42 Bowl Games Coming to a TV Near You

[Mavric]

 

[Decked]

Everybody gets a participation trophy! We won six games In the sun belt now we get to go to the corncob bowl!

[mrandyk]

84 out of 128 teams get a bowl. A full two-thirds of all teams make the postseason. How long until 5-7 teams get rewarded?

[Decked]

84 out of 128 teams get a bowl. A full two-thirds of all teams make the postseason. How long until 5-7 teams get rewarded?

Welcome to the participation trophy era.

[Notre Dame Joe]

84 out of 128 teams get a bowl. A full two-thirds of all teams make the postseason. How long until 5-7 teams get rewarded?

 

It might not be a reward at that point.

[VA Husker Fan]

Not sure if they'll fill them as there were only 81 bowl eligible teams last year, plus 3 new schools that were 6-6 or better but not yet eligible in their first year. No wiggle room, especially since the year before only had 79 eligible. I guess they will relax the winning record (or rather, the "not a losing record") restriction if they have to.

 

Either way, whatever. It's a bit unfair that some of the teams that need more practice time (for the next year) the most are unable to have it, but I guess that is part of the reward and incentive of a bowl. As for TV saturation, don't watch games you don't care about. I think ESPN has enough alternate channels to carry replays of the world series of poker or whatever else might be preempted by a new December week night minor bowl game.

 

Hey, remember how some said the playoffs were going to kill the bowls? Funny how they are adding bowls, not losing them.

[BigRedBuster]

Wait....I thought the playoff was supposed to ruin the bowls.

[Notre Dame Joe]

Wait....I thought the playoff was supposed to ruin the bowls.

 

If this isn't ruin then what would it take?

[Mavric]

 

Wait....I thought the playoff was supposed to ruin the bowls.

 

If this isn't ruin then what would it take?

 

 

In what ways was it worse than the year before?

[mrandyk]

Not sure if they'll fill them as there were only 81 bowl eligible teams last year, plus 3 new schools that were 6-6 or better but not yet eligible in their first year. No wiggle room, especially since the year before only had 79 eligible. I guess they will relax the winning record (or rather, the "not a losing record") restriction if they have to.

 

Either way, whatever. It's a bit unfair that some of the teams that need more practice time (for the next year) the most are unable to have it, but I guess that is part of the reward and incentive of a bowl. As for TV saturation, don't watch games you don't care about. I think ESPN has enough alternate channels to carry replays of the world series of poker or whatever else might be preempted by a new December week night minor bowl game.

 

Hey, remember how some said the playoffs were going to kill the bowls? Funny how they are adding bowls, not losing them.

Not only does this leave no wiggle room, there is a recent trend of schools going against scheduling the "guarantee" games against FCS competition. It looks like it might just be a matter of time before either a 5-7 team makes a bowl or a bowl is left hanging with a spot they can't fill.

[Notre Dame Joe]

 

 

Wait....I thought the playoff was supposed to ruin the bowls.

 

If this isn't ruin then what would it take?

 

 

In what ways was it worse than the year before?

 

 

A lot of crap bowls is slightly better than even more crappy bowls. I'll agree that it is a very minor difference, but there is certainly nothing good for the bowl tradition here.

 

Here's another detail. The playoff committee counts how many "bowl teams" a contender played against. Now they can get an extra smidgen of credibility for a 5-7 team.

[VA Husker Fan]

 

 

 

Wait....I thought the playoff was supposed to ruin the bowls.

 

If this isn't ruin then what would it take?

 

 

In what ways was it worse than the year before?

 

 

A lot of crap bowls is slightly better than even more crappy bowls. I'll agree that it is a very minor difference, but there is certainly nothing good for the bowl tradition here.

 

Here's another detail. The playoff committee counts how many "bowl teams" a contender played against. Now they can get an extra smidgen of credibility for a 5-7 team.

 

Yeah, "slightly" better (worse) and "extra smidgen" is far from "ruined". And you don't know what the playoff committee is really considering. Smart people like Tom Osborne and Condoleezza Rice aren't going to swayed by a win over an Austin Bowl bound team.

 

What is your definition of "ruining the bowls"? I assumed it was something like the mid major bowls that have been around a long time going under such that there aren't bowls around for 10 win non-playoff teams to go to. Or that they are all so diminished that they pretty much all get less than 10,000 spectators at (which I would think lead to doing away with them). Tell us what you think it is.

[Mavric]

A lot of crap bowls is slightly better than even more crappy bowls. I'll agree that it is a very minor difference, but there is certainly nothing good for the bowl tradition here.

How did the playoff cause this?

 

Here's another detail. The playoff committee counts how many "bowl teams" a contender played against. Now they can get an extra smidgen of credibility for a 5-7 team.

You don't think they give more credit for some than others?

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

Wait....I thought the playoff was supposed to ruin the bowls.

 

If this isn't ruin then what would it take?

 

 

In what ways was it worse than the year before?

 

 

A lot of crap bowls is slightly better than even more crappy bowls. I'll agree that it is a very minor difference, but there is certainly nothing good for the bowl tradition here.

 

Here's another detail. The playoff committee counts how many "bowl teams" a contender played against. Now they can get an extra smidgen of credibility for a 5-7 team.

 

Why would they get an extra smidgen of credibility to a 5-7 team?

[Notre Dame Joe]

 

Yeah, "slightly" better (worse) and "extra smidgen" is far from "ruined". And you don't know what the playoff committee is really considering. Smart people like Tom Osborne and Condoleezza Rice aren't going to swayed by a win over an Austin Bowl bound team.

 

 

 

What is your definition of "ruining the bowls"? I assumed it was something like the mid major bowls that have been around a long time going under such that there aren't bowls around for 10 win non-playoff teams to go to. Or that they are all so diminished that they pretty much all get less than 10,000 spectators at (which I would think lead to doing away with them). Tell us what you think it is.

 

 

In Revenge of the Nerds Coach John Goodman is giving the pep talk including the line "we're going to a bowl game" without qualification. None was needed as everyone in 1984 knew a bowl was a reward for having a successful season. Most knew the bowls had just been made the final factor in determining a national champion, as the voting was moved in the 70s to after the bowls. This produced the best day in sports known as January 1st, whereas as many as 6 successful teams vied for the national title and the rest tried to improve their record and head into the season with a positive vibe.

 

 

But not everyone got a participation ribbon. Bowls started sprouting up like dandelions. Concurrently the BCS was formed so simpletons wouldn't have to wrap their heads around co-champions, at the expense of the other Jan 1st bowls. The playoff grabbed even more attention to itself.

 

So what does "we went to a bowl" mean now?

 

- not a successful season.

- not a reward.

- if this continues, maybe not even a .500 season.

- extra practices

- extra holiday travel

 

It means the men of a 7-5 Northern Illinois squad get their season extended. In exchange for the extra work load they get shipped to a city that doesn't care to play in an empty stadium while no one watches. At best minor bowls are like late spring presidential primaries when everyone knows the nominee but sort of go through the motions anyway because someone decreed that's what your supposed to do.

 

Here's a thought, if they are going to be treated like a 13th regular season game then why not treat them as such and play them on campus? One team would get to save on travel and the local fans would too.