Deace On The Mark Regardng Bowl Games

[CycloneYoda]

Instead of just handwaving to the arguement I put out there, why not answer the questions I raised?

It is my belief that the implementation of so many corporate-named bowls has taken away some of the mystique of bowl season. Sure, the fans and host cities benefit, but at what expense? Over one half of D-1 football teams make a bowl game now? Name another college sport that has over 50% of the teams in the post season.

No, the small bowls don't affect the Rose Bowl.

I see the influx of bowls as a sign of the times. We reward teams for mediocracy because money is involved. Will this behavior spill over to the rest of society? I sure there would be an uproar if any average person who stayed in a Holiday Inn Express obtained a medical license despite being average.

 

[Cyclonesrule91]

You forgot the bacis premise for bowls and NCAA. It is making money, has nothing to do with a crowning a true national champion.

This is the only thing that matters to the bowl system.....^^^^^

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

The only part of the championship game any of the sponsors give a pinch of donkey crap about is if their sponsored bowl gets the championship game and revenue, otherwise it's the green stuff that matters. All the rest is foo foo dust to them. I add the NCAA to this group since they get the revenue as well..

So don't look for the NCAA to lower the number of bowl games or to try and go to a playoff until they can build a stadium that will hold the same amount of merchandise, food and ticket buyers they hold collectively now in the 32 bowl games into the lower number. Money talks and the BS(championships, credibility, more relevance AKA: the things we like to see) walks.

 

[CycloneYoda]

The profit-driven animal that is college bowl season has spilled over to basketball as well. We have the NCAA tournament, then the historically accepted NIT, and now a couple other post-season tournaments that reward teams like Oregon State, who had a losing record, a chance to play some more.

But hey, no problems. I'm sure the fans love it. Think about what those small tournaments did to the host communities. Staved of the recession, I tells ya.

 

[Wesley]

I vote for a 8 or 16 team playoff, similar to what most sports have and a case where the press people do not make the final call. The minor bowls can be played, but they are not bringing much to the table other than a diversion or the local team that managed to sneak into one of them.

 

[akclone]

I agree with both their opinions that playoffs are not the way to go as it would water down the greatest regular season in sports. That said, I disagree on this whole notion of what is, and isn't, a "crappy bowl".
Does the existence of the Poinsettia Bowl or Humanitarian Bowl somehow make the Rose Bowl or Sugar Bowl less special? Does it affect the determination of a national champion?

I would think that anyone who loves college football should want the season to continue as long as possible. Using the argument that crappy bowls just match a couple crappy teams is odd as well. Using that argument, let's scrap the first couple weeks of the regular season too because there our tons of crappy matchups with inferior teams. Heck, maybe once the season starts and a team has lost too many games to assure at least a .500 season by season end, then any remaining games against teams in the same predicament (i.e.…two crappy teams), those games should be cancelled as not to subject anyone to crappy regular season matchup.

All bowls provide opportunities for teams to play that don't normally get a change to play…..and for that matter, for fans to travel to cities that they wouldn't normally get to go to. How's that a bad thing?

Bottom-line -- How do the so-called "crappy" bowls negatively affect anyone other than the teams and fans that participate in them?

I agree 100%. I dont understand all of the bowl bashing that takes place. It's more college football and as a fan I like to watch as much ball as possible. Especially when it is early december, the weather sucks, so stay in light a fire or go out to pub and watch some football with the fellas.

I am sure the players who play in the humanitarian bowls of the world cherish those memories forever especially since most of the seniors are finished playing organized football.

I say bring on more football, more bowls.

How is this bad for college football?

 

[pyrocyz]

As a team that isn't one of the top eight teams all that often, ISU should be even less inclined to go to a playoff. It is just going to make the richer teams richer. Sure there will be surprises, but otherwise its just going to be a showcase of the good schools. These schools will then get the revenue from playing multiple post season games, including possible home games. At least with the current system, teams like ISU have a chance to go to a lower bowl game and get some extra revenue. In a conference like the big 12, ISU would get pushed to the curb and would never get up again.

