It’s No Holiday Dealing Only for the Second Best

From the looks of the conference room down the hall from his office, John Reid could be a travel agent specializing in autumn tours of football weekends at American universities.

Reid’s conference room at San Diego Jack Murphy Stadium stadium is cluttered with football schedules, airline schedules and road maps to outposts such as Ames, Ann Arbor, Auburn, Annapolis and Albuquerque. And don’t forget College Park, University Park and College Station.

And the walls are covered with football standings and season records. In his position as executive director of the Holiday Bowl, Reid dispatches scouts who scour the country in search of good collegiate football teams and receptive athletic administrations. Either is worthless without the other.

Though these fellows are considered scouts, the job description is a little misleading. Basically, they are ambassadors of good will, both for the bowl game and the community. They have to sell prospective “customers” on how nice it would be to be playing football in San Diego on Dec. 22.

Don’t tell it to the Chamber of Commerce, but it is not an easy sell.

The very best of these football teams prefer to play on New Year’s Day, when a substantial percentage of the American population settles comatose in front of televisions for a filibuster of five bowl games. The vast viewing audience produces the high ratings, which produce high payoffs for the participating institutions.

Thus, a sub-stratum of pre-New Year’s Day bowls goes after the next-to-the-very-best teams.

The Holiday Bowl does not quite rate among the attractions that might draw from some of those next-to-the-very-best teams. Its 1985 payoff, while seemingly a handsome $650,000 per team in the event of a sellout, is still not high enough to get a Big 10 runner-up or twice-beaten independent.

You see, the payoff is virtually the whole ballgame in this ballpark. The players at someplace like Iowa City might be interested in a December beach party, but the administration wants to know how big an armored car to bring--or pick up.

And so it is that the payoff establishes a “pecking order” of sorts among postseason games.

“I don’t know what the other bowls have done,” said Reid, “but we were 11th a year ago and I’d figure we’d be around ninth this year.”

An increase in television revenue and a raise in ticket prices will make up the difference between last year’s $502,000 per team and this year’s $650,000. However, the Holiday Bowl still has far to go to number among the real big boys, unless one of California’s instant millionaires wants to donate his or her lottery proceeds. (The Rose Bowl paid $5,900,000 for each team in 1984. The Cotton, Orange and Sugar bowls were all over $2 million.)

In each of the first six years, Holiday Bowl representatives scrambled around the country--and waited to see what would shake down from above. It was a little different last year, when it had a lock on top-ranked Brigham Young University because of the agreement with the Western Athletic Conference. Even then, it could only entice unranked Michigan (6-5) to come as the “at large” team.

In each of those first seven Holiday Bowls, BYU was the WAC champion and the host team. The rules were changed for 1985, giving the WAC champion leeway to go elsewhere and the Holiday Bowl the right to invite two “at-large” teams. Essentially, the one-year “sabbatical” was arranged to give both the Holiday Bowl and BYU a break from each other.

Along has come Air Force, unbeaten and ranked fourth in the nation. Of course, the Falcons still have that little formality of winning at BYU Saturday. Should they do that, and beat Hawaii as well in the season finale, they will represent the WAC in a New Year’s Day game--instead of the Holiday Bowl.

“Hindsight is easy,” Reid said, “especially with Air Force doing so well. But we felt we needed some variety, and we’ve created a lot of interest around the nation.”

Alas, it is now a matter of parlaying that interest into an interesting matchup. It is no longer a matter of simply finding a dance partner for BYU, but rather putting together the whole party.

“Things are still confused,” Reid said. “It’s always a hassle, but the difference this year is that is seems that virtually every conference still has two, three, four or even five teams alive.”

Because the invitations will be extended Nov. 23, a lot of “shaking down” will have to happen very quickly.

“I do a lot of checking around,” Reid said, “trying to see what the other bowls are thinking. But that’s tough, too, because we’re competing with them. I can see the possibility for a lot of either/or package deals with multiple schools and multiple bowls.”

These are hush-hush times as bowl directors and their scouts scrimmage at Friday night cocktail parties, pregame receptions and postgame post-mortems and/or celebrations. They are allowed to say things like: “We might like to have you if you’d like to come.” And the university says: “We might like to come if you invite us.”

That is the way it has always been.

Here are some universities the Holiday Bowl might like to have if they might like to come:

Air Force (10-0)--Obviously. If the Falcons lose to BYU, and therefore lose the potential luster of a national championship game, they could well opt for the Holiday Bowl. The service academies, thanks to taxpayers, are not quite as much at mercy of the almighty dollar.

Arkansas (8-1)--The Razorbacks would have to stumble, but their final two games are with Texas A&M; and Southern Methodist. Coach Ken Hatfield is quite familiar with the Holiday Bowl, and San Diego, from his days at Air Force.

Texas A&M; (6-2)--Another loss or two wouldn’t hurt, and Arkansas may well help.

Minnesota (6-3)--The Golden Gophers finish with Michigan and Iowa, but an upset over either one would make them a respectable bowl representative.

Michigan State (5-4)--The record is modest, but the Spartans finish up with Northwestern and Wisconsin. At 7-4, they too would fit in the picture.

Tennessee (5-1-2)--Part of a tangled-mangled mess in the Southeastern Conference. Consider that Auburn, 14th in the nation, is sixth in the conference. Though still in the hunt for a Sugar Bowl berth, Tennessee is said to be interested in San Diego as an alternative.

Pacific 10 runner-up--The strongest interest seems to be in Washington, Arizona State and USC, figuring UCLA could well lose a game and still go to a more lucrative bowl. A catch here involves potential Big Ten involvement, since teams from the Pac-10 and Big Ten can meet nowhere else but in the Rose Bowl.

Alas, what is one more complication in a sea of confusion?