PDA

View Full Version : This would make me really hate bowl season.....



SteelClip49
4/29/2010, 01:05 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5145761

MONTGOMERY, Ala. -- A bowl game is supposed to be a reward for a good season. Now, with the glut of postseason contests, a team with a losing record might get an invitation.

"I think it stinks," former Nebraska player Aaron Taylor said Wednesday in a text message. The CBS college football analyst said the sport "is becoming perilously close to losing the purity and amateurism that separates it from it's pro counterpart."

Finding enough winning teams to fill bowl slots is a fairly recent concern. The number of bowl games has nearly doubled from the 18 held in 1996.

The NCAA recently licensed the Dallas Football Classic and the New Era Pinstripe Bowl at Yankee Stadium, pushing the number of bowls to 35. The International Bowl didn't apply for a license, so there will only be one more bowl than last season.

That still means 70 of 120 Football Bowl Subdivision teams will get to go bowling, even if one or two happen to be 5-7.

"I'm not one of those guys that's like, well, that's too many bowls," said Tony Barnhart, who covers college football for CBS Sports and the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. "But everything can have it's excess, and to me, I think that's kind of where we need to draw the line is having 5-7 teams playing in the bowl games."

Based on recent history, the NCAA's margin of error is two.

In the past three years, 72 FBS teams were at least 6-6. FBS programs switched to 12-game schedules in 2006, when 73 of 119 teams had .500 records or better.

Though the NCAA doesn't think a losing team will get in a bowl game, especially with wins over Football Championship Subdivision teams counting toward bowl eligibility, it is still coming up with a contingency plan -- just in case.

"That's what's being discussed at this point, if you can't fill the spots," said Mark Womack, associate commissioner of the Southeastern Conference and a member of the NCAA's Football Issues committee that approved the new bowls. "But historical data will tell you can, so I think the odds of that happening are probably pretty good to fill all those games based on the historical data that we have.

"A what-if case, that's certainly something that's currently being discussed: That if you only had 69 teams, what would you do? Those are things that will be discussed over the summer."

The NCAA experimented with 12-game seasons in 2002 and 2003, and 68 and 69 teams, respectively, had six wins or more (out of 117 teams).

Nick Carparelli, chairman of the NCAA committee, cited television ratings and attendance last season as evidence that there isn't a bloated bowl system. The NCAA said bowls generated more than $237 million in revenue and drew nearly 1.59 million fans.

"If you ask the student-athletes, specifically football players, what the best experience or greatest memory of their career is, it's almost always the experience they had participating in bowl games," said Carparelli, who is senior associate commissioner of the Big East Conference.

"The people that matter -- the student-athletes and the fans -- enjoy going to bowl games. I'm not quite sure there are too many."

Plenty of bowl teams have been close to having losing records.

Last season, there were eight 6-6 teams in bowl games, including six from BCS conferences, which have the most bowl slots to fill.

John Junker, president and CEO of the Fiesta and Insight bowls, said not all teams with so-so records are created equally. He noted that things like strong finishes and overcoming adversity can make for compelling postseason teams.

In last season's Insight Bowl, Iowa State defeated Minnesota 14-13 in matchup of 6-6 teams. Visits to the teams' locker rooms didn't leave the impression that the game was meaningless.

"When I went to the Iowa State locker room, you would have thought they had won the national championship," Junker said. "When I went to the Minnesota locker room, you had at least a dozen guys in tears."

Bowl trips, he noted, are rewards for the guys who "enable athletic departments to pay their bills."

Womack said the NCAA committee looks at interest from within the communities vying to host a game and historical data from the potential conference tie-ins.

"If you can meet that historical data, you try to have as many bowl games as possible," he said.

Two other bowl game applications were turned down, the Cure Bowl in Orlando and the Christmas Bowl in Los Angeles.

Taylor says the increasing number of bowl games is one of the issues facing the NCAA. Others include coaches salaries and offering recruits scholarships at younger ages.

"All of that is taking the pure game of college football in a direction that scares me," the former Husker said. "Do I understand it? Yes. Do I like it? No."

yermom
4/29/2010, 01:09 PM
maybe if they are short they should put the 1-AA champ into one :D

ndpruitt03
4/29/2010, 01:16 PM
If the bowls were about making the season matter more there wouldn't be 35 bowl games. I'm for a bowl system if we get rid of about half the games we have now. 7 win teams shouldn't be sure they are going to a bowl. Some 8 win teams are probably not good enough to go to bowls. The best system is a playoff system with 8 teams but that won't happen. There is no need for more than 20 bowl games.

Also if this was really about missing class these bowls could all be finished before Xmas.

