With expanded playoffs, what is everyone’s opinion about bowls? Frankly, I see bowls evolving in the same manner as the NIT for basketball. As more teams were added to the NCAA playoffs, the less the NIT mattered.
It's a strange question you ask.
If you only care about national titles, then every non-playoff bowl has been "irrelevant" since the BCS was introduced in 1998. Tennessee and Florida State played for the crown that winter, and everyone else was in an "irrelevant" bowl.
Right?
So how can things be _more_ irrelevant now? Irrelevant is irrelevant. Going to 12 teams, or some day probably 16, doesn't add to the irrelevance of the non-playoff bowls. They already were, by this logic.*
So I totally don't get the question.
And, btw, I don't agree with the premise, either. There's more to college football than a national title each year. The sport is rich with intermediate goals and traditions and sources of pride. If you don't pay any attention to all the rest, you're missing 90% of the sport.
Go Vols!
* In fact, one could argue the exact opposite of your point. Today, there are 11 playoff / bowl games involved in deciding the national title. Back when the BCS was introduced, there was only 1 "relevant" game. As recently as two years ago, there were only 3 matches of "relevance." Based on that, one could be forgiven for concluding the bowls are once again becoming MORE relevant. If you take this viewpoint at all.
