Bowl Eligibility

[Solo One]

Hi all. I would like to throw this out for discussion.

With the number of bowl games (41, I think) now days the selection criteria should be stricter. IMO teams that are selected for a bowl game must have a .500 record within their conference. Most (if not all).conferences have football programs that have no hope ( or very little hope) of winning their conference championship or winning half of theIr in-conference games. These schools instead rely on scheduling lower division teams or other "not so good teams" from other conferences to make it to an overall .500 record. One reason for this IMO is conference tie-ins to bowl games. This makes it easier for a "mediocre" program to get a bowl game by creatively scheduling three or four "sure things" and squeak out two or three wins in conference to become " bowl eligible." Why reward schools with a bowl game when they can't win half their in-conference games?

Further, if a conference with bowl tie-ins doesn't have enough teams meeting the eligibility requirements as described (.500 in conference and .500 overall record) then select teams from other conferences that do meet the criteria. If there aren't enough teams to fill all of the bowl games ( remember last year) then select teams with losing records. Personally, I would be in favor of reducing the number of bowls but, I guess that train has left the station.

Finally, I know money is the driver for bowl games but, not everyone deserves to go. Thanks for letting me vent.

 

[teamcanada]

There aren't enough teams now to fill the bowl slots. Requiring a team to have a 500 win percentage would shrink the pool even further.

 

[Guy Gadbois]

agree OP. cut the number bowls in half and it would still be too many IMHO.

Here are the only bowls I think there should be:

Orange
Rose
Sugar
Fiesta
Cotton
Citrus
Peach
Gator
Outback
Sun
Liberty
Independence
Music City
Hula (Hawaii)

That basically gives you a top 25 plus 3, and then if you still wanted to do the whole 4 team playoff thing with the top 4 bowls and then a national championship game, that would be cool with me too.

maybe add the holiday, alamo, and cactus as well for more southwestern exposure, but then I'd probably cut the Music City bowl out

 

[rentalman]

No Motor City or Pinstripe Bowl? Can we live without those? Agree with Guy that there are way too many bowls. His list is pretty close to what it should be. I think that might even improve regular season play. Teams on the bubble might have more of a since of urgency as they play out the last two or threes games in order to land a bowl bid.

 

[teamcanada]

One reason they will never cut the number of games- $

 

[gocds]

Hi all. I would like to throw this out for discussion.

With the number of bowl games (41, I think) now days the selection criteria should be stricter. IMO teams that are selected for a bowl game must have a .500 record within their conference. Most (if not all).conferences have football programs that have no hope ( or very little hope) of winning their conference championship or winning half of theIr in-conference games. These schools instead rely on scheduling lower division teams or other "not so good teams" from other conferences to make it to an overall .500 record. One reason for this IMO is conference tie-ins to bowl games. This makes it easier for a "mediocre" program to get a bowl game by creatively scheduling three or four "sure things" and squeak out two or three wins in conference to become " bowl eligible." Why reward schools with a bowl game when they can't win half their in-conference games?

Further, if a conference with bowl tie-ins doesn't have enough teams meeting the eligibility requirements as described (.500 in conference and .500 overall record) then select teams from other conferences that do meet the criteria. If there aren't enough teams to fill all of the bowl games ( remember last year) then select teams with losing records. Personally, I would be in favor of reducing the number of bowls but, I guess that train has left the station.

Finally, I know money is the driver for bowl games but, not everyone deserves to go. Thanks for letting me vent.

Yeah "money" is the driver for bowl games, but if you think the schools are making money from these "games" then you are sadly mistaken. The only people making money are the TV folks. Just ask the athletic administration at UofL (you can't ask the uahkay folks) about the "profit" from bowl games. Schools want a bowl game for the honor for a successful season and for recruiting purposes. PERIOD.

GO CARDS - BEAT EVERYBODY!!! God Bless America!!!

 

[Guardman]

Guy's list is right. Maybe a couple could be subtracted from his list.

As long as people/fans are willing to spend/waste their $$$$ to watch junk-bad-football (on tv or in-person or via internet), then ESPN and FOX and CBS will serve us up these awful offerings.

 

[HedleyLamarr]

Go to a sweet sixteen playoff system, encompassing the major bowls, and let all the other bowls do whatever they want to do.

 

[Guardman]

Go to a sweet sixteen playoff system, encompassing the major bowls, and let all the other bowls do whatever they want to do.

Well I'm generally OK with this, as long as the "other bowls" are OFFICIALLY called "POST-SEASON EXHIBITION GAMES" ... by the NCAA.