Seems more people are getting on the do away with bowls bandwagon, just teams in playoffs should be in post season. Discuss.
Are bowl games going the way of the dinosaur?
- Thread starter Bugeater
- Start date
BREAKING NEWS: Christian McCaffrey Reconsiders
Stanford star RB Christian McCaffrey will now play in the upcoming Sun Bowl. McCaffrey changed his mind after the North Carolina defense agreed to the same terms Iowa followed last year: they promised not to lay a hand on him.
Stanford star RB Christian McCaffrey will now play in the upcoming Sun Bowl. McCaffrey changed his mind after the North Carolina defense agreed to the same terms Iowa followed last year: they promised not to lay a hand on him.
I expect to see more and more of what McCaffery and Fournette are doing in the future with bowl games not being important to them. IMO, a way to make them more interesting to each fan base is allow non transfer redshirts to play in non championsip bowl games. I would love to see that.
I expect to see more and more of what McCaffery and Fournette are doing in the future with bowl games not being important to them. IMO, a way to make them more interesting to each fan base is allow non transfer redshirts to play in non championsip bowl games. I would love to see that.
Just hearing on some different sports talk shows how meaningless bowl games are for the most part and in the discussion ways to cut back the amount of games and somewhere down the road get rid of them altogether. That will take awhile, but it's interesting banter for now.
If the NCAA wanted to protect their interests and the post season, there would be 13 total bowls including the new years six. Guarantee a bowl to every conference champ and then go from there. The problem isnt the playoffs in itself...the problem is far too many bowl games combined with the playoffs.
Give me the rose, orange, fiesta, cotton, sugar, peach, sun, holiday, gator, outback, alamo, liberty, armed forces bowls and thats it. Arguments over the last three or four obviously.
Ten spots guaranteed to conference champs leaves 16 at large spots for other teams. All of the top 25 in the polls would be represented.
Give me the rose, orange, fiesta, cotton, sugar, peach, sun, holiday, gator, outback, alamo, liberty, armed forces bowls and thats it. Arguments over the last three or four obviously.
Ten spots guaranteed to conference champs leaves 16 at large spots for other teams. All of the top 25 in the polls would be represented.
Disagree 8 is too many, pretty soon we will be clamoring for 16. Four protects the regular season, and bowl games still have a place especially if you limit the number of them and they will be special again even with the playoff.
It looks like a business decision. If meaningless bowls still make meaningful money for teams/conferences, then bowls continue.
Yeah, could you imagine how excited people would be to see POB, Farniok, Spielman, etc play? I think it would be pretty cool.
I end up going to Nebraska's bowl game every other year of so. A lot of upside in being able to attend, and little downside. It is an opportunity to hook up with friends/family from other parts of the country, lets me explore new places (never been to Nashville before), lets me go to cool stadiums without paying dearly to go to a pro game, and probably most of all, one last game before the long spring/summer. Plus, a few of them I have been to actually mean something (e.g. Fiesta 1997 season).
I think it is possible. Are there too many? Probably. 15 in 1980, 19 in 1990. 25 in 2000.
When the number was 15, one third (Cotton, Rose, Fiesta, Orange, and Sugar) were all on one day. The others were still fun to watch because back then, there was one college game on per week during the season.
IMO, the playoff needs to be expanded to 8. Any remaining bowl games should be what they were originally meant to be....a reward. It should be basically an exhibition. Redshirts and transfers should be eligible to play as yes these games are meaningless. So of they are meaningless, let teams use them as prep for the next year, as I expect more and more draft eligible players will opt out of playing in the "meaningless" bowls.
We are going to look back someday and 2016 will be considered the start of a new era in college football.
When the number was 15, one third (Cotton, Rose, Fiesta, Orange, and Sugar) were all on one day. The others were still fun to watch because back then, there was one college game on per week during the season.
IMO, the playoff needs to be expanded to 8. Any remaining bowl games should be what they were originally meant to be....a reward. It should be basically an exhibition. Redshirts and transfers should be eligible to play as yes these games are meaningless. So of they are meaningless, let teams use them as prep for the next year, as I expect more and more draft eligible players will opt out of playing in the "meaningless" bowls.
We are going to look back someday and 2016 will be considered the start of a new era in college football.
