Low tier bowls be gone

[Behr]

I'm glad there was a bowl for the gatersuck to lose and one for Mike Leach and his bunch to get embarrassed in. Lol, sure wished we'd hired Mullen or Leach.

 

[LordBolton]

I know it’s highly unlikely because these games are all about the TV and sponsorship money…but what if a team had to win 8 games to be bowl eligible? It would save us the torture of these bojangles cheddar bo biscuit bowls and the like. Plus it would make the bowls mean more and maybe kids wouldn’t elect to sit out. Just a thought

I have yet to watch a bowl game. I'll watch Tennessee, and possibly the playoff games. Only Tennessee's is a guaranteed watch. They can put every team in America in a bowl game if they want to, it's no skin off my nose. If it makes somebody some $, go for it.

 

[Jake Tate]

Yeah, as with most here, I’ll watch as much college football as I can. I watched Auburn Houston yesterday and enjoyed it.

 

[Jake Tate]

Also, SEC is now 0-4 in bowl games. Not a good look. We need to win ours for sure

 

[BearBryant]

I know it’s highly unlikely because these games are all about the TV and sponsorship money…but what if a team had to win 8 games to be bowl eligible? It would save us the torture of these bojangles cheddar bo biscuit bowls and the like. Plus it would make the bowls mean more and maybe kids wouldn’t elect to sit out. Just a thought

If you don't like these lower tier bowls; don't watch them. What would you rather the TV space be filled with? Mindless episodes of 30 for 30?

 

[Panthro]

I know it’s highly unlikely because these games are all about the TV and sponsorship money…but what if a team had to win 8 games to be bowl eligible? It would save us the torture of these bojangles cheddar bo biscuit bowls and the like. Plus it would make the bowls mean more and maybe kids wouldn’t elect to sit out. Just a thought

The torture??
You know you don’t have to watch those games, right?

 

[SoddyAllVol]

The torture??
You know you don’t have to watch those games, right?

Easy snarf

 

[Boca Vol]

They lost $44k against annual revenues over $127 million. It's not like they had to turn the heat off and clip coupons to make ends meet.

I agree but that's not the point. The point is that a lot of teams lose money on their bowl trip.

 

[Behr]

Lol, all I heard was " He might not win championships in the SEC, but at least Mike Leach pressers would be entertaining". Wonder if MSU was happy with his "presser" after the embarrassment?

 

[savannahfan]

I know it’s highly unlikely because these games are all about the TV and sponsorship money…but what if a team had to win 8 games to be bowl eligible? It would save us the torture of these bojangles cheddar bo biscuit bowls and the like. Plus it would make the bowls mean more and maybe kids wouldn’t elect to sit out. Just a thought

If you hold these games in such low regard then DON'T TURN THEM ON!!!! Just watch some meaningless basketball game or rerun of NCIS of other important show.

 

[savannahfan]

Over saturated. Diluted. Just takes away some prestige. Oh and yes I do do other things when a crappy game is on. Didn’t mean to offend you buddy.

Offend??? Don't think that is what you did. You just voiced an idea that not too many folks would agree with. Better you had just kept doing your "other things" and not brought all this attention to yourself.

 

[savannahfan]

The thing I love is IT'S ANOTHER FOOTBALL GAME!! What I dislike is the lackluster performance of some teams. Like the way the SEC teams have played so far. The effort I have seen so far by SEC teams has been embarrassing.

 

[Volunteer forever]

I’ll never understand this line of thinking. I have a serious question to anyone who thinks that there are “too many” bowl games….why not just watch something else instead? Why do you care?

I agree. Gives us fans more football to watch

 

[hog88]

I watch most of the games that I can but it wouldn't bother me a bit if they did away with 1/2 or more of the bowl games. Just let every D1 team have the extra practices.

 

[DaddyChad]

Also, SEC is now 0-4 in bowl games. Not a good look. We need to win ours for sure

Looks fine to me.

 

[hog88]

Looks fine to me.

Yep, don't care either. The SEC is borderline pathetic outside of 3 maybe 4 programs.

 

[JohnWardForever]

I know it’s highly unlikely because these games are all about the TV and sponsorship money…but what if a team had to win 8 games to be bowl eligible? It would save us the torture of these bojangles cheddar bo biscuit bowls and the like. Plus it would make the bowls mean more and maybe kids wouldn’t elect to sit out. Just a thought

WHY so Many Bowl Games and spaced out to play every day? Las Vegas ! That one is too easy..

