Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
The year college football died due to realignment?
Author Message
Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #41
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-14-2018 11:11 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(01-14-2018 07:17 PM)ken d Wrote:  I've been a fan of college football since a time when games on TV were rare, they were all in black and white, and all players played on both offense and defense. Now, 60 years later, I'd say college football has never been better than it is today.

Back then, nobody was talking about "major" and "minor" programs and conferences. But the number of schools who were legitimate contenders was pretty small. Schools like Alabama could keep competitors from getting better by giving scholarships to everybody in sight, then burying them deep on the bench so they couldn't play for somebody else.

Does ESPN deserve all the credit for the strides we have made since those days? Not all of it, but surely a lot of it.

I'm not quite at 60 years but I remember only two games being on most Saturday's. If you lived in Central Arkansas that meant a SWC game in the morning followed by an ABC game of the week which was generally a SWC or Big 8 game. Big 10 you saw Ohio State vs. Michigan and not much else. SEC generally Bama-Tenn or the Iron Bowl and not much else. Pac-8 you saw USC-UCLA, independents you saw Penn St and Pitt. If you lived in eastern Arkansas and could pick up Memphis TV you could see an SEC game and an ABC game that was generally SEC or SWC or Big 8. If you lived close enough to Jonesboro you could get the SWC morning game on Jonesboro TV and SEC on Memphis.

Later with WTBS we could get a night game!

After the ABC game you had the Prudential scoreboard show that would have highlights from the ABC regional games you didn't see and sometimes ABC would send a cameraman to someone like ECU that was ranked or a game with a ranked big conference team that wasn't on TV and send a few highlights in.

When ABC sent a crew to film highlights of an Arkansas State game in 1975 it got mentioned by the Jonesboro Sun, Arkansas Gazette, Arkansas Democrat, Memphis Commercial-Appeal, and Memphis Press-Scimitar just getting highlights on national TV was news.

Bowl games? Not only were there fewer bowl games but in most markets you couldn't even watch all of the few that existed. If a bowl was on the Mizlou Network it was the whims of the local station managers to determine if you would get to see it.

If you were the fan of a MAC team living in LA you'd never see your team on TV. If you were a Pac-8 fan living on the east coast and your team wasn't USC or UCLA you might see them every few years and even then maybe only in a bowl game.

Today, outside of a smattering of games on conference subscription only websites and Pac-12 Network games, I can watch every FBS team play and if the mood were to strike a good number of FCS and Division II schools.

In 2016 Western Michigan as undefeated MAC champion could go play #8 Wisconisin in the Cotton Bowl in 1986 if they had done that they would have played San Jose State in Fresno in the California Bowl.

In 1968 and 1969 the WAC champion couldn't land a bowl bid.

In 1980 five I-A conference champs didn't play in a bowl (MAC - Central Michigan, PCAA/Big West - Long Beach State, MoValley - Tulsa, Southern - Furman, and of course Ivy - Yale). A total of 8 schools that weren't on probation and weren't in the Ivy didn't make a bowl with 8 or 9 wins.

No way I'd turn the clock back.

The system hasn’t changed all that much beyond the access bowl. Today, there are fewer conferences—but there are far more bowls. None the less—four conference champs still are looking at playing Fresno St in a game that’s probably no more impressive (probably less so) than the California Bowl.

That said, I’m coming more and more to the conclusion that the current state of the G5 post season is largely because the G5 have never chosen to invest in creating high quality post season destinations for themselves. As long as I have been watching college football, I have yet to hear any G5 commissioner even discuss investment in the postseason. They are waiting for someone else to do it. I suspect thier long wait will only get longer.

College football largely ended for me in 1996. I grew up watching the SWC. In fact, my knowledge of college football was severely limited beyond those SWC teams (college football was a pretty regional pursuit back then). I miss that league. I still can’t belive Texas and Texas A&M dont play annually.
(This post was last modified: 01-15-2018 10:43 AM by Attackcoog.)
01-15-2018 10:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 50,020
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2374
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #42
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-14-2018 08:51 PM)esayem Wrote:  All one has to do is pick up a World Almanac from the 80's or 90's to see that independents were categorized by region not major or mid-major. Look at the schedules: big-time programs were still getting 2-for-1's with the USM's and ECU's of the world. The reason things shifted was the influx of marginal 1-AA programs moving into the 1-A ranks. There just weren't that many independents circa 1985 because the NCAA actually enforced the attendance rule and even Cincinnati was classified as 1-AA one year.

ECU fans have propaganda points they like to push. One is that in the 80s ECU was regarded as a 'major'. They were not, they were in no way shape or form regarded the same was as Penn State or Notre Dame or (later) FSU, the major independents of those years. Heck, for the length of the 80s, probably 9/10 college fans had never heard of ECU.

Second is that the 1992 Peach Bowl they won was a "major" bowl, equal to a BCS or NY6 bowl. It absolutely was not.

I was following college football avidly at that time (80s and early 90s) and both ideas are laughable.

Nevertheless, there is a contingent of ECU fans always trying to push these points. 07-coffee3
(This post was last modified: 01-15-2018 10:33 AM by quo vadis.)
01-15-2018 10:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
The REAL BillyBobby
*

Posts: 11,898
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 502
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #43
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-15-2018 10:26 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  
(01-14-2018 08:51 PM)esayem Wrote:  All one has to do is pick up a World Almanac from the 80's or 90's to see that independents were categorized by region not major or mid-major. Look at the schedules: big-time programs were still getting 2-for-1's with the USM's and ECU's of the world. The reason things shifted was the influx of marginal 1-AA programs moving into the 1-A ranks. There just weren't that many independents circa 1985 because the NCAA actually enforced the attendance rule and even Cincinnati was classified as 1-AA one year.

