Which Bowls would you cut?

#4
#4
There is no purpose in cutting bowls. Whether it’s 20 bowls or 40 bowls. The national championship is the goal of most P5 programs and the G5 schools just are happy to get to a bowl.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#5
#5
Once you’re out of contention for the playoff, your season is over. Problem solved. Even if it’s in September
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#6
#6
I agree. No reason to cut any. The New Years 6 bowls are the only ones that mean anything really. Other than that, just enjoy the games.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#12
#12
They could probably cut some and most people wouldn't know. I'd be interested to know how many bowl games people actually watch.

I know my viewing pics up after Christmas when the better matchups start taking place.
 
#13
#13
As long as money is to be made....more and more bowls will appear.
 
#14
#14
UTK said:
I agree. No reason to cut any. The New Years 6 bowls are the only ones that mean anything really. Other than that, just enjoy the games.
Click to expand...

None of them mean anything other than playoff. The name of a prestigious bowl is a nice thing to put on your resume, but as a fan, if there is a mismatch in the Rose Bowl, I'll be more excited about the Sun Bowl.
 
#15
#15
The only change I would make is to let all teams have the same number of practice sessions whether they go to a bowl or not. Most schools lose money going to bowls.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#16
#16
hog88 said:
The only change I would make is to let all teams have the same number of practice sessions whether they go to a bowl or not. Most schools lose money going to bowls.
Click to expand...

I can see this being beneficial to the teams not going to bowls. The Sr's wouldn't necessarily be involved other than to be on the "scout" team. It would give the coaching staff, whether existing or new, to see what they have to work with going into next season.
 
#17
#17
I wish they'd go back to the old system where each conference champ was guaranteed a certain bowl, and then every other bowl just bid on the teams they wanted. If all of the bowls outside of the NY6 had to compete for the best teams rather than having conference tie-ins, we'd get better, and more varied, match-ups.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#18
#18
bamawriter said:
I wish they'd go back to the old system where each conference champ was guaranteed a certain bowl, and then every other bowl just bid on the teams they wanted. If all of the bowls outside of the NY6 had to compete for the best teams rather than having conference tie-ins, we'd get better, and more varied, match-ups.
Click to expand...

Isn't that still done, at least to a certain extent? Isn't the SEC champ guaranteed at least the Sugar, and if the SEC champ is involved in the playoff it goes to SEC #2, SEC #3 (like Auburn last year), etc?
 
#19
#19
"There are too many bowls" is the dumbest sports complaint ever.

Those bowls exist because there is a willing sponsor and TV network to broadcast it. If you think the game is a dud, then don't watch. If most people agreed with you, then the game wouldn't exist.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#20
#20
05_never_again said:
Isn't that still done, at least to a certain extent? Isn't the SEC champ guaranteed at least the Sugar, and if the SEC champ is involved in the playoff it goes to SEC #2, SEC #3 (like Auburn last year), etc?
Click to expand...

Right. The conference champs are guaranteed certain bids, which I wouldn't change.

However, I would do away with all conference tie-ins outside of the NY6.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#21
#21
bamawriter said:
Right. The conference champs are guaranteed certain bids, which I wouldn't change.

However, I would do away with all conference tie-ins outside of the NY6.
Click to expand...

Are conference tie-ins something that the NCAA mandated, or did all the bowls agree to cooperate and do that? The bowls are independent from each other, the conferences, and the NCAA - is there anything preventing a bowl from unilaterally trying to compete/bid for a particular team, even if they aren't their conference tie-in? Seems like if a single bowl started doing that then all the conference tie-ins would go away.

If they were allowed to, the bowls would compete for teams in the geographic region of the site of their game anyway (which is the entire point behind conference tie-ins), so I'm not sure much would actually change. But I like the idea, and it probably would lead to slightly better matchups, particularly when the de facto "mandated" ACC vs. SEC matchup is looking weak because the SEC was deeper than the SEC that year, or vice versa.
 
#22
#22
05_never_again said:
Are conference tie-ins something that the NCAA mandated, or did all the bowls agree to cooperate and do that?
Click to expand...

I don't think there's any kind of requirement. I think it's something that started happening as the remaining independent teams (outside of Notre Dame) started joining conferences (and even Notre Dame is now attached to the ACC's bowl tie-ins). The bowls wanted to guarantee decent match-ups, so they essentially bid in advance by entering into deals with the conferences rather than directly with the teams.

It's probably true that the bowls would continue to have a geographic bias, but I think some bowls would step out a bit. For instance, Nashville is a tourist attraction with appeal beyond the Southeast. Imagine a Music City Bowl that pits LSU vs USC.
 
#23
#23
Boca Vol said:
They could probably cut some and most people wouldn't know. I'd be interested to know how many bowl games people actually watch.

I know my viewing pics up after Christmas when the better matchups start taking place.
Click to expand...

It's hard to keep up with since the names change every few years as the sponsors change. I miss the Poulan-Weedeater Bowl. The best sponsor name ever. I guess the Idaho Tater Bowl might be the best name now.
 
#24
#24
bamawriter said:
I don't think there's any kind of requirement. I think it's something that started happening as the remaining independent teams (outside of Notre Dame) started joining conferences (and even Notre Dame is now attached to the ACC's bowl tie-ins). The bowls wanted to guarantee decent match-ups, so they essentially bid in advance by entering into deals with the conferences rather than directly with the teams.

It's probably true that the bowls would continue to have a geographic bias, but I think some bowls would step out a bit. For instance, Nashville is a tourist attraction with appeal beyond the Southeast. Imagine a Music City Bowl that pits LSU vs USC.
Click to expand...
That's a big part of it. I also think the conferences wanted to make sure that their teams that aren't necessarily brand names like Vandy, Duke, Baylor, ECT didn't get left out. That's why many of these conferences have up to 9 or 10 contracted bowls.
 
#25
#25
I would cut the bread bowl. Actually, now that I think of it, I would just tear it to pieces.


I'll be here all day, folks.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top