I really can't argue either way without knowing the financials, but obviously there's a reason BCS Bowl Officials go ga-ga over Notre Dame whenever they are eligible and regardless of whether or not they are the most formidable team available.

I would be interested to find out how profitable that Fiesta Bowl was that featured a suspect Pitt team and BCS crasher Utah team a few years ago. My guess is that was the ultimate lose-lose scenario. There wasn't much interest from national TV audiences and the fan bases didn't travel particularly well.

Moreover, I'd say the amount of money the bowl sponsors put in probably determines (or is inversely proportionate to) how badly the bowl officials want to invite teams with fans that travel well. The more money the sponsor puts in, the less concerned the bowl officals are in getting good travel teams and the more concerned they are with getting a match-up that will draw a large TV audience to appease the sponsor who was looking for the national exposure to begin with (obviously a team like Notre Dame gives them best of both worlds).

Based on this theory, I'd say you have a point that BCS bowls care less about how well the teams fan bases travel because they have the big sponsor dollars where as smaller bowls with lesser known or even regional sponsors care more about injecting money into the local economy.

Regardless, no matter the size of the bowl or the sponsor, all bowl officials will be looking to invite teams that will give them optimal returns on both the TV audience and local enconomy infusion fronts. Otherwise, they won't be heading up those Bowl committees for long.

There's a lot more to it I'm sure, but that seems logical.