thus, it is in the process of being setup so that the SEC will almost always have at least one more team in the tier 1 bowls compared to every other conference, maybe 2 or 3 some years, and will thus keep a much larger piece of the pie annually...

What you've got:
Rotating among other 6, so 2 sites/yr will lose their "tie ins"
Playoff #1 vs #4
Playoff #2 vs #3
In off years(not in playoffs)
Rose Bowl(Pac12 vs B1G)
Sugar Bowl(SEC vs Big12)
Orange Bowl(SEC/B1G/ND vs ACC)
Fiesta Bowl(Big12 vs Pac12*pac being likely included, not necessarily historically*)
Cotton Bowl(SEC vs Big12)
Peach Bowl(SEC vs ACC)

Total (non playoff) tie-ins:
SEC 4
Big12 3
ACC 2
B1G 2
Pac12 2

That's how Slive makes it happen...