Bowl games: What's the point?

[JimboJ]

I understand the tradition behind the bowl games, and I know this topic has been beaten to death. But I still just don't get it. So Miami wins the Big East and they get to play FSU in the Orange Bowl, and they win the game, and they get a nice trophy... but so what? Their season is over and they have no opportunity to advance any further. And why should I as a general fan, with no afilliation with either of those schools, care??

And I've heard all the arguments about changing to a playoff system, and how it could work and how it could never work. I keep hearing that it's all about the money and sponsorships, so the bowl system will never go away. But the bottom line is that the sponsorships and advertising money are driven by ratings. Wouldn't a tournament generate more ratings?

Look how big March Madness has gotten. Do you think it would be anywhere near as popular if they had the same BCS system that football has? And basketball is nowhere near as popular as football in this country. Yes, football games are harder to schedule because they play only once a week. But if lower divisions can do it, why not 1A??

I just keep thinking about how in a playoff system every game would mean something. Every game is an opportunity for one team to advance one step closer to a national championship. Whether the tournament involves 8 or 16 or 32 teams, each team at least has a chance going in to win it all. Let the polls determine who the #1 team is, but let the tournament determine who the champion is.

Am I crazy or could we actually see this in our lifetime?

[Ragone]

Probably will never happen.. Football is just not a game that can be turned around and play 2-4 games in a week like during march madness..

However.. bcs could be turned into a playoff bracket i think.. however it would mean colleges would have to give up a reg season non conf game of probable revenue.. which will never happen..

What it comes down to jimbo, is College Football is a cash cow first.. second.. and third.. the on the field competition ranks a distant.. well last :)

[akw4572]

I can't believe they haven't gone to a tourney. Can you imagine the interest and MONEY generated by a 16 team playoff? 4 weeks that would rival March Madness IMO. I really wish they would. How could would it have been to see a cinderella like Miami of Ohio get to make a run at a title? Same old stuff gets boring to me.

[Cringer]

Bowl Games: What is the point?


MONEY

[TLK]

Originally posted by Cringer
Bowl Games: What is the point?


MONEY

B-I-N-G-O

[Honolulu Blue]

One other reason I had forgotten about until the announcers mentioned it is that all the bowl teams get extra practice time. The coaches seem to think it's important not only to keep sharp for the game, but to get ready for next year.

With a playoff, most of that extra practice would go away.

[Taur]

Alright, I am going to lower the wammy on you all. You may not believe this, but inside those big building are classrooms.

Taking off 4 weeks from school in march, the middle of a semester, is a little different than taking off 4 weeks in december, the end of the semester(Finals).

Now, if they could go back in time and use the rules from the 1920s, where student athletes did not have to be enrolled in classes, then I think you could have your turnament.

[Peregrine]

Alright, I am going to lower the wammy on you all. You may not believe this, but inside those big building are classrooms.

Football players go to classes during the regular season, I'm sure they can during any kind of tournament, except during the actual game trips, just like any week.

Division 1-AA, 2 and 3 already have tournaments which work just fine.

[Suicane75]

Originally posted by Taur
Alright, I am going to lower the wammy on you all.


AND........................ STOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Man, I loved that show.

[Leonidas]

Used to be that bowl games were a reward to the team for having a good season. And that's all they were. Before the late 60's national champions were determined before the bowl games even took place. This is why it used to be bowl game statistics didn't count in the record books, because they were exhibitiona games only.

Some speculate this is why the PAC 10 (or PAC 8 as it was called then) used to dominate the Rose Bowl in the 60's and 70's. The Big 10 Teams were on vacation for the game, while the PAC 8 teams were at home preparing for a regular game. Bo Shembechler took a lot of heat in the 70's because he treated it like a reward for his players.

The emphasis was so low on bowl games there once was a year where Ohio State turned down the Rose Bowl (after winning the Big 10 and actually being number 1 in the polls) because the school had a policy not to go to the game in consecutive years. I think Woody Hayes considered leaving over that, but in the end the trustees had their way. It was just a far different culture back then.

I think things really changed once the corporate sponsors took the games over in the 80's and started pouring really big money into it. The Sugar Bowl was the Sugar Bowl, not the Nokia Sugar Bowl. And there was no Outback Bowl or Blockbuster Bowl. The bowls were put on by local organizations, like the Jaycees, mainly to promote local tourism. Now it's TV deals, corporate sponsors, and conference tie-ins. They all learned how to milk the bowl system for big bucks and now they are afraid to let go.