 

[JohnWardForever]

Also, SEC is now 0-4 in bowl games. Not a good look. We need to win ours for sure

Last Year, the SEC went 7-2. So law of averages----

 

[VolGee4]

If it wasn't for the playoff split of the pie, most teams would lose money from their bowl game. Here's an article from when UT play Indiana a few years ago.

Indiana football lost money playing in Gator Bowl against Tennessee

Trust me, if there wasn't a net gain in playing, teams wouldn't play. These games aren't continued to be played (and added) if everyone is losing money.

SEC postseason payout (saturdaydownsouth.com)

This is 7 years ago, so I am sure it's even higher now. Orange Bowl paid out $27.5 million? to MSU, which goes to the conference. They all make money.

 

[hog88]

Trust me, if there wasn't a net gain in playing, teams wouldn't play. These games aren't continued to be played (and added) if everyone is losing money.

SEC postseason payout (saturdaydownsouth.com)

This is 7 years ago, so I am sure it's even higher now. Orange Bowl paid out $27.5 million? to MSU, which goes to the conference. They all make money.

Those are major bowls, what was teh payout for the Birmingham or Liberty Bowls and how much did those bowls cost the participants?

 

[GUNTERSVOL]

P5 schools don’t lose money on bowls because there is a split of all payouts among the conference teams. I read a Forbes article from about 6-7 years ago that said maybe 10-20 schools lose money in the bottom tier bowls.

BUT, they may consider it money well spent to get the prolonged exposure, and ESPECIALLY the additional practice days. It is possible that more schools would prefer the ability to have the same number of practices bowl participants do without going. I don't know why they need to keep that practice in place. Give everybody practice days bowl or not. One less set of differential rules to enforce.

I would like to think we may push some of the lower tier bowl eligible down and the lowest out by expanding the playoffs to 16 teams and using 8 early bowls to get to elite 8 and 4 lower bowls to get to the current final 4 format, reseeding or lottery as necessary to avoid rematches, minimize travel or whatever. Have to believe every bowl gets better teams all the way down the line. Let everybody practice. Who needs it more than non bowl eligible teams? If the playoff makes the money I think it would, distribute the money to eligible teams not selected or every team.... once again whatever works for the masses. There is of course an 8 team format that uses 4 bowls only to get back to final 4. That would for sure allow a rotation of the New Years 6 bowls , Rose, Orange, Sugar, Cotton, Fiesta, Peach and add one more, either fixed or rotational in either plan. Bidding would go up for the next tiers down. have to think the quality of games goes up down stream.

 

[SoddyAllVol]

Offend??? Don't think that is what you did. You just voiced an idea that not too many folks would agree with. Better you had just kept doing your "other things" and not brought all this attention to yourself.

Thank you for that

 

[VolGee4]

Those are major bowls, what was teh payout for the Birmingham or Liberty Bowls and how much did those bowls cost the participants?

The Birmingham Bowl payout in 2019 was 1.375 million, and Auburn went this year. So, their expenses were lower. The Liberty Bowl pays out a combined $6 million to both schools, so I presume $3 million each. It is roughly 10th in the bowl payout rankings.

The SEC has a formula for payouts where each school in a big enough bowl gets roughly a maximum of $2 million for expenses and then the rest get thrown into a pot to be evenly distributed among schools. So, you obviously want more schools to make bowl games.

I am not suggesting that teams don't lose money. Anyone who goes to the Hawaii Bowl loses money. The Bahamas Bowl is not a money maker. I am sure there are some Florida bowls where teams don't make any real money. But P5 schools make a net positive with bowls, and they wouldn't be playing them if it was a net negative.

Linked is an article from 2015 from our TaxSlayer Bowl:
UT had a net positive of $165,000 from the money that the conference gave to them for bowl expenses. They made more, but that was put into the distribution pot for conference members.

Bowl expenses were more than $1.25 million, but UT claims profit (columbiadailyherald.com)

 

[stonesk]

Less college football is never the answer!

 

[Winchester73]

Something seems overlooked throughout this discussion - quality vs quantity. More games = less quality, meaning many games may not have a lot of eye candy. I would think, which seems happen by default, the bigger the bowl the higher the quality of the matchup. And I get the idea of meaningless “bowls” … but hasn’t there always been only a FEW that could/would matter in the final rankings? Wasn’t it #8 TN that knocked off #1 Miami in the Sugar Bowl … Vols in my opinion were the BEST in the nation at that point. Finished 4th … ? after the 85 season.