- This topic has 37 replies, 23 voices, and was last updated 8 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
It’s hard to complain about NC State’s bowl options in a season where we really didn’t do much with our opportunities. Forget the UNC game for a momen
[See the full post at: Giglio lays out Pack’s Bowl scenarios]Too many bowls:
College football decision-makers have considered allowing some bowls to not be played this year given that not enough teams are eligible, Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby said Sunday.
Although bowls going dark seems unlikely to happen this season, there is deep frustration by some administrators within college football that teams with 5-7 records will be in the postseason. At least two 5-7 teams, and possibly up to five, would have to participate since there aren’t enough 6-6 teams to fill the 80 slots created by a record 40 bowl games. About five cities have applied to stage future bowls.
“If we add more bowls next year, where are we going to find 84, 86, 88 eligible teams?” said Bowlsby, chairman of the Football Oversight Committee. “Having bowls go dark may be the way to slow the process down. There are a lot of people that don’t even like 6-6, much less 5-7. There are people who absolutely want bowls to go dark.”
When asked if going dark is a viable possibility this season, Bowlsby replied, “The problem with them going dark is you don’t end up with both sides (of the participating teams) not being filled. So you’re penalizing a team that did everything it should.”
To me there is a real issue when teams with losing records go to bowl games. The Pack’s standing to me should be iffy along with all other teams in the same category. Granted I’m very old school but I remember when a bowl invite was something special – any bowl for most teams. Days gone by.
TV importance being paramount makes sense. That applies to me, too. Much rather play an SEC team in Shreveport (better TV viewing) than Navy in DC, since not going regardless.
There is so much football on TV these days I skip most of it. No longer are bowl games so special. I can remember the day when my FIL (dyed in the wool Clemson fan) would rig up multiple TV’s for New Year’s Day. In those days any bowl game was special. Today I’m more likely than not to skip …
Shreveport Baby! The dominoes are about to fall for my dream scenario.
Just doesn’t have the same street cred without the “Poulan Weedwhacker” or “Duck Fuhrer” sponsorship, IMHO.
I guess the “Let’s Sleep in the Woods” Independence Bowl does have a nice ring though.I mean, it’s no Bitcoin, but…
Lots of good practice reps for McLendon and the younger/redshirting players.
And I used to love hearing the commentators try to say Poulan Weedeater bowl. Awesome.
I agree with about everyone on this, there are too many bowls. Bowl attendance is devalued to a point that the most that the majority can hope for is a strong turnout by the fan base, and solid regional TV coverage. Everyone I know feels that way. I used to love them, but no more. I typically watch our game, maybe the national championship game, and the NFL.
HOWEVER, the players and coaches love it. The coaches love the 20 (i think) additional practices they get, and the players like being rewarded with a trip and being treated like celebrities.
So, who cares if there are too many bowls? The kids and coaches get rewarded for a season of hard work. Sooner or later, ‘king capitalism’ will determine if they are viable and shut them down if they aren’t.
I try to watch all the ACC games and most of the big games outside the conference. Don’t know why folks bitch about lots of football to watch. But the only losing records that make sense would be a 6-6 team that lost their Championship game – AKA UCLA. Hey, the Panthers made the playoffs last year with a losing record. They were worthy.
I understand why the coaches and teams like a bowl – any bowl for most teams but I as a fan simply am over saturated. Sort of like I am with college BB on TV. Years ago when both were in less supply I watched most all. These days I watch some and skip many. That might be one of the current issues with ESPN and their financial problems. I appreciate the TV of the games I wish to see but I still think there are too many bowl games as a fan of college football.
Missouri, at 5-7, has announced it is declining any invitation to a bowl, focusing instead on hiring its new coach and beginning the transition.
Missouri, at 5-7, has announced it is declining any invitation to a bowl, focusing instead on hiring its new coach and beginning the transition.
In a related note, Herb Sendek has announced he is not a candidate for the Mizzou FB HC opening.
‘Dog I do respect your view. I happen to look at it differently as a fan. I do remember tossing Tangerines on to the Carter field back in the day.
‘Dog I do respect your view. I happen to look at it differently as a fan. I do remember tossing Tangerines on to the Carter field back in the day.
I meant when there was only 12.
I just thought the article I posted was timely and interesting. I’m happy for the kids going out that they get one more, and glad to have the extra practice time for our boys.
As big of a football fan as I am, I don’t watch the majority of them. Part of that is just my crazy holiday schedule with work/friends/family commitments. But I do try to keep tabs on who did what.
bowl games are holiday programming
content for TV/radio/internet.
would not surprise me to see
NBCSN sponsor a bowl.There are too many Kardashians, too many idiots haranguing endlessly about politics, and too many home shopping channels. But there is not too much college football.
The bowl that State gets will most likely be a high-priced affair in a faraway place few care about traveling to, against an opponent who would look like State’s OOC opponents this season. What is to be gained here? I went to the old school that taught me to believe that a bowl game was a reward for a good season. This has been a lousy season, one that I believe was even worse than the last one.
I say put State and Duke in the same bowl. After 5 or 6 years, isn’t it about time that we got to play them again on the gridiron? And for goodness sakes, play the game in Boise or somewhere way out west, since the schools are only 25 miles apart.
Or, heaven forbid, start letting these awful bowls be played on the home field of the higher-seeded team. At least give one set of fans some semblance of a reason to attend.
For all those who long for the old days:
Remember that when State last won the ACC we didn’t even get a bowl.
And the Bowl Coalition and Bowl Alliance days had bowl match ups set by early November.
This will be significantly improved when the playoff goes to 16 teams. The lesser bowls will get the first round and there will be 15 meaningful games spread out over 3 weekends. That will pretty much cover the viewing appetite of the average “fan.”
There will be some other exhibition game type bowls, but those will only be watched by the alums and fans of the teams participating. That’s pretty much how it is now. These will likely be broadcasted by the networks that don’t get the playoff, so there will be money there because they want some sort of holiday programming. I suspect most of these will fall to the week days so they can air without competition from the meaningful games.
As for the current bowl structure, unless there’s a game that is within local proximity, a destination that I’d just want to visit, or one of the top tier bowls, there’s really no sense in going. There’s absolutely no sense in going to the Boise bowl for instance.
I need to catch up on the news…apparently, a law was passed dictating that I have to watch mid and lower-tiered bowl games.
To me, what is more interesting is the impact of the bowl game on the existing upper tier games and the cascading effect of this on both bowl and regular season attendance and viewership.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
