(05-07-2015 03:08 PM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Tucson and Austin both are both giving the same story. Orlando seems to be the only new one assured for this season.

The ncaa is doing a pretty poor job of approving new bowl games. Why approve when the organizers have not secured the venue, title sponsor or even tv network? Also, in the Austin Bowl's case, they claim they don't have it set for sure on which conferences they will contract with.

(05-08-2015 07:15 AM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  

(05-07-2015 03:08 PM)BeliefBlazer Wrote:  Tucson and Austin both are both giving the same story. Orlando seems to be the only new one assured for this season.

The ncaa is doing a pretty poor job of approving new bowl games. Why approve when the organizers have not secured the venue, title sponsor or even tv network? Also, in the Austin Bowl's case, they claim they don't have it set for sure on which conferences they will contract with.

Not an expert by any means, but maybe the Bowl needs to be approved before final negotiations can be made with sponsers and venues. This may only be a 'green light' from the NCAA and the network who would like to cover the game. Now it's up to the Bowl Committees to finalize the contracts (i.e. it's probably hard to have a contract when you don't even know if there's going to be a game).

Chicken or Egg??

(05-07-2015 05:39 AM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(05-06-2015 01:25 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Then he should have chosen to place a team in Austin rather than Tucson. Let's see. Austin is in your footprint, and there are a whopping FOUR Texas teams in CUSA. A no brainer if there ever was one ahead of any other bowl.

His reasoning may be that the AAC does not cover this bowl (would that mean someone among SMU, Tulsa, Tulane, Connecticut, or USF has to get to 6 wins?), and the Texas C-USA programs, if not in Shreveport for a P5 opponent as back-up for Independence, would get in the game anyway.

I have real mixed feelings about this bowl. Just don't see that I'd be motivated to travel into Longhorn town to see Rice play SMU, Tulsa or Tulane. But it's a moot point now.

Yeah, I have a feeling the Texas CUSA teams might show up in this one from time to time, assuming it lasts.

And it would be a convenient bowl for me if that's where Rice ends up....

(05-07-2015 09:18 AM)THUNDERGround Wrote:  My belief is that a team should be at least 7-5 (or 7-6 with a CCG loss) in order to go bowling. That would pare the bowls down by probably ten or more.

This is how I feel. A team shouldn't have to win 8 or 9 games as they had to do in the 70's, but 7 wins would be a fair requirement now. If you can't win 7 games out of a 12-game schedule, you don't need to be bowling. Being rewarded with a bowl game and extra practice time should only go to those teams that have really earned it with a special season. It's a privilege that average and below average teams shouldn't have.

(05-08-2015 09:49 AM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(05-07-2015 09:18 AM)THUNDERGround Wrote:  My belief is that a team should be at least 7-5 (or 7-6 with a CCG loss) in order to go bowling. That would pare the bowls down by probably ten or more.

This is how I feel. A team shouldn't have to win 8 or 9 games as they had to do in the 70's, but 7 wins would be a fair requirement now. If you can't win 7 games out of a 12-game schedule, you don't need to be bowling. Being rewarded with a bowl game and extra practice time should only go to those teams that have really earned it with a special season. It's a privilege that average and below average teams shouldn't have.

Agreed. My only concern is any attempt to put in a rule like this would be corrupted somehow by the P5 to screw the G5...

(05-07-2015 03:03 PM)MinerInWisconsin Wrote:  So now it looks like the Tucson Bowl is not assured for 2015. They need a title sponsor and are talking to people but...

tucson bowl article

Let it fall through. UTEP can't anchor two western bowls for CUSA.

(05-06-2015 01:14 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-06-2015 01:05 PM)RonBurgundy Wrote:  It's good we have more bowl spots but geez the amount of bowls are getting ridiculous. 84 teams in bowls is crazy.

82 teams. They're counting the NC game which doesn't require 2 additional teams.

Bowls used to be a reward for a great season. Now they are like participation awards.

In 1990 there were 19 bowl games and 42 now.

