ACC Bowl “Beauty Contest” to Change

It looks like this year’s arguable shafting (depending on your point of view) of Boston College and Georgia Tech will be less likely in the future, per this Atlanta Journal-Constitution article. Key excerpt:

In the future, the Charlotte, Nashville and San Francisco bowls will tell the ACC which teams they want, the schools will tell the ACC which bowls they want, and ACC commissioner John Swofford and assistant commissioner Mike Finn will “go in a smoke-filled room” and make the final decisions, Cavalli said.

Personally, I find all approaches to the bowl selection situation filled with pitfalls, inadequacies, and nonsense. I do see some point, in that we’d all be highly pissed if the NFL or MLB had a rule requiring that at least one NY team participated in the playoffs, to ensure TV ratings (i.e., market forces). But then again, the bowls are “different” in that they are just glorified exhibitions, not meaningful post-season that is utilized in every other sport at every level above middle school.

The only true solution would be to have a 16-team playoff that EVERY major D-1 team could reasonably have a chance to make once in awhile (if they run their program right), and let the remaining bowls do whatever the hell they want (just like the NIT). But what about preserving beloved/antequated “traditions” like the Peach Bowl? Oh, wait, now it’s JUST the Chick-Fil-A Bowl. Is the only argument left really “half the teams end as winners!” crap? More to come.

About BJD95

1995 NC State graduate, sufferer of Les and MOC during my entire student tenure. An equal-opportunity objective critic and analyst of Wolfpack sports.

General Media NCS Football

22 Responses to ACC Bowl “Beauty Contest” to Change

  1. Class of '74 12/16/2005 at 11:44 AM #

    The last time I checked it’s still a free country so let the darn bowl choose. Their paying the conference the money and the schools get the same share so who cares. I’d rather have the bowls select than have Swofford do it. Can you imagine if UNC and State are competing for the Gator or Peach and Swofford chooses UNC?

  2. newswolf 12/16/2005 at 12:08 PM #

    I know everyone loves talking about a playoff, but to me the best part about college football is that the entire season is a mini playoff. The drama builds each week.

  3. BJD95 12/16/2005 at 12:14 PM #

    The NFL has playoffs, and I still find plenty of drama in that regular season. Only difference is that the level of excitement goes UP several notches in the post-season, not down.

    Remember also that there are rules keeping bowls from taking Notre Dame every year, no matter what (and I don’t think anyone disagrees with that). If it’s the ONLY form of post-season, I think you have to put SOME rein on the selection system.

  4. newswolf 12/16/2005 at 12:33 PM #

    So will this playoff be played at the higher seeded team?

  5. Cardiac95 12/16/2005 at 12:52 PM #

    Exactly how will Johnny S. parse conference records into bowl bids when every team is playing a different conference schedule? Even within a division, every team is playing a different conference schedule.

    So whose to say 2 losses to Miami & Va Tech are better or worse than 2 wins over Duke & Wake (with all other conference games being equal)?

  6. VaWolf82 12/16/2005 at 1:23 PM #

    [blockquote]Swofford said the ACC made its deal with the Emerald Bowl with full knowledge that many ACC fans won’t be able to afford a cross-country trip. “Obviously, that was a factor and is a factor,” he said. “Our schools understand that but felt that San Francisco is a very attractive destination. . . . The overall package was very attractive to our schools despite the fact that it’s difficult for a large number of our fans to travel.”[/blockquote]

    I suspect that the biggest attraction was that the Emerald Bowl had a spot open.

  7. choppack 12/16/2005 at 3:19 PM #

    Well, just chalk this up as to another reason not to listen to the ACC when they come knocking about a bowl tie-in.

    Someone needs to tell Johnny boy just whom is doing whom the biggest favor. The Charlotte and Nashville bowls could pull out as free agents and pick whomever the heck they want.

    Isn’t funny, it wasn’t an issue last year when the Heels benefitted from this stuff, but as soon as his alma mater doesn’t – he’s outraged! Is there anything that screams less integrity than Swofford and this other nut deciding who goes where? There’s an honesty to letting bowls choose whomever they want.

    And I also wonder how they’d handle this year:
    Charlotte: We want Clemson, then NC State
    Nashville: We want State, then UVa, then GaTech
    San Frisco: We’ll take whomever is left
    Boise: When do we get to pick again?

    Clemson: We want 1st Atlanta, 2nd Charlotte
    BC: We want Atlanta, we want Orlando, we want Charlotte, we don’t Boise -who does?
    State: If I was AD, “We want Charlotte, then Nashville, then Frisco, then Boise” Lee Fowler probably said, “Aw shucks, we’ll go whereever. We’ve got UT on the schedule in football, are you going to go to bat for us – if not that’s cool, we don’t have a written contract or anything.”
    GaTech: We want Charlotte, Nashville or Frisco, anywhere but Boise
    UVa: We want Charlotte, Nashville or Frisco, anywhere but Boise

    Swofford – so you guys all want to go the same place, huh? And GaTech and BC, the bowls don’t want you…Well, they’ll just have to lose money!!

