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.