[jayasena]

Each member of the conference has an interest in seeing that all members are competitive.  Sharing bowl proceeds helps meet that objective.  I think it would be a mistake to cut the less successful teams out of the revenue stream, weakening them further.

Actually, it's pretty easy to argue that "all members are competitive" is probably close to the worst case for overall conference bowl revenues. At the top, that would reduce the likelihood of undefeated or 1-loss teams that will go to the NCG/playoff or get at-large BCS berths. In the middle, multiple teams will beat each other out of bowl eligibility. Both these have happened quite frequently in the Pac-N.

That said, my prior comment was a jab at a very specific team that hasn't made it to the Rose Bowl in over 50 years.

[jayasena]

Each member of the conference has an interest in seeing that all members are competitive.  Sharing bowl proceeds helps meet that objective.  I think it would be a mistake to cut the less successful teams out of the revenue stream, weakening them further.

Actually, it's pretty easy to argue that "all members are competitive" is probably close to the worst case for overall conference bowl revenues. At the top, that would reduce the likelihood of undefeated or 1-loss teams that will go to the NCG/playoff or get at-large BCS berths. In the middle, multiple teams will beat each other out of bowl eligibility. Both these have happened quite frequently in the Pac-N.

That said, my prior comment was a jab at a very specific team that hasn't made it to the Rose Bowl in over 50 years.