NCAA Approves 3 New Bowl Games

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
Usually your choices are:

1) The 98th airing of the Griswold Christmas movie
2) It's a Wonderful Life
3) Brian's Song, the updated one that nobody likes
4) The Grinch
5) Home Alone 6: This Time It's Personal
6) Rudolph
7) The Grinch
I would take USA vs Bowling Green in Montgomery over any of those. I have too many Cousin Eddies in my family that play those over and over again.
 

Crimson1967

Hall of Fame
Nov 22, 2011
18,734
9,918
187
Sorry, Willy, but unless Alabama gets a golden ticket to one of those games, I likely won't watch. If we play in one of them this year, I may be too depressed to watch.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

PA Tide Fan

All-American
Dec 11, 2014
4,442
3,058
187
Lancaster, PA
I guess it provides job security for a few more head coaches. It's tougher to fire the coach if he just led his team to a bowl game. If he does get fired it's still something he can put on his resume for his next job.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
Complaining that there are too many football games on TV is like complaining that there is too much beer in your refrigerator.
This coupled with too many undeserving programs completely waters down the product. It's not like we're talking about bowl games with huge sold out crowds, we are talking about declining attendance for bowl games. Attendance has reached a point we haven't seen since the 70s. We're talking about bowl games that don't even get 30,000 people to show up. Matchups like Buffalo and San Diego St. and we're going to get more of that?

Anyway, the product is being harmed. Too many bowl games means too many bad teams in bowl games. It lowers the hype, and it spreads the fans thinner. The less bowl games you have, the less crap teams you have, meaning the more exciting the bowl games you do see will be.
 

Atl Joe

1st Team
Nov 27, 2010
405
5
37
This coupled with too many undeserving programs completely waters down the product. It's not like we're talking about bowl games with huge sold out crowds, we are talking about declining attendance for bowl games. Attendance has reached a point we haven't seen since the 70s. We're talking about bowl games that don't even get 30,000 people to show up. Matchups like Buffalo and San Diego St. and we're going to get more of that?

Anyway, the product is being harmed. Too many bowl games means too many bad teams in bowl games. It lowers the hype, and it spreads the fans thinner. The less bowl games you have, the less crap teams you have, meaning the more exciting the bowl games you do see will be.
Fewer football games on TV equals FEWER football games on TV. Look, on any given Thursday night or Saturday there can be crap games on the tube. During the bowl season, would you rather have the possibility of a good football game or some reality Show on HGTV? When I was a kid, all that mattered to my brother and I was that we were off from school and there would be football on during the break. We never cared who was playing, only that there was a game on TV. Did anyone here watch the Bahanas Bowl last year?? It was awesome!
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
This coupled with too many undeserving programs completely waters down the product. It's not like we're talking about bowl games with huge sold out crowds, we are talking about declining attendance for bowl games. Attendance has reached a point we haven't seen since the 70s. We're talking about bowl games that don't even get 30,000 people to show up. Matchups like Buffalo and San Diego St. and we're going to get more of that?

Anyway, the product is being harmed. Too many bowl games means too many bad teams in bowl games. It lowers the hype, and it spreads the fans thinner. The less bowl games you have, the less crap teams you have, meaning the more exciting the bowl games you do see will be.
Ok, you've been on this point about "undeserving" programs for awhile, but how are we to decide if a program is undeserving? You would have to limit the number of teams first and foremost. So if you go by attendence then when cutting programs came down to cutting between Kentucky and Stanford who do you cut? By your arguement you cut Stanford. Yes, because Kentucky out does the mighty Stanford by almost 10k people. and Kentucky actually is a few hundred above Oregon. But yet those teams would desrtoy Kentucky on the gridiron.

The biggest hole in why attendence should matter arguement is the ticket prices itself. Most people cant acquire a ticket that is about 200% over face value so they sit at home and cheer for their favorite team on a way more comfortable seat with a bathroom that is easily accesable. While we are stuck at 1% increase a year due to this, those lower teams that are having success are seeing a 10% increase. So growth is there.

Another point on why we probably should keep these "undeserving" teams is the anti-SEC movement is trying to force us to play non-FCS oppenents in the future. While the idea of playing Oklahoma,Oregon,and teams of the such for our 3 non conference games sounds like a good idea. It will actually decrease the liklihood of us playing for a championship in the longrun. I would like to play teams like that as much as anyone, but with the CFP committee a loss or a close win could influence them greatly since all of them have an agenda. I rather have a tune up game before Auburn than have Oklahoma in Norman the week before only to either expose us or tire us out before the Iron Bowl. I would take an easy win from a tune up game than an exhausting slugfest between a powerhouse before a SEC game.

Im not saying that all teams are deserving of being a NCAA team,but attendence shouldnt be the prime component of the decision making. Probably the best way is to divide the NCAA into leagues like the English Soccer League and move teams up and down based on performance. It will never happen because of the conferences, but it is the most fair way to decide.
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...ndance-home-crowds-drop-to-lowest-in-14-years
 

selmaborntidefan

TideFans Legend
Mar 31, 2000
36,432
29,735
287
54
Ok, you've been on this point about "undeserving" programs for awhile, but how are we to decide if a program is undeserving? You would have to limit the number of teams first and foremost. So if you go by attendence then when cutting programs came down to cutting between Kentucky and Stanford who do you cut? By your arguement you cut Stanford. Yes, because Kentucky out does the mighty Stanford by almost 10k people. and Kentucky actually is a few hundred above Oregon. But yet those teams would desrtoy Kentucky on the gridiron.
I think krazy3's point is clear that he's referring more to those mid-majors that have moved up in recent years like Boise State and the Lessers.

The biggest hole in why attendence should matter arguement is the ticket prices itself. Most people cant acquire a ticket that is about 200% over face value so they sit at home and cheer for their favorite team on a way more comfortable seat with a bathroom that is easily accesable.
Orange Bowl tickets....ORANGE BOWL tickets for Mississippi State-Ga Tech (both based IN THE SOUTH) were selling on game day on StubHub for THREE DOLLARS!!!!!!

Lower level midfield seats for $50 - you can't even go see us play Middle TN State for that.


Don't think that because of Tide Pride every other venue has this problem.




While we are stuck at 1% increase a year due to this, those lower teams that are having success are seeing a 10% increase. So growth is there.

Another point on why we probably should keep these "undeserving" teams is the anti-SEC movement is trying to force us to play non-FCS oppenents in the future. While the idea of playing Oklahoma,Oregon,and teams of the such for our 3 non conference games sounds like a good idea. It will actually decrease the liklihood of us playing for a championship in the longrun. I would like to play teams like that as much as anyone, but with the CFP committee a loss or a close win could influence them greatly since all of them have an agenda. I rather have a tune up game before Auburn than have Oklahoma in Norman the week before only to either expose us or tire us out before the Iron Bowl. I would take an easy win from a tune up game than an exhausting slugfest between a powerhouse before a SEC game.

Im not saying that all teams are deserving of being a NCAA team,but attendence shouldnt be the prime component of the decision making. Probably the best way is to divide the NCAA into leagues like the English Soccer League and move teams up and down based on performance. It will never happen because of the conferences, but it is the most fair way to decide.
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...ndance-home-crowds-drop-to-lowest-in-14-years
So Vandy falls out of the SEC the first year and who moves up?

That idea would never work because of the conferences (as you duly note). We wouldn't play Oklahoma the week before Auburn but having them say the third week rather than MTSU or Southern Miss would be an improvement.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
So Vandy falls out of the SEC the first year and who moves up?

That idea would never work because of the conferences (as you duly note). We wouldn't play Oklahoma the week before Auburn but having them say the third week rather than MTSU or Southern Miss would be an improvement.
It was an example really. It would be an improvement from a fan's perspective, but what if we went with a power 5 schedule like this (Wk1 Wisky, Wk2 @TTU, Wk 4 OU, Wk12 PSU) and Auburn went like this (Wk1 Louisville,Wk2 @Kansas,Wk5 Rutgers, and Wk12 Iowa St). Which one would you rather have? My point is that while I dont agree that we shouldnt need more bowls, I feel that each team should have the right to play for one if they meet the criteria to play for one if one is available. People have been using the arguement of attendence to try to limit the number of teams in NCAA. I just feel there are better ways to do it and I see the need for these smaller teams at the momment until there is a bonafide way to do it. So what harm is it to us that there are some directional schools that have 6 wins playing in the New Orleans bowl. If you wanna watch it watch it, if not enjoy your Christmas flicks.IMO
 
