How Many Bowl Games are too Many?

Roll Tide 00

1st Team
Sep 13, 2007
814
54
52
The more football the better.I have no problem with adding bowls and teams regardless of their record.Let these kids get a chance play in a bowl.Bowl games are already over rated anyway.It's not important like the old days.
 

SavannahDare

Hall of Fame
Jul 23, 2004
15,169
316
102
Gulf Breeze, Florida
I'm one of those that believes bowl games should be the top tier teams in the country playing each other, period. If I had my way, there would only be about a dozen games. If your team isn't good enough to land in the top 24, your season ends in early December (or late November).

Of course, those days of rewarding high levels of achievement are in the rear view mirror, unlikely ever to return. :(
 

GrayTide

Hall of Fame
Nov 15, 2005
18,810
6,245
187
Greenbow, Alabama
I listened to someone today, can't remember who it was, but he said NIU will lose $2 million because they cannot sell their ticket allotment and that FSU has sold 4,000 tickets of its allotted 17,000. They have to sell half of their allotment before conference helps them financially. He also said that in 2014 it will get worse unless there is a game of special interest like the TAMU vs OU game this year.

Their are only 2 teams in the final BCS poll with less than 9 wins, Texas and Michigan at 8-4. IMO the bar should be raised to 8 wins. I suspect the current economic climate will take care of a lot of these bowls. Tony Barnhart was making the comments.
 
Last edited:

bamacon

Hall of Fame
Apr 11, 2008
17,179
4,352
187
College Football's Mecca, Tuscaloosa
16 max which would essentially be the top 32 teams. Wouldn't mind some type of Conf. champions vs. Conf. Champions. That might be cool. More than half of the FBS teams go bowling now. That's waaaaaayyyy too much. Also, if Legion Field has a bowl game there are too many.
 
With the BCS, they got a lot right, but they got a lot wrong. I miss the days where even small bowls were great match-ups. I'm glad there is a 1/2 match-up, but if you are good enough to be in the top teams there should be match-ups. You can't fault NIU though. They got in fairly. It was just not a lot of common sense with the rest of the BCS.
 

Dallas4Bama

Suspended
Sep 27, 2006
3,882
0
0
Dallas, Texas
Because it absolutely cheapens the 'reward' of paying in a bowl game. It benefits teams (financially, extra coverage, extra practice time) that don't deserve.

I care because I think it cheapens the sport.
So our BCSCG is less important because of the Bell Helicopter Bowl? I would be interested to know how many of players in the Orange, Sugar, Cotton or Rose Bowls think their game is less important because of the Papa Johns Pizza Bowl. My guess is most would say it has zero affect on them. So your argument is basically you don't like it because that's not the way they used to do it? I guess the bigger question is who is the game for, the fans or the players?

Is the consensus that it cheapens the game for rewarding sub par performance? If we called them "exhibition" games instead of "bowl" games would that be better? I think the idea of these bowls being some big reward sailed about 30 years ago. They are basically post season exhibition games.

Are there too many games on every Saturday during the season? Being on TV used to be reserved for the top teams that were winning and had good records. In the 70's you wouldn't have been watching Alabama play a game against a winless or one win Arkansas on a major network. Should we go back to the days of two or three games on TV every Saturday? Did allowing BAMA to play on TV the years between CGS and CNS just cheapen the games that Florida, LSU, OU, TX and teams that were winning played?
 
Last edited:

KrimsonNinja

All-SEC
Apr 22, 2009
1,612
0
0
Florida
The current number (whatever it is) is far too many.

15 bowl games, in my opinion, would be much better. 30 teams compete. The top 25 teams are automatic participants and the other 5 teams are selected based on where they would fall (26-30) in the rankings. There would be no automatic qualifiers. You play where you play based on ranking/voting.

That would eliminate any 6-6, 6-7 or undeserving 7-5 teams.
 

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
63,414
67,193
462
crimsonaudio.net
So our BCSCG is less important because of the Bell Helicopter Bowl? I would be interested to know how many of players in the Orange, Sugar, Cotton or Rose Bowls think their game is less important because of the Papa Johns Pizza Bowl. My guess is most would say it has zero affect on them. So your argument is basically you don't like it because that's not the way they used to do it? I guess the bigger question is who is the game for, the fans or the players?

Is the consensus that it cheapens the game for rewarding sub par performance? If we called them "exhibition" games instead of "bowl" games would that be better? I think the idea of these bowls being some big reward sailed about 30 years ago. They are basically post season exhibition games.

Are there too many games on every Saturday during the season? Being on TV used to be reserved for the top teams that were winning and had good records. In the 70's you wouldn't have been watching Alabama play a game against a winless or one win Arkansas on a major network. Should we go back to the days of two or three games on TV every Saturday? Did allowing BAMA to play on TV the years between CGS and CNS just cheapen the games that Florida, LSU, OU, TX and teams that were winning played?
*sigh*

I've made it clear how I feel, the assumptions you make do not match what I clearly stated above. The benefits of extra practice and exposure help the program and int today's 'everyone deserves a trophy' culture, that advantage is being reduced.

Beyond that, spin it however you wish, I'm not going to argue with you or point-by-point refute your post.
 

Al A Bama

Hall of Fame
Jun 24, 2011
6,658
934
132
I just hate to see bowl games played with stadiums having very few fans. Some of these bowl games probably need to be played in high school or small college stadiums.

If a school's fan base is NOT going to a game to support their team, should they even be invited?
 

uaintn

All-American
Aug 2, 2000
2,904
192
182
franklin, tennessee, usa
I don't mind the silly little ones. If I had to pick I'd say about 15, with no restrictions except good competition on who goes where. Nobody with a .500 record or below should qualify. They make good money for the cities that host them. Some of the smaller ones with stadiums 25% full are going to fold eventually, but more will crop up to take their place. If my choice is a couple of 7-6 teams playing a close, well-played game, I'd rather watch a lot of that than any level of basketball. Sports is a wasteland for me between the Super Bowl and MLB and I'm not that excited about the NFL, so I'm ok with it. I will definitely watch Texas Ore State tonight.
 

Tide1986

Suspended
Nov 22, 2008
15,670
2
0
Birmingham, AL
Any bowl that I dont recognize its name is too many.
Hmmm...that's kind of harsh and not very "inclusive" of you. Maybe you're a closet conservative. ;)

Anyway, on topic, I would be very supportive of raising the bowl eligibility requirement to at least 7 wins as others have suggested. Plus, I would exclude any victories over non-FBS teams. However, I really don't care how many bowl games there are -- I've enjoyed every game I've watched thus far, excepting the VT/Rutgers game.
 

GrayTide

Hall of Fame
Nov 15, 2005
18,810
6,245
187
Greenbow, Alabama
It would be interesting to see how much money these schools actually net when playing in these minor league bowls. I actually watched about 2 minutes of the Syracuse vs WVU in Yankee Stadium. The crowd looked to be about 15,000 maybe. I would suspect this bowl has a very short life span.
 

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.