MLS Red Bulls, MSG Extend TV Deal Harold NFL Hires Matthews As Senior VP/Media Sales Adidas Unveils Latest NCAA Hoops Uniforms Blank: Talks On Atlanta MLS Club "Substantial" Drexler Part Of LG's Final Four Activation Bills Adopt Variable Ticket Pricing Nike's Parker Talks Innovation, Competition Classified Advertisements
SBD/October 25, 2012/CollegesPrint All
A proposed seventh access bowl in the new BCS playoff format is “becoming less likely" and BCS commissioners "might stick with their original plan of only having six,” according to sources cited by Brett McMurphy of ESPN.com. The report in September noted the commissioners had "discussed the possibility of creating a seventh access bowl.” The game would “give smaller conferences guaranteed access.” However, that is becoming “more unlikely because of a myriad of concerns and obstacles involved for a seventh access bowl.” Sources said that among those concerns are the bowl's “lesser worth compared to the other access bowls, the difficulty of selling tickets for an annual bowl featuring a non-power conference team and finding a bowl that wants to host the game that also meets the stadium capacity requirements for an access bowl and the national semifinals.” A source said, "I think everyone has realized the seventh bowl is not on the level with the other contract bowls. The question was, how much can we get for this game? It didn't sound like it was a lot." The Rose and Champions bowls “will be worth $80 million a year.” Sources said that the Orange Bowl “will be worth $60 million a year, compared to only about $25 million a year for the proposed seventh bowl.” The six access bowls “have not been ‘officially’ selected.” However, sources said that the access bowls “will be the existing four BCS bowls ... plus the Cotton and Chick-fil-A” (ESPN.com, 10/24).
SEVENTH HEAVEN: USA TODAY’s Dan Wolken reports the seventh game “had been seen as an opportunity for Houston, perhaps, to get into the semifinal rotation of cities by matching up the best of the five non-power conferences against a team from either the Big 12 or Pac-12.” It was also an “idea with significant support from the Big East, which does not yet have a contract bowl for its champion under the new format” (USA TODAY, 10/25).