(04-30-2011 12:03 PM)TodgeRodge Wrote:  

(04-30-2011 08:45 AM)FloridaJag Wrote:  April 30, 2010...interesting.


I think the proliferation of the bowls is a problem because of the 6th and 7th place BCS schools participation. It appears the CURE Bowl and the Christmas Bowl were about to give to much exposure to Non AQ conferences. The bowls would have highlighted more of the injustice of the BCS and the ridiculous money grab by the bowl organizations. Aaah...exposed the payout schemes used by the Fiesta Bowl committees and others to keep the Non AQ schools from promoting a playoff.

Your AD is less inclined to protest if he is recieving two paid vactions a year. The SBC and other Conference Commissioner along with the AD probably counted it as working when attendin these "meetings". They were encourage to go along with the deal.

again this makes absolutely ZERO sense

two teams (as I was corrected) with .500 RECORDS from the worst conference in D1-A football went to bowl games......those bowl games were some of the lowest watched and attended bowl games

how exactly could anyone with an ounce of common sense claim that the non-AQ teams need more exposure than THAT!

and with a playoff at best 16 teams will participate in the post season and it is certainly not going to suddenly become a situation where all the money made is distributed equally to each team or conference......it would be split just like the basketball money based on participation

and lastly you are leaving out the historical fact that it was the BOWL GAMES and the CONFERENCES INVOLVED IN CREATING THEIR BOWL GAMES that made the bowl game system what it is.....the Rose Bowl, sugar Bowl, Cotton Bowl, Sun Bowl and many others were around long before the sunbelt was a gleam in the eye of a bunch of teams that don't belong in D1-A football

no one forces non-AQ schools to go to bowl games and lose money.....no one forces their fans to not buy tickets or show up to support their teams in those games......but you seem to want to force others to share money from something they are responsible for creating and that you had nothing to do with......other than participating in new bowls that lose money and lose the schools money......either find better financial support, get better fan support, or live with the results of what you bring to the table

"but you seem to want to force others to share money from something they are responsible for creating and that you had nothing to do with......other than participating in new bowls that lose money and lose the schools money......either find better financial support, get better fan support, or live with the results of what you bring to the table"


Again, you missed the point and you don't make any sense. You can not have a true National Championship unless you let all of the members in the Division participate. If it is okay to count NON AQ and FCS wins toward your bowl eligibility and the BCS title game then you must have a true competition by having a playoff. Use the bowls as playoff sites. Let the #3 through #6 teams play in the miscellaneous bowl games. At the moment, you only allow 68 teams out of 121 (125) compete for the title. That does not cut it.

Yes, share the money. I rather see it go the schools than to boon doggle bowl committees.

All for a playoff using the most established bowls and it doesn't have to hurt the smaller and newer bowls either. Look at basketball with the NIT, the CBI and all of the other post-season tourneys. Smaller bowls such as our own GoDaddy.Com Bowl in Mobile could serve as a postseason reward for winning teams just like they do today, even under a playoff format...

Just my 2¢