[Draft Dodger]

personally, I like the fact that half the teams playing in Bowl games will go home a winner.

may not mean much to you, the fan. but I think it DOES mean something to the guys playing, especially those who won't be going on to the pros.

[JimboJ]

Originally posted by Taur
Taking off 4 weeks from school in march, the middle of a semester, is a little different than taking off 4 weeks in december, the end of the semester(Finals).
Don't they have four weeks off after finals? At least we did back when I went to college.

Of course it's about the money. That was my whole point - I believe they could make MORE money from a tournament. Tournament = more interest = higher ratings = more $$$.

For example, how many people watched that big traditional Plains Capital Forth Worth Bowl? How manay people even heard of that game or know who played in it? How many would have watched it if it were a first round tournament matchup between 1st seed USC and 16th seed Miami of Ohio?

I rest my case.

[akw4572]

Originally posted by Taur
Alright, I am going to lower the wammy on you all. You may not believe this, but inside those big building are classrooms.

Taking off 4 weeks from school in march, the middle of a semester, is a little different than taking off 4 weeks in december, the end of the semester(Finals).

Now, if they could go back in time and use the rules from the 1920s, where student athletes did not have to be enrolled in classes, then I think you could have your turnament.

Why do you have to take four weeks off of classes? It would be like an extension of the regular season.......one game a week.

[rkmsuf]

The bettors get the most out of all the bowls...

[JonInMiddleGA]

I just love how the same people who bitch most about the BCS system seem to be the same ones who so badly want a playoff system.

Guess what?

The same sort of formula would determine the entrants in a tournament.

As it stands now, it's a two-team tournament instead of a 4/8/12/16/32/64/128 team tournament.

Whoop-de-doo.

[rkmsuf]

How do you have co-champs with a tourney?

[judicial clerk]

Don't start caring about student athletes all of a sudden just because you are trying to deny me of my right to a college football playoff. These football players have it as easy academically as possible. Schools bend over backwards to accomodate them, and the only ones that put in any effort are doing it of their own desire to learn. A playioff system would only effect the teams playing in it, not the other roughly 100 schools who could go play in NIT style bowl games. Also, you could knock a week or two off of the regular season to accomodate the playoffs. Its not like every other division of NCAA football is suffering from incredible expulsion rates due to playoff induced flunking (and those schools do it without all of the special "tutors" and "counselors" available to the big time programs).

Also, the tradition of the bowls is gone as evidenced by the bowls moving their game date off of New Years day so that they can gain a half-point of TV ratings.

[SteelerFan448]

Originally posted by Draft Dodger
personally, I like the fact that half the teams playing in Bowl games will go home a winner.

may not mean much to you, the fan. but I think it DOES mean something to the guys playing, especially those who won't be going on to the pros.

That's how I feel too. Plus it also gives you one more opportunity to see the great juniors and seniors play in a college game before they go off to the NFL.

One thing that I would like to see, keep the entire bowl system as it is and then have the winners from the top two bowl games play for the title. This year it would be the winners of the Sugar and Rose Bowls playing. In all seriousness, there are never more than 2-4 teams that have legitimate claims to a title and this would keep the bowl people and playoff people more happy than they are now.

[MJ4H]

Originally posted by JonInMiddleGA
I just love how the same people who bitch most about the BCS system seem to be the same ones who so badly want a playoff system.

Guess what?

The same sort of formula would determine the entrants in a tournament.

As it stands now, it's a two-team tournament instead of a 4/8/12/16/32/64/128 team tournament.

Whoop-de-doo.

But with a 2 team tournament you are much more likely to deny the best/most-deserving team in the country a SHOT at the NC. With a larger tournament, that chance goes down significantly.

[Easy Mac]

Here is how my playoff would look

Playoff (http://fc.furman.edu/~christopher.mason/playoff.html)

[judicial clerk]

Texas gets beat by Miami (OH)

[Easy Mac]

Only if they play at Miami. I guess technically it wouldn't be fair for better teams to go on the road, but it leads to a few more upsets.

[Ragone]

Easy mac.. let the #1 team play at home.. so #1 is something to play for


Let the rest play at neutral (aka the bowl sites that stand to lose the revenue.. otherwise they'd never agree to let this happen)

16 teams is too many.. probably 8 would be max

acc/big 10/big east/big 12/sec/pac 10 champ and 2 wild cards is plenty which this year would be like

Fsu/Michigan/Miami Fla/K-State/Lsu/Usc/ Oklahoma and Texas as the wild card's.. but honestly maybe the best thing to do would be to eliminate conf championships as well.. and use conf record as the indicator hmm..