    Next year: “I don’t understand why you’re pulling out of our agreement. We gave you a Top 25 team and agreed to buy 10k tickets.”

    “Yes, I understand that only 15000 people were in that big arena and a lot of the children of cooks and waitresses didn’t get much for Christmas, but darnit, we’ve got to protect the integrity of this system!”

  8. packfan1980 12/16/2005 at 3:19 PM #

    Isn’t it interesting that this has come up now that NCSU is going to a bowl and UNC is not. And on top of that it is near home so more of our fans can go. Good ole Swoffy hates that. I agree with Class of 74 let the darn bowls decide who they want..

  9. VaWolf82 12/17/2005 at 9:04 AM #

    I think that some people need to quit looking for black helicopters. I think that this agreement has far more to do with BC, GT, and potentially WF, than it does about State…..and I think that it has more to do with BC than anyone else.

    We discussed parts of this situation in the various entries on the bowl selections. Swofford is not happy that bowls are picking based on ticket sales, rather than actual records. It should now be obvious, that if the bowls pick freely, then BC will nearly always head west to either SF or Boise. This deal gives Swofford the ability to make sure that BC goes somewhere else. It will also allow the conference to rotate the Boise bowl to “spread the pain.”

    There will be plenty of opportunity to complain, and to complain loudly if Swofford begins to show favoritism to UNC or against State. I suspect that Johnny had to make some promises to Charlotte that are not necessarily in writing. But in any event, time will tell.

  10. Jeff 12/17/2005 at 9:58 AM #

    My perspective is aligned with newswolf.

    Two of my biggest problems with the “answer” of a playoff system is how few people consider the logistical issues with the idea and the consequences of the idea.

    Some of which include the impact on regular season scheduling (and importance of reg season games) and how do you choose the seedings/rankings of the teams since you will obviously be playing all of the games on the home field of the higher seeded team. (Which, has an awful lot of problems with it)

  11. Joe 12/17/2005 at 12:22 PM #

    What is the problem with playing playoff games at home? It works well for 1-AA and every pro sport. Giving teams the incentive to play hard all year to wrap up home playoff games is a good idea. I’m sure a Florida team would not slack off late in the year if it meant they could avoid playing a game in Michigan.

  12. Cardiac95 12/17/2005 at 3:10 PM #

    AT MOST….Swofford should simply extend the picking guidelines given to the Gator & Peach Bowls to all the bowls…..pick a team within 1 Win of the pick you have.

    That guarantees that a team could only fall so far from their “earned” position AND it keeps Swofford’s grubby little hands out of the cookie jar.

  13. Jeff 12/17/2005 at 6:42 PM #

    What is the problem with playing playoff games at home? It works well for 1-AA and every pro sport. Giving teams the incentive to play hard all year to wrap up home playoff games is a good idea. I’m sure a Florida team would not slack off late in the year if it meant they could avoid playing a game in Michigan.

    A couple of things.

    First, I thought that a playoff was all about being ‘for the fans’? Who can afford to travel from Raleigh to watch the Pack play at UCLA one weekend, and then make arrangements (and take vacation) to go see our match-up in Miami….and then go to Michigan six days later? It’s not about being for the fans at all.

    Second, who chooses the seeding? Seriously…I totally agree with your comments about the “incentive” to have a great regular season. Well, with that said…WHY does there have to be a playoff? Why can’t you pick two teams who took advantage of that incentive during the regular season?

    Home field means EVERYTHING in college football. Last year, who would you have seeded/chosen to host the semi-final match up of Auburn vs Oklahoma? If you say OU…then why have a playoff? You are admitting that OU was “seeded” ahead of Auburn because of their regular season performance. What is the difference of having a ‘playoff’ between 2 teams or 16 teams?

  14. bcudd17 12/17/2005 at 8:35 PM #

    I DONT UNDERSTAND ALL THE FUSS.WHERE DID BOSTON COLLEGE GET SHAFTED.ARE THEY BETTER THAN CLEMSON FOR THAT CHAMPS SPORTS BOWL AND WHY WOULD THEY WANT TO GO TO THE SAME BOWL TWICE.SO THAT LEFT THEM WHERE THEY ARE AT PLAYING THE BETTER TEAM THAN EITHER STATE OR CLEMSON.WHATS THE BIG DEAL, THEY ARE PLAYING BETTER COMPETION AND THE PAY OUT IS THE SAME AS THE BOWLS THAT CLEMSON AND STATE ARE PLAYING IN.BASICALLY THE ACC HAS THE GATOR AND PEACH WHICH ARE FINE BOWLS AND THEN JUST A COLLECTION OF STIFFS.SO WHAT AFTER THE PEACH AND GATOR

  15. VaWolf82 12/17/2005 at 8:36 PM #

    Kill the caps lock if you actually want someone to read your posts.

  16. choppack 12/17/2005 at 9:02 PM #

    “We discussed parts of this situation in the various entries on the bowl selections. Swofford is not happy that bowls are picking based on ticket sales, rather than actual records. It should now be obvious, that if the bowls pick freely, then BC will nearly always head west to either SF or Boise. This deal gives Swofford the ability to make sure that BC goes somewhere else. It will also allow the conference to rotate the Boise bowl to “spread the pain.â€?

