Way too many bowl games

[Rocco]

Honestly, no team should qualify for a bowl game with less than 9 wins. They need to maintain some sort of prestige to the "qualifying" aspect for a bowl game. This would impact Syracuse this year, but so be it. It should be an honor and you should accomplish a true feat to play in a bowl game, not just win 6 games and Ho Hum. I mean the AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl featuring an exhilarating matchup between Ohio and UL-Monroe. Really?

Bowl games have turned into the college whore... everyone's getting in.

 

[Marsh01]

Honestly, no team should qualify for a bowl game with less than 9 wins. They need to maintain some sort of prestige to the "qualifying" aspect for a bowl game. This would impact Syracuse this year, but so be it. It should be an honor and you should accomplish a true feat to play in a bowl game, not just win 6 games and Ho Hum. I mean the AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl featuring an exhilarating matchup between Ohio and UL-Monroe. Really?

Bowl games have turned into the college whore... everyone's getting in.

Amen brother

 

[SmilinBob]

SU better start scheduling Lemoyne, Cortland, OCC, Brockport and Colgate then if the only criteria is 9 wins or more.

 

[shandeezy7]

Honestly, no team should qualify for a bowl game with less than 9 wins. They need to maintain some sort of prestige to the "qualifying" aspect for a bowl game. This would impact Syracuse this year, but so be it. It should be an honor and you should accomplish a true feat to play in a bowl game, not just win 6 games and Ho Hum. I mean the AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl featuring an exhilarating matchup between Ohio and UL-Monroe. Really?

Bowl games have turned into the college whore... everyone's getting in.

You think a lot of the OOC scheduling is weak now, imagine what it would be like with that criteria...

 

[OrangeMojo]

Honestly, no team should qualify for a bowl game with less than 9 wins. They need to maintain some sort of prestige to the "qualifying" aspect for a bowl game. This would impact Syracuse this year, but so be it. It should be an honor and you should accomplish a true feat to play in a bowl game, not just win 6 games and Ho Hum. I mean the AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl featuring an exhilarating matchup between Ohio and UL-Monroe. Really?

Bowl games have turned into the college whore... everyone's getting in.

nonsense - if this stretches out the college football season and provides even semi-interesting games on days where there would otherwise not be college football, then more power to them

gives incentive to teams to not mail it in at the end of the season and not just play out the string (see SU and Pitt after bad starts) and gives a boost to some smaller cities that get to host games and teams from out of the area

the last thing that college football needs is even greater incentive to schedule all guaranteed wins out of conference

 

[CuseIsInTheHouse]

Honestly, no team should qualify for a bowl game with less than 9 wins. They need to maintain some sort of prestige to the "qualifying" aspect for a bowl game. This would impact Syracuse this year, but so be it. It should be an honor and you should accomplish a true feat to play in a bowl game, not just win 6 games and Ho Hum. I mean the AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl featuring an exhilarating matchup between Ohio and UL-Monroe. Really?

Bowl games have turned into the college whore... everyone's getting in.

I understand your point, but it you believe that the extra 15 practices matter, limiting the number of bowl games will only increase the separation between the top-tier programs and the mid-level programs. I think non-bowl eligible teams should still get the extra 15 post-season practices and then the bowl games should be reduced.

 

[orangepassion]

I understand your point, but it you believe that the extra 15 practices matter, limiting the number of bowl games will only increase the separation between the top-tier programs and the mid-level programs. I think non-bowl eligible teams should still get the extra 15 post-season practices and then the bowl games should be reduced.

I agree with you about the post-season practices part.

 

[orangepassion]

My (and others) thoughts on this

http://syracusefan.com/threads/i-loathe-pat-forde.38152/

 

[Rocco]

You think a lot of the OOC scheduling is weak now, imagine what it would be like with that criteria...

Pretty simple - you only get 1 game from a D1AA and 1 game from a lower level FBS school. You can be more specific with the rules than I just stated, but there would absolutely be ways to prevent schools from scheduling peanuts.

 

[Rocco]

I understand your point, but it you believe that the extra 15 practices matter, limiting the number of bowl games will only increase the separation between the top-tier programs and the mid-level programs. I think non-bowl eligible teams should still get the extra 15 post-season practices and then the bowl games should be reduced.

That is a great idea regarding practices. All teams should be eligible to practice until Dec 31st. After that, programs shouldn't be allowed to practice officially until their 15 practices in spring ball.

 

[Moontan]

Reducing the number of bowls and increasing the requirements for bowl eligibility are necessary steps.

I suspect 8 wins might be a more realistic goal. Heck, even 7 would be an improvement.

With regard to the issue of practices... I would suggest that all teams get 10 post-season practices. Those participating in bowl games would get an extra 5 practices.

 

[Whitey23]

eh, i don't mind the games. Something to watch on miserable winter weeknights.

 

[JoeSU]

I may be in a minority, but the number of football bowl games doesn't bother me any more than the number of early season basketball tournaments or league challenges (BE vs SEC, etc.). I think requiring a winning record is a good place to draw the line, but these games present some intriguing match-ups. No, I don't give a rat's a$$ about the AdvoCare V100 Independence Bowl match-up (UL-Monroe vs. Ohio), but there are a number of games outside the BCS Bowls that I am looking forward to.


