Too many Bowl games

When I was a kid, and it wasn't that long ago, going to a bowl game meant something. Today it's ridiculous. Case in point: Minnesota Golden Gophers playing in a bowl game today. Minnesota with a record of 5-7 on the year and 2-6 in their conference. How is this a "Bowl" team??

Historically, a team needed to have at least 6 wins to be bowl eligible. Apparently 2 new bowls were added though, and there weren't enough teams at 6-6. That is just sad.

Quote: kewlj

When I was a kid, and it wasn't that long ago, going to a bowl game meant something. Today it's ridiculous. Case in point: Minnesota Golden Gophers playing in a bowl game today. Minnesota with a record of 5-7 on the year and 2-6 in their conference. How is this a "Bowl" team??

It's all about the TV dollars. The teams also get some extra television time that helps them recruit.

I agree it is a ridiculous concept yet I still love having all these games to watch. I hope to watch at least 15 of the remaining 22 games. I do hate the fact that the semi final games start at 1:15pm on Thursday.

Sure it is "rediculous" but the schools involved are probably glad they are. I just don't watch them and don't care.

Quote: sabre

Historically, a team needed to have at least 6 wins to be bowl eligible. Apparently 2 new bowls were added though, and there weren't enough teams at 6-6. That is just sad.

In fact, there is an NCAA bylaw saying that, normally, teams with losing records are not eligible for bowl games. However, this year, there were 40 bowl games, and only 77 eligible teams, so the NCAA added a new rule saying that the three 5-7 teams with the highest Academic Progress Rate (APR) would be eligible. (A team's APR is something like (500 x the fraction of its scholarship players who remain academically eligible) + (500 x the fraction of its scholarship players who will have eligibility remaining and are not leaving school). If a school does not give out athletic scholarships - for example, I don't think West Point does - then they use a different method to determine who to count.)

There is, in fact, a "priority list" of teams that would be bowl eligible if there are not enough normally eligible teams, but I don't think any teams fell into any of the five categories (note that a team that finished its regular season 6-6 but loses a conference championship game is bowl eligible automatically):

1. Normally, a school cannot count wins against non-FBS opponents (all losses count), except that one win against an FCS team can be counted if the FCS team gave out at least 90% of its allowed scholarships over the past two years. If a team didn't count an FCS win, but would have been eligible had an FCS team that it beat gave out enough scholarships, then it would be in Group 1. This almost happened; had Cal lost its last game, there was some question as to whether or not Grambling gave out enough scholarships, and had Grambling not, then Cal would have been in this group.

2. If a school would have been eligible had it been allowed to count two wins against FCS teams instead of just one (regardless of scholarships), then it is in Group 2.

3. Three schools - Hawaii, Colorado, and Louisiana-Monroe - played 13 games in their regular seasons. (This is because Hawaii, and any other team that has a regular-season game in Hawaii, is allowed an extra game.) Had any of them finished 6-7, they would have been in Group 3.

4. UNC-Charlotte is in its second year of a transfer from FCS to FBS. Normally, that makes them bowl ineligible, but had they won enough games to be bowl eligible, they would have been in Group 4. (I think Coastal Carolina is in Group 4 next season.)

5. A 5-7 team that is in the top 5 of the FBS Football APR list is in Group 5. None of the top 5 were 5-7 this year; I think the highest 5-7 team was 7th. The difference between this and the "best APRs" rule that the NCAA did use was, if there was only one spot remaining and there were two 5-7 teams in the top 5, then the bowl could choose either team, and not necessarily the one with the higher APR.

I watched midget porn all day long today. It's much more entertaining than a crappy bowl game or two.

the way I see it, it is basically another week in the college football schedule. most bowl games aren't special, they are just another game, that's all.

Quote: HowMany

I watched midget porn all day long today. It's much more entertaining than a crappy bowl game or two.

Other than the Boise St and San Diego St games I think all of the bowls have been pretty good this year. Probably the best early bowl season I remember in a while.

Hopefully the Tar Heels can keep it close today as I have multiple bets on them.

There are two many bowl games. They are like "Participation Trophies" now. I know, I know...the schools make some money on them for their athletic program and the coach can use his streak of mediocre bowls to make him seem worth more than he really is worth...but I just wish there were a good many less and there was a real playoff....

That being said...Wreck'em Tech!!

Looking forward to the Texas Bowl tonight...

Too may bowl games? Nah. We need more, more bowl games. Start now and run thru next summer, then start a new season.
No?
What? I'm supposed to tune in to soccer?

Quote: TwoFeathersATL

Too may bowl games? Nah. We need more, more bowl games. Start now and run thru next summer, then start a new season.

They would conflict with the men's basketball tournament.

Somewhat seriously, they do have to get all college football games done in time for the two-sport players to switch to their spring sports. Baseball practice starts January 30 in 2016.

(edited to remove comment about how Stanford, with John Elway, couldn't even get into a bowl game in 1982 - then I discovered they only went 5-6 that year)