(05-08-2015 09:48 AM)JustAnotherAustinOwl Wrote:  

(05-07-2015 05:39 AM)ESE84 Wrote:  

(05-06-2015 01:25 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  Then he should have chosen to place a team in Austin rather than Tucson. Let's see. Austin is in your footprint, and there are a whopping FOUR Texas teams in CUSA. A no brainer if there ever was one ahead of any other bowl.

His reasoning may be that the AAC does not cover this bowl (would that mean someone among SMU, Tulsa, Tulane, Connecticut, or USF has to get to 6 wins?), and the Texas C-USA programs, if not in Shreveport for a P5 opponent as back-up for Independence, would get in the game anyway.

I have real mixed feelings about this bowl. Just don't see that I'd be motivated to travel into Longhorn town to see Rice play SMU, Tulsa or Tulane. But it's a moot point now.

Yeah, I have a feeling the Texas CUSA teams might show up in this one from time to time, assuming it lasts.

And it would be a convenient bowl for me if that's where Rice ends up....

We are entering an era where there are enough G5 bowls to where we will see them swapped and traded around a lot. Just look these past two seasons with the swapping going down behind the scenes for all these Florida bowls. Each Conference will more than likely have two or three anchor bowls and swap around with the rest.

(05-07-2015 05:17 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(05-06-2015 06:05 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(05-06-2015 04:41 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(05-06-2015 04:37 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(05-06-2015 01:05 PM)RonBurgundy Wrote:  It's good we have more bowl spots but geez the amount of bowls are getting ridiculous. 84 teams in bowls is crazy.

It's beyond ridiculous. There aren't words to explain how meaningless bowl games are now. I hope they can't find enough teams to play in them all.

On that subject I'm afflicted, Afflicted. For me there's a ton of excitment on gameday and it just gets better every year.

I love the pageantry and excitement of bowl games, but I miss the days when only the truly deserving teams played in them.

These days, bowl games are about the extra practice days the team gets and rewarding the players and coaches. Most schools do well to break even money wise. For the vast majority of G5 schools, going back to the days when "only the truly deserving teams played in them" would mean never playing in a bowl game at all.

1975 Arkansas State went 11-0. Watched bowl games on TV. Screw the "deserving" BS because only one bowl even scouted AState, the Tangerine and they took 7-4 South Carolina who ended up losing by 13 to Miami (OH) in the bowl.

Now if I were emperor of college football the standard would be:
Conference or division champ or eight regular season wins but the current system is working financially so no one is going to upset the apple cart.

(05-08-2015 09:56 AM)Cscollis Wrote:  

(05-06-2015 01:14 PM)BullsFanInTX Wrote:  

(05-06-2015 01:05 PM)RonBurgundy Wrote:  It's good we have more bowl spots but geez the amount of bowls are getting ridiculous. 84 teams in bowls is crazy.

82 teams. They're counting the NC game which doesn't require 2 additional teams.

Bowls used to be a reward for a great season. Now they are like participation awards.

In 1990 there were 19 bowl games and 42 now.

The participation award meme is a sneer at the G5. No one is getting in without winning six games, if it were a participation award everyone would be playing.

There are no more nice pick ups for bowl games. Its getting embarrassing and no longer an accomplishment to get to a bowl. I remember the being a 8 and 9 win team, and being left out of a bowl. That was the time where you had to be a champ or a runner up to even sniff a bowl. Now, just need 6 wins. I think its garbage. Bowls should have stopped at least at 30, so more teams stay home than go to the post season.

(05-08-2015 10:30 AM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(05-07-2015 05:17 AM)BRtransplant Wrote:  

(05-06-2015 06:05 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  

(05-06-2015 04:41 PM)CajunFanatico Wrote:  

(05-06-2015 04:37 PM)Afflicted Wrote:  It's beyond ridiculous. There aren't words to explain how meaningless bowl games are now. I hope they can't find enough teams to play in them all.

On that subject I'm afflicted, Afflicted. For me there's a ton of excitment on gameday and it just gets better every year.

I love the pageantry and excitement of bowl games, but I miss the days when only the truly deserving teams played in them.