When you get down to it, the only game that really matters is the NC game.

 

[SmilinBob]

A friend of mine who coached hs football for many many years tells me each time this subject is brought up.

"Define irony...a bunch of fat guys who root for 18 to 23 year old college kids who work hard to get this opportunity with a remote in their hands screaming there are too many bowls as they reach into their all in one recliner and drink their 12th beer".

Some kids have worked since pop warner/little league to play a game like this (may be their only chance) and yet I'm sure if espn puts a poll up 80% or more would say there are too many bowls. Don't like it, don't watch it but for the name of god why do people feel the need to control every freakon aspect of everything? Let the market determine if there are too many bowls and once they start losing money then I'm sure either some of other sponsor will take over or the bowl will go away. This isn't a participation award and if it were all the schools would go.

 

[xc84]

Oh... The "Way too many bowls thread"...finally!

I don't see an issue. No one really thinks minor bowls mean anything. I hear about "They should not be rewarded for a mediocre season!" stuff. Well, the fact is, the reward is based on the season performance. For a mediocre season, you get a mediocre bowl. It's fitting. Not sure why that bothers people. Fans like it. The players like it. Apparently, some sponsors like it.

 

[SUintheVille]

Well, would you rather watch a football game or a bunch of talking heads on ESPN?

I could see 7-5 though.

 

[SmilinBob]

Well, would you rather watch a football game or a bunch of talking heads on ESPN?

I could see 7-5 though.

Yeah you ain't kidding...let's have another 4 hour show with the ESPN crew talking about Bama vs ND. Holtz is going to make this even more unbearable then it already is. I'll take a Pitt 3-0 win over that yapping just to hear their own voices, they are not the show...the players and coaches are and I think they are forgetting that.

 

[Scooch]

I love football.

We love football.

America loves football.

More football is never a bad thing.

 

[xc84]

Yeah you ain't kidding...let's have another 4 hour show with the ESPN crew talking about Bama vs ND. Holtz is going to make this even more unbearable then it already is. I'll take a Pitt 3-0 win over that yapping just to hear their own voices, they are not the show...the players and coaches are and I think they are forgetting that.

That show was brutal.

 

[SaltineWarrior]

While I grew up believing a post season game was a reward, I think I have come around. High school football usually has a "bowl" game for teams that have losing records and don't make the playoffs. Heck there are several tourneys after the NCAA that allow basketball teams to play (NIT, CBI, CIT). If it was the end of your season or your career, I'm sure you'd like to get one more game in. If people don't want to watch, don't watch.

Ask Louisiana Tech if there are too many bowls.

 

[Chris02M]

9 wins is too exclusive. 7 wins should be the minimum for bowl eligibility

 

[Upstate]

Ask Louisiana Tech if there are too many bowls.

La Tech turned down a bowl invite. They have themselves to blame.

 

[Rocco]

1.) I love football. I can't get enough of it; however, doesn't make it right to have bowls just to include more average to slightly above average teams.

2.) I threw 9 wins out there to begin a discussion. 7 wins only knocks out 12 teams. 8 wins knocks out another 15 teams. All in all - 27 teams (14 games - bowl could pick a 7-5 team if they had to) if it is raised to 8 teams. IMO bowl games should be rewarded to teams with very good seasons (8+ wins).

3.) I love lamp?

 

[xc84]

1.) I love football. I can't get enough of it; however, doesn't make it right to have bowls just to include more average to slightly above average teams.

2.) I threw 9 wins out there to begin a discussion. 7 wins only knocks out 12 teams. 8 wins knocks out another 15 teams. All in all - 27 teams (14 games - bowl could pick a 7-5 team if they had to) if it is raised to 8 teams. IMO bowl games should be rewarded to teams with very good seasons (8+ wins).

3.) I love lamp?

Your whole premise is that getting to a bowl is and should be indicative of some great achievement/honor. It's not and has not been for a while. Of course, getting to a big (e.g. BCS) bowl is an honor...but the rest are not. So, I would say it does not make it right or wrong to have bowls to include average to slightly above average teams. This is a market-driven thing. If the market can't support all these bowls, there will be fewer. If you feel that these bowl games are not worth watching, don't watch. If SU is in a bowl, I'll watch. Frankly, I am happy to have SU in a bowl and to have another chance to see them play.

 

[xc84]

This argument sort of reminds me of the typical argument about how sports figures are paid. "Why should Michael Jordan get paid more than a school teacher? They are educating our children! They are more valuable!"

The fact is, in a capitalistic society, you are not paid based on your value to society. You are paid based on how much revenue you can generate. Football teams can draw fans... even some with not-so-good records. Fans bring in dollars. Bowls are just a way to make some extra cash (directly and/or indirectly) for schools and other stakeholders. That's what bowls are about and it's not right or wrong...just the way it is. They are not about bestowing some great honor upon a team.