Pac 12 passes 6-win rule to go bowling

TomFromBama

Suspended
May 14, 2003
1,142
0
0
Lower Alabama
My point was, the Sugar Bowl doesn't mean less to a player because some other team is in another bowl game, the Sugar Bowl means less to a player because the bowl experience itself has been devalued as a whole.

I mean if it was up to me, there would be a hard cap on the number of bowls, with preference for historical significance, and every team would have to have a winning record. Then, it would mean a bit more. You'd have to actually earn it, and what you earned would have some significance. You can't take a brand new bowl you just made up, and then put a couple 6-6 teams in there and not taint the bowl experience. And yes, I do disagree with anyone who says otherwise, heh.
This ^^^ OF course, since "Mammon" rules the game these days, let's not hold our breath waiting for THAT to happen!

And in the same Vein, the PAC-12 rule is just so much EMPTY POSTURING. When was the last time a PAC team with only 5 wins went to a bowl??? Yea, that would be about NEVER.

IF they wanted to make an Actual "STATEMENT" about the "quality of the game" or some other meaningless platitude, they'd pass a rule that ONLY teams with 7 FBS wins could go to bowls. But they won't - because THAT rule might have actual consequences - unlike this phony-balony "rule" they passed.
 

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,503
46,846
187
Actually - and not that it matters, but just as an aside; but MOST schools who go "Bowling" these days make Little to NOTHING when it comes to their NET result, and quite a few actually LOSE money to play in the lower bowls.

If memory serves, not so many years ago, the barn had to "Guarantee" a certain amount of ticket sales to some bowl they were going to as a condition of getting a bid, and though they never admitted it, one of the newspapers projected that the bowl trip was COSTING them money.
I think that it depends on how conferences split up bowl revenue. Most conferences put it all into a single bucket and spilt it up equally among the members. So, it might cost a school more to travel to a bowl game than the conference is paid by that bowl, but schools in the SEC or B1G get paid plenty to cover that expense.
 

B1GTide

TideFans Legend
Apr 13, 2012
45,503
46,846
187
Well, if people really loves bowls so much why not just have every single team play in one? Just add the game on an automatic basis, we can have some fun ones, like the Loser Bowl with two 10+ loss teams pitted against each other. I mean Duke could have had their 12th loss! That would have been amazing. Why exclude anyone at all? More football amirite?
I wouldn't complain if they did this.
 

81usaf92

TideFans Legend
Apr 26, 2008
35,306
31,375
187
South Alabama
I think that it depends on how conferences split up bowl revenue. Most conferences put it all into a single bucket and spilt it up equally among the members. So, it might cost a school more to travel to a bowl game than the conference is paid by that bowl, but schools in the SEC or B1G get paid plenty to cover that expense.
According to this Bama lost money for both the Texas and LSU BCSNCG

https://www.google.com/amp/miami.cb...games-are-not-always-winners-for-schools/amp/
 

RedWave

All-SEC
Sep 26, 2000
1,579
3
0
Arlington, Tx
I wouldn't complain if they did this.
I wouldn't either. I stated earlier that, meaningless or not to me, I enjoy bowl season. I know we are in the last month of college football availability, which will be followed by a drought during which time fans will argue endless over who should be playing what positions, coaching here or there, what color hate to wear, whether we should go to white helmets (of course we should), etc. So, I want as much college football as I can get before it ends. Besides that, it may be meaningless to Alabama fans that Barely Can Play State made it to a bowl for the first time in X years, but it might mean a whole lot to fans of that team. So let them have it. Could be our team barely getting a shot at the postseason (have we forgotten when that was the case?). As a Troy grad, I enjoy it when my school gets to make it into whatever "meaningless" bowl they can.
 

TomFromBama

Suspended
May 14, 2003
1,142
0
0
Lower Alabama
Well, if people really loves bowls so much why not just have every single team play in one? Just add the game on an automatic basis, we can have some fun ones, like the Loser Bowl with two 10+ loss teams pitted against each other. I mean Duke could have had their 12th loss! That would have been amazing. Why exclude anyone at all? More football amirite?
I wouldn't complain if they did this.
I wouldn't complain either - nor would I watch.

Frankly, I can't remember the last time I watched any football game from start to finish when Alabama (OR our next opponent) wasn't one of the teams playing.

