... a bowl tie-in this year.

The PAC12 couldn't fill all its commitments and so they snatched up Houston to compete with the MWC champ. I forget what happens if the MWC champ (usually BSU) goes to NY6 bowl, but that seems like a 50/50 proposition and may leave Vegas free to chose us. I don't really know the details of the contracts though.

If we were "at-large" don't you think they pick us To match up with SDSU?

Would be nice to have the better payout too.

I guess a change in venue for Cougar fans has an upside (in Vegas for WCC Tourney yearly, and often for Las Vegas Bowl over the last decade).

However, do you think it possibly gives players/coaches/fans more motivation and good drama to not know what the bowl tie in will be? They get their 6 wins and then play for pride, which is good, but that unknown of finishing strong and getting snatched up by a bigger name Bowl with a better payout and P5 might be nice.

There are some national trends and other factors which might make us rethink committing to bowls years in advance:

1) With the proliferation of bowls, they are scrambling each year to get 5-7 teams deemed "bowl-elegible"

2) More P5 conferences are going to 9 Conference games and discouraging playing any FCS schools. Results in more conference members with losing records.

3) Many P5 conferences require at least one P5 (or equivalent) OOC matchup. Exacerbates the result above in #2.

4) BYU is a national brand and has a program reputation/fan base that is solidly in the top 25-30 range nationally.

5) The CFP and NY6 Bowls snatch up 12 schools and there are loads of other great bowls out there.

I must be missing something, but it sure seems like a "buyers market" for teams like BYU that can fill more seats and have more brand value than most of the programs currently going to nonCFP/NY6 bowls. In the future we may want/deserve something better if we have a great (but not CFP/NY6-worthy) 11-2 or 10-2 or 9-3 season and are more of a ranked/relevant team than going to the Poinsetta or Hawaii bowls.

I know that "our kind" are generally risk-averse and not prone to "gamble" on something like this, but I've gotta think that the reward far outweighs the risk. It's not an easy position for Tom and the AD, but it's something worth considering. I don't think we have a tie in next year and that might be a great "test case" for these ideas and issues.

Thoughts CB?