elf owl
All American
Posts: 3,041
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 14
I Root For: Birds
Location: Ankh-Morpork
|
Bowl inflation over the years
Sampling the number of college bowls over ten year intervals reveals a disturbing trend. See if you can spot it.
Year # of Bowls
1940 5
1950 9
1960 9
1970 11
1980 15
1990 19
2000 25
2010 35
2016 41
A 16 game playoff would require 15 games. Today I watched a 5-7 team beat a 6-6 team. Both teams finished their seasons a sub .500 6-7. And you thought the election was a farce.
|
|
12-26-2016 07:03 PM |
|
Ranger
Hall of Famer
Posts: 10,020
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 48
I Root For: SOF/Owl Basebal
Location:
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
(12-26-2016 07:03 PM)elf owl Wrote: Sampling the number of college bowls over ten year intervals reveals a disturbing trend. See if you can spot it.
Year # of Bowls
1940 5
1950 9
1960 9
1970 11
1980 15
1990 19
2000 25
2010 35
2016 41
A 16 game playoff would require 15 games. Today I watched a 5-7 team beat a 6-6 team. Both teams finished their seasons a sub .500 6-7. And you thought the election was a farce.
This is why I do not get excited for us to "go to a bowl." There are so many "participation" bowls with semi worthless teams playing. If I were the king, a team would need at least 8-4 to get to a bowl. They should make it mean something. 41 bowls. That means 82 teams. Incredible.
|
|
12-26-2016 07:23 PM |
|
elf owl
All American
Posts: 3,041
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 14
I Root For: Birds
Location: Ankh-Morpork
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
(12-26-2016 07:23 PM)Ranger Wrote: (12-26-2016 07:03 PM)elf owl Wrote: Sampling the number of college bowls over ten year intervals reveals a disturbing trend. See if you can spot it.
Year # of Bowls
1940 5
1950 9
1960 9
1970 11
1980 15
1990 19
2000 25
2010 35
2016 41
A 16 game playoff would require 15 games. Today I watched a 5-7 team beat a 6-6 team. Both teams finished their seasons a sub .500 6-7. And you thought the election was a farce.
This is why I do not get excited for us to "go to a bowl." There are so many "participation" bowls with semi worthless teams playing. If I were the king, a team would need at least 8-4 to get to a bowl. They should make it mean something. 41 bowls. That means 82 teams. Incredible.
Actually 80 teams, since two will play twice. Still ridiculous. It's like participation trophies.
|
|
12-26-2016 07:42 PM |
|
Da.Owl
Rs.for.Cars@gmail.com
Posts: 6,235
Joined: Jul 2005
Reputation: 38
I Root For: The Rice Owls
Location: Under H. R. S.
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
Check and you'll find most of the newest bowls belong to E$PN. Will be interesting to see how many survive as E$PN's financial fortunes continue to fall.
|
|
12-26-2016 07:44 PM |
|
elf owl
All American
Posts: 3,041
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 14
I Root For: Birds
Location: Ankh-Morpork
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
Looking forward to tomorrow morning's Heart of Dallas Bowl, featuring the 5-7 Mean Green Of North Texas, whose 5 wins include powerful Bethune Cookman (lost their first 5 games) and our own mighty Owls (lost their first 6), not to mention Army, their opponent for tomorrow.
|
|
12-26-2016 09:27 PM |
|
WeatherfordOwl
1st String
Posts: 1,168
Joined: Jun 2005
Reputation: 10
I Root For:
Location:
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
(12-26-2016 07:03 PM)elf owl Wrote: Sampling the number of college bowls over ten year intervals reveals a disturbing trend. See if you can spot it.
Year # of Bowls
1940 5
1950 9
1960 9
1970 11
1980 15
1990 19
2000 25
2010 35
2016 41
A 16 game playoff would require 15 games. Today I watched a 5-7 team beat a 6-6 team. Both teams finished their seasons a sub .500 6-7. And you thought the election was a farce.
