NO LIKE NEW SBC RULE ( Revenue Sharing )

[Cajunsmike]

No, outside of a BCS bowl teams other bowl teams rarely make money on bowls.

I just find it horse farm and million dollar grab ridiculous that the UL powers that be, when finding themselves the "one" profitable bowl team in the country, would agree to give it away.

I don't think we "gave away" our bowl profit. I think we were outvoted by other league members. You might say our bowl profit was "stolen".

[Turbine]

I don't think we "gave away" our bowl profit. I think we were outvoted by other league members. You might say our bowl profit was "stolen".

UL is in a position where they could have shut down the vote with the threat of going independent.

Just like MTSU could have shut down the $10m vote with the threat of CUSA.

[Cajun90]

I don't think we "gave away" our bowl profit. I think we were outvoted by other league members. You might say our bowl profit was "stolen".

From The Independent by Dan McDonald

This year, with the new regulations requiring the revenue split with the conference, Farmer says UL's total income will obviously be smaller. He was the only league athletic director to vehemently oppose the new regulations.
"The schools that had never been to bowls were all in favor of it," he says. "The schools that had been to bowl games, they all had new athletic directors who didn't know what was going on. I was a one-man fight."
Farmer says the regulations are in place just for this year, and the process will be revisited by the league's AD's this spring.

http://www.theind.com/news/sports/12...-to-go-bowling

[Turbine]

From The Independent by Dan McDonald

This year, with the new regulations requiring the revenue split with the conference, Farmer says UL's total income will obviously be smaller. He was the only league athletic director to vehemently oppose the new regulations.
"The schools that had never been to bowls were all in favor of it," he says. "The schools that had been to bowl games, they all had new athletic directors who didn't know what was going on. I was a one-man fight."
Farmer says the regulations are in place just for this year, and the process will be revisited by the league's AD's this spring.

http://www.theind.com/news/sports/12...-to-go-bowling

If the SBC can act that fast one getting UL's bowl money . . . why couldn't they act that fast to require a huge exit fee from MTSU and FAU?

[CajunNation]

UL is in a position where they could have shut down the vote with the threat of going independent.

Just like MTSU could have shut down the $10m vote with the threat of CUSA.

I'm almost to the point to where I'm hoping we get passed over by other leagues and they kill the SBC in the process. It would force us to go Indy and inadvertently reap the rewards of that move, like securing our own Bowl agreement with the NOLA Bowl much like BYU has now with the Poinsettia, and not having to share revenues.

[Turbine]

I'm almost to the point to where I'm hoping we get passed over by other leagues and they kill the SBC in the process. It would force us to go Indy and inadvertently reap the rewards of that move, like securing our own Bowl agreement with the NOLA Bowl much like BYU has now with the Poinsettia, and not having to share revenues.

The New Orleans Bowl would jump onboard in a split second at the chance of that option.

[CajunRebel]

Back on topic:

There's an article at theind.com by Dan McDonald that briefly explained how the revenue sharing vote went down. Basically it was every other school vs. Scott Farmer:

This year, with the new regulations requiring the revenue split with the conference, Farmer says UL's total income will obviously be smaller. He was the only league athletic director to vehemently oppose the new regulations.
"The schools that had never been to bowls were all in favor of it," he says. "The schools that had been to bowl games, they all had new athletic directors who didn't know what was going on. I was a one-man fight."

http://www.theind.com/news/sports/12...-to-go-bowling

[Turbine]

Back on topic:

There's an article at theind.com by Dan McDonald that briefly explained how the revenue sharing vote went down. Basically it was every other school vs. Scott Farmer:

This year, with the new regulations requiring the revenue split with the conference, Farmer says UL's total income will obviously be smaller. He was the only league athletic director to vehemently oppose the new regulations.
"The schools that had never been to bowls were all in favor of it," he says. "The schools that had been to bowl games, they all had new athletic directors who didn't know what was going on. I was a one-man fight."

http://www.theind.com/news/sports/12...-to-go-bowling

Lights out at Blackdom

Farmer should have walked out stating if this vote is taken we are taking a clue from the home town weekly. The Independent

[CajunRebel]

I sure hope he was hollering and screaming about this one. Until now I've never heard an argument that convinces me UL should go Independent. But losing out on almost a million dollars every year is a pretty good reason.

You know in a way the New Orleans Bowl might be our biggest asset when it comes to conference realignment. From what I understand this rule (or one similar to it) is in place in every conference. So inviting a school that can consistently make a lot of money off a bowl game would make great financial sense for a conference like C-USA.