12-09-2013, 11:46 AM
(12-09-2013, 09:57 AM)stupac2 link Wrote:[quote author=71Bear link=topic=9080.msg77364#msg77364 date=1386570059]
You don't have to wait long for a new bowl lineup. The roster changes next year.
But it changes very little, right? I don't think we're getting much better matchups.
[/quote]
The bowl tie-ins are only slight upgrade, but the CFB playoff system should make a big difference in more marquee matchups.
| Pac-12 Order | Current Bowl | New Bowl in 2014-2019 |
| 1 | Rose: B1G #1 | Rose: B1G #1 |
| 2 | Alamo: Big 12 #3 | Alamo: Big 12 #2 |
| 3 | Holiday: Big 12 #5 | Holiday: B1G |
| 4 | Sun: ACC #4 | Fight Hunger: B1G |
| 5 | Las Vegas: MWC #1 | Sun: ACC #3-6 |
| 6 | Fight Hunger: BYU or ACC #9 | Las Vegas: MWC #1 |
| 7 | New Mexico: MWC #4 | Buffalo Wild Wings: Big 12 #6 |
The Alamo Bowl upgrades one spot in the Big 12, Holiday and Sun switches from Big 12/ACC to B1G (the B1G no longer is guaranteeing selection spots, the conference will pick teams to create good matchups), #5 spot switches from MWC to ACC, and we add another Big-12 matchup in Wild Wings Bowl. There is also talk of adding a new Christmas Bowl in LA that would be a Pac-12/MWC matchup.
However, the really big deal is the changes related to the playoff system. The 4 team playoff gets all the attention, but the selection committee will also be picking 4 other major bowl games. Three of the six bowl options have conference tie-ins (Rose, Sugar, Orange), but three of them are mostly at-large. The number of at-large spots goes from 2 in the current BCS system to up to 5 in years when the Rose/Sugar are hosting the playoff. I think the net effect of this will be to have many more "matchups everyone wants to see".