I don't have a solution, but I have my doubts that a playoff system would be profitable with the current economic situation. Asking fans to travel more than once is not going to go over well. It is going to turn into the super bowl where there aren't any fans of the actual teams at the games.

If we were to go to a 8 team playoff, then there will just be arguments about the team that didn't make it. Are they really going to put 3 teams from the same conference in the playoff? maybe, but probably not. Look, Life isn't fair and nothing is going to change for a while with the current TV deals that are in place. So just sit back and get ready to **** and moan about the current system for a long time.

 

[CyBobby]

So since the current system doesn't solve anything we should go back to the former system that solved just as little? I say we scrap it and go to 8,12, or even 16 team playoff.

Don't look now cyfan but...Joe Barton R-Texas has given the bcs a limited time frame to come up with a playoff system...


If they dont Mr Joe Barton aka congress will start cutting funding to ncaa schools NOT IN COMPLIANCE.

I've said for the last 50 years that we need an eight team playoff and its really quite simple...Take the top eight teams and the top four teams all get the home field advantage....

It works for the nfl and it will work for the ncaa football championship!!!:yes:

 

[Wingback]

Don't look now cyfan but...Joe Barton R-Texas has given the bcs a limited time frame to come up with a playoff system...


If they dont Mr Joe Barton aka congress will start cutting funding to ncaa schools NOT IN COMPLIANCE.

I've said for the last 50 years that we need an eight team playoff and its really quite simple...Take the top eight teams and the top four teams all get the home field advantage....

It works for the nfl and it will work for the ncaa football championship!!!:yes:

Now there's a classic example of our tax dollars at work. When I first saw on television that Congress (the biggest conglomeration of boobs ever assembled on the face of the earth) was holding hearings on the BCS, my jaw about dropped. Another classic example of why we need to limit the amount of time these morons are in Washington in session (screwing up our lives) and the number of terms they can hold office for. Can someone please explain to me why these knotheads are wasting my tax dollars arguing over whether collee football should have a playoff or not. Unbelievable!!!

But then, I digress.

 

[LindenCy]

I'd love to see the number of bowl games reduced to something like 20 (how many are their now? 40-ish?). They should actually mean something, the top 40 making a bowl game sounds fair.

Unfortunately, it'll never happen. If anything, we'll get more meaningless bowls like the SuperDog Stand Bowl live from Boone, IA. Too much $$$ involved.

If SuperDog in Chicago was sponsoring, I would definitely go.:biggrin:

 

[LindenCy]

If you made 7-5 a minimum requirement (or I would prefer 6-5 and drop back to 11 games), it would clean up a lot of bad bowls fast. That way you would know what it took to get to a bowl and 20 bowls is still a lot of bowls.

 

[besserheimerphat]

As it stands, I will care more about how the champion is determined when it effects ISU. In the meantime, I want to watch ISU play football as often as possible. If that means there are 60 bowl games, I don't care. The extra practice time and extra game are good for the team, so I want any post-season system that gives us that.

 

[JonDMiller]

I podcasted that segment of today's show:

Des Moines' Sports Station - 1460 KXNO

 

[capitalcityguy]

If you made 7-5 a minimum requirement (or I would prefer 6-5 and drop back to 11 games), it would clean up a lot of bad bowls fast. That way you would know what it took to get to a bowl and 20 bowls is still a lot of bowls.

Going back to my original point on this thread -- why? Who's getting hurt here? What is a "bad bowl"? Who makes that determination?
Why can't the fans, cities, and sponsors determine which bowls survive? Let the market and fan's thirst (or lack thereof) determine how many bowls are sufficient.

The only schools (and fan bases) that should be for shrinking the number of bowls games are the Texas, Florida, Ohio State, etc. etc ..of the world. As many advantages as they have now in recruiting, how much would they like to add -- yeah, you may be able to play at (pick your more modest school) earlier, but you'll have very little chance to ever play in a bowl game.

I hate to say this, but if I'm in in-state recruit and Iowa and ISU are about even in my mind as a possibility, I'm going to Iowa as the chance to play in a bowl game is greater (if the numbers are decreased).

