From: pfleming@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Patrick E Fleming)
Subject: Re: Bowl alliance a crock!
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 16:30:36 GMT

Spiro the Spiny Goldfish exhorts:

>Once again, Pat, you are incorrect. 

Oh, darn.

>Penn State is quite obviously NOT a Big Ten team this season, or they would 
>not be playing in the Blockbuster Bowl, which IS part of the Coalition
>(although it is a minor part of the second tier).

Now we are getting somewhere.  The Blockbuster bowl was considered as the 
fourth bowl to make the coalition come together, but for some reason, no 
agreement was reached between the coalition schools, the other three bowls and 
the Blockbuster.  The descision was made to go with the Fiesta bowl instead and
then the consortium was solidified.  At this time, no "second tier" existested.
The plan was to take the top Big East, ACC, SEC, SWC and Big 8 teams along with
Notre Dame and two others.  Penn State had every opportunity to be one of the 
two others.  This was the plan as published in the USA Today immediately after 
the agreement was reached. I'm sure that a fine institution such as Penn State
would have back issues of this publication for scholarly consultation.

Shortly after the consortium was put together, the Big Ten announced deals with
the Holiday and Citrus Bowls and concurrently announced a policy that no Big 
Ten teams would be allowed to participate in consortium bowls.  History buffs
may recall teh discussions which took place in r.s.f.c in which the wisdom of
such a move by the Big Ten was questioned and/or supported.  The question at 
this point (before the existance of tier II) was whether or not the ban was 
extended to Penn State (my impression at the time was that the ban *was* 
extended to include Penn State and this lead to a long and involved thread on 
how Penn State was getting screwed.)

Then two things happened (and I honestly don't know what the order of events 
was.)  There was a huge push to lock conference runners-up into bowls (as the 
Big Ten had done) and somewhere along the line Penn State hooked up with the 
Blockbuster bowl.

So which came first?  The chicken or the egg?  Did the Big Ten force the hand
of the consortium to form teh second tier which lead to the exclusion of Penn 
State?  Did the Big Ten force the hand of Penn State by excluding them from 
participation in the origianl plan?

You can blame the bowl coalition, you can blame the Big Ten, you can blame
Notre Dame if you want to or you can blame me.  But it is really difficult to 
tell where you are if you refuse to look at how you got there.

>For the last time, the Big Ten doesn't have anything to do with Penn State's
>bowl situation, except for the fact that the Coalition *may* have not cared
>about excluding Penn State for only one year, given the greater good.

Whether or not Big Ten rules dictate Penn State's bowl situation, it was the 
Big Ten's signing of contracts with the Holiday and Citrus Bolws which (in 
part) precipitated the formation of BCII which excluded Penn State.

     - Pat
.
-- 
- Patrick E. Fleming ---------------------------------------------------------
- Department of Chemistry ------------ Some things are still a mystery to me -
- Ohio Wesleyan University ----------- While others are much too clear! ------
- pfleming@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu -----------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.sport.football.college