So why did you watch that game? I didn't. I'd suggest that if folks would quit watching every game that is televised, there might not be so many bowls. But even if that trend doesn't change, so what? It's nothing to me. Like reality TV shows. I don't watch what I don't like. In the early 1970's, the Oilers sold out the 'Dome for every home game, while they went winless two years straight. People have been trained like sheep.
|
|
12-26-2016 11:10 PM |
|
GoodOwl
The 1 Hoo Knocks
Posts: 25,218
Joined: Nov 2010
Reputation: 2239
I Root For: New Horizons
Location: Planiverse
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
(12-26-2016 07:23 PM)Ranger Wrote: (12-26-2016 07:03 PM)elf owl Wrote: Sampling the number of college bowls over ten year intervals reveals a disturbing trend. See if you can spot it.
Year # of Bowls
1940 5
1950 9
1960 9
1970 11
1980 15
1990 19
2000 25
2010 35
2016 41
A 16 game playoff would require 15 games. Today I watched a 5-7 team beat a 6-6 team. Both teams finished their seasons a sub .500 6-7. And you thought the election was a farce.
This is why I do not get excited for us to "go to a bowl." There are so many "participation" bowls with semi worthless teams playing. If I were the king, a team would need at least 8-4 to get to a bowl. They should make it mean something. 41 bowls. That means 82 teams. Incredible.
Why? The text in bold is the problem. I have yet to watch one this season. Agree whole-heartedly with Ranger. Having standards matters. Except perhaps on South Main.
|
|
12-27-2016 12:13 PM |
|
tramile12
2nd String
Posts: 387
Joined: Sep 2012
Reputation: 0
I Root For: RICE
Location:
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
Who cares if there are so many bowls?? If you don't like it, don't watch it. I personally like watching many of these "irrelevant" bowls. Football is football, and if Rice was in the Potato Bowl, I would watch it. Its often times fun to see a 5-7 or 6-6 team win: it is a nice little slice of redemption for slow start or just a mediocre season.
|
|
12-27-2016 01:54 PM |
|
WRCisforgotten79
Hall of Famer
Posts: 10,600
Joined: May 2007
Reputation: 50
I Root For: Rice
Location: Houston
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
North Texas now has the "distinction" of being the 1st school to have TWO bowl appearances after posting a losing regular season record (2001 New Orleans Bowl).
|
|
12-27-2016 02:28 PM |
|
OptimisticOwl
Legend
Posts: 58,536
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 854
I Root For: Rice
Location: DFW Metroplex
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
(12-27-2016 01:54 PM)tramile12 Wrote: Who cares if there are so many bowls?? If you don't like it, don't watch it. I personally like watching many of these "irrelevant" bowls. Football is football, and if Rice was in the Potato Bowl, I would watch it. Its often times fun to see a 5-7 or 6-6 team win: it is a nice little slice of redemption for slow start or just a mediocre season.
Currently watching the HOD Bowl, UNT vs. Army. Wish Rice were in it.
I wonder what most people would think is the correct number of bowls.
|
|
12-27-2016 02:40 PM |
|
elf owl
All American
Posts: 3,041
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 14
I Root For: Birds
Location: Ankh-Morpork
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
(12-27-2016 02:40 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: (12-27-2016 01:54 PM)tramile12 Wrote: Who cares if there are so many bowls?? If you don't like it, don't watch it. I personally like watching many of these "irrelevant" bowls. Football is football, and if Rice was in the Potato Bowl, I would watch it. Its often times fun to see a 5-7 or 6-6 team win: it is a nice little slice of redemption for slow start or just a mediocre season.
Currently watching the HOD Bowl, UNT vs. Army. Wish Rice were in it.
I wonder what most people would think is the correct number of bowls.