Last edited:

GrayTide

Hall of Fame
Nov 15, 2005
18,810
6,245
187
Greenbow, Alabama
This coupled with too many undeserving programs completely waters down the product. It's not like we're talking about bowl games with huge sold out crowds, we are talking about declining attendance for bowl games. Attendance has reached a point we haven't seen since the 70s. We're talking about bowl games that don't even get 30,000 people to show up. Matchups like Buffalo and San Diego St. and we're going to get more of that?

Anyway, the product is being harmed. Too many bowl games means too many bad teams in bowl games. It lowers the hype, and it spreads the fans thinner. The less bowl games you have, the less crap teams you have, meaning the more exciting the bowl games you do see will be.
KrAzY we have had this discussion more than once on here and I am in total agreement that the number of bowl games is ridiculous. I have stated before that possibly 12-15 bowl games would reward the top 25% of the FBS teams. it is a shame that a team only has to win 6 games to qualify for a bowl invitation. IMO that number should be at least 8.

I have become very selective in my old age as to what games I will watch. It is rare that I will watch an entire SEC game that includes Kentucky, Miss State or Vanderbilt. I know MSU was good last year, but typically they are a boring team. In all honesty I believe the over exposure of having games on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday nights and 20+ games on Saturday has, as you said, watered down the product. To each his own though.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
Ok, you've been on this point about "undeserving" programs for awhile, but how are we to decide if a program is undeserving?
Not everyone has perfect recollection, but to really distill my point it comes down to two things.

A: Programs that do not meet the NCAA mandated minimum attendance requirements. This for what ever reason has never been enforced, but any program that doesn't have an average attendance of 15,000 (UAB for instance) violates that rule.
B: Programs that are wasting an especially large amount of money. UAB comes to mind, but if the program lacks the support to come close to being self-sustaining, why do public universities and likewise taxpayers have to continue support?

I actually agree somewhat with your schedule difficulty point, but I also have defended having non-FBS programs on the schedule as well. I also don't advocate all of these programs being eliminated, but there's no need for over 100, and that would still leave around 40 outside of the major conferences.
 

crimsonaudio

Administrator
Staff member
Sep 9, 2002
63,414
67,193
462
crimsonaudio.net
Complaining that there are too many football games on TV is like complaining that there is too much beer in your refrigerator.
It's more like complaining that there are too many crappy football games is like complaining that there is too much crappy beer in your refrigerator.
 

bama2112

All-American
Nov 19, 2006
2,016
290
107
Cobb County, Ga.
I forgot who wrote the article this past December about the number of bowl games and how do they make money. People will watch a bowl game with Southwestern Louisiana vs Peppercorn St. The tv audience is a million views and that makes up for the no shows in the stands. Let alone the product they put on the field. It going to bite them on the butt, just ask Nascar. Look at the tracks and empty seats. I just realized they tore down the backstretch seats at tallladega and put up parking for SUV's. So give them 5 years, or another body other than the NAZZI and who know. I was hoping weed eater would at least put their name back on that bowl.
 

gtowntide

All-American
Mar 1, 2011
4,288
1,092
187
Memphis,TN.
I actually enjoy watching the smaller bowls. I get to look at all the crappy new uniforms that Adidas, Nike and UA have created. Now that's entertainment!
 

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,499
46,842
187
Some of the "great" bowl games turn out to be snooze fests and some of the "horrible" bowl games turn out to be compelling. I'll give just about any football game on TV a shot (college, high school or NFL). If it is competitive, it stays on - no matter the names on the uniforms or the teams' w/l record.

I love me some football.
 

RedStar

Hall of Fame
Jan 28, 2005
9,628
0
0
39
The Shoals, AL
If you don't like the bowl games, AND you wont watch the bowl games, AND they feature teams you don't want to see, then why do some of you care so much?
 

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.