The Case for More Bowls

[NaturalStateReb]

The NCAA approved three new bowl games in Orlando, Austin, and Tucson this week.  (Little Rock considered submitting an application for a new bowl game, but decided against it at the last minute.)  The new bowls raise the overall number of bowl games to 42.  The announcement was greeted with howls of protest from many media members, raising the familiar chorus of "too many bowls." 

Too many bowls?  I say bring 'em on.

The demand for college football appears to be inelastic--college football fans always want more.  The number of bowl games fulfills this demand.  Demand for the sport has become so intense that things that used to be relegated to the margins of fan interest, like spring practices, spring games, and recruiting, are now not only hot discussion topics, they're broadcasted nationally on television.  College recruiting has almost become its own sport, with a #1 team crowned each spring.

We want more, and the bowls deliver more.  Think we don't want more, or that no one watches?  Consider this:  the 2012 New Mexico Bowl featured a matchup between Arizona and Nevada.  Both teams were 7-5, and one of them wasn't even from a major conference.  The bowl pulled a 1.9 rating on ESPN.  That doesn't sound so hot, until you consider that's about 1/4 of the audience that Monday Night Football averages for an entire season--to watch two 7-5 college teams, neither of which is considered a major program, duke it out in Albuquerque.  Don't think that 2012 New Mexico Bowl was a fluke, either.  The median rating for bowls last season was 2.4.  Nevada played in the New Orleans Bowl against Sunbelt member Louisiana-Lafayette.  The game pulled a 1.6. 

Just because a bowl isn't a major bowl doesn't mean that it can't be interesting or make for compelling viewing.  Last year's Texas Bowl featured two 6-6 teams in the Longhorns and Razorbacks.  The matchup was full of interesting backstories, with the longtime SWC series, the Arkansas rebuild, and the new hire of Arkansas-native Charlie Strong in Austin.  Last year's Bahamas Bowl may have produced one of the most exciting finishes all season, as the Central Michigan Chippewas erased a 49-14 deficit only to fall to the Western Kentucky Hilltoppers 49-48 on a last-second (literally), failed two-point conversion.

The same talking heads that bemoan the number of bowls are worshipping at the altars of the Alabamas, Ohio States, and USC's of the world.  Additional bowls don't matter to college football's upper-crust, for whom a trip to a lower-tier bowl is an occasional disappointment.  These bowls serve college football's middle and blue-collar programs.  If you think that these bowls are unimportant to those programs, just ask UAB.  Think the Blazers would have considered a bowl invite important after this season?  These bowls give these types of programs invaluable exposure.

But don't all of these bowls just degrade the whole thing?  Not really.  How much value did the Independence, Music City, or Beef O'Brady's Bowl really have to start with?  With a playoff determining the champion, absolutely nothing is lost or devalued by playing these games.  They don't determine a champion, but so what?  They don't really hurt anything, either.

The minor bowl games, to me, are like the football version of the NIT.  Each March, the NIT is played at the same time as the NCAA Tournament.  Yet we don't have pundits running around shrieking like Chicken Little about how the NIT is destroying the integrity of college basketball.  Likewise with the minor bowls--they're not proving anything, but that's not really the point.

I get that 65% of the teams may have a chance to qualify for a bowl.  If this really gives you heartache, instead of asking why we have 84 slots, maybe we should ask what's so wrong with college football scheduling that 2/3 of the teams win at least 1/2 of their games. 

If the new bowls are just too much college football, feel free to tune into that Ralphie marathon while you pull down the Christmas decorations.  Me, I'm going to be getting ready for kickoff.

[hogsanity]

Ok, first the Ralphie marathon ends on Christmas, why would we be pulling down the decorations yet?

2nd, the case for more bowls can be made with a symbol. $, actually many $$$$$$$$.

It is not so much that there are too many bowls. I hate the rules of what it takes to be eligible. If a bowl wants a 2-10 team, they should be allowed to invite them. What do you think is better for the Liberty Bowl, a 6-6 NC St or a 5-7 Arkansas ( just for an example )?

[East Clintwood]

I agree.  More football, not less.

[Hoginsavga]

Between now and the first kickoff in Sept my wife and I will go into withdrawals and scan the 100+ channels looking for any college classic football game to watch. There is way too much other crap on TV.  I take advantage of the bowl games as I know there is a long dry spell looming in the not too distant future.