Personally I have no idea. However, a 32 team playoff would require 31 games, a 16 team playoff would require 15. So four to five weeks and all teams with a chance to advance vs whatever you call what we have sounds like a plan.
|
|
12-27-2016 03:17 PM |
|
waltgreenberg
Legend
Posts: 33,138
Joined: Feb 2006
Reputation: 138
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: Chicago
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
(12-27-2016 05:08 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: (12-27-2016 03:17 PM)elf owl Wrote: (12-27-2016 02:40 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: (12-27-2016 01:54 PM)tramile12 Wrote: Who cares if there are so many bowls?? If you don't like it, don't watch it. I personally like watching many of these "irrelevant" bowls. Football is football, and if Rice was in the Potato Bowl, I would watch it. Its often times fun to see a 5-7 or 6-6 team win: it is a nice little slice of redemption for slow start or just a mediocre season.
Currently watching the HOD Bowl, UNT vs. Army. Wish Rice were in it.
I wonder what most people would think is the correct number of bowls.
Personally I have no idea. However, a 32 team playoff would require 31 games, a 16 team playoff would require 15. So four to five weeks and all teams with a chance to advance vs whatever you call what we have sounds like a plan.
I have long favored a 32 team playoff.
For football? Ugh.
|
|
12-27-2016 05:20 PM |
|
OptimisticOwl
Legend
Posts: 58,536
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 854
I Root For: Rice
Location: DFW Metroplex
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
(12-27-2016 05:20 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote: (12-27-2016 05:08 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: (12-27-2016 03:17 PM)elf owl Wrote: (12-27-2016 02:40 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: (12-27-2016 01:54 PM)tramile12 Wrote: Who cares if there are so many bowls?? If you don't like it, don't watch it. I personally like watching many of these "irrelevant" bowls. Football is football, and if Rice was in the Potato Bowl, I would watch it. Its often times fun to see a 5-7 or 6-6 team win: it is a nice little slice of redemption for slow start or just a mediocre season.
Currently watching the HOD Bowl, UNT vs. Army. Wish Rice were in it.
I wonder what most people would think is the correct number of bowls.
Personally I have no idea. However, a 32 team playoff would require 31 games, a 16 team playoff would require 15. So four to five weeks and all teams with a chance to advance vs whatever you call what we have sounds like a plan.
I have long favored a 32 team playoff.
For football? Ugh.
Well, we currently have 80 teams in postseason play, so the 32 team playoff would respond to the dilution question. No 6-6 or 7-5 teams need apply. Probably most 8-4 teams would be SOL.
16 teams would be done after 1 week, another 8 after 2 weeks, only 4 still playing after three. Seems better for those who worry it would be too tough for the kids academically.
Ten conference champions and 22 at large should satisfy the P5 thirst for getting a lot teams into the postseason.
|
|
12-27-2016 05:45 PM |
|
georgewebb
Heisman
Posts: 9,582
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 110
I Root For: Rice!
Location:
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
The Football Championship Subdivision (formerly known as Division I-AA) has a playoff as follows:
- 24 teams (11 conference champions and 13 at-large)
- Team must have at least 7 wins to be eligible for an at-large spot (and the regular season is only 11 games)
- Top 8 seeds receive first-round byes
- First round is Thanksgiving weekend
- Octafinals, quarterfinals, and semifinals are on the first three weekends of December
- Final is on first weekend of January (two weeks after the semifinals)
- All games are at campus sites except the final, which is at an MLS stadium
So, neither the first round nor the final game interfere much with school.
bracket:http://i.turner.ncaa.com/sites/default/files/external/gametool/brackets/football_fcs_2016.pdf
|
|
12-27-2016 06:02 PM |
|
Seventyniner
1st String
Posts: 1,074
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 12
I Root For: Rice
Location:
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
(12-27-2016 01:54 PM)tramile12 Wrote: Who cares if there are so many bowls?? If you don't like it, don't watch it. I personally like watching many of these "irrelevant" bowls. Football is football, and if Rice was in the Potato Bowl, I would watch it. Its often times fun to see a 5-7 or 6-6 team win: it is a nice little slice of redemption for slow start or just a mediocre season.
I agree with the bolded part. Who exactly is harmed by having so many bowls? Some peoples' sense of fairness?
