Bowls, Bowls for everyone!!!

[Redux]

Didn't realize I was in such a minority. Personally, I think the bowl system has become dilluted with the inflation of new bowls every year.

 

How many bowls should there be? What is a good number?

[Sargon]

20. That would be just shy of half the P5 teams plus 10 more from elsewhere. It would help NU recruit a bit IMO since NU would usually be in and recruits like bowling. It would also help our brand some. The fewer games would have higher ratings. More football junkies will be 'forced' to watch us lol. I doubt this happens btw it's just what I'd prefer.

[Redux]

20. That would be just shy of half the P5 teams plus 10 more from elsewhere. It would help NU recruit a bit IMO since NU would usually be in and recruits like bowling. It would also help our brand some. The fewer games would have higher ratings. More football junkies will be 'forced' to watch us lol. I doubt this happens btw it's just what I'd prefer.

 

Agreed. If the bowl slate could be reconstructed to like 25 games + playoffs, then tie ins set per conference and for the mid majors.

[GSG]

Where is the "IDGAF" option?

[Sargon]

Where is the "IDGAF" option?

 

It's right next to the STFU button

[GSG]

 

Where is the "IDGAF" option?

 

It's right next to the STFU button

 

 

[Sargon]

Have some coffee and see if it works a bit later.

[knapplc]

I'm of two minds on this. I think there should be maybe 15-20 bowls, or there should be a bowl game for every team that wants to go, regardless of record.

 

The 6-win threshold is a relic, and completely meaningless in modern football. Bowls ceased being "a reward for a good season" in the 1980s. They're vehicles for corporate sponsorship, and have been for so long they're no longer "a new reality." So this debate over whether a 5-win team should go to a bowl means nothing. Seven losses is not materially better or worse than six or five losses. You're not playing for a conference championship at that point, no ranking past the Top 25 really matters, and you're just there for advertising purposes.

 

I'll take any kind of football, though. Give me a Sunbelt game on Tuesdays. MAC on Wednesdays. I'll watch it.

 

Let's have thirteen "real" bowls where the Top 25 play each other, and sort out the end of season rankings that way. Then toss every other team who wants to participate - because some won't - into a pool. Have the fans vote on which matchups they'd like, or maybe the corporate sponsors get to vote, or whatever. Nebraska isn't in the Top 25? Maybe set 'em up with Kansas State or Oklahoma State for a Big 8 rematch. Put Nebraska & BYU together again and let the Huskers have a shot at redemption. Get interesting matchups, play 60 bowl games, and have one of the two teams host the stupid thing.

[BigRedBuster]

Bowl games mean absolutely nothing. Ever since the beginning of time, only a couple have mattered in any given year. The playoff system hasn't done anything to make them any more meaningless.

 

What they are good for is giving the players a week reward after playing a tough few months of football and giving the fans a place to go on vacation over the holidays. That's it. They have never meant anything more.

 

So, to me, it really doesn't matter how many there are as far as a fan. I have never watched anything other than the game Nebraska is in and maybe I might watch one of the few that has to do with the NC.

 

The playoff is a great move in the right direction. I personally would like to see it expanded to 8 teams but that's it.

 

 

PS....I forgot one more factor. Bowl teams get another week or two of practice in the fall. For competitive reasons, I feel it is beneficial to get that for more teams.

[cm husker]

Where's the option: let the market decide?

 

As long as taxpayers aren't asked to foot bills, I don't care how many bowl games there are. The more the merrier, imo

[Redux]

Where's the option: let the market decide?

As long as taxpayers aren't asked to foot bills, I don't care how many bowl games there are. The more the merrier, imo

If it was up to the market teams would play 2 bowls a season. Tax payers will be asked to chip in.

[Red Dead Redemption]

 

Where's the option: let the market decide?

As long as taxpayers aren't asked to foot bills, I don't care how many bowl games there are. The more the merrier, imo

If it was up to the market teams would play 2 bowls a season. Tax payers will be asked to chip in.

Chicken little, is that you?

[Redux]

 

 

Where's the option: let the market decide?

As long as taxpayers aren't asked to foot bills, I don't care how many bowl games there are. The more the merrier, imo

If it was up to the market teams would play 2 bowls a season. Tax payers will be asked to chip in.

Chicken little, is that you?

Nope, just a guy with an opinion.

[Saunders]

Meh, I don't really care. I enjoy the glut of games during the holiday season, and try to watch as many as I can since we won't get anything for another 9 months. Come June, I'll be rewatching old Husker games on my youtube channel, or checking out ones I missed on WatchESPN or BTN.

[Atbone95]

I'm surprised by the sheer number of:

 

"I don't care, let Kansas and UCF play a bowl game!" followed by "Of course I'd never watch that."

 

Uhhhh