The attendance rule needs to be enforced again but it will not happen. No offense to these schools but if you can not average over 25,000 a game, you should not be FBS.

Not tickets sold either. Actual 25,000 fans in the stands average or you must drop out of FBS. The AAC would lose 4 schools.:
Tulane, Tulsa, USF and SMU.
Uconn would struggle but make it. SMU could get over the hump if put with that ultimatum. Tulsa, Tulane and USF wouldn’t be able to get a 25k actual attendance imo. Tulsa and Tulane don’t have the fan base. Tampa is just not that into USF for whatever reason....
01-15-2018 10:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
colohank Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 2,027
Joined: Jul 2014
Reputation: 248
I Root For: Cincy
Location: Colorado
Post: #44
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-15-2018 10:26 AM)Carolina_Low_Country Wrote:  
(01-14-2018 08:51 PM)esayem Wrote:  All one has to do is pick up a World Almanac from the 80's or 90's to see that independents were categorized by region not major or mid-major. Look at the schedules: big-time programs were still getting 2-for-1's with the USM's and ECU's of the world. The reason things shifted was the influx of marginal 1-AA programs moving into the 1-A ranks. There just weren't that many independents circa 1985 because the NCAA actually enforced the attendance rule and even Cincinnati was classified as 1-AA one year.

The attendance rule needs to be enforced again but it will not happen. No offense to these schools but if you can not average over 25,000 a game, you should not be FBS.

Agreed. And if USN&WR doesn't rank a school in the top 150 academically, or if a school doesn't have at least a $400 million research portfolio or a one billion dollar endowment, it shouldn't be allowed to field a team until it gets its act together. Hell, it shouldn't even be considered an institution of higher learning.
01-15-2018 10:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
billybobby777 Offline
The REAL BillyBobby
*

Posts: 11,898
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 502
I Root For: ECU, Army
Location: Houston dont sleepon
Post: #45
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-15-2018 10:27 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-14-2018 11:11 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(01-14-2018 07:17 PM)ken d Wrote:  I've been a fan of college football since a time when games on TV were rare, they were all in black and white, and all players played on both offense and defense. Now, 60 years later, I'd say college football has never been better than it is today.

Back then, nobody was talking about "major" and "minor" programs and conferences. But the number of schools who were legitimate contenders was pretty small. Schools like Alabama could keep competitors from getting better by giving scholarships to everybody in sight, then burying them deep on the bench so they couldn't play for somebody else.

Does ESPN deserve all the credit for the strides we have made since those days? Not all of it, but surely a lot of it.

I'm not quite at 60 years but I remember only two games being on most Saturday's. If you lived in Central Arkansas that meant a SWC game in the morning followed by an ABC game of the week which was generally a SWC or Big 8 game. Big 10 you saw Ohio State vs. Michigan and not much else. SEC generally Bama-Tenn or the Iron Bowl and not much else. Pac-8 you saw USC-UCLA, independents you saw Penn St and Pitt. If you lived in eastern Arkansas and could pick up Memphis TV you could see an SEC game and an ABC game that was generally SEC or SWC or Big 8. If you lived close enough to Jonesboro you could get the SWC morning game on Jonesboro TV and SEC on Memphis.

Later with WTBS we could get a night game!

After the ABC game you had the Prudential scoreboard show that would have highlights from the ABC regional games you didn't see and sometimes ABC would send a cameraman to someone like ECU that was ranked or a game with a ranked big conference team that wasn't on TV and send a few highlights in.

When ABC sent a crew to film highlights of an Arkansas State game in 1975 it got mentioned by the Jonesboro Sun, Arkansas Gazette, Arkansas Democrat, Memphis Commercial-Appeal, and Memphis Press-Scimitar just getting highlights on national TV was news.

Bowl games? Not only were there fewer bowl games but in most markets you couldn't even watch all of the few that existed. If a bowl was on the Mizlou Network it was the whims of the local station managers to determine if you would get to see it.

If you were the fan of a MAC team living in LA you'd never see your team on TV. If you were a Pac-8 fan living on the east coast and your team wasn't USC or UCLA you might see them every few years and even then maybe only in a bowl game.

Today, outside of a smattering of games on conference subscription only websites and Pac-12 Network games, I can watch every FBS team play and if the mood were to strike a good number of FCS and Division II schools.

In 2016 Western Michigan as undefeated MAC champion could go play #8 Wisconisin in the Cotton Bowl in 1986 if they had done that they would have played San Jose State in Fresno in the California Bowl.

In 1968 and 1969 the WAC champion couldn't land a bowl bid.

In 1980 five I-A conference champs didn't play in a bowl (MAC - Central Michigan, PCAA/Big West - Long Beach State, MoValley - Tulsa, Southern - Furman, and of course Ivy - Yale). A total of 8 schools that weren't on probation and weren't in the Ivy didn't make a bowl with 8 or 9 wins.

No way I'd turn the clock back.

