Shake up of bowl tie ins.

[AlistarWills]

Just curious of what the board thinks about shaking up what bowls are tied to what conferences? I’d personally like to see some shifting or better yet, ditch the bowl/conference tie in, especially for the 80 or so crappy bowl games. Let the lesser teams travel to and fro. It’s not much of a trip for agbarn to go to Nashville/Birmingham/Shreveport. Let em travel to the Alamo Bowl, the Holiday Bowl, the Potato Bowl, etc every once in a while.

 

[Bama_N_Va]

I'd love to see tOSU and the barn play in the Toilet Bowl from sunny Cleveland, OH, EACH AND EVERY YEAR!!!! :biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2:

 

[B1GTide]

I would like to see no bowl tie-ins at all. Make them all bid for teams each year, and let the schools decide where to go based on their offers. But it isn't going to happen.

 

[RTR91]

I would love for the tie-ins to go away. Would allow for better matchups.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[81usaf92]

I would love for the tie-ins to go away. Would allow for better matchups.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Maybe but I think you run the risk of worse attendance when you get matchups like LSU vs GT in the Rose bowl.

 

[AlistarWills]

I think the bowls having to bid for teams may run off some of the bottom feeders or make them up the ante in order to get off the bottom of the pecking order.

I would like to see no bowl tie-ins at all. Make them all bid for teams each year, and let the schools decide where to go based on their offers. But it isn't going to happen.

 

[bamaga]

I would like to see no bowl tie-ins at all. Make them all bid for teams each year, and let the schools decide where to go based on their offers. But it isn't going to happen.

This is probably the best idea. If we want the 4 best in th playoffs, I think we need the best possible matchups in the bowl games regardless of conference affiliation in order for the bowl system to survive,

 

[GrayTide]

I will beat my dead horse for the final time in 2018. 39 freaking bowl games with attendances in the 13K-35K, that is embarrassing. 15 bowls would host the top 30 teams. Possibly 20 bowls, but no more. Yes in dissolving the conference bowl tie-ins.

 

[tattooguy21]

It would be cool to see an SEC in the rose bowl on years where it's not a cfp/c game. But some people like the traditions.

Sent from my SM-N950U using Tapatalk

 

[AlistarWills]

I don’t have so much of a problem with the “you won your conference” tie in’s. Although being able to go to the Granddaddy of them all would be awesome every now and then. They usually end up with a crappy game because of the lack of a decent team in the Pac12

 

[JBama_in_PCOLA]

I'd love to see tOSU and the barn play in the Toilet Bowl from sunny Cleveland, OH, EACH AND EVERY YEAR!!!! :biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2::biggrin2:

Yes!! Yeeeeees!

 

[CB4]

As we continue further and further down the road of the CFP, the “other bowls” and the conference tie-ins are more and more irrelevant, especially in terms of viewership and attendance.
Prior to the BCS and CFP, the results of several of the New Year’s Day bowls could impact the national title. It was must watch tv. And if your team was remotely in the title hunt, for many fans it was “must attend” games.
Tomorrow, outside of interest in how my conference (SEC) performs, I have little interest. Until about two weeks ago, I couldn’t tell you who was playing in the New Year’s bowls.
And until this past Friday night, I probably didn’t spend more than a a few minutes clicking through games.
And I’m a guy that loves college football. Imagine what the interest level for those lower tier bowls is for the “average” fan.

 

[AlistarWills]

Frankly I can’t see how bowls like the Birmingham Bowl or the Redbox Bowl makes any money unless it’s off the TV money. They sure as heck don’t sell tix.

 

[Elefantman]

The bowl tie ins is a main reason we got the BCS. So many times #1 And #2 could not meet due to conference obligations. The bowls have always been about protecting their interest and having a bidding war to get #1 and 2 in your stadium is not in a bowl's best interest. Who knows how the NC tally at each school would look if we never had bowl tie ins.

 

[Con]

Frankly I can’t see how bowls like the Birmingham Bowl or the Redbox Bowl makes any money unless it’s off the TV money. They sure as heck don’t sell tix.

I know what you mean, but going to the Hall of Fame bowl when it was in Birmingham when I was a kid was a highlight of my year. The teams weren't going to win a national championship or anything but I did get to see George Rogers the year before he won the heisman.

 

[81usaf92]

The bowl tie ins is a main reason we got the BCS. So many times #1 And #2 could not meet due to conference obligations. The bowls have always been about protecting their interest and having a bidding war to get #1 and 2 in your stadium is not in a bowl's best interest. Who knows how the NC tally at each school would look if we never had bowl tie ins.

Yet the BCS bowed to the Rose Bowl and made it the most powerful bowl committee in the country when it only decided a handful of national champions in the poll era

 

[81usaf92]

Simple fix:

-Keep the NY6 a tie in deal with the exception of semis.

- keep the mid majors. Roughly 16-20. Make them a selection ordeal instead of a tie in.

 

[ReturnToGlory]

ESPN Events own 13 of the bowls, including the Birmingham and Camellia. ESPN needs programming during the last 2 weeks of the year. The actual attendance doesn't matter. These bowls would not exist without ESPN.

Oh, and the Myrtle Beach Bowl is coming in 2020.

 

[crimsonaudio]

I will beat my dead horse for the final time in 2018. 39 freaking bowl games with attendances in the 13K-35K, that is embarrassing. 15 bowls would host the top 30 teams. Possibly 20 bowls, but no more. Yes in dissolving the conference bowl tie-ins.

Extra bowls don't bother me - my father and I attended the Liberty Bowl on a whim yesterday and while there couldn't have been more than 30K in the stands (probably fewer), it was a blast and people travelled from all over to support their teams. Heck, the economic impact of even a small bowl like the Liberty Bowl is measured in the millions - that alone makes it good for host cities.

If people don't want to watch the smaller games, don't. I mean, who is embarrassed by 15k people showing up? Does that really bother you in any way?

I just enjoy watching football, and knowing that very soon CFB will be over for a long time doesn't make me think "less football is better"...

 

[LSUgrad2BamaDad]

Extra bowls don't bother me - my father and I attended the Liberty Bowl on a whim yesterday and while there couldn't have been more than 30K in the stands (probably fewer), it was a blast and people travelled from all over to support their teams. Heck, the economic impact of even a small bowl like the Liberty Bowl is measured in the millions - that alone makes it good for host cities.

If people don't want to watch the smaller games, don't. I mean, who is embarrassed by 15k people showing up? Does that really bother you in any way?

I just enjoy watching football, and knowing that very soon CFB will be over for a long time doesn't make me think "less football is better"...

well said CA. Most players enjoy competing again. Plus, teams need the extra practice.