Chicago Fanatics Message Board
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/

My thoughts on bowls
https://mail.chicagofanatics.com/viewtopic.php?f=101&t=54585		 Page 1 of 2
Author:  My_name_1s_MUD [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 8:56 am ]
Post subject:  My thoughts on bowls
I have kind of an idealistic of what college football is supposed to be about. At the end of the day, I think it's about developing men of character and representing your school well. Back in the day, bowls were meant as a prize. The team and fans got to go someplace interesting (and warm) to celebrate the season's accomplishment and play a meaningless exhibition game. The REAL season was conference play. College sports were a REGIONAL game whereas pro football was national.

But TV changed all that. It's not just the money, but it's the information as well. Conferences were once leagues.... but have morphed into divisions. Bowls were once exhibition games... but have morphed into some sort of obscure bracketology to crown a national champion. And the addition of so many of the bowls has diluted the regular season. I mean, how special can a bowl trip be when you go .500 in conference play? Really?

So I've given up on this idealistic view of what college football is supposed to be. We've pushed it too far across the line now. I've flipped. I'm now in favor national championship bracket. Perhaps it is defeatist, but I actually think it is impossible to change it back. The mindset is changed. It's another slow sociological change (actually pretty fast in the case of college football) which would take a massive grassroots backlash to change it back... and I don't see that coming.
Author:  conns7901 [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 8:59 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
I think it was SI who wrote an article recently how most teams lose money going to bowl games.
Author:  Douchebag [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 9:02 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
Ike South wrote:
Bows are okay, but blunts are better.
Author:  Brick [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
So Mud, you'd be happy if Northwestern played in a postseason game about once every 20 years because unless it's a 16 team playoff Northwestern isn't going to be the Big Ten participant very often and highly unlikely to be one of the 2 "at large" teams given that one would likely be the undefeated team from a non-BCS conference?

Unless you are Ohio State, Michigan or Nebraska an 8 team NCAA playoff would be bad for all the other Big Ten teams. Even teams like Iowa and Wisconsin would be left out most of the time.
Author:  NSJ [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:25 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
So Mud, you'd be happy if Northwestern played in a postseason game about once every 20 years because unless it's a 16 team playoff Northwestern isn't going to be the Big Ten participant very often and highly unlikely to be one of the 2 "at large" teams given that one would likely be the undefeated team from a non-BCS conference?

Unless you are Ohio State, Michigan or Nebraska an 8 team NCAA playoff would be bad for all the other Big Ten teams. Even teams like Iowa and Wisconsin would be left out most of the time.


Bowl games and a national championship bracket don't have to be mutually exclusive.
Author:  spanky [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:26 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
I know we've been through this, but couldn't the rest of the teams that have "good" seasons, but not eligible for the playoff, still have the reward of warm weather bowl games that they potentially lose money on? It's still fun for the fans and players and boosters.
Author:  Douchebag [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:26 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
What is the difference between a meaningless bowl game and let's say the 49ers and Vikings facing each other after the regular season ends? I really don't see the point of them. Unless you are in the National Championship game, it means completely nothing.
Author:  spanky [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:27 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
Douchebag wrote:
What is the difference between a meaningless bowl game and let's say the 49ers and Vikings facing each other after the regular season ends? I really don't see the point of them. Unless you are in the National Championship game, it means completely nothing.

Are you saying now (current system) or the proposed playoff?
Author:  Douchebag [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
spanky wrote:
Douchebag wrote:
What is the difference between a meaningless bowl game and let's say the 49ers and Vikings facing each other after the regular season ends? I really don't see the point of them. Unless you are in the National Championship game, it means completely nothing.

Are you saying now (current system) or the proposed playoff?

Current system.

Every bowl (except the national championship), is equal to the 49ers facing the Vikings (or any other non-playoff matchup) after this NFL season. It's completely meaningless.
Author:  sjboyd0137 [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:30 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
spanky wrote:
I know we've been through this, but couldn't the rest of the teams that have "good" seasons, but not eligible for the playoff, still have the reward of warm weather bowl games that they potentially lose money on? It's still fun for the fans and players and boosters.

Yeah, but how much of a reward is it for teams from cold weather cities to go to those warm weather bowls and get their asses handed to them by teams from warmer climates?
Author:  NSJ [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
spanky wrote:
I know we've been through this, but couldn't the rest of the teams that have "good" seasons, but not eligible for the playoff, still have the reward of warm weather bowl games that they potentially lose money on? It's still fun for the fans and players and boosters.


That's a very good point. In other words, are you saying that a playoff system and going to bowls could co-exist?
Author:  Northside_Dan [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
sjboyd0137 wrote:
spanky wrote:
I know we've been through this, but couldn't the rest of the teams that have "good" seasons, but not eligible for the playoff, still have the reward of warm weather bowl games that they potentially lose money on? It's still fun for the fans and players and boosters.

Yeah, but how much of a reward is it for teams from cold weather cities to go to those warm weather bowls and get their asses handed to them by teams from warmer climates?


I think that's just something people say. Has this ever been actually determined?
Author:  Terry's Peeps [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
sjboyd0137 wrote:
spanky wrote:
I know we've been through this, but couldn't the rest of the teams that have "good" seasons, but not eligible for the playoff, still have the reward of warm weather bowl games that they potentially lose money on? It's still fun for the fans and players and boosters.

Yeah, but how much of a reward is it for teams from cold weather cities to go to those warm weather bowls and get their asses handed to them by teams from warmer climates?


We need more bowl games in New York and Chicago!
Author:  spanky [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:32 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
sjboyd0137 wrote:
spanky wrote:
I know we've been through this, but couldn't the rest of the teams that have "good" seasons, but not eligible for the playoff, still have the reward of warm weather bowl games that they potentially lose money on? It's still fun for the fans and players and boosters.

Yeah, but how much of a reward is it for teams from cold weather cities to go to those warm weather bowls and get their asses handed to them by teams from warmer climates?

You're not dragging me into this one today..... :lol: :wink:


Yes, NSJ, I typed it at the same time you did. But you are superior. Don't worry.
Author:  peopleselbow [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:35 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
spanky wrote:
I know we've been through this, but couldn't the rest of the teams that have "good" seasons, but not eligible for the playoff, still have the reward of warm weather bowl games that they potentially lose money on? It's still fun for the fans and players and boosters.

Exactly. Basketball has the NIT. They can still have a Kraft Foods Fight Hunger Bowl for the teams who did not get invited to the National Championship Tournament.

Here is an idea that rarely gets mentioned. What if the playoff games were played at the largest bowl sites? All of the playoffs would be at neutral sites like the Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl etc. I think it would work and they would start selling the games out again at a higher ticket price. I saw A LOT of empty seats this year. The whole upper deck of the Orange Bowl was not even half full.
Author:  Irish Boy [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:35 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
spanky wrote:
I know we've been through this, but couldn't the rest of the teams that have "good" seasons, but not eligible for the playoff, still have the reward of warm weather bowl games that they potentially lose money on? It's still fun for the fans and players and boosters.

Maybe, but probably not, because the top bowls would lose almost all of their value and could no longer subsidize the rest.
Douchebag wrote:
What is the difference between a meaningless bowl game and let's say the 49ers and Vikings facing each other after the regular season ends? I really don't see the point of them. Unless you are in the National Championship game, it means completely nothing.

This is almost exactly backwards. In a playoff system, every game is "meaningless" except the championship game. The NFC Championship Game is meaningless if the AFC wins the Super Bowl by this line of logic.

On the other hand, there are now a bunch of meaningful games at the end of the college football season. Winning the Rose Bowl is a huge deal...ask any TCU fan. Would they rather win the national championship? Of course? Would they rather make the "Football Final Four" or whatever? Winning a bowl game is an end to itself, not a means towards something else. It is itself the accomplishment. Some games mean more than others, but at the top, winning a Sugar Bowl or an Orange Bowl is itself a reward.
Author:  spanky [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:36 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
Irish Boy wrote:
This is almost exactly backwards. In a playoff system, every game is "meaningless" except the championship game. The NFC Championship Game is meaningless if the AFC wins the Super Bowl by this line of logic.

It must be January!!!!!
Author:  Irish Boy [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:37 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
Quote:
Here is an idea that rarely gets mentioned. What if the playoff games were played at the largest bowl sites? All of the playoffs would be at neutral sites like the Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl etc. I think it would work and they would start selling the games out again at a higher ticket price. I saw A LOT of empty seats this year. The whole upper deck of the Orange Bowl was not even half full.

There will be even more empty seats if you are asking fans to fly across the country multiple weekends in a row to neutral sites. Hell, the men's basketball tournament has trouble selling out lots of sites, and they get multiple games per day.
Author:  sjboyd0137 [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:37 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
Northside_Dan wrote:
sjboyd0137 wrote:
spanky wrote:
I know we've been through this, but couldn't the rest of the teams that have "good" seasons, but not eligible for the playoff, still have the reward of warm weather bowl games that they potentially lose money on? It's still fun for the fans and players and boosters.

Yeah, but how much of a reward is it for teams from cold weather cities to go to those warm weather bowls and get their asses handed to them by teams from warmer climates?


I think that's just something people say. Has this ever been actually determined?

I personally think the theory is bullshit...it was an editorial in the Trib yesterday.
Author:  Douchebag [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
Irish Boy wrote:
Douchebag wrote:
What is the difference between a meaningless bowl game and let's say the 49ers and Vikings facing each other after the regular season ends? I really don't see the point of them. Unless you are in the National Championship game, it means completely nothing.

This is almost exactly backwards. In a playoff system, every game is "meaningless" except the championship game. The NFC Championship Game is meaningless if the AFC wins the Super Bowl by this line of logic.

I completely disagree with this. Any team that plays in the playoffs is playing in a meaningful game. You have a chance at winning the championship. Even though TCU played in the Rose Bowl and won, they have a 0% chance at winning the national championship. If they would have lost the game, they would still have a 0% chance of winning the National Championship. The outcome of the game meant absolutely nothing.
Author:  peopleselbow [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
Irish Boy wrote:
Quote:
Here is an idea that rarely gets mentioned. What if the playoff games were played at the largest bowl sites? All of the playoffs would be at neutral sites like the Rose Bowl, Sugar Bowl, Orange Bowl etc. I think it would work and they would start selling the games out again at a higher ticket price. I saw A LOT of empty seats this year. The whole upper deck of the Orange Bowl was not even half full.

There will be even more empty seats if you are asking fans to fly across the country multiple weekends in a row to neutral sites. Hell, the men's basketball tournament has trouble selling out lots of sites, and they get multiple games per day.

Good point. This true of the 1st 2 rounds, now the 1st 3 (NCAA logic) but the sweet 16 and on are all sell outs. the Semi-finals and finals could be held at the Orange, Rose, Sugar etc. and they would do well. IMHO.

Peace.
Author:  Northside_Dan [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:44 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
Irish Boy wrote:
[

On the other hand, there are now a bunch of meaningful games at the end of the college football season. Winning the Rose Bowl is a huge deal...ask any TCU fan. Would they rather win the national championship? Of course? Would they rather make the "Football Final Four" or whatever? Winning a bowl game is an end to itself, not a means towards something else. It is itself the accomplishment. Some games mean more than others, but at the top, winning a Sugar Bowl or an Orange Bowl is itself a reward.



The 'reward' you talk about is just something that people are used to since we've had a more or less meaningless bowl system for so long.. At the end of the day, winning the Rose Bowl means very little. 10 years from now it'll mean the same as winning the Fighting Hunger Bowl.

A playoff system would provide a quantifiable standards to each teams season. You don't think TCU would consider it just as successful if they won their Rose Bowl playoff game and lost their next one and finished 3rd or 4th in the country? I truly believe fans of each school would be able to find as much, if not more, satisfaction from a playoff system and knowing their teams standing. Right now, they are undefeated, Rose Bowl champions and they are going to be watching the national championship game on TV.

You are 100% correct about the multiple neutral site things. Higher seeds in a playoff would need to host games until say the semi finals or so.
Author:  Northside_Dan [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:44 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
sjboyd0137 wrote:
I personally think the theory is bullshit...it was an editorial in the Trib yesterday.


Thankfully I missed that. Wow.
Author:  Brick [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:47 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
NSJ wrote:
Bowl games and a national championship bracket don't have to be mutually exclusive.
Right now the bowl system is viewed as the same thing as the national title game. You are slotted into a certain level such as BCS Bowl, New Years Day bowl, post Christmas Bowl, pre Christmas Bowl but it's still the same general system. With a playoff of more than 4 teams but less than 16 the bowls would become the NIT which no one cares about. It's not an accomplishment to make the NIT unless you were even worse the year before.

If I'm a recruit choosing between Northwestern and Michigan, the coach at Michigan can sell me on the fact that I'll be playing in the "better postseason" because they have a history of being good enough to play in it. It would greatly help the traditional elite because most schools, including mine, would be locked out with no chance of playing in it unless they have one of those once in 20 years type players or get really lucky. Right now, the difference between the Capital One Bowl and the Rose Bowl is noticeable but not huge. The difference between the Capital One Bowl and the quarterfinal game would be massive. Depending on how they use it, the Rose Bowl would either be part of the playoff or greatly diminished.

Now, a 16 team playoff, which is unrealistic, does give that type of access as 2-3 Big Ten teams would be in it every year. An 8 team playoff and I predict it looks something like this for Big Ten teams making it.
Ohio State
Ohio State
Nebraska
(Someone else)
Ohio State
Michigan
Michigan
Nebraska
(Someone else)

I'm not high on my teams chances to be that someone else and I am sure recruits wouldn't be either.
Author:  sjboyd0137 [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:49 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
Northside_Dan wrote:
sjboyd0137 wrote:
I personally think the theory is bullshit...it was an editorial in the Trib yesterday.


Thankfully I missed that. Wow.

If you want to read it, the link is here:
viewtopic.php?p=988749#p988749
Author:  spanky [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:49 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
Douchebag wrote:
I completely disagree with this. Any team that plays in the playoffs is playing in a meaningful game. You have a chance at winning the championship. Even though TCU played in the Rose Bowl and won, they have a 0% chance at winning the national championship. If they would have lost the game, they would still have a 0% chance of winning the National Championship. The outcome of the game meant absolutely nothing.

Don't worry, this is IB's annual "playoffs are useless" because the best team is guaranteed to win, and therefore every game leading up to the championship is deemed "useless" in his opinion.

He does it every January. It will really pick up steam after an upset or two this weekend. Sit back and enjoy. :wink:
Author:  conns7901 [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:50 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
If i'm TCU I'd rather lose in the Quarter Finals of a Championship tournament than win the Rose Bowl. At least in a playoff you have a shot of winning it all.
Author:  Brick [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:52 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
Douchebag wrote:
What is the difference between a meaningless bowl game and let's say the 49ers and Vikings facing each other after the regular season ends? I really don't see the point of them. Unless you are in the National Championship game, it means completely nothing.
The sport is setup differently and the motivation is different. In the NFL, there is only one goal. That is to win the Super Bowl. No one even cares about division titles or NFC titles. They really aren't comparable.

In college, you have these goals:
1) Win national title(not realistic with so many teams for most schools)
2) Win your conference
3) Winning record
4) Beat your rival(s)
5) Make a good bowl game
6) Bowl win

A bowl win also goes a long way towards your ranking next year, the mood of the program, and season ticket sales. It's also the last game for a class of seniors and is viewed as the final exclamation point on a career. The week 17 games don't matter because it's not the end.
Author:  spanky [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:53 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Right now the bowl system is viewed as the same thing as the national title game. You are slotted into a certain level such as BCS Bowl, New Years Day bowl, post Christmas Bowl, pre Christmas Bowl but it's still the same general system.

I'm confused. You're saying that the "quality" of the bowl game is ranked on these points (currently)? If so, I'd like to disagree, along with the fine sponsors at Kraft, GoDaddy, and whoever sponsors the Cotton Bowl now, among others.
Author:  Brick [ Wed Jan 05, 2011 10:56 am ]
Post subject:  Re: My thoughts on bowls
spanky wrote:
Boilermaker Rick wrote:
Right now the bowl system is viewed as the same thing as the national title game. You are slotted into a certain level such as BCS Bowl, New Years Day bowl, post Christmas Bowl, pre Christmas Bowl but it's still the same general system.

I'm confused. You're saying that the "quality" of the bowl game is ranked on these points (currently)? If so, I'd like to disagree, along with the fine sponsors at Kraft, GoDaddy, and whoever sponsors the Cotton Bowl now, among others.
That's my general view of the bowl system and which ones are better than the others. The post NYD non-BCS games are probably equal to the Christmas to New Year's eve bowl games outside of the Cotton Bowl.
Page 1 of 2 All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/