The system hasn’t changed all that much beyond the access bowl. Today, there are fewer conferences—but there ARE a crap load of bowls. None the less—four conference champs still are looking at playing Fresno St in a game that’s probably no more impressive than the California Bowl.

That said, I’m coming more and more to the conclusion that the current state of the G5 post season is largely because the G5 have never chosen to invest in creating high quality post season destinations for themselves. As long as I have been watching college football, I have yet to hear any G5 commissioner even discuss investment in the postseason.

WAC/MWC-
created the Fiesta Bowl for their champ in early 70’s. Usually vs a big Indy.
Created the Holiday Bowl for their champ in 1979. Usually vs a Big 10 #2.
Took the Las Vegas Bowl for their champ or #2 vs a major conference team in 1997 when before it the minor California raisin bowl with Big West winner vs MAC winner.
Created now defunct bowls in 90’s and 2000’s, like the Poinsetta, Aloha & Silicon Valley Bowls. Usually vs a PAC team or Army or Navy.
Created the Hawaii Bowl. Usually vs CUSA, but PAC a few times and AAC a couple too.
Created the New Mexico Bowl. Vs PAC 3 times, CUSA several times. Temple once.

^That’s what me and you and a UCF poster hoped Aresco and the AAC would do. Create bowls for us in our stadiums. That’s something the WAC/MWC got right. What a missed opportunity.
01-15-2018 10:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #46
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-15-2018 10:51 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  
(01-15-2018 10:27 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-14-2018 11:11 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(01-14-2018 07:17 PM)ken d Wrote:  I've been a fan of college football since a time when games on TV were rare, they were all in black and white, and all players played on both offense and defense. Now, 60 years later, I'd say college football has never been better than it is today.

Back then, nobody was talking about "major" and "minor" programs and conferences. But the number of schools who were legitimate contenders was pretty small. Schools like Alabama could keep competitors from getting better by giving scholarships to everybody in sight, then burying them deep on the bench so they couldn't play for somebody else.

Does ESPN deserve all the credit for the strides we have made since those days? Not all of it, but surely a lot of it.

I'm not quite at 60 years but I remember only two games being on most Saturday's. If you lived in Central Arkansas that meant a SWC game in the morning followed by an ABC game of the week which was generally a SWC or Big 8 game. Big 10 you saw Ohio State vs. Michigan and not much else. SEC generally Bama-Tenn or the Iron Bowl and not much else. Pac-8 you saw USC-UCLA, independents you saw Penn St and Pitt. If you lived in eastern Arkansas and could pick up Memphis TV you could see an SEC game and an ABC game that was generally SEC or SWC or Big 8. If you lived close enough to Jonesboro you could get the SWC morning game on Jonesboro TV and SEC on Memphis.

Later with WTBS we could get a night game!

After the ABC game you had the Prudential scoreboard show that would have highlights from the ABC regional games you didn't see and sometimes ABC would send a cameraman to someone like ECU that was ranked or a game with a ranked big conference team that wasn't on TV and send a few highlights in.

When ABC sent a crew to film highlights of an Arkansas State game in 1975 it got mentioned by the Jonesboro Sun, Arkansas Gazette, Arkansas Democrat, Memphis Commercial-Appeal, and Memphis Press-Scimitar just getting highlights on national TV was news.

Bowl games? Not only were there fewer bowl games but in most markets you couldn't even watch all of the few that existed. If a bowl was on the Mizlou Network it was the whims of the local station managers to determine if you would get to see it.

If you were the fan of a MAC team living in LA you'd never see your team on TV. If you were a Pac-8 fan living on the east coast and your team wasn't USC or UCLA you might see them every few years and even then maybe only in a bowl game.

Today, outside of a smattering of games on conference subscription only websites and Pac-12 Network games, I can watch every FBS team play and if the mood were to strike a good number of FCS and Division II schools.

In 2016 Western Michigan as undefeated MAC champion could go play #8 Wisconisin in the Cotton Bowl in 1986 if they had done that they would have played San Jose State in Fresno in the California Bowl.

In 1968 and 1969 the WAC champion couldn't land a bowl bid.

In 1980 five I-A conference champs didn't play in a bowl (MAC - Central Michigan, PCAA/Big West - Long Beach State, MoValley - Tulsa, Southern - Furman, and of course Ivy - Yale). A total of 8 schools that weren't on probation and weren't in the Ivy didn't make a bowl with 8 or 9 wins.

No way I'd turn the clock back.

The system hasn’t changed all that much beyond the access bowl. Today, there are fewer conferences—but there ARE a crap load of bowls. None the less—four conference champs still are looking at playing Fresno St in a game that’s probably no more impressive than the California Bowl.

That said, I’m coming more and more to the conclusion that the current state of the G5 post season is largely because the G5 have never chosen to invest in creating high quality post season destinations for themselves. As long as I have been watching college football, I have yet to hear any G5 commissioner even discuss investment in the postseason.

WAC/MWC-
created the Fiesta Bowl for their champ in early 70’s. Usually vs a big Indy.
Created the Holiday Bowl for their champ in 1979. Usually vs a Big 10 #2.
Took the Las Vegas Bowl for their champ or #2 vs a major conference team in 1997 when before it the minor California raisin bowl with Big West winner vs MAC winner.
Created now defunct bowls in 90’s and 2000’s, like the Poinsetta, Aloha & Silicon Valley Bowls. Usually vs a PAC team or Army or Navy.
Created the Hawaii Bowl. Usually vs CUSA, but PAC a few times and AAC a couple too.
Created the New Mexico Bowl. Vs PAC 3 times, CUSA several times. Temple once.