[Leonidas]

Originally posted by Easy Mac
Only if they (Texas) play at Miami.

That should be amended to say if they only play at Miami or any other stadium outside of Austin. They were 0-2 this year on neutral sites.

[dawgfan]

This argument has gone around ad nauseum, and I've expressed my opinion more than once, but here's another condensed version:

Bowl games are about more than just casual fans watching on TV. They are a weeklong reward to winning college football teams. An entire community gathers together to pamper the players and alumni of the participating schools, usually over the holidays when school is on hiatus. Alumni travel to said location and spend money which boosts tourism for the bowl location, and the players feel like kings since they're the big game in town.

There's no question that the bowl system has expanded so large that the bowls themselves carry less prestige than when it was just the Rose, Orange, Cotton and Sugar Bowls, but then again it's a nice way to reward a team like Kansas that has stunk for years and years and finally breaks out with a decent season.

The NCAA basketball tournament is exciting and all, but it's a completely different feeling and the result means something completely different than the poll system in college football. Yes, the teams play on the court in the NCAA tourney, but with 1-game single-elimination you have a system where the luckiest/hottest team is crowned national champs rather than the best team, whereas in college football everhthing has been set-up to try and determine the best team over the entire season rather than whoever is the hottest team at the end of the season.

Was Villanova really the best team when they won the tourney, or just the luckiest/hottest in the tourney? What if we had a 16-team tourney in college football and Georgia got hot and won it all even though they had 3 losses going into the tourney? Do those regular season and conference championship games not count then?

I would be willing to live with a compromise that kept the bowl system as is and then added a four-team tourney over 2 weekends following the bowls. I don't think there's ever been a season when more than 4 schools had a legitimate claim to being national champs. Yes, there would be controversy in deterimining the 4 seeds, and yes you might have a somewhat distasteful result where a 4 seed with perhaps 2 losses might win out and be national champs, but I think that's probably the best compromise - otherwise, just go back to the old traditional conference bowl alignments and let the polls decide a mythical champion with no constrictions. So what if you get a split title - why shouldn't fans of both Washington and Miami of 1991 get to feel their teams were national champs? They were both outstanding teams? And why the clamor for an 'official' champion - does this really prove anything?

[Tigercat]

The point is the casual fan won't care if Miami wins the bowl.

The plus for having some sort of Bowl system instead of only a playoff system is the fans and players of specific teams get a chance to end the season on a positive note, whereas in a playoff system that may only be possible for one team.

As a casual fan you get the chance to watch more football, only not in a playoff setting. These players do want to win these bowl games badly for the most part though, so you shouldn't get too much dropoff in intensity and play from the players accross the board.

[TLV]

Originally posted by Taur
Alright, I am going to lower the wammy on you all. You may not believe this, but inside those big building are classrooms.

Taking off 4 weeks from school in march, the middle of a semester, is a little different than taking off 4 weeks in december, the end of the semester(Finals).

Now, if they could go back in time and use the rules from the 1920s, where student athletes did not have to be enrolled in classes, then I think you could have your turnament.

Or they could play the games in January when most of the kids are on their winter breaks.

[JimboJ]

Originally posted by Tigercat
The point is the casual fan won't care if Miami wins the bowl.

The plus for having some sort of Bowl system instead of only a playoff system is the fans and players of specific teams get a chance to end the season on a positive note, whereas in a playoff system that may only be possible for one team.

As a casual fan you get the chance to watch more football, only not in a playoff setting. These players do want to win these bowl games badly for the most part though, so you shouldn't get too much dropoff in intensity and play from the players accross the board.

I think a playoff system would bring more attention from casual fans, resulting in more revenue for everyone involved. I give you two words: office pools.

How many people do you know who don't watch any college basketball throughout the regular season, but as soon as March rolls around, they fill out their brackets and watch the games, and root for the underdogs, and pretend like they are college hoops fans? You don't think the same thing would happen if there was a football tournament? It's all about marketing - if they do it right it could be huge.

I know the hard-core college football fans would prefer the traditional bowl games, but I think there is a huge untapped market of casual fans, or NFL fans that don't really pay much attention to college football. I just don't buy this crap about how abandoning the bowl system will result in less money being made.