Meanwhile we have bowl organizers and promoters working with the NCAA to bring people what they want, i.e. more football, and trying to make a profit while doing so. In other words, capitalism at its finest. Why shut that down?
|
|
12-27-2016 11:06 PM |
|
Jonathan Sadow
1st String
Posts: 1,104
Joined: Jan 2006
Reputation: 27
I Root For: Strigids
Location:
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
(12-26-2016 07:44 PM)Da.Owl Wrote: Check and you'll find most of the newest bowls belong to E$PN. Will be interesting to see how many survive as E$PN's financial fortunes continue to fall.
Yes - ESPN runs these bowls because it provides it with lots of original programming for almost a month. Previously, even with the inflated number of bowls it's been able to make money with them - maybe not now....
(12-26-2016 11:10 PM)WeatherfordOwl Wrote: So why did you watch that game? I didn't. I'd suggest that if folks would quit watching every game that is televised, there might not be so many bowls. But even if that trend doesn't change, so what? It's nothing to me. Like reality TV shows. I don't watch what I don't like. In the early 1970's, the Oilers sold out the 'Dome for every home game, while they went winless two years straight. People have been trained like sheep.
It wasn't quite as bad as that - the Oilers went 1-13 for consecutive seasons, but just a few years later they were in the AFC championship game. Hope springs eternal, and in pro sports turnarounds can happen quickly ( e.g. this season's Dallas Cowboys).
|
|
12-28-2016 01:21 AM |
|
owl95
1st String
Posts: 1,136
Joined: Sep 2010
Reputation: 28
I Root For: Rice
Location:
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
(12-27-2016 02:40 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote: (12-27-2016 01:54 PM)tramile12 Wrote: Who cares if there are so many bowls?? If you don't like it, don't watch it. I personally like watching many of these "irrelevant" bowls. Football is football, and if Rice was in the Potato Bowl, I would watch it. Its often times fun to see a 5-7 or 6-6 team win: it is a nice little slice of redemption for slow start or just a mediocre season.
Currently watching the HOD Bowl, UNT vs. Army. Wish Rice were in it.
I wonder what most people would think is the correct number of bowls.
Clearly nobody cared about that toilet bowl. That's why it's written up in a major newspaper with no ties to either team. Don't tell me Rice couldn't use that publicity.
http://www.latimes.com/sports/more/la-sp...story.html
|
|
12-28-2016 09:02 AM |
|
georgewebb
Heisman
Posts: 9,582
Joined: Oct 2005
Reputation: 110
I Root For: Rice!
Location:
|
RE: Bowl inflation over the years
(12-27-2016 11:06 PM)Seventyniner Wrote: (12-27-2016 01:54 PM)tramile12 Wrote: Who cares if there are so many bowls?? If you don't like it, don't watch it. I personally like watching many of these "irrelevant" bowls. Football is football, and if Rice was in the Potato Bowl, I would watch it. Its often times fun to see a 5-7 or 6-6 team win: it is a nice little slice of redemption for slow start or just a mediocre season.
I agree with the bolded part. Who exactly is harmed by having so many bowls? Some peoples' sense of fairness?
Meanwhile we have bowl organizers and promoters working with the NCAA to bring people what they want, i.e. more football, and trying to make a profit while doing so. In other words, capitalism at its finest. Why shut that down?
On the other hand, fans expressing opinions about more appealing ways to do things, or against what is popular or profitable, is a time-honored part of sports. Artificial turf, the designated hitter, "alternate" uniforms, wild cards, playing football games overseas etc. have all, at one time or another, been "popular" with some segment of the market and profitable for the people implementing them. But it does not follow that fans who don't like those things should be castigated for expressing their opinions.
Yet that is exactly what seems to happen when fans opine on the bowl system: they are not merely disagreed with; they are treated as outcasts just for having the opinion, as if the opinion is not merely wrong but illegitimate.
Who exactly is harmed by someone expressing the opinion that, in his view, there are too many bowls, or that a different post-season system would be more appealing? We have people expressing opinions and trying to persuade others. That is the marketplace of ideas at its finest. Why seek to shut that down -- in an opinion forum, of all places?
|
|
12-28-2016 10:43 AM |
|