^That’s what me and you and a UCF poster hoped Aresco and the AAC would do. Create bowls for us in our stadiums. That’s something the WAC/MWC got right. What a missed opportunity.

Thats not really what Im talking about--well, with possibly the exception of the Fiesta Bowl. Sure, the G5 has created bowls--but they have concentrated almost entirely on creating low end games to make sure no 6-6 G5 was left out. Where they totally missed the boat was not investing in any high end games that would serve as a quality post season destination for a G5 conference champion. When the WAC got the Fiesta going--it wasnt the game it is now--but its was more along the lines of what I think the G5 should be aiming for than the Camilla, Bahamas. or Boca Bowls are.

When we were in the SWC--the season was all about getting to the Cotton Bowl. Getting ranked was cool and all---but a season was successful if you got to the Cotton Bowl. That was the goal. The AAC (and for the most part, none of the G5) has nothing like that. Its access bowl or bust in the AAC and the rest of the G5. Fall short of the Peach, and you get a run down crumbling stadium in Birmingham (or worse).
(This post was last modified: 01-15-2018 11:27 AM by Attackcoog.)
01-15-2018 11:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
ken d Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 17,337
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 1211
I Root For: college sports
Location: Raleigh
Post: #47
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-15-2018 10:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-14-2018 08:51 PM)esayem Wrote:  All one has to do is pick up a World Almanac from the 80's or 90's to see that independents were categorized by region not major or mid-major. Look at the schedules: big-time programs were still getting 2-for-1's with the USM's and ECU's of the world. The reason things shifted was the influx of marginal 1-AA programs moving into the 1-A ranks. There just weren't that many independents circa 1985 because the NCAA actually enforced the attendance rule and even Cincinnati was classified as 1-AA one year.

ECU fans have propaganda points they like to push. One is that in the 80s ECU was regarded as a 'major'. They were not, they were in no way shape or form regarded the same was as Penn State or Notre Dame or (later) FSU, the major independents of those years. Heck, for the length of the 80s, probably 9/10 college fans had never heard of ECU.

Second is that the 1992 Peach Bowl they won was a "major" bowl, equal to a BCS or NY6 bowl. It absolutely was not.

I was following college football avidly at that time (80s and early 90s) and both ideas are laughable.

Nevertheless, there is a contingent of ECU fans always trying to push these points. 07-coffee3

My memory of that era is that the Peach Bowl was struggling. In the 10 years before that '92 game, they had only been able to attract 2 ranked teams (out of 20), and attendance was slipping. By pairing two regional rivals (though NC State was reluctant to elevate the Pirates to the status of "rival") who produced an exciting epic game, they sold out the stadium and put the bowl on solid footing from then on.

So, while the Peach was not a major bowl at the time, ECU did play a role in helping it become one years later.
01-15-2018 11:19 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 50,020
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2374
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #48
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-15-2018 11:13 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Thats not really what Im talking about--well, with possibly the exception of the Fiesta Bowl. Sure, the G5 has created bowls--but they have concentrated almost entirely on creating low end games to make sure no 6-6 G5 was left out. Where they totally missed the boat was not investing in any high end games that would serve as a quality post season destination for a G5 conference champion.

When we were in the SWC--the season was all about getting to the Cotton Bowl. Getting ranked was cool and all---but a season was successful if you got to the Cotton Bowl. That was the goal. The AAC has nothing like that. Its access bowl or bust in the AAC. Fall short of the Peach, and you get a run down crumbling stadium in Birmingham

Let's face it: For a conference, it is of more benefit to make sure your 6-6 teams have a bowl to go to than that your first or second place team has a better bowl to go to. Is it really that big a deal that the top AAC team (if not in the NY6) goes to the Military Bowl or the Birmingham Bowl and not the Gator Bowl or the Texas Bowl?

But bowl-eligible teams missing out? That's disheartening.

FWIW, I think the current AAC situation is similar to the old SWC: AAC teams want to make an NY6 bowl, that is the goal, what motivates you during the season, just like making the Cotton Bowl was for the 1980s SWC.
(This post was last modified: 01-15-2018 11:25 AM by quo vadis.)
01-15-2018 11:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
esayem Online
Hark The Sound!
*

Posts: 16,267
Joined: Feb 2007
Reputation: 1207
I Root For: Olde Ironclad
Location: Tobacco Road
Post: #49
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-15-2018 10:51 AM)billybobby777 Wrote:  
(01-15-2018 10:27 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-14-2018 11:11 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  
(01-14-2018 07:17 PM)ken d Wrote:  I've been a fan of college football since a time when games on TV were rare, they were all in black and white, and all players played on both offense and defense. Now, 60 years later, I'd say college football has never been better than it is today.

Back then, nobody was talking about "major" and "minor" programs and conferences. But the number of schools who were legitimate contenders was pretty small. Schools like Alabama could keep competitors from getting better by giving scholarships to everybody in sight, then burying them deep on the bench so they couldn't play for somebody else.

Does ESPN deserve all the credit for the strides we have made since those days? Not all of it, but surely a lot of it.

