CSNbbs

Full Version: Do Bowls really mean anything anymore?
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
There once was a time when bowls meant something. Do they mean anything now? Sure, but do they hold the same weight they once did?

Back then there were 15 or 18 bowls. Now, there are twenty-eight, and conferences are struggling to fill their spots. This means that 56 teams get to go bowling. The NCAA has now legalized the use of 6-6 teams so the the BcS boys can fill their allotments, thus leaving the 8-4 and 7-5 "Mid-Majors" out of the race. It is getting to the point where any team with a winning record (non-bcs) gets to go, while the other middies have to win their conference or be runner-up in order to go...

Even if the Mid-Majors do go bowling, does it really mean more than a novelty game? The payouts for the bows pale in comparison to some of the others.

There needs to be a shakeup in the bowl alignments. Yes, I know that it will never happen because conferences are not "equal", but it sure sucks.

For the MACsters, it means that if you win your bowl, you might be "given" a token top 25 ranking by the voters...

In 1999, Marshall was shafted. They won the MACC, and beat a top 25 BYU team, but didn't climb higher than 10 for 3 weeks (being leapfrogged by some teams).

In 2000, Toledo got the big meat shalale in the corn hole. (10-1) #25 in the country, and staying home. Ridiculous...

What do you think???



<!--EDIT|THUNDERstruck73|Nov 22 2002, 08:26 PM-->
With the proliferation of bowls, they have become something of a "joke", especially when a team is "rewarded" for a "good" season when they are a pitiful 6-6.

At the same time, if the MAC had 3 teams (to be guaranteed) bowling they would likely all be deserving (in terms of quality of play), and we don't get to see our schools play on TV much, so from that perspective it would be exciting. We probably have 3 or even 4 teams deserving this year I would think.
To answer the question, no.

Outside of the BCS payout games and a handful of others, bowls are touristic-driven endeavors in which college athletic departments basically agree to assume the net financial risk of loss for their teams' participation in a lackluster game in exchange for the "reward" to the fanbase and the ability to schedule three extra weeks of practice. (For example, Clemson went to Boise last year, knowing that they'd lose $200K or more, essentially to get a jump on spring practice.)

Guest

Toledo got hosed even worse than that, Thunderstruck. 10-1 and Top 25 before the bowls. Still 10-1, but out of the polls after the bowls. All the while picking up part of the tab for a team that they had destroyed earlier in the season to go bowling.
Honostly, I don't see more than two MAC teams deserving of a Bowl most years. Under the current system I certainly wouldn't mind seeing 3 or 4 MAC teams, but honestly I'd much rather have the bowl massivly reduced in size. I'd like to see the division winners get a bowl bid, and maybe a 3rd in an exceptional year, but in a systeme where making a bowl actually means more than being an alledged top 56 team.
Reference URL's