jdub27 Posted July 24, 2014 Share Posted July 24, 2014 More ticket sales more money for the NCAA, plus you get a team with a winning record means bowl games again more money for the NCAA. See where I am going with this. Actually no clue. The NCAA doesn't get any money from local games during the regular season. The home (host) team gets the ticket revenue. All of the bowl games are filled with teams every year, so a different team with a winning record would just take the place of another team. We don't have bowl games that aren't played because they don't have enough teams. They aren't going to add bowls games just because there is another team with a winning record. Plus the NCAA doesn't control bowl games (although they are a partner in the BCS so they do get some of the revenue). Replacing EMU with another school would do little or nothing to the NCAA bottom line. What he said. The NCAA doesn't get a cut of their attendance. And as was pointed out, the NCAA doesn't control bowl games. And the BCS doesn't control any bowl game EMU would ever play in anyway so while so not even sure that is an issue even though its a valid point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.