I'm not quite at 60 years but I remember only two games being on most Saturday's. If you lived in Central Arkansas that meant a SWC game in the morning followed by an ABC game of the week which was generally a SWC or Big 8 game. Big 10 you saw Ohio State vs. Michigan and not much else. SEC generally Bama-Tenn or the Iron Bowl and not much else. Pac-8 you saw USC-UCLA, independents you saw Penn St and Pitt. If you lived in eastern Arkansas and could pick up Memphis TV you could see an SEC game and an ABC game that was generally SEC or SWC or Big 8. If you lived close enough to Jonesboro you could get the SWC morning game on Jonesboro TV and SEC on Memphis.

Later with WTBS we could get a night game!

After the ABC game you had the Prudential scoreboard show that would have highlights from the ABC regional games you didn't see and sometimes ABC would send a cameraman to someone like ECU that was ranked or a game with a ranked big conference team that wasn't on TV and send a few highlights in.

When ABC sent a crew to film highlights of an Arkansas State game in 1975 it got mentioned by the Jonesboro Sun, Arkansas Gazette, Arkansas Democrat, Memphis Commercial-Appeal, and Memphis Press-Scimitar just getting highlights on national TV was news.

Bowl games? Not only were there fewer bowl games but in most markets you couldn't even watch all of the few that existed. If a bowl was on the Mizlou Network it was the whims of the local station managers to determine if you would get to see it.

If you were the fan of a MAC team living in LA you'd never see your team on TV. If you were a Pac-8 fan living on the east coast and your team wasn't USC or UCLA you might see them every few years and even then maybe only in a bowl game.

Today, outside of a smattering of games on conference subscription only websites and Pac-12 Network games, I can watch every FBS team play and if the mood were to strike a good number of FCS and Division II schools.

In 2016 Western Michigan as undefeated MAC champion could go play #8 Wisconisin in the Cotton Bowl in 1986 if they had done that they would have played San Jose State in Fresno in the California Bowl.

In 1968 and 1969 the WAC champion couldn't land a bowl bid.

In 1980 five I-A conference champs didn't play in a bowl (MAC - Central Michigan, PCAA/Big West - Long Beach State, MoValley - Tulsa, Southern - Furman, and of course Ivy - Yale). A total of 8 schools that weren't on probation and weren't in the Ivy didn't make a bowl with 8 or 9 wins.

No way I'd turn the clock back.

The system hasn’t changed all that much beyond the access bowl. Today, there are fewer conferences—but there ARE a crap load of bowls. None the less—four conference champs still are looking at playing Fresno St in a game that’s probably no more impressive than the California Bowl.

That said, I’m coming more and more to the conclusion that the current state of the G5 post season is largely because the G5 have never chosen to invest in creating high quality post season destinations for themselves. As long as I have been watching college football, I have yet to hear any G5 commissioner even discuss investment in the postseason.

WAC/MWC-
created the Fiesta Bowl for their champ in early 70’s. Usually vs a big Indy.
Created the Holiday Bowl for their champ in 1979. Usually vs a Big 10 #2.
Took the Las Vegas Bowl for their champ or #2 vs a major conference team in 1997 when before it the minor California raisin bowl with Big West winner vs MAC winner.
Created now defunct bowls in 90’s and 2000’s, like the Poinsetta, Aloha & Silicon Valley Bowls. Usually vs a PAC team or Army or Navy.
Created the Hawaii Bowl. Usually vs CUSA, but PAC a few times and AAC a couple too.
Created the New Mexico Bowl. Vs PAC 3 times, CUSA several times. Temple once.

^That’s what me and you and a UCF poster hoped Aresco and the AAC would do. Create bowls for us in our stadiums. That’s something the WAC/MWC got right. What a missed opportunity.

The Aloha Bowl was created in the early 80's following the tradition of the Pineapple Bowl. I believe it hosted two at-larges or Hawai'i if they were good.

You may be thinking of the Oahu Bowl; I think that was a real thing haha.
01-15-2018 11:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 50,020
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2374
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #50
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-15-2018 11:19 AM)ken d Wrote:  
(01-15-2018 10:31 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-14-2018 08:51 PM)esayem Wrote:  All one has to do is pick up a World Almanac from the 80's or 90's to see that independents were categorized by region not major or mid-major. Look at the schedules: big-time programs were still getting 2-for-1's with the USM's and ECU's of the world. The reason things shifted was the influx of marginal 1-AA programs moving into the 1-A ranks. There just weren't that many independents circa 1985 because the NCAA actually enforced the attendance rule and even Cincinnati was classified as 1-AA one year.

ECU fans have propaganda points they like to push. One is that in the 80s ECU was regarded as a 'major'. They were not, they were in no way shape or form regarded the same was as Penn State or Notre Dame or (later) FSU, the major independents of those years. Heck, for the length of the 80s, probably 9/10 college fans had never heard of ECU.

Second is that the 1992 Peach Bowl they won was a "major" bowl, equal to a BCS or NY6 bowl. It absolutely was not.

I was following college football avidly at that time (80s and early 90s) and both ideas are laughable.

Nevertheless, there is a contingent of ECU fans always trying to push these points. 07-coffee3

My memory of that era is that the Peach Bowl was struggling. In the 10 years before that '92 game, they had only been able to attract 2 ranked teams (out of 20), and attendance was slipping. By pairing two regional rivals (though NC State was reluctant to elevate the Pirates to the status of "rival") who produced an exciting epic game, they sold out the stadium and put the bowl on solid footing from then on.