Last edited:
Have an eight-team playoff, and then let EVERY team in FBS play a post-season exhibition game in hot-weather climates. The playoff games, of course, should be in cities all over the U.S., weather conditions be damned.
Why limit the extra practices and bowl bonuses to only those teams with 5-7 records or better? And sure, why not let some redshirts play instead of seniors who don't want to hurt themselves in preparation for the draft. As it is, 80 teams are playing in the post-season and 48 aren't. Those 48 generally have a tough enough time competing without having to see other programs get an additional 16 practices and exposure.
I'm sure ESPN would find slots for 60 meaningless bowl games, just as they do for 38 of them now.
Why limit the extra practices and bowl bonuses to only those teams with 5-7 records or better? And sure, why not let some redshirts play instead of seniors who don't want to hurt themselves in preparation for the draft. As it is, 80 teams are playing in the post-season and 48 aren't. Those 48 generally have a tough enough time competing without having to see other programs get an additional 16 practices and exposure.
I'm sure ESPN would find slots for 60 meaningless bowl games, just as they do for 38 of them now.
More football is more better, therefore, less bowl games is more worse.
Football games on TV =Good.
No football games on TV =Bad.
Football games on TV =Good.
No football games on TV =Bad.
Way too many bowl games.. I can't even keep up with them . I don't care outside the new year bowls and the playoffs.
I'm watching Kentucky and Louisville play basketball.
Why?
Because BYU and Wyoming are about to play football.
Why?
Because BYU and Wyoming are about to play football.
As long as Western Kentucky and Memphis pull a better rating than Kentucky and Louisville (basketball), there will be crappy bowls in December.
Do away with bowl games..and college football itself is sure to follow.
What's the purpose of some programs even competing if only 4 to 8 teams can make the playoffs, or the season ends.
What's the purpose of some programs even competing if only 4 to 8 teams can make the playoffs, or the season ends.
Last edited:
It was a decent game until BYU stacked the box and WY had no accurate passing game to counter. Looked familiar.
Seems more people are getting on the do away with bowls bandwagon, just teams in playoffs should be in post season. Discuss.
Nope. It's going to take the same thing to kill both off...a large meteorite.
First off I think what McCaffrey is doing is wrong. He is healthy and should play. Fournette may not be completely healthy so that's a slightly different story.
It isn't just about whether a game is relevant or not. The school gave him a scholarship for a free education (how much does undergrad at Stanford cost?) to participate fully the entire season and the post-season. If his team loses because he doesn't play, there are a lot of people that are affected including the coaching staff. A loss is a loss, a stat that will be recorded and used to measure the effectiveness of paid employees. The school's trophy case won't have new hardware. Even the television ratings are effected when star players don't participate and that can hurt recruiting efforts, It's a selfish act, in my opinion.
Also, this trend is very concerning for the longterm health of the sport. We will eventually see players quit midseason or just before the bowl games for even playoff teams if their draft stock is high enough. Would a player that is projected to be a top 5 pick be individually better off not playing in a two-game playoff? Absolutely. But then you have effectively destroyed everything that made college football great. Soon we may see schools trotting out backups all across the bowl season.
I don't know how any college football fan can defend this. It might be inevitable, but there are ways to slow the progression. How about schools require players to participate in every game each season or pay back the scholarship for one whole year?
THIS! I think four is the only acceptable number of teams in order to preserve the integrity of the season. Too many playoff games will reward teams with deeper depth than the most deserving teams.
Doesn't FCS take 24? I actually think 16 could work but at that point all other Bowls would go away I don't think there would much interest at all in Bowls gaems not involving the playoff system if you took 16. I do believe there are way too many bowls so getting rid of the bottom 10 or so I think would be a good idea.
Agreed...if these bowl match-ups were all played on a single Saturday in October, we wouldn't shut up about how many great games there were to watch. Of course, we'd probably have a fair share of people complaining that they needed to spread all of these games out over more than one weekend - i.e., maybe in December and into early January.
I guess we'd just complain, no matter what.
IMO take away the conference alignments and the match ups will get better.Seems more people are getting on the do away with bowls bandwagon, just teams in playoffs should be in post season. Discuss.
Similar threads