NOVSooner
4/29/2010, 01:37 PM
if this was really about missing class these bowls could all be finished before Xmas.

I was wondering about this during the NCAA basketball tournament. you have 65 teams (soon to increase) and the tournament spans roughly 3 to 3-1/2 weeks. whether for it or not, how could an 8 team playoff for football not fit into a 3 week period, also? but yes, to the original reasoning for this thread, too many bowls as it is, too many mediocre teams getting awarded for something that really, isn't an accomplishment when you're 5-7 or 6-6

ndpruitt03
4/29/2010, 01:53 PM
I've tried to come up with a couple solutions to that problem and here's a couple I can think of.


The lesser one is just have all the lower record bowls done by the first week then have the real bowl season start the next week. You could have all the Bowls done by around the 1st of Jan in this format instead of having about weeks off before the Bowls start.

The one I like is to cut the bowls to about 20. I'm more in favor of 15 but 20 is a nice round number. 40 teams is 1/3rd of the teams in Div 1 that's closer to what NCAA Div 1 mens basketball tournament has in all of their playoffs combined. You can take a week off so lets say the Championship games are done by the 5 of December The bowl games would start around the week of the 19th of Dec and you can do 7 bowl games the first 2 weeks 6 the final week which is perfect because you can have the NC game, then have the Orange, Rose, Feista, Sugar, and Cotton bowls. No other games during this week. These games would be the ones everyone wants to go to. No more Humanitarian Bowl type games during this time. Those have no business being during the BCS bowl game time. You can have all these games done within a weekend from around Friday to Monday or Teusday if you want the NC game on a different night. There's no reason to space these games so far out and take away from players class periods like they do now.

goingoneight
4/29/2010, 01:56 PM
Playoff. There is no other way.

KantoSooner
4/29/2010, 02:24 PM
maybe if they are short they should put the 1-AA champ into one :D

Or just say that, if not enough Div 1 WITH winning records are around, then you fill in with 1-AA teams, starting with the champs.

Let them drink from the money chalice, too. (and probably whip the unholy dog sh*t out of some sorry Div 1, 6-6 team, too, just for fun).

Jacie
4/29/2010, 02:31 PM
One of Switzer's teams refused to go to a bowl after going 8-4 . . .

RedstickSooner
4/29/2010, 03:57 PM
I think when we get bent out of shape about second-rate bowls, we're missing the point. The Big Bowls -- y'know, the real bowls, are a reward for a season well played. The rest are simply a way to give us what we want and deserve: A slightly longer football season.

Sure, we have to cut those bowls at some point, because garbage teams with horrible losing records shouldn't be subjected to another game. But, while I'm not interested in watching, I don't really have anything against some cruddy 5-7 team freezing their butts off up in Boise come December.

yermom
4/29/2010, 04:13 PM
the fans, the players and the cities hosting the bowls enjoy it, so what's the problem?

SoonerLB
4/29/2010, 04:19 PM
Though I understand the point, I'm with Redstick and yermom, anything that means more football works for me!

Oldnslo
4/29/2010, 04:22 PM
Hey, East Popcorn State is the toughest 8-loss team in the nation! We're just proud to represent our team here in the DeezNuts ESPN Programming Filler Bowl!

bluedogok
4/29/2010, 08:23 PM
Also if this was really about missing class these bowls could all be finished before Xmas.
...or they wouldn't start until the week of Christmas, most schools are done with class by then so football players aren't "missing class time" like every other student athlete in any other sport does. In fact football players probably miss the least amount of class time than any other sport. I know baseball players miss a whole lot more. So those that use "missing class" as a reason are full of it.


Though I understand the point, I'm with Redstick and yermom, anything that means more football works for me!
It's better than most of the other stuff on...and I like watching football.

There are many more schools looking to move up to DI-A from DI-AA or starting from scratch and planning to move up quickly.

goingoneight
4/30/2010, 11:10 AM
Honestly, after the OSU game 2009... if you told me we weren't going "bowling" I wouldn't be offended. I would call "bed-lame" a decent end to a long season and start planning for 2010. Why? Maybe it's because we lost five freaking games and let ourselves get embarassed in on of them.

But schools will NOT refuse to play in any bowl game. The dollar hath spoken.

rawlingsHOH
4/30/2010, 12:55 PM
maybe if they are short they should put the 1-AA champ into one :D

They'd compete in one of the lower-tiered bowls.

Leroy Lizard
4/30/2010, 07:16 PM
I was wondering about this during the NCAA basketball tournament. you have 65 teams (soon to increase) and the tournament spans roughly 3 to 3-1/2 weeks. whether for it or not, how could an 8 team playoff for football not fit into a 3 week period, also?