So, while the Peach was not a major bowl at the time, ECU did play a role in helping it become one years later.

No question, the Peach Bowl was able to attract far more ranked teams in the 1990s than it had been able to in the 1980s. Its status was elevated, from a 3rd-tier bowl to a 2nd-tier bowl (e.g., Gator Bowl, Outback Bowl level), and it was able to stay at that level through the 2000s, until successfully elevating to NY6 level with the CFP.

My recollection was that the key to this 1990s elevation was moving from the old Atlanta Fulton-County Stadium to the (then-new) Georgia Dome around 1992 or 1993.

It was the move to the Georgia Dome that enabled it to generate a lot more revenue and thus increase its payout, guaranteeing a higher standing in the bowl pecking order, most critically securing tie-ins with the SEC and ACC.

IIRC, in fact, ECU in 1992 was the last non- ACC or SEC team to play in the Peach until TCU played in it 22 years later, as part of the CFP/NY6.
(This post was last modified: 01-15-2018 11:45 AM by quo vadis.)
01-15-2018 11:37 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #51
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-15-2018 11:25 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-15-2018 11:13 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Thats not really what Im talking about--well, with possibly the exception of the Fiesta Bowl. Sure, the G5 has created bowls--but they have concentrated almost entirely on creating low end games to make sure no 6-6 G5 was left out. Where they totally missed the boat was not investing in any high end games that would serve as a quality post season destination for a G5 conference champion.

When we were in the SWC--the season was all about getting to the Cotton Bowl. Getting ranked was cool and all---but a season was successful if you got to the Cotton Bowl. That was the goal. The AAC has nothing like that. Its access bowl or bust in the AAC. Fall short of the Peach, and you get a run down crumbling stadium in Birmingham

Let's face it: For a conference, it is of more benefit to make sure your 6-6 teams have a bowl to go to than that your first or second place team has a better bowl to go to. Is it really that big a deal that the top AAC team (if not in the NY6) goes to the Military Bowl or the Birmingham Bowl and not the Gator Bowl or the Texas Bowl?

But bowl-eligible teams missing out? That's disheartening.

FWIW, I think the current AAC situation is similar to the old SWC: AAC teams want to make an NY6 bowl, that is the goal, what motivates you during the season, just like making the Cotton Bowl was for the 1980s SWC.

Absolutely disagree. What's disheartening is when the 6th place 6-6 AAC team essentially goes to the same quality of bowl as the 12-1 AAC champ. That outcome devalues your league championship. In addition, it removes the context that might drive television interest in your conference race. The current AAC situation is only like the old SWC situation if you beileve the AAC is a 65 team 5 division conferece with no CCG. If there is no difference in how the champion and 6-6 team are rewarded---the championship becomes fairly inconsequential.
(This post was last modified: 01-15-2018 12:01 PM by Attackcoog.)
01-15-2018 11:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
The Cutter of Bish Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,281
Joined: Mar 2013
Reputation: 217
I Root For: the little guy
Location:
Post: #52
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-15-2018 08:53 AM)Chappy Wrote:  I think college football is on the right path, but I hope the bowl games will lose their luster, die, and be replaced with a real playoff.

The bowls won't go away. The lower tier ones could, but the top? Not as long as there is a PAC and Big Ten.

More than likely, if there ever is a formal split within FBS, whatever "top unit" exists will just take the current model with them. Has the major body ever even hinted there wasn't a spot for them in the future? I mean, when you consistently use "bowl partners," I don't see how one can extract eventual abandonment.

I think cfb started "to die" before realignment. It's how the power structure responded to BYU's national championship and the UMFL-PSU Fiesta Bowl that got us to here. Realignment has come to serve that power bloc of conferences and their top bowls. We know the major conferences aren't good for fixing anything toward a fair, competitive, and equitable solution...why even start?
01-15-2018 01:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
quo vadis Online
Legend
*

Posts: 50,020
Joined: Aug 2008
Reputation: 2374
I Root For: USF/Georgetown
Location: New Orleans
Post: #53
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-15-2018 11:59 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-15-2018 11:25 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-15-2018 11:13 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Thats not really what Im talking about--well, with possibly the exception of the Fiesta Bowl. Sure, the G5 has created bowls--but they have concentrated almost entirely on creating low end games to make sure no 6-6 G5 was left out. Where they totally missed the boat was not investing in any high end games that would serve as a quality post season destination for a G5 conference champion.

When we were in the SWC--the season was all about getting to the Cotton Bowl. Getting ranked was cool and all---but a season was successful if you got to the Cotton Bowl. That was the goal. The AAC has nothing like that. Its access bowl or bust in the AAC. Fall short of the Peach, and you get a run down crumbling stadium in Birmingham

Let's face it: For a conference, it is of more benefit to make sure your 6-6 teams have a bowl to go to than that your first or second place team has a better bowl to go to. Is it really that big a deal that the top AAC team (if not in the NY6) goes to the Military Bowl or the Birmingham Bowl and not the Gator Bowl or the Texas Bowl?

But bowl-eligible teams missing out? That's disheartening.

FWIW, I think the current AAC situation is similar to the old SWC: AAC teams want to make an NY6 bowl, that is the goal, what motivates you during the season, just like making the Cotton Bowl was for the 1980s SWC.

