Who thinks there are to many damn football bowls? Well, I do to many crummy teams playing each other in games that mean Jack-$shat! Its bad when you would rather watch a B-movie or TV rerun than watch those sorry boring games!

I think no team should play in the post season if they have a chance of coming out of the game with a losing record. Post season play is supposed to be a reward for a great season...

Who thinks 6-6 is a great season?

If you don't like the bowl games, don't watch 'em. I can't get enough football, the more football the better, so I have nothing against all the bowls.

I don't watch all of 'em. The games I could care less about I ignore...

(01-11-2011 07:14 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  If you don't like the bowl games, don't watch 'em. I can't get enough football, the more football the better, so I have nothing against all the bowls.

+1

Wilie, as a fellow Cards fan, I am not sure you should be starting this thread. not this year.

(01-11-2011 07:14 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  If you don't like the bowl games, don't watch 'em. I can't get enough football, the more football the better, so I have nothing against all the bowls.

I have no problem watching a 6-6 Sun Belt vs. a 6-6 MAC team. I love college football.

(01-11-2011 08:15 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Wilie, as a fellow Cards fan, I am not sure you should be starting this thread. not this year.

Yep. The Cards kinda benefitted with ESPN creating and owning several lower tier bowl games.

I love college football. The more the merrier I say.

It (the increasing # of meaningless bowls) has simply become a back-door for increasing the schedule by another game.
So, since 1970, we've gone from 10 to 11 to 12 to 13 (and, of course, to 14 for teams that either play in a CCG or at Hawaii, and to 15 if a team happens to do both) as an "average" length of a college football schedule.

All that may be harmless fun. But it is something to remember when the anti-playoffs crowd talks about maintaining the "legacy" of bowl games in college football, and/or about minimizing the "time away from the classroom". Pure, absolute bullsh*t on both counts.

(01-11-2011 07:14 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  If you don't like the bowl games, don't watch 'em. I can't get enough football, the more football the better, so I have nothing against all the bowls.

I watch the good ones, but because I love football and know football, I can't stand the BS games!

(01-11-2011 06:13 PM)bitcruncher Wrote:  I think no team should play in the post season if they have a chance of coming out of the game with a losing record.

Agreed. 7-5 should be the minimum record for bowl teams. A bowl game should be, at a minimum, a matchup of two winning teams. And doing that would probably result in the reduction of at least 5 bowls. Hell, the SEC had 3 teams with 6-6 records in bowls this year.

(01-11-2011 08:15 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Wilie, as a fellow Cards fan, I am not sure you should be starting this thread. not this year.

.. or as a Big East fan, as many of our bowls (st pete, pinstripe, bbva) are johnny-come-latelies.

Believe me, if the number of bowls was cut from 35 to say 25, it wouldn't be the SEC that loses tie-ins, it would be the Big East.

(01-12-2011 12:23 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-11-2011 08:15 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Wilie, as a fellow Cards fan, I am not sure you should be starting this thread. not this year.

.. or as a Big East fan, as many of our bowls (st pete, pinstripe, bbva) are johnny-come-latelies.

Believe me, if the number of bowls was cut from 35 to say 25, it wouldn't be the SEC that loses tie-ins, it would be the Big East.

While we'd lose a bowl before the SEC, we wouldn't be losing much, probably 1 bowl spot at most. I think any and all bowls would be glad to have BE #6 over teams who didn't win their league from the MAC and Sun Belt, or CUSA #4, #5, #6, etc.

(01-11-2011 07:14 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  If you don't like the bowl games, don't watch 'em. I can't get enough football, the more football the better, so I have nothing against all the bowls.

Agree...

I think there are too many BAD tv sitcoms...so my solution to that dilemma is I don't watch them.

If one thinks there are too many bowl games on tv (mostly ESPN)...the perfect solution for them is "don't watch".

Problem solved.

Its actually a very easy problem to solve....not sure why some strain and/or even suffer over their decision.

Until there is a playoff

Let the market decide how many are too many.

I tried to watch as many as I could.

love bowl games
but the promblem with cutting back is, you still get 6-6 BCS schools playing
& 10-2 non-BCS schools sitting home

(01-12-2011 12:23 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-11-2011 08:15 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Wilie, as a fellow Cards fan, I am not sure you should be starting this thread. not this year.

.. or as a Big East fan, as many of our bowls (st pete, pinstripe, bbva) are johnny-come-latelies.

Believe me, if the number of bowls was cut from 35 to say 25, it wouldn't be the SEC that loses tie-ins, it would be the Big East.

Truth is the truth. I watched the Louisville bowl but I am sure the game did not mean much to most.

(01-12-2011 10:26 AM)Wilkie01 Wrote:  

(01-12-2011 12:23 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-11-2011 08:15 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  Wilie, as a fellow Cards fan, I am not sure you should be starting this thread. not this year.

.. or as a Big East fan, as many of our bowls (st pete, pinstripe, bbva) are johnny-come-latelies.

Believe me, if the number of bowls was cut from 35 to say 25, it wouldn't be the SEC that loses tie-ins, it would be the Big East.

Truth is the truth. I watched the Louisville bowl but I am sure the game did not mean much to most.

I confess that even though i do want the # of bowls reduced, i watched ALL the bowls, with the exception of the three played on December 18 and the one on December 21 (the UofL bowl), and i only missed those because i was in Japan at the time.

I'm a junkie, no doubt, LOL.

(01-11-2011 09:55 PM)Shannon Panther Wrote:  I love college football. The more the merrier I say.

+1