If you had thought about it longer, you would have come up with the answer yourself.

1. March Madness does not occur around final exams.
2. You can schedule numerous basketball teams to play in one arena over a two-day stretch.

Leroy Lizard
4/30/2010, 07:18 PM
...or they wouldn't start until the week of Christmas, most schools are done with class by then so football players aren't "missing class time" like every other student athlete in any other sport does. In fact football players probably miss the least amount of class time than any other sport. I know baseball players miss a whole lot more. So those that use "missing class" as a reason are full of it.

Good God, we have been through this a billion times. A final exam day is not equivalent to a regular class day. You can make up a missed class. You cannot make up a missed final exam.

Not equivalent.

Not the same.

Crucifax Autumn
4/30/2010, 07:33 PM
I don't care how many bowls there are or what the records are as long as they make sure to make it known that there are top tier BCS games, second tier games with decent teams, and all the toilet bowl games with teams that could only just barely get in with their .500 or losing records.

bluedogok
4/30/2010, 09:48 PM
Good God, we have been through this a billion times. A final exam day is not equivalent to a regular class day. You can make up a missed class. You cannot make up a missed final exam.

Not equivalent.

Not the same.
As I said, most of the bowl games are around Christmas or later, the first bowl game was Saturday, December 19th. So for most schools they are after finals, which means most players aren't missing class or finals. They could start the bowl season the Monday of Christmas week and limit the number of days the teams are at the bowl site for the dog and pony show. I was not proposing to move them up to interfere with finals week.

Leroy Lizard
4/30/2010, 10:28 PM
Sorry about that.

DakotaSooner
5/1/2010, 09:14 PM
Though I understand the point, I'm with Redstick and yermom, anything that means more football works for me!

I agree. I appreciate football in general. Why not let some of the teams who know they are not going to compete for a national title have something to play for. If you don't agree with two 6 -6 teams playing, don't watch it.

AlbqSooner
5/2/2010, 07:05 AM
If you don't agree with two 6 -6 teams playing, don't watch it.

Hang on a sec. College footbal on TV and I am not going to watch?
Pffffft. GET REAL!:D

Jdog
5/3/2010, 07:30 AM
UNT won their conference a few years ago and went to the New Orleans bowl with a losing record.
Think its the only time its happened

sooneron
5/3/2010, 09:13 AM
If you had thought about it longer, you would have come up with the answer yourself.


2. You can schedule numerous basketball teams to play in one arena over a two-day stretch.

You could easily schedule 3 football games at one stadium over a given day- 11:30, 3:30, 8:00. It would just need to have some sort of artificial surface.

Leroy Lizard
5/3/2010, 11:38 AM
You could easily schedule 3 football games at one stadium over a given day- 11:30, 3:30, 8:00. It would just need to have some sort of artificial surface.

There is a reason why no one ever does this.

Besides, college basketball teams play multiple games during the weekend. Tough to do in football.

badger
5/3/2010, 11:42 AM
Even with the bowl schedule approved, there are fewer and fewer sponsors for these games. I really think more of this sh!t tier bowls are in danger of dying in favor of the higher tier bowls.

ndpruitt03
5/3/2010, 11:47 AM
There is a reason why no one ever does this.

Besides, college basketball teams play multiple games during the weekend. Tough to do in football.

Yeah Basketball courts you can play on for years without really messing up and they are easier to clean.

Football fields get destroyed relatively quickly especially the grass and the turf grass type fields.

goingoneight
5/3/2010, 12:42 PM
And it's a helluva lot easier for a basketball tournament's host city to house all of the visiting fans. Now, put Alabama, Oklahoma, Ohio State and just throwing another big dog out there... Florida into a football "tournament." Would the city LOVE the revenue? Yes. Would they love the rioting? Do they have enough hotels? Isn't this similar to the joke of a suggestion about Tulsa hosting the Olympics recently? Bring the NCAA tourney here... no biggie... great for the local economy. Bring in hoard of people you have no room nor ammenities for? And liquor them all up on the same day "tailgating?"

I'm no expert, of course... it just seems like a football "tournament" wouldn't work. Nor would traveling to numerous bowl sites for playoff games. Let's be honest... we have a great fanbase, but if we got into a BIG 12 Championship game, after a long, expensive season... then we advance to a first round in the Rose Bowl, a semi-final in Dallas/Arlington and a finale in Miami... would OUr fanbase have a good showing EVERY game? We're a great fanbase... so you KNOW if we'd struggle there, fairweather fanbases like USC and Miami would.