Absolutely disagree. What's disheartening is when the 6th place 6-6 AAC team essentially goes to the same quality of bowl as the 12-1 AAC champ. That outcome devalues your league championship. In addition, it removes the context that might drive television interest in your conference race. The current AAC situation is only like the old SWC situation if you beileve the AAC is a 65 team 5 division conferece with no CCG. If there is no difference in how the champion and 6-6 team are rewarded---the championship becomes fairly inconsequential.

See, to me, the AAC conference championship IS fairly inconsequential, by its nature. It means you beat out 11 other G5 schools in games among those schools. Eh.

That's why on the AAC board (well, before whiners got me booted), I tended to laugh at Houston/Temple/UCF fans who thumped their chest about their trophy cases having AAC championship trophies and pointed their fingers about USF having an "empty trophy case", when in fact our case is filled with six bowl trophies, each of which I value as much as an AAC champion trophy.

So since I don't find much value in an AAC title, it doesn't bother me if the AAC champ goes to the Military Bowl, and yes, I'll feel the same way when USF wins an AAC title as well.

But bowls are a big deal. IMO, there's a big difference from having your season end on say November 25th, done with, see you 9 long months from now, while other schools get to play a bowl game a month later, even if it is a purely rink-dink bowl. That's one month where your season is still alive, you have a game to look forward to, a game possibly against an interesting OOC opponent, a game on national TV, and where you are getting some press coverage. To me, making sure every AAC team that is technically NCAA eligible actually gets to do that is important.
(This post was last modified: 01-15-2018 06:07 PM by quo vadis.)
01-15-2018 05:59 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #54
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-15-2018 05:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-15-2018 11:59 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  
(01-15-2018 11:25 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  
(01-15-2018 11:13 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Thats not really what Im talking about--well, with possibly the exception of the Fiesta Bowl. Sure, the G5 has created bowls--but they have concentrated almost entirely on creating low end games to make sure no 6-6 G5 was left out. Where they totally missed the boat was not investing in any high end games that would serve as a quality post season destination for a G5 conference champion.

When we were in the SWC--the season was all about getting to the Cotton Bowl. Getting ranked was cool and all---but a season was successful if you got to the Cotton Bowl. That was the goal. The AAC has nothing like that. Its access bowl or bust in the AAC. Fall short of the Peach, and you get a run down crumbling stadium in Birmingham

Let's face it: For a conference, it is of more benefit to make sure your 6-6 teams have a bowl to go to than that your first or second place team has a better bowl to go to. Is it really that big a deal that the top AAC team (if not in the NY6) goes to the Military Bowl or the Birmingham Bowl and not the Gator Bowl or the Texas Bowl?

But bowl-eligible teams missing out? That's disheartening.

FWIW, I think the current AAC situation is similar to the old SWC: AAC teams want to make an NY6 bowl, that is the goal, what motivates you during the season, just like making the Cotton Bowl was for the 1980s SWC.

Absolutely disagree. What's disheartening is when the 6th place 6-6 AAC team essentially goes to the same quality of bowl as the 12-1 AAC champ. That outcome devalues your league championship. In addition, it removes the context that might drive television interest in your conference race. The current AAC situation is only like the old SWC situation if you beileve the AAC is a 65 team 5 division conferece with no CCG. If there is no difference in how the champion and 6-6 team are rewarded---the championship becomes fairly inconsequential.

See, to me, the AAC conference championship IS fairly inconsequential, by its nature. It means you beat out 11 other G5 schools in games among those schools. Eh.

That's why on the AAC board (well, before whiners got me booted), I tended to laugh at Houston/Temple/UCF fans who thumped their chest about their trophy cases having AAC championship trophies and pointed their fingers about USF having an "empty trophy case", when in fact our case is filled with six bowl trophies, each of which I value as much as an AAC champion trophy.

So since I don't find much value in an AAC title, it doesn't bother me if the AAC champ goes to the Military Bowl, and yes, I'll feel the same way when USF wins an AAC title as well.

But bowls are a big deal. IMO, there's a big difference from having your season end on say November 25th, done with, see you 9 long months from now, while other schools get to play a bowl game a month later, even if it is a purely rink-dink bowl. That's one month where your season is still alive, you have a game to look forward to, a game possibly against an interesting OOC opponent, a game on national TV, and where you are getting some press coverage. To me, making sure every AAC team that is technically NCAA eligible actually gets to do that is important.

And there you have it. Though I disagree with why. Its inconsequential because there is no reward for winning it. When the winner of CUSA goes to the Mr Potato Bowl to play a 6-6 Akron (like just happened)--its hard to explain to fans why that championship mattered.

You know, the Cotton Bowl had no tie to the other side of the bowl. If you won the SWC--all you knew was you were going to the Cotton Bowl to play a good team. So, it wasnt even like the Rose where a Big10 team knew they would be facing a Pac12 champ. Didnt matter. Years ago the motto for one UH season was "Think Cotton". Wasnt hard. We thought that every year. The fans of every SWC team did.
(This post was last modified: 01-15-2018 07:14 PM by Attackcoog.)
01-15-2018 07:11 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Nerdlinger Offline
Realignment Enthusiast
*

Posts: 4,908
Joined: May 2017
Reputation: 423
I Root For: Realignment!
Location: Schmlocation
Post: #55
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-15-2018 05:59 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  See, to me, the AAC conference championship IS fairly inconsequential, by its nature. It means you beat out 11 other G5 schools in games among those schools. Eh.