    There will be plenty of opportunity to complain, and to complain loudly if Swofford begins to show favoritism to UNC or against State. I suspect that Johnny had to make some promises to Charlotte that are not necessarily in writing. But in any event, time will tell.”

    You see, there’s nothing worse in any kind of human interaction than when someone says, “Trust, me.” Essentially, that is what is Swofford is saying. “Trust me, I know what is in the best interest of the conference – and trust me, I’ll execute accordingly.”

    This is crap – especially since everyone knows that Swofford has ties to an ACC school. Why should we trust him, really? What has he done to earn the trust of the NC State’s, Clemson’s, UVa(When he looked the other when we some very shady dealings occurred to bring one Ronald Curry to Chapel Hill’s door steps) and Va Tech’s trust? Think about that, but that what’s he’s asking to do. Essentially, he’s told EVERYONE to stick it – he knows best.

  17. VaWolf82 12/17/2005 at 9:14 PM #

    You see, there’s nothing worse in any kind of human interaction than when someone says, “Trust, me.â€? Essentially, that is what is Swofford is saying. “Trust me, I know what is in the best interest of the conference – and trust me, I’ll execute accordingly.â€?

    I don’t disagree, but we also don’t have any choice either. It’s not like Johnny is ever up for re-election. I’m not going to worry about it; but I’m sure that we will all keep an eye on what Swofford does with the bowls.

    The Chris Paul incident worked out well, even though the powers that be (at State and at the ACC office) did nothing to help the situation. I suspect that the same sort of scrutiny could be brought to bear if Johnny got caught playing favorites. Sports writers have columns to fill….and bowl assignments always get alot of ink.

  18. Joe 12/17/2005 at 9:35 PM #

    The difference between 2 and 16 teams is that if you only pick 2 there might be a lot of controversy about which 2 get picked. That’s less of a problem with 16. They got lucky this year where nobody has a problem with the final 2. I would be happy with a 4 team playoff even though there would still be complaints about teams being left out.

    Pro team fans don’t seem to have much of a problem with their teams playing on the road in playoffs. It’s just considered part of their playoff system. Unless you are a top 4 seed in NCAA BB you might get sent 3000 miles away for the first round. The Pack did pretty well in 83 playing a long way from home!

  19. Nathan 12/17/2005 at 11:11 PM #

    The funny part of this is that GT travels extremely well, and has already sold more tickets to the Emerald Bowl in San Francisco than UVa is going to sell in Nashville – the Music City Bowl just made a really bad decision for themselves, heck UVa is basically begging for folks to buy tickets right now.

    The real heart of the problem is that the ACC bowl tie-ins suck badly. There’s only 3 “good” bowls in the whole package, and a couple of really bad bowls that nobody wants to go to (Boise and San Fran). The SEC tie-ins are about 100x better, for example.

  20. Eddie 12/18/2005 at 2:05 AM #

    I agree that a 16 team playoff is the way to go. You can have that, only have 2 weeks of travel for only half the teams (the other half, the upper seeds, would be playing at home), and still have the complete bowl lineup as it is today.
    The losers of the playoff games would still go the the **** Bowl and their kids would get that experience.

    It is complete BS that they don’t do this. I keep hearing that it’s all about the money, and they don’t want to mess up the bowls. Well, this would do it, make more money, and the bowls would still be just fine.

    I don’t want to hear about travel, either. If you had the top 5 playing the bottom 8, then the top 8 would play at home, and the bottom 8 would travel. The next week it would be the bottom 4 traveling, then 2.
    So it would be nowhere near the amount of teams traveling like in the NCAA tourney.

    The NCAA needs to get on the ball and get this rolling.

  21. Eddie 12/18/2005 at 2:06 AM #

    “The funny part of this is that GT travels extremely well”

    Since when? They don’t even sell out their home stadium on a regular basis.

    Got a link to some data showing how GT travels?

  22. Nathan 12/18/2005 at 7:26 PM #

    GT has had decent to excellent showings in their recent “southern” bowl games (Gator Bowl x2, Peach Bowl, Champs Sports Bowl ). It hurts that 3 of the last 4 bowl games have been in the west coast now (Silicon Valley, MPC Computers, Emerald Nut) but even as evidenced this year – GT has sold more tickets to San Fran than UVa to Nashville.

    The GT alumn are very well off for the most part, and extremely loyal. Of the 42,000 or so who come to regular season games, about 20-25k of those are people who will travel to bowls. The problems with selling out Bobby Dodd are because GT has a small fanbase of non-alumni (or “sidewalk” fans), that has no impact really on whether or not they will travel to bowls. GT would have probably had 20-25k at the Music City Bowl this year, or about six times as many people as UVa is bringing – our AD just did a horrible job selling the game on us, and UVa promised 30k tickets sold (lol @ Music City for buying that). 30k right now looks more like 4k.

Leave a Reply