25 minutes ago, futurecoach said:

Honestly I think it is a good thing that the bowls are going away. They literally serve no purpose anymore, and truly never did IMO.  I do think they should expand the playoffs, and possibly have a NIT type tournament if teams that aren't in the playoffs want to. 

I think this would really enjoyable, especially for G5 teams.  However, we run into the issues of player movement again like what college basketball has run into and I can see it hard for teams to get enough guys that want to beat themselves up over another 3-4 games for an NIT football title.  That's why I think the sport is in a mess until something gets resolved with transfers or trying to lock players in for longer periods of time.  Otherwise, this opt out problem will accelerate even more.

I hate what they are becoming, but I've loved the bowl season for years. Watching random teams that I normally wouldn't get a chance to watch is always fun. Even with depleted rosters, I look forward to the next three weeks of random games.

One way to end opt outs would be to make all opt outs a two year proposition. Team opts out this year, they sit out next year too. Coach leaves his bowl eligible team early (without being fired), then he can't coach in the next years bowls or playoffs, a player opts out then come next December he's standing on the sidelines.

The bowl games used to be prestigious, because they were less numerous.  They used to have more diversity, because more networks aired them.  In the days without the playoffs, or even the definite national title being decided by a 1 vs. 2, they also had very real, definite implications.  Those are the reasons to me, that they used to be an event people would tune in for, and why players wanted to play.  

* 26 years ago, there were 18 bowl games.  There are 47 this year.  

* 26 years ago, those 18 bowl games were broadcast by seven different entities. Only four of those were doing a single game, while CBS, NBC, and ABC/ESPN all had multiple.  (For the purpose of this, I am still going to consider ABC and ESPN one and the same, even though then, they weren't.  Consider it eight if you disagree.)  This year it is only five.  Fox, CBS, The CW, and TNT all have a single game.  The other 43 are all by ESPN/ABC.  

* The title implications are self explanatory.  The particular year I chose - 89/90 - featured three games that could have conceivably produced the national champion.  #1 Colorado lost 21-6 to #4 Notre Dame in the Orange Bowl, #3 Michigan lost 17-10 to #12 USC in the Rose Bowl, and #2 Miami defeated #7 Alabama 33-25 in the Sugar Bowl, securing the national title.  The Sugar Bowl and Orange Bowl took place simultaneously on competing networks, meaning you could flip back and forth to watch two very entertaining games with the title on the line.  

More Bowls + Homogeny in who is producing that (which helped produce the dreaded NARRATIVE) + Removing real implications = This stuff isn't all that important. The BCS and playoffs gave us something that we did desire - no ambiguity about who the champion should be.  But we lost something along the way.

Kill the bowls.

32 team playoff... Do away with conference championships.  

31 games...give them a bowl name.  

1 minute ago, okie1 said:

32 team playoff... Do away with conference championships.  

31 games...give them a bowl name.  

First round games Thanksgiving weekend.  2 weeks off before NC...played on or around new years.

Can you imagine 16 games on the Friday/Saturday of Thanksgiving weekend, along with NFL on Thursday and Sunday...If you favorite HS team is playing a little Semi final action HS football...

It would be an incredible weekend.

3 hours ago, Jumper_Dad said:

This is fantastic. 

2 hours ago, 9068 said:

How many players in this era see 10+ practices, giving up Christmas break, and heading to a bowl in a smaller venue as a reward? They are getting PAID and many of the players will opt out to enter the portal and hit their next spot. Saw where a guy at UK is planning to leave.....and go to his fourth school in his fourth year.

That's bad, but I've seen worse.  Saw a kid hit the portal two Decembers ago, go to another school, spring practice didn't work out so he hit the portal again.  Went to a 3rd school starting in July, then after last season, hit the portal again in December.  Basically, 4 schools from November 2023 to January 2025.  It really is insane.

 

6 hours ago, Jumper_Dad said:

Don't lose to Miami and Texas AM!

11 hours ago, Jumper_Dad said:

That is funny.

I don't know if it will die out completely, but they need to cut back on the number.  There are way too many bowls with bad teams playing.  If you hit .500, your basically guaranteed a bowl.  College football needs to stop rewarding mediocrity.  Participation ribbons are ok for elementary school, not major college football.

I’d rather see a 16 team playoff for the Power 4 conferences and a separate 16 team playoff for the other conferences. The smaller conference teams have no real shot at winning the national title anyway. It’s all called FBS but it’s virtually two separate divisions from a competitive standpoint. 

One thing we all seem to forget is if this wasn't beneficial for the teams, the sponsors and the networks...there wouldn't be bowls. 

We can wring our hands and complain that too many teams make bowls or that some teams are undeserving. Honestly though, if someone is willing to pay and someone is willing play...why should we all be so bothered by it?

I, even in this thread, called for half as many bowl games. After thinking it through, why? Who does it bother if WKU plays Southern Miss in New Orleans or any of the 40 other bowls.

I would like to see an NIL component in place for each player in a bowl game. Maybe an NIL Bonus Pool where winning team gets 75% and losers get 25% would put a little fire in the players as well. If to make that viable financially there needed to be a reduction in the number of bowl games so be it.