That's why on the AAC board (well, before whiners got me booted), I tended to laugh at Houston/Temple/UCF fans who thumped their chest about their trophy cases having AAC championship trophies and pointed their fingers about USF having an "empty trophy case", when in fact our case is filled with six bowl trophies, each of which I value as much as an AAC champion trophy.

So since I don't find much value in an AAC title, it doesn't bother me if the AAC champ goes to the Military Bowl, and yes, I'll feel the same way when USF wins an AAC title as well.

But bowls are a big deal. IMO, there's a big difference from having your season end on say November 25th, done with, see you 9 long months from now, while other schools get to play a bowl game a month later, even if it is a purely rink-dink bowl. That's one month where your season is still alive, you have a game to look forward to, a game possibly against an interesting OOC opponent, a game on national TV, and where you are getting some press coverage. To me, making sure every AAC team that is technically NCAA eligible actually gets to do that is important.

So you were banned from the AAC forum for pointing out that the "P6" crowd is delusional?
01-15-2018 07:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,035
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 236
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #56
The year college football died due to realignment?
Bowls are not going away anytime soon. As long as the people organizing the bowls make money, they will ensure the bowls stay active.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
01-15-2018 08:50 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
58-56 Offline
Blazer Revolutionary
*

Posts: 13,288
Joined: Mar 2006
Reputation: 825
I Root For: Fire Ray Watts
Location: CathedraloftheDragon

BlazerTalk Award
Post: #57
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-15-2018 07:11 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  Years ago the motto for one UH season was "Think Cotton". Wasnt hard. We thought that every year. The fans of every SWC team did.

Because it was the "Cotton Bowl," not the "Ron Jeremy Extenze Bowl." Allowing named sponsors destroyed any chance of one bowl meaning more than another.
01-15-2018 09:17 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
arkstfan Away
Sorry folks
*

Posts: 25,818
Joined: Feb 2004
Reputation: 967
I Root For: Fresh Starts
Location:
Post: #58
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
Very few people understand why the attendance rule was first adopted.

The original purpose was not to weed out schools. It was created to permit some schools to be I-A when I-AA was created. When I-A and I-AA were created the split was rooted around sport sponsorship and scholarships awarded and there were some schools that were going to be pushed into I-AA that were saved by creating the attendance rule. Also generally forgotten is it was not just home attendance you could use combined home and away attendance and if you had 30,000 seats you only had to meet one of the two options once every four years instead of averaging that over a rolling four years. The rule also contained an exemption for schools who didn't meet the criteria but were members of a conference where a majority of the schools did meet the criteria.

A few years later (1981) when the NCAA didn't want to cave in to the CFA on TV the NCAA leadership proposed removing the "or" in the rule and replacing it with an "and".

Thanks to the and you could average 17,000 home over a rolling four years or 20,000 home and away over a rolling four years or if you had 30,000 seats you could average 17,000 home one season in the past four or 20,000 home and away one season in the past four and barring that, you were fine if half the members of the conference met the criteria.

The math involved is why the MAC voted to kick EMU out. Going to 9 meant that as long as five schools met the criteria the whole league was safe. With EMU in, the magic number for "more than half" was six. EMU threatened litigation and the league backed down.

But the rule being a controlling criteria was simply a move to enrich the power schools to try to keep them from breaking up the NCAA TV deal.
01-15-2018 09:36 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
templefootballfan Online
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,615
Joined: Jan 2005
Reputation: 162
I Root For: TU & BGSU & TEX
Location: CLAYMONT DE Temple T
Post: #59
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
AAC has to take baby steps to improve bowls
there 12 bowls that pay between 1 & 2 million

Military & Birmingham pay 2 million
Detriot pays 1.8, ACC hates this game
Dallas pays 1.65, never gets both tie-ins
Armed Forces pay 1.55 vs MWC [army]
Mobile pays 1.5 bump ACC down
INDY pays 1.4, back-up for SEC
St Pete, NM & Boise pay 1 million
(This post was last modified: 01-15-2018 09:48 PM by templefootballfan.)
01-15-2018 09:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Attackcoog Online
Moderator
*

Posts: 44,738
Joined: Oct 2011
Reputation: 2860
I Root For: Houston
Location:
Post: #60
RE: The year college football died due to realignment?
(01-15-2018 09:44 PM)templefootballfan Wrote:  AAC has to take baby steps to improve bowls
there 12 bowls that pay between 1 & 2 million

Military & Birmingham pay 2 million
Detriot pays 1.8, ACC hates this game
Dallas pays 1.65, never gets both tie-ins
Armed Forces pay 1.55 vs MWC [army]
Mobile pays 1.5 bump ACC down
INDY pays 1.4, back-up for SEC
St Pete, NM & Boise pay 1 million

Honestly, there is little hope of the AAC getting a slot against a relatively high selection from a P5 conference in any existing bowl. For that to happen, a bowl would have to give up a P5 vs P5 tie to create an AAC Champ vs a P5 tie. Not gunna happen.

The AAC would have to do something creative. Either, create a new bowl with a payout high enough to attract a high pick from the P5....or get ESPN to place the AAC in a major bowl as part of the TV deal (this could even be some sort moving slot that rotates between several bowls like the Liberty/Belk/Texas). I of course would love for it to happens---but that negotiation is going to be very tough sledding for Aresco.
(This post was last modified: 01-15-2018 11:53 PM by Attackcoog.)
01-15-2018 11:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.