I can still "Wink" and "Squint" enough to see "college football" when it's Alabama out there - but when it's almost anyone else......
 

bamamick

All-American
Feb 22, 2005
2,047
219
82
If Alabama lost money on the 2011 BCSCG, you did it on purpose. That game was close, and selling your ticket allotment would not have been a problem. Probably more about all of the extra people that Alabama brings to these games.
I think so. CMM and CNS never scrimped when it came to rewarding everyone involved in the success of the program (so I have heard. I have no personal knowledge of this).

rtr
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
You act like all bowls with the exception of the playoffs should be disbanded. I’m for getting rid of some bowls and just having the top 40% make a bowl, but getting rid of all of them except the NY6 is looney.
I didn't say anything of the sort, heck I want the playoffs disbanded, not the bowl games. But teams without winning records playing in ten year old bowls is joke in my opinion. Bowls have such a rich history, I hate to see them degraded in such fashion. They are part of why people grew to love college football so much. No one grew to love football because of the GoDaddy bowl game though...

I wouldn't complain if they did this.
I would, a lot, heh...
 

Redwood Forrest

Hall of Fame
Sep 19, 2003
11,042
907
237
76
Boaz, AL USA
This whole "deserves a bowl" thing is about as accurate (in today's world) as that clause in the Heisman about "character." Neither applies any longer. It is only us old codgers who can't accept the new norm.
 

TomFromBama

Suspended
May 14, 2003
1,142
0
0
Lower Alabama
I didn't say anything of the sort, heck I want the playoffs disbanded, not the bowl games. But teams without winning records playing in ten year old bowls is joke in my opinion. Bowls have such a rich history, I hate to see them degraded in such fashion. They are part of why people grew to love college football so much. No one grew to love football because of the GoDaddy bowl game though...
AAAAAAAAAAA-Men! :smile:

Put me in the column in favor of the "Bad Ole' Days"!!! Let Saban, Meyer, Swinney, etc. get on a conference call and hash it all out in the first week of December, and let the chips fall where they may!


This whole "deserves a bowl" thing is about as accurate (in today's world) as that clause in the Heisman about "character." Neither applies any longer. It is only us old codgers who can't accept the new norm.
Well, I'd say "refuse to accept the new 'manure' over the long-standing norms we abandoned."

But otherwise I agree.... ;)

 

RedWave

All-SEC
Sep 26, 2000
1,579
3
0
Arlington, Tx
Can't believe anyone wants to go back to a way where the champion is chosen arbitrarily rather than through a playoff system. I like it better when who gets to play in the championship is decided on the field rather than a board room. Give me more playoff games, not less.
 

TomFromBama

Suspended
May 14, 2003
1,142
0
0
Lower Alabama
Can't believe anyone wants to go back to a way where the champion is chosen arbitrarily rather than through a playoff system. I like it better when who gets to play in the championship is decided on the field rather than a board room. Give me more playoff games, not less.
Respectfully, friend, are you even REMOTELY familiar with the secret, closed door, "board room" system currently in use to decide who gets to "decide on the field"?????? ;)

If you are looking for any semblance of "objectivity" - Well, we HAD that with the BCS system, which was so "terrible" that it had to be abolished.

All I'm saying is that I prefer one form of "Back room deal" over another form of "Back room deal" - that's all.
Now - That said, I realize this opinion is FAR outside the "mainstream" of fan opinion these days. It's still my opinion! :)
 

UntouchableCrew

All-SEC
Nov 30, 2015
1,530
338
102
Respectfully, friend, are you even REMOTELY familiar with the secret, closed door, "board room" system currently in use to decide who gets to "decide on the field"?????? ;)

If you are looking for any semblance of "objectivity" - Well, we HAD that with the BCS system, which was so "terrible" that it had to be abolished.

All I'm saying is that I prefer one form of "Back room deal" over another form of "Back room deal" - that's all.
Now - That said, I realize this opinion is FAR outside the "mainstream" of fan opinion these days. It's still my opinion! :)
Well the most current form of "back room deal" allowed Alabama to play for a title when they otherwise wouldn't have been able to, so I'll take it.
 

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
Can't believe anyone wants to go back to a way where the champion is chosen arbitrarily rather than through a playoff system. I like it better when who gets to play in the championship is decided on the field rather than a board room. Give me more playoff games, not less.
How is a playoff not arbitrary in its own right? You just said you wanted more, so at least 8 teams right? How are those eight teams chosen? What makes those games mean so much more than what occurred in the regular season? Why should teams be allowed into the playoff with two losses for instance (I'd have to do some digging but I believe 8 teams would open the door to 3 loss teams), but a single loss within the playoff means a team no longer can win a championship?

To me, the idea that one team can have three regular season losses, another team can have one loss, both of those teams being in the power 5... and we crown the former and not the latter champion seems rather arbitrary to me. The least arbitrary thing to do was to make every single game count and weigh them all against each other, not promote some to special importance.
 
Last edited:

KrAzY3

Hall of Fame
Jan 18, 2006
10,615
4,540
187
44
kraizy.art
When they imposed the 85 scholarship limits, there were closer to 85 FBS programs in total...

I'm sure glad they did that, without that we'd have less crap bowls and self proclaimed national champions.
 

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.