I say bring them on and for those of us that can't get enough college football, thank you.

[JackTNHogfan]

If you want a reason to watch the lower tier bowls other than the obvious reasons, try doing a bowl pickems challenge.  It's fun and every game matters.  I play against my friends and family every year on ESPN.  No money involved just fun.

[Hoginsavga]

If you want a reason to watch the lower tier bowls other than the obvious reasons, try doing a bowl pickems challenge.  It's fun and every game matters.  I play against my friends and family every year on ESPN.  No money involved just fun.

It would be even more fun for each person to throw about $5 in the pot. I might even join you with that, Haha

[lefty08]

 

70% of teams in a bowl is too many

It's like Upwards Soccer now

[JackTNHogfan]

It would be even more fun for each person to throw about $5 in the pot. I might even join you with that, Haha

We did that a few times and just decided not to do it anymore.  The first year we did it, ten of us paid $10 a piece and I won the pot.  The game that clinched it for me was my pick of LSU to beat Oklahoma in the championship that year.

[LZH]

I say as long as you're .500 or better, your kids (especially your seniors) have the right to a last game and a hopefully a week of a little fun.  If you don't wanna watch Purdue vs. Utah State, don't watch.  But fans of Purdue and Utah State damn sure wanna see it.

If all of the "there are too many bowls" howlers had gotten their way a few years ago, we'd have been sitting at home last winter and would not have gotten to beat the **** out of Texas.

[Seminole Indian]

70% of teams in a bowl is too many

It's like Upwards Soccer now

See you rounded up you make your point.

In case you have not noticed college football continues to grow in popularity even as they add these bowl games.

Good thing for college football that 'given the people what the people want' works, and what they want is more college football.

[lefty08]

See you rounded up you make your point.

In case you have not noticed college football continues to grow in popularity even as they add these bowl games.

Good thing for college football that 'given the people what the people want' works, and what they want is more college football.

Doesn't that make something like 86 teams bowling?  Granted I didn't use a calculater but 86 out of 120 is damn close to 70%

[Seminole Indian]

Doesn't that make something like 86 teams bowling?  Granted I didn't use a calculater but 86 out of 120 is damn close to 70%

I don't know just looked at the 65%  in the original post, and thought that was what i had read in another news release.

Really does not matter, because there are obviously not to many, or they would not approve any more bowl games.

Must be getting close though because i think C-USA's problem with the bowl in Austin was they were not sure if they would have enough eligible teams next year to feel comfortable investing $ into it, and that is apparently why the SBC is now involved.

[TNRazorbacker]

I don't see that it hurts. Why care?? Just like anything else on TV, if it sucks don't watch.

[razorjack12]

I think Little Rock and War Memorial Stadium should get in on the action.

[lefty08]

I think Little Rock and War Memorial Stadium should get in on the action.

They have tried a couple times and have been denied.

I've got no problem with everyone bowling, except that it used to be a reward for a good season, now, not so much

[The Boar War]

If you want more college football (and most do) add another regular season game.  But don't lower the standards and consider it a reward.

[lefty08]

If you want more college football (and most do) add another regular season game.  But don't lower the standards and consider it a reward.

I'm 100% in this camp

[Seminole Indian]

I'm 100% in this camp

What camp is that?

These are bowl games for G5 programs, and their fans, and many are alumni of those schools.

The AAC is arguably the best of the G5's, so two of the bowls are in fact upgrades for the SBC.

[HiggiePiggy]

I think it needs more playoff teams.  Not really more bowl games. 

[lefty08]

What camp is that?

These are bowl games for G5 programs, and their fans, and many are alumni of those schools.

The AAC is arguably the best of the G5's, so two of the bowls are in fact upgrades for the SBC.

The camp that thinks 1 more regular season game does more for the viewership and the sport than meaningless bowl games for teams that haven't accomplished anything

[Seminole Indian]

The camp that thinks 1 more regular season game does more for the viewership and the sport than meaningless bowl games for teams that haven't accomplished anything

No problem.

Guess everything is relative when it comes to defining 'accomplishing anything', but it is nice that the fans of these smaller FBS programs,or even those at the FCS or lower levels, have the opportunity for post-season play as a rewarded for having success.

Their fans, and players seem to enjoy it.

[Inhogswetrust]

Bowls for everybody...............trophy's for all, everyone wins, etc,etc,etc..............this isn't pee wee ball where they give out rewards simply for participation.