I think too many of us listen to the talking heads and don't sit back and consider if what they say over and over and over again really makes sense or is in the best interest of ALL of college football.

 

[capitalcityguy]

Continuing...
Yes, the Motor City Bowl seem hardly like a reward -- but guess what? 9-3 BCS teams are not playing there, are they? No, teams with modest records (and modest traditions) do. Doesn't that all seem to make sense? If Detroit can get sponsors, fans, and teams to participate, what harm is it to anyone or to college football? IT MEANS MORE FOOTBALL!! Again, the Motor City Bowl doesn't tarnish the image of the BCS Bowls or other more prestigious ones.

Make fun of the bowl, don't watch it, laugh about it, but why should anyone make the value judgment on which stay, and which should go?

 

[GeronimusClone]

I podcasted that segment of today's show:

Des Moines' Sports Station - 1460 KXNO

Thanks

 

[Wallruss64]

Why don't we have the bowls keep on like they are but not allow them to crown a NC and then have an 8 or 12 team playoff. This will allow teams to turn down bowl game appearances to try to win a NC or they could go to a bowl game and recieve all the perks of going to a bowl game.

 

[jakemcilroy]

what is so hard for NCAA folks to understand. Your fans (people who ultimately pay the bills) aren't happy. Fix it!

Fans have the control, stop buying tickets to these meaningless bowl games. When that happens, they'll make a change. But until Iowa, for instance, stops sending 30,000 to the Alamo Bowl nothing is going to change. I'm not bashing Iowa because we sent 30,000 to the Insight.com bowl.

My point is, stop buying tickets and things we'll change.

 

[Tornado man]

I would think that anyone who loves college football should want the season to continue as long as possible. All bowls provide opportunities for teams to play that don't normally get a change to play…..and for that matter, for fans to travel to cities that they wouldn't normally get to go to. How's that a bad thing?

Bottom-line -- How do the so-called "crappy" bowls negatively affect anyone other than the teams and fans that participate in them?

Right on, right on, right on. If some bowls are half-full, so what? It's not my money that's being lost. There are tons of great bowl games, and I love to watch them.
The more bowls, the better. It gives the players another game to play.

 

[Cyrocks]

Bottom-line -- How do the so-called "crappy" bowls negatively affect anyone other than the teams and fans that participate in them?

:yes::notworthy:

Those calling for a "reduction" in bowl games are athletic snobs.

How does having, for example, the Motor City Bowl dimish the Rose Bowl, or the Outback Bowl or whatever bowl? No one forces anyone to watch or go to these bowl games.

I don't like "Dancing With the Stars". But I'm not going to be hoity-toity about those who do like it.

 

[goinlow67]

I agree with both their opinions that playoffs are not the way to go as it would water down the greatest regular season in sports. That said, I disagree on this whole notion of what is, and isn't, a "crappy bowl".
Does the existence of the Poinsettia Bowl or Humanitarian Bowl somehow make the Rose Bowl or Sugar Bowl less special? Does it affect the determination of a national champion?

I would think that anyone who loves college football should want the season to continue as long as possible. Using the argument that crappy bowls just match a couple crappy teams is odd as well. Using that argument, let's scrap the first couple weeks of the regular season too because there our tons of crappy matchups with inferior teams. Heck, maybe once the season starts and a team has lost too many games to assure at least a .500 season by season end, then any remaining games against teams in the same predicament (i.e.…two crappy teams), those games should be cancelled as not to subject anyone to crappy regular season matchup.

All bowls provide opportunities for teams to play that don't normally get a change to play…..and for that matter, for fans to travel to cities that they wouldn't normally get to go to. How's that a bad thing?

Bottom-line -- How do the so-called "crappy" bowls negatively affect anyone other than the teams and fans that participate in them?

Absolutely spot on!!!!! God forbid ISU goes to a lower tier bowl and gets extra practices and TV exposure and fans get a mini-vacation. Regardless of the BCS, why in the hell would we want to eliminate teams from the postseason when there are corporate sponsors more than eager to pay for teams to come play games?