CSNbbs

Full Version: Bowled Over
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
http://cbs.sportsline.com/collegefootbal...381893/rss

Bowled over

The NCAA is considering adding four new bowls to its already glutted 28-bowl lineup. If all are approved, 64 of the 119 Division I-A schools (54 percent) will be guaranteed postseason berths.

And you thought the Stanley Cup playoffs were too inclusive?

The new bowls have to be first approved by the NCAA bowl certification committee. More important, concerned parties are waiting for the NCAA board of directors to define bowl eligibility in 2006.

The board almost has to set the standard at 6-6 when it hands down the decision on April 27. The last time a 12-game schedule existed in 2002 and 2003, at least four teams became bowl eligible each year because of the six-win standard.

The NCAA barely found enough bowl-eligible teams last year (it needed 56) during the 11-game regular season. If teams were required to finish above .500 -- in other words 7-5 in a 12-game schedule in 2006 -- it's almost certain there wouldn't be 64 bowl-eligible teams.

A look at the new bowls waiting to be certified:


The new BCS national championship game which debuts Jan. 8, 2007 in the new Glendale, Ariz. stadium. Approval is a slam dunk.

The Birmingham Bowl, to be played at Legion Field, where UAB struggles to attract fans. This newbie would match Conference USA against either a Big East or MAC rep. Can't wait.

The New Mexico Bowl in Albuquerque. Who cares who plays in it (Mountain West vs. WAC), this is what bowls are all about: a destination city where you can go from teeing off to snow skiing in 30 minutes.

International Bowl in Toronto. Nothing says college football like a match between Big East and MAC runners-up in Canada.
HUSKIEFOOTBALLFAN Wrote:http://cbs.sportsline.com/collegefootbal...381893/rss

Bowled over

The NCAA is considering adding four new bowls to its already glutted 28-bowl lineup. If all are approved, 64 of the 119 Division I-A schools (54 percent) will be guaranteed postseason berths.

And you thought the Stanley Cup playoffs were too inclusive?

The new bowls have to be first approved by the NCAA bowl certification committee. More important, concerned parties are waiting for the NCAA board of directors to define bowl eligibility in 2006.

The board almost has to set the standard at 6-6 when it hands down the decision on April 27. The last time a 12-game schedule existed in 2002 and 2003, at least four teams became bowl eligible each year because of the six-win standard.

The NCAA barely found enough bowl-eligible teams last year (it needed 56) during the 11-game regular season. If teams were required to finish above .500 -- in other words 7-5 in a 12-game schedule in 2006 -- it's almost certain there wouldn't be 64 bowl-eligible teams.

A look at the new bowls waiting to be certified:


The new BCS national championship game which debuts Jan. 8, 2007 in the new Glendale, Ariz. stadium. Approval is a slam dunk.

The Birmingham Bowl, to be played at Legion Field, where UAB struggles to attract fans. This newbie would match Conference USA against either a Big East or MAC rep. Can't wait.

The New Mexico Bowl in Albuquerque. Who cares who plays in it (Mountain West vs. WAC), this is what bowls are all about: a destination city where you can go from teeing off to snow skiing in 30 minutes.

International Bowl in Toronto. Nothing says college football like a match between Big East and MAC runners-up in Canada.

Screw this jack***! He makes bowl games for MAC teams sound terrible! He is the reason why BCS schools get whatever they want. NIU would bring a lot of fans to their bowl games. Everyone would love to go down to Alabama for a bowl game in December! It'd be like a vacation.
He is right though. There are too many bowls. We must get rid of some. Unfortunately, America is not interested in the third best MAC team against the sixth best CUSA team...let alone Canadians. Sorry :domokun:
akronzip Wrote:He is right though. There are too many bowls. We must get rid of some. Unfortunately, America is not interested in the third best MAC team against the sixth best CUSA team...let alone Canadians. Sorry :domokun:

America is not interested in 6-6 Wake Forest vs 6-6 Kansas either. However, Wake Forest and Kansas have more fans than the 3rd place MAC and 6th place C-USA and that is why they have bowl tie-ins and the MAC has to struggle to try and get a 3rd bowl tie-in. The majority of American could care less if 6-6 Kansas or 9-3 Toledo go to a bowl game. But Kansas does have more fans than Toledo and that is what matters, not the quality of football on the field.
Stated PERFECTLY :iagree:
akronzip Wrote:He is right though. There are too many bowls. We must get rid of some. Unfortunately, America is not interested in the third best MAC team against the sixth best CUSA team...let alone Canadians.

That's why we would be bringing in the Big East.

05-stirthepot
They, too, aren't interested in the fifth placed Big East team not other real bowl watned, eh?

Perhaps we could swap...Cleveland could host the Queens vs.Waterloo Hockey Game for a top tier MAC vs. 6-6 Big East team in Toronto.
Actually in Bowl Games over the past ten years, MAC teams have been outdrawing fans of nearly all those 7-4 and 6-5 BCS teams.
Reference URL's