As for college football's bowl games, what is compelling about, for example, Troy vs North Texas? Marshall vs Colorado State? Ohio vs UAB?
Unless you're a fan, or alumnus of any of those institutions, what about those games (or others like them) is interesting? That's what I'm getting at - why do people care about mediocre match-ups to the tune of good TV ratings for ESPN?
Don't get me wrong, there are some bowl games that are interesting. OSU vs USC, or maybe Stanford vs TCU, as examples. But the others - with two 6-6 or 7-5 teams playing each other, why is that compelling to watch?
I don't think I'd use the word compelling ...
But it's football ... and on a day where there are few/limited games ... I'll take Troy v North Texas over nothing.
Would I normally watch that game ... probably not.
But on Saturday, when there is little competition .... and I have a beer in my hand ... yeah, I guess that makes it somewhat compelling.
And if you happen to have a friend "in the desert" and you happen to drop a few nickels on .... let's say, Troy -6' .... compelling takes on a different meaning ;)
But I do get your point ... some of these match-ups are pure trash. Couldn't agree more.
But that's what is kind of fun about it for me. I have a group of friends that will get together this Saturday ... watch these horrible games ... have a lot of laughs in the process ... and a few beers to go with them.
It's a fun December tradition.
But don't get me wrong .... I long for the days of only 25 or so bowl games that went to teams as an actual reward ... not a participation ribbon.
6-6 or even 7-5 teams shouldn't be showered with praise and a bowl game every year.
Those games used to have a much deeper value and meaning ... but now we get 6-6 UVA playing 6-6 Navy AT NAVY ... and that's a bowl game?!?!
Oh well ... I'll watch and enjoy a Esther's Lil Secret or two to add to the compelling-ness (available in cans on Kenny Rd in Cbus if my sources are correct)
I call Bullshit. The problem when there were 25 games was that all the 6 and 6 teams from power conferences went to bowls and deserving 9 and 2 teams missed out if they didn't win their conference. The idea that bowls used to be about rewards is complete garbage.
I think we're somewhere in the middle here. I wouldn't call it complete garbage.
Yeah ... back when there were only 20 bowl games (1997-98) there were a handful of 6-5 teams that made bowls from power conferences.
Less than 10 years later, we were up to 32 bowl games in 2006-07 ... the same year the NCAA started allowing 6-6 bowl teams. That year there were 7 of them.
2007-08 = 7
2008 up to 34 bowls and they started allowing 5-7 teams...
2008-09 = 9 non-winning teams
2010-11 = 14 non-winning teams (bowls expanded to 35)
2011-12 = 14
2012-13 = 13
2013-14 = 8
2014-15 = 13 non-winning teams (bowls expanded to 39)
2015-16 = 15 non-winning teams (bowls expanded to 41)
2016-17 = 20 non-winning teams ... 25% of all participants
2017-18 = 15 ... only the second time in nine years that no teams with losing seasons had to be invited to fill available bowl berths.
The train started really going off the track about 10 years ago .... the fact we're in an era where 6-6 or 5-7 MAC teams are "earning" bowl bids is complete garbage to me.
128 teams have earned bowl bids in the last ten years with non-winning records. That's insane.
I think there is a middle ground where bowl games can be trimmed back and only teams that truly deserve/earn it get a bowl game.
But we all know that won't happen ... follow the money! CFB is beyond repair at this point ... it's gotten too far off the rails to ever be reigned back in unfortunately.
Last Edited: 12/14/2017 1:19:07 AM by bshot44