These days, bowl games are about the extra practice days the team gets and rewarding the players and coaches. Most schools do well to break even money wise. For the vast majority of G5 schools, going back to the days when "only the truly deserving teams played in them" would mean never playing in a bowl game at all.

1975 Arkansas State went 11-0. Watched bowl games on TV. Screw the "deserving" BS because only one bowl even scouted AState, the Tangerine and they took 7-4 South Carolina who ended up losing by 13 to Miami (OH) in the bowl.

Now if I were emperor of college football the standard would be:
Conference or division champ or eight regular season wins but the current system is working financially so no one is going to upset the apple cart.

"Deserving" is a myth perpetrated by the elite to excuse their greed driven decision making. The best TECH teams we have had never made it to bowls. We are in a transition phase and I'm certain that a lot of these bowls will fade away. We will reach an appropriate equilibrium eventually.

(05-08-2015 11:53 AM)goherd24herdfans Wrote:  There are no more nice pick ups for bowl games. Its getting embarrassing and no longer an accomplishment to get to a bowl. I remember the being a 8 and 9 win team, and being left out of a bowl. That was the time where you had to be a champ or a runner up to even sniff a bowl. Now, just need 6 wins. I think its garbage. Bowls should have stopped at least at 30, so more teams stay home than go to the post season.

"And that's the way it was, and we liked it! We liked it fine!"

Here's the thing. We're not talking about some ridiculously expanded playoff where everybody gets a shot at the championship (which already happens in basketball, but I digress). The vast, vast majority of bowl games are absolutely meaningless except to the teams playing in them and the network broadcasting them. It's an exhibition. A couple more weeks of practice for the underclassmen. One more chance for the seniors to play. One more chance for their families to watch them play. One more road trip for the fans. Nothing more, nothing less. The biggest possible consequence of a non-playoff bowl is a couple of spots difference either way in the final poll.

If somebody thinks a .500 team doesn't deserve a bowl, it's a valid opinion, but you'd be hard pressed to document the harm that results from said team playing in one. What purpose is served by more teams staying home? Heaven forbid anybody's school get a couple more hours on TV. The coaches and players want to play. The cities want the traffic. The networks want a game to show. What's the benefit of not letting it happen?

(05-09-2015 11:49 AM)HarborPointe Wrote:  

(05-08-2015 11:53 AM)goherd24herdfans Wrote:  There are no more nice pick ups for bowl games. Its getting embarrassing and no longer an accomplishment to get to a bowl. I remember the being a 8 and 9 win team, and being left out of a bowl. That was the time where you had to be a champ or a runner up to even sniff a bowl. Now, just need 6 wins. I think its garbage. Bowls should have stopped at least at 30, so more teams stay home than go to the post season.

"And that's the way it was, and we liked it! We liked it fine!"

Here's the thing. We're not talking about some ridiculously expanded playoff where everybody gets a shot at the championship (which already happens in basketball, but I digress). The vast, vast majority of bowl games are absolutely meaningless except to the teams playing in them and the network broadcasting them. It's an exhibition. A couple more weeks of practice for the underclassmen. One more chance for the seniors to play. One more chance for their families to watch them play. One more road trip for the fans. Nothing more, nothing less. The biggest possible consequence of a non-playoff bowl is a couple of spots difference either way in the final poll.

If somebody thinks a .500 team doesn't deserve a bowl, it's a valid opinion, but you'd be hard pressed to document the harm that results from said team playing in one. What purpose is served by more teams staying home? Heaven forbid anybody's school get a couple more hours on TV. The coaches and players want to play. The cities want the traffic. The networks want a game to show. What's the benefit of not letting it happen?

I am fine with the standard being higher than .500 but why is the standard .500? Because the Big XII proposed legislation to make it .500 and a majority of the then 11 conferences agreed.

If the power leagues who seem to understand how to make money and how to recruit think .500 is where the line should be, so be it and we should embrace it. I'd like higher but as long as the game is being played the way it is, embrace it and play by the rules.