We need a new Bowl selection system

[mantonio]

If the BCS has become an integral part of college football, the ENTIRE Bowl Setup needs to be revamped to reflect the reality of the game.

First, they get rid of the pre-requisite of 6 wins to make a Bowl if they are letting lower conference teams in with much easier schedules.

The fact that Temple & Wyoming are Bowling above the Big East schools that didn't get in is ridiculous.

The setup is simple:

You use the BCS to rank every team in Div.1, & those which are ranked highest get all the available Bowl spaces.

Strength of schedule should figure in more prominently than wins & losses. This setup would actually discourage BCS conference teams from scheduling weak teams, like Rutgers does...

You would see a few teams with a losing record get in, but those teams are still better than a Temple, Rhode Island or Wyoming...

 

[adk(roc)CUSE]

yeah cuz 5-7 'Cuse v 4-8 Arizona in the myspace.com bowl would be glorious. The little teams earn their little bowls, let them have their day.

 

[mantonio]

Maybe they should just create more little bowls for the littler teams. Why let an inferior team keep a BCS caliber team out of the Bowls?

That Syracuse or Arizona team would beat down Temple or Wyoming in a game, so how exciting would the Bowl between those little teams be?

I would rather see 4-8 Arizona play a 5-7 Syracuse, & so would all the rest of college football fans...

 

[skurey]

we need less damn bowls

 

[OrangeCrush22]

If you can't go at least .500 in a season, then you don't deserve a bowl. Especially when all teams now play an FCS team.

 

[BlackKnight76]

Are you really trying to argue that we should go bowling this year?

Good lord...

 

[mantonio]

Are you really trying to argue that we should go bowling this year?

Good lord...

I am saying there at least 5 teams that deserve a Bowl over teams like Temple & Wyoming. Can you say with a straight face, those teams are as good as Arizona or Syracuse?

They only have a winning record because they play 90% of their schedule against teams ranked below 100.

Those teams would rank below Syracuse in the Big East, so why are they given a reward for taking it easy with their schedule.

If you don't play a BCS schedule, you should not be allowed to go to a Bowl, regardless of your record.

 

[repos]

I am saying there at least 5 teams that deserve a Bowl over teams like Temple & Wyoming. Can you say with a straight face, those teams are as good as Arizona or Syracuse?

They only have a winning record because they play 90% of their schedule against teams ranked below 100.

Those teams would rank below Syracuse in the Big East, so why are they given a reward for taking it easy with their schedule.

If you don't play a BCS schedule, you should not be allowed to go to a Bowl, regardless of your record.

I can say with a straight face if these teams like Temple & Wyoming played Cuse'. The game would be close... Or we would throw the game away with stupid penalties costly mistakes.

 

[qdawgg]

I can say with a straight face if these teams like Temple & Wyoming played Cuse'. The game would be close... Or we would throw the game away with stupid penalties costly mistakes.

I agree. At this point if we were in a bowl with a really good D2 school we might struggle.

 

[NKR1978]

I am saying there at least 5 teams that deserve a Bowl over teams like Temple & Wyoming. Can you say with a straight face, those teams are as good as Arizona or Syracuse

You are right that there are more deserving teams than Wyoming and temple, but there is no way Syracuse is one of them.
Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk

 

[mantonio]

You are right that there are more deserving teams than Wyoming and temple, but there is no way Syracuse is one of them.
Sent from my ADR6400L using Tapatalk

Maybe so, but let the have a shot against other BCS schools for the Bowl slots, & get rid of the non-bcs schools from consideration.

 

[SWC75]

I remember when I was a kid I convinced my parent to buy me a book I saw in a store called "Big Bowl Football". It covered all the Bowl games from the beginning of the Rose Bowl through the early 60's. it had picutres, box scores, the stories of the games and of the individuals involved. All the teams in it had had great seasons, the best years in their schools's history. The New Year's Day games were between the top teams in the country and the handful of "lesser" bowls were between teams that weren't quite that good. Almost all bowl teams were undefeated or had a single loss or maybe two. A three loss team in a bowl looked a little odd.

I understand the realities of the resent day- including that decisions that are made are all aobut the money. It's a plutocracy, not a meritocracy. I also can see that the present system is a help to schools like Syracuse who are trying to rebuild their programs.

Still, I will go to my grave believing that the bowls should represent what they seemed to in that book. If I had a magic wand, (and that's what it would take), I'd have a dozen bowls, with the top four on New Year's Day and the rest before that. There would be an 8 win minimum or a top 25 ranking and all 8 wins would have to be against teams in the Division. And that seems generous.