[CTcard]

If you're right that other conferences pick the teams rather than the bowls, that's yet another reason to fire Larry Scott!!

It's from 2015 but here's an article on the selection process that makes it clear that it is the bowl game's choice https://www.cougcenter.com/wsu-cougars-f...ss-tie-ins
Another 2016 article refers to the bowl selecting teams https://watchstadium.com/news/pac-12-bow...1-01-2016/

As I said, I think you are correct, but neither of those sources is particularly authoritative.
You did get me reading a lot more about the situation.

Assuming this disparity is true, is the reason why the Big Ten and the SEC got to pick their bowl order and we don't because we have a conference commissioner who negotiates weakly, or because he has a conference product that leaves him with a weaker hand to negotiate?

I don't think it is either - though I don't really know.
I think that in each case the situation is what the university presidents/ADs wanted.

The Pac 12 schools were happy to keep the conference out as a middle-man, but backed that up with the no-more-than-one-loss-differential rule. The SEC and Big Ten simply made fewer rules but used the conference office as the arbiter of disputes.

The Big 12 seems to follow roughly the Pac 12 scenario.

The ACC is complicated. A first tier is strictly by conference finish (though I don't know how they determine who is #2).
The next tier has the schools, conference, and bowls getting together to slot teams by "consensus".
A final tier has bowls picking out of whomever is left.

[CTcard]

If you're right that other conferences pick the teams rather than the bowls, that's yet another reason to fire Larry Scott!!

It's from 2015 but here's an article on the selection process that makes it clear that it is the bowl game's choice https://www.cougcenter.com/wsu-cougars-f...ss-tie-ins
Another 2016 article refers to the bowl selecting teams https://watchstadium.com/news/pac-12-bow...1-01-2016/

As I said, I think you are correct, but neither of those sources is particularly authoritative.
You did get me reading a lot more about the situation.

Assuming this disparity is true, is the reason why the Big Ten and the SEC got to pick their bowl order and we don't because we have a conference commissioner who negotiates weakly, or because he has a conference product that leaves him with a weaker hand to negotiate?

I don't think it is either - though I don't really know.
I think that in each case the situation is what the university presidents/ADs wanted.

The Pac 12 schools were happy to keep the conference out as a middle-man, but backed that up with the no-more-than-one-loss-differential rule. The SEC and Big Ten simply made fewer rules but used the conference office as the arbiter of disputes.

The Big 12 seems to follow roughly the Pac 12 scenario.

The ACC is complicated. A first tier is strictly by conference finish (though I don't know how they determine who is #2).
The next tier has the schools, conference, and bowls getting together to slot teams by "consensus".
A final tier has bowls picking out of whomever is left.