NCAA allows UCLA Bowl waiver

[kingottoiii]

So they get in if they lose to Oregon, ending up 6-7. Sorry but that is BS.

 

[gmoney44]

That is a hot pile of garbage. They should just have every team play a bowl game regardless of the record. More then half of the current bowls already don't mean squat.

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk

 

[orange03]

We need to eliminate 10 Bowl games.

 

[mantonio]

I guess this means ANY team from here on out can get into a Bowl if they lose their conference title game & have a losing record? The NCAA has painted themselves into a corner with this decision...

 

[SU2NASA]

One year they're going to run out of bowl eligible teams. It's almost happened. Only one bowl-eligible team didn't go to a bowl last year, and there are more bowls this year.

 

[OrangeMuskyFish]

On this particular issue, I don't have a problem. If we were "forced" to play for a shot at a BCS bowl, you know damn well every single one of us would be pissed if the alternative resulted in no bowl at all.

On the issue of bowls overall... I wish people would stop crying about them. "Boo hoo hoo, football is supposed to be the most popular game in the country yet it makes my heart sad to see so many bowl games. Boo hoo hoo." Do you really need a handwritten note from the FCC that states that the number of bowl games covered is not considered offensive, and you have the right to NOT turn on the channel??? These are glorified exhibitions, always have been. There is a total of ONE that REALLY matters. It's a reward to the fans, players, and everyone with a bank account, at the end of the season.

 

[orange03]

On this particular issue, I don't have a problem. If we were "forced" to play for a shot at a BCS bowl, you know damn well every single one of us would be pissed if the alternative resulted in no bowl at all.

On the issue of bowls overall... I wish people would stop crying about them. "Boo hoo hoo, football is supposed to be the most popular game in the country yet it makes my heart sad to see so many bowl games. Boo hoo hoo." Do you really need a handwritten note from the FCC that states that the number of bowl games covered is not considered offensive, and you have the right to NOT turn on the channel??? These are glorified exhibitions, always have been. There is a total of ONE that REALLY matters. It's a reward to the fans, players, and everyone with a bank account, at the end of the season.

Some people have a problem with teams being rewarded for mediocrity.

 

[Chip]

This is a weird one. Assuming they lose to Oregon, they would be punished by USC's wrongdoings. UCLA shouldn't be in that conf championship game, they know they're not ready to be in that game, but they have to because USC isn't eligible.

Flip side would be to defer it to another team in the Pac 12 South, but how would that look?

Could they be the first team in college football history to finish 6-8?

 

[IthacaMatt]

So they get in if they lose to Oregon, ending up 6-7. Sorry but that is BS.

It is BS, but if you have more bowl slots than 50% of the teams in NCAA football, then this is going to happen. There needs to be a cap, so that there are only enough bowl slots for the top 40 teams, rather than 60 or so like they have now.

 

[OrangeMuskyFish]

Some people have a problem with teams being rewarded for mediocrity.

But why? It's not like we are talking about adding another round to the NCAA tourney. I can see how there would be two divided sides to that argument. In this case we are talking about exhibitions that are about entertainment and really don't effect anybody negatively that I can see. So why the bitterness about the number of bowls? The fact that you don't like the quality of the games just means that you don't have to watch. But obviously there are people that want to watch, money to be made, players that want to play, schools that want the pub, coaches that want the practices, etc, etc, etc.

 

[IthacaMatt]

But why? It's not like we are talking about adding another round to the NCAA tourney. I can see how there would be two divided sides to that argument. In this case we are talking about exhibitions that are about entertainment and really don't effect anybody negatively that I can see. So why the bitterness about the number of bowls? The fact that you don't like the quality of the games just means that you don't have to watch. But obviously there are people that want to watch, money to be made, players that want to play, schools that want the pub, coaches that want the practices, etc, etc, etc.

Because none of the bowls matter anymore. 90% of them are meaningless exhibition games between schools that aren't that great.

It used to be that I was glued to the TV when the last bowl games were ALL played on New Year's Day. Those were the days. There was nothing like it, and it seems like it has been almost a generation since fans have had that.

 

[OrangeMuskyFish]

Because none of the bowls matter anymore. 90% of them are meaningless exhibition games between schools that aren't that great.

It used to be that I was glued to the TV when the last bowl games were ALL played on New Year's Day. Those were the days. There was nothing like it, and it seems like it has been almost a generation since fans have had that.

Mmmm, gotta disagree Ithaca. I think you, and perhaps others, are overplaying the nostalgia card. None of the bowls really mattered THEN either. OK, cool, the big bowls used to be all on New Year's Day or whatever. But back then they didn't even have the ONE bowl that actually pits #1 and #2 against each other for the title every year.

 

[orange03]

Mmmm, gotta disagree Ithaca. I think you, and perhaps others, are overplaying the nostalgia card. None of the bowls really mattered THEN either. OK, cool, the big bowls used to be all on New Year's Day or whatever. But back then they didn't even have the ONE bowl that actually pits #1 and #2 against each other for the title every year.

Bottom line teams shouldn't be rewarded for being at best mediocre.

 

[OrangeMuskyFish]

Bottom line teams shouldn't be rewarded for being at best mediocre.

Agreed. But I guess my way of looking at that quote is a bit different than yours. If a bowl is willing to pick them, fans willing to watch, and advertisers willing to line everyone's pockets... then I guess that means they "deserve" to play in a meaningless exhibition. Hell, I have a bigger problem with the fact that they could possibly represent their conference in a BCS game... whether or not they go to a bowl is nothing compared to that, if we are talking about deserving.

 

[rosconey]

bowls are nothing more than a end of season money grab-most schools loose money because its so deluted-

 

[orange03]

Agreed. But I guess my way of looking at that quote is a bit different than yours. If a bowl is willing to pick them, fans willing to watch, and advertisers willing to line everyone's pockets... then I guess that means they "deserve" to play in a meaningless exhibition. Hell, I have a bigger problem with the fact that they could possibly represent their conference in a BCS game... whether or not they go to a **** bowl is nothing compared to that, if we are talking about deserving.

I understand why they do it, it's more money to go around. I just don't agree with it.