Ohio State football gets one-year bowl ban; Tressel hit with 5-year "show cause"

Either way, the schools could cut down on the expenses, especially when it's a non-BCS game. There's no need for the University president and the entire board of trustees and their families to be enjoying December in Shreveport or Charlotte.

 

Well, yeah. There's no "need" for a lot of what major college football programs pay for without a second thought anymore.

 

Actually a lot of teams lose more money going to the BCS than they would at a minor bowl. Case in point: Louisville receives the same revenue share from the Big East as WVU and Cincinnati will, but because they're headed to the Charlotte Bowl instead of the Orange, they'll come out ahead financially.

Belk Bowl has schools on the hook for only 12,500 tickets versus 17,500 for the Orange, and the face price of the tickets is cheaper. Travel from Louisville to Charlotte is much cheaper than going all the way down to Miami, and I would assume (though don't know for sure) the mandatory hotel in Charlotte is cheaper than the hotels the teams are required to stay at.

 

One year I covered the Aloha Bowl. School brought 80 players, no band, a few cheerleaders, and turned down the lei ceremony at the airport because they were going to be charged $10 each.

 

And again even on BCS-levels bowls. See UConn and Va. Tech.
Unless you have a HUGE, loyal fan base, like Alabama, UT, and fromerly Penn State, it's very likely even a large school will be lucky to break even.
Small schools? Forget it.
They lose their ass but conmtinue to go, saying it's a reward for players (like going to fucking Boise in Dec. is reward, plus the additional practice time) and a great recruiting tool for the school.

The financial statements for schools and their bowl games are readily availble on-line. Wiz of Odds runs them every year and a lot of newspapers have picked up on the practice as well.

 

Layman is right. A cold chill ran up the spines of officials at those ACC schools when they saw tOSU's sanctions. UNC didn't even have the sense to offer conciliatory sanctions, which is even more damning than the lowballing the Buckeyes proffered.

And about Ohio State's bowl bid. There's no way the NCAA could make it work now, 10 days before the game. Who would replace the Buckeyes? If I'm a head coach, I want a bowl game because I get an extra month of workouts. I'm not interested in being somebody's Plan B.

 

The idea (spewed throughout most of the Penn State thread) that bowl game trips are some kind of incredible "reward" for the players is complete bullshit.

They don't get to lie on the beach and soak in the sun. They don't get to chase chicks (except maybe very very briefly). They don't get to party down (again, except very briefly). On the whole most of them would rather be home, partying their asses off with the coaches mostly out of their hair.

Most players hate bowl games, especially the bullshit fleabag bowls, because it means another month of 24-hour marching to the drumbeat of the coaches from sunrise to midnight. They'd much rather be done with it, spend an hour or so a day lifting weights, and the rest of their time fucking around like most college students.

 

Speaking of taking the band to the bowl game ...

http://theadvocate.com/sports/lsu/1642905-123/bcs-band-aid.html

 

You must have been hanging out in the Tennessee locker room during Kentucky week; plenty of program insiders have hit the blogs claiming the Vol players openly bitched about the possibility of "having" to play in a bowl game.