Too many bowls?

This season, 73 out of 119 Division I Football Bowl Subdivision teams met the bare minimum requirements for bowl consideration: obtaining at least a .500 record and defeating six FBS opponents (or five FBS opponents and one Division I Football Championship Subdivision pansy). However, "only" 64 bowl spots were available, with merely two at-large berths possible (Motor City and Poinsettia), which meant that any 6-6 teams were in danger of being left out. Here are the nine who will be staying home:



Pittsburgh
Kansas
Southern Methodist
Kent State
Wyoming
Arizona
Washington State
Arkansas State
Louisiana-Lafayette

This just in: football games make money. I agree it's sort of sad how meaningless the entire bowl system has become. Honestly, what's the point of an 6-5 team playing a 7-4 for the right to still be mediocre? It's all about money.

if there are 64 spots open in a bowl series - could you imagine the month of December with a 64 team BCS???? :eek:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RedsManRick

This just in: football games make money. I agree it's sort of sad how meaningless the entire bowl system has become. Honestly, what's the point of an 6-5 team playing a 7-4 for the right to still be mediocre? It's all about money.

---

Especially when it's 7-5 Middle Tennessee State versus Central Michigan in Detroit.

When I was younger Marshall played in 1-AA (now the Championship Subdivision). Those playoff games were some of the most exciting--and money making--games in school history.

I wish that the big boys would adopt a 16 team playoff. It gives all conference champs a chance. Teams from the weaker leagues would usually get bounced and the power conferences would dominate. For instance, my freshman year MU went 15-0 and won the title game 49-20. The last few seasons in 1-AA provided clear evidence we needed to jump divisions. We would never have reached that level without a playoff system.

I definitely think there are too many bowls and we need a playoff to determine a true champion. Check out my song/video about this very topic:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SDlwYLM-S8

My Cougs (Wash. St.) deserve to stay home. They were flat this year and finished weakly. I have no problem with the number of bowl games as it allows me to watch more college football, but I do think there needs to be something done to allow for a more absolute resolution to who is crowned champion (ie, 10-16 team playoff grid).

The only bowl game that matters is the national championship game. Any other game is just a meaningless exhibition.

For a team to take pride in saying "we made the Pep Boys Auto Parts Bowl" is really silly.

Boise St and Utah would not have gotten to the BCS if it weren't for all the lower bowl money they, and other teams in their conferences, have brought in over the years.

It may seem like overkill, but it's good for football.

Hey now. As an alumnus of Kent State University, I have to say it would have been nice if they had made a bowl, because I don't know if they've ever done it before. 6-6 is about the best they've been since forever.

I think the greater number of bowls has helped teams in mid-major conferences like the MAC get more recognition and more teams into post-season play. If they dropped the number of bowls, it would be good teams from the mid-major conferences that would miss out. IIRC, in the days with fewer bowl games, selection committees would rather extend an invite to a mediocre team from a major conference than a good team from a mid-major conference.

More bowls = More gambling = More Casinos....


What could go wrong?

6-6 teams should NOT make Bowl Games....rewarding for being nothing more than average.

That's a start.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Matt700wlw

6-6 teams should NOT make Bowl Games....rewarding for being nothing more than average.

That's a start.

---

yeah...but if only 7-5 (or better) teams were eligible for bowl games, there wouldn't be enough teams that make the cut for the the 32 bowl games. Hey...I may be on to something here...:thumbup: