More bowl games on the way?

**cigaretteman** · 04-25-2008, 09:06 AM

Stewart Mandel: An already bloated bowl schedule may get even bigger - Stewart Mandel - SI.com

**cyclonemaniac7** · 04-25-2008, 09:07 AM

Dumb. Seriously, there are already too many bowl games as it is. It's not going to mean ANYTHING to make a bowl anymore.

**cybsball20** · 04-25-2008, 09:12 AM

They aren't going to he happy untill EVERY .500 team goes to a bowl...

**HandSanitizer** · 04-25-2008, 09:12 AM

Originally Posted by cigaretteman

Stewart Mandel: An already bloated bowl schedule may get even bigger - Stewart Mandel - SI.com

Just to give everyone and idea of what is happening. When you think of the 80's. I think of some bad jerseys and bad ISU football.

Did you guys know that 1980,86,89 ISU would have went to bowl games if it were today's rules? And that was with an 11 Game schedule.

**HILLCYD** · 04-25-2008, 09:13 AM

Just what we need, more bowl games. What a freakin joke. If this happens we will eventually see a team under .500 in a bowl. It will happen.

**Clonehomer** · 04-25-2008, 09:14 AM

What happens when there aren't any .500 teams available? They came very close to not having enough 6-5 teams a couple of years ago. Are there usually that many 6-6 teams to guarentee these bowls will be filled every year?

**brianhos** · 04-25-2008, 09:16 AM

Wasn't there a situation a few years ago where if certain teams had beaten other teams at the end of the year, there was not going to be enough teams to fill all the bowls? And now they are adding more?

Is the federal government running this thing or something?

**HandSanitizer** · 04-25-2008, 09:21 AM

Originally Posted by cybsball20

They aren't going to he happy untill EVERY .500 team goes to a bowl...

So teams are going to start scheduling accordingly. all you will need is 6 wins. Most teams are already playing 4 cupcakes to start the season.

If this passes....(which I hope it won't) I better see ISU in a fricking bowl game almost every year starting soon. They should be able to win 3-4 conference games every year (don't tell me about last year). Probably 4 if Iowa is at Home. They would only have to scrape together 2 wins in conference. I compare this to what if a team in Basketball played nobody for 13 games and then got to conference and won 5 games against 2 of the worst teams in the league and another game against a middle of the pack. They would be laughed for the consideration of the tourney.
Football needs to get their crap together or everyone will be playing a game. Maybe that is their goal?

**HandSanitizer** · 04-25-2008, 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by brianhos

Wasn't there a situation a few years ago where if certain teams had beaten other teams at the end of the year, there was not going to be enough teams to fill all the bowls? And now they are adding more?

Is the federal government running this thing or something?

This would really help a team like Iowa. Iowa is always going to be floating around the 5-7 win mark with ocassional good to really good years, but with the new 7 win rule they got left out last year. Iowa would be the most coveted 6 win team out there so this could be a big new in Iowa City for future 6 win seasons.

**if they don't win 7-8 games next year with it being the last year of the easy schedule it could get messy over there. ISU could help that along by winning in Kinnick.

**cloneu** · 04-25-2008, 09:26 AM

Originally Posted by brianhos

Is the federal government running this thing or something?

Maybe the government should spend some money and hold a hearing on why there are so many bowl games.

For how much I don't like the idea of having more bowl games I know I will still watch Middle Tennessee St. play Akron in the 1800petmeds.com bowl or whatever.

**HILLCYD** · 04-25-2008, 09:27 AM

Last year's bowl season was a joke and I have finally officially begun to lose interest. I never thought I would ever say I was apethetic on bowl season, but it has happened and will only get worse.

**cycloneryan** · 04-25-2008, 09:31 AM

In theory I think it is great that more teams get a chance to go to a bowl game but the fact is that a lot of teams that go to the smaller, less respected bowl games lose money because they dont get paid much to go there and the cost of sending a football team and all the people that come with it.

**nomadiclone** · 04-25-2008, 09:42 AM

Originally Posted by cys_av8r

Just what we need, more bowl games. What a freakin joke. If this happens we will eventually see a team under .500 in a bowl. It will happen.

It already happened in 2001. North Texas was 5-6 but won their conference title. They started out 0-5 went 5-1 in conference and ended up 5-7 after losing to Colorado State in the New Orleans Bowl 45-20.

**jumbopackage** · 04-25-2008, 09:57 AM

Originally Posted by cys_av8r

Just what we need, more bowl games. What a freakin joke. If this happens we will eventually see a team under .500 in a bowl. It will happen.

It can only happen if a team plays 13 games (which they can, if they are willing to go to Hawaii to play). 5 win teams are not eligible for bowl games.

Originally Posted by Clonehomer

What happens when there aren't any .500 teams available? They came very close to not having enough 6-5 teams a couple of years ago. Are there usually that many 6-6 teams to guarentee these bowls will be filled every year?

The bowls can't be played, then. It's a risk those bowls have to take. This really is a non-issue, IMO, because the "marketplace" will determine the fate of any new bowl games. A new bowl is going to be sucking up the dregs of teams that are left. If they can make money on those games, and risk not having teams to fill them, then they'll make it. Otherwise (and likely) they won't. That's why the higher profile bowls have conference tie-ins with conferences that are likely to supply eligible teams - less risk of not having teams to play in your bowl game, and a better chance of having a high profile team.

Originally Posted by nomadiclone

It already happened in 2001. North Texas was 5-6 but won their conference title. They started out 0-5 went 5-1 in conference and ended up 5-7 after losing to Colorado State in the New Orleans Bowl 45-20.

Winning a conference championship does not guarantee you a bowl game, but it makes a strong argument. The NCAA granted an exemption to North Texas that year to participate in a bowl game only because it won it's conference. That's a very limited and pretty unique situation. It was the first year of the Sun Belt conference, and it's kind of a slap in the face to say your conference champion can't go to a bowl game.

The point is, that's not going to happen wholesale with 5 win teams. I honestly don't see the problem in all 6 win teams making it to bowl games. That's what the NCAA says makes you eligible. It's not like they mean anything anyway, other than a reward for having an alright season. The better you do, the better bowl you go to. Do you think anyone in the Big 10 really WANTS to go to the Motor City Bowl?

**1100011CS** · 04-25-2008, 10:06 AM

Until fans quit watching/going to these crappy bowls, they'll keep adding them:

"Last year's 32 bowl games netted an average attendance of 54,078, highest in eight years. The PapaJohns.com Bowl pitting Cincinnati and Southern Miss garnered a modest but respectable 2.26 rating on ESPN2. By comparison, NBA regular-season games on ESPN average a 1.3."