[lefty08]

No problem.

Guess everything is relative when it comes to defining 'accomplishing anything', but it is nice that the fans of these smaller FBS programs,or even those at the FCS or lower levels, have the opportunity for post-season play as a rewarded for having success.

Their fans, and players seem to enjoy it.

The attendance for the majority of these bowls is awful. It's all about tv money. It's not about viewership either

[Seminole Indian]

Bowls for everybody...............trophy's for all, everyone wins, etc,etc,etc..............this isn't pee wee ball where they give out rewards simply for participation.

I agree totally.

IMO no 6-6 team should ever be allowed to go to a bowl game, but they did not ask me.

[Seminole Indian]

The attendance for the majority of these bowls is awful. It's all about tv money. It's not about viewership either

No argument here.

Think it is viewed simply as a reward for a good season by most schools, and lets face it unless your team is one of the teams in the playoff, your bowl game, and season for that matter is pretty meaningless anyway.

I do think the G5's deserve their bowl games.

[Hogfaniam]

Little Rock leadership is foolish

[hogcard1964]

They have tried a couple times and have been denied.

I've got no problem with everyone bowling, except that it used to be a reward for a good season, now, not so much

I thought Little Rock was a done deal.  Wasn't it due to be between a mountain west school and a conference USA school? What happened now?

[hogcard1964]

I agree totally.

IMO no 6-6 team should ever be allowed to go to a bowl game, but they did not ask me.

You have to be downright awful NOT to go to a bowl game now.

[Seminole Indian]

I thought Little Rock was a done deal.  Wasn't it due to be between a mountain west school and a conference USA school? What happened now?

It was submitted to the NCAA as a game between the AAC and SBC, then withdrawn.

The bowl game in Austin was suppose to be between the AAC and C-USA.

Most SBC fans, and many in the media, thought there had just been a mistake when it was first reported that the game in Austin was between the AAC and SBC.

[ErieHog]

The camp that thinks 1 more regular season game does more for the viewership and the sport than meaningless bowl games for teams that haven't accomplished anything

This is the real nugget here, that bowl elitists gloss over.

Bowls have never meant you've accomplished anything.    They have *always* been meaningless exhibitions between teams, even when there were mere handfuls of bowls.    Far more often than not, bowl games had no bearing on the declaration of the National Title, but were exercises in celebrating a conference or two.

[hamARchy in the USA]

While they're at it they should allow teams to accept more than one bowl bid.  A team might get in 2 or 3 extra games.   

[ErieHog]

While they're at it they should allow teams to accept more than one bowl bid.  A team might get in 2 or 3 extra games.   

They're actually counting the national semis and the national final as bowls in this number scheme- it is why there are only 82 teams for 42 bowl games.

[reddogjcss]

If it gets the kids more exposure and they have a great time I say bowl. It's for the kids and to promote areas, company's, etc...
I don't care how many bowls there is. I watch the ones I want to and turn the channel on ones I don't want to watch.

[sickboy]

All I really want is football year round. Move the non-power conferences to playing in the spring so I can watch college football in the spring and fall.

[razoredge178]

It was submitted to the NCAA as a game between the AAC and SBC, then withdrawn.

The bowl game in Austin was suppose to be between the AAC and C-USA.

Most SBC fans, and many in the media, thought there had just been a mistake when it was first reported that the game in Austin was between the AAC and SBC.

Ha! Withdrawn....denied...whatever you want to call it. I think the NCAA did little rock a favor and save face by 'withdrawing' the application. They won't ever approve a bowl game in that dump. Yet another modest setback for 2014's #1 most dangerous mid sized city in the U.S. Now that's a selling point to put on the bowl game application! 

[Rison Razor Hog]

All I really want is football year round. Move the non-power conferences to playing in the spring so I can watch college football in the spring and fall.

There's only two sports in Texas, Football and Spring Football, lol!

[Hogarusa]

1 more football
2 more money

Bowl games are exhibition games

The end

[MuskogeeHogFan]

There's only two sports in Texas, Football and Spring Football, lol!

And three in Arkansas. Football season, Recruiting season and Spring football season.

[Hawghiggs]

I think Little Rock and War Memorial Stadium should get in on the action.

They should contact the GAC and host a championship game for them.

[Pigliophile]

I'm always down for more bowls. 

[PEtrader]

Doesn't that make something like 86 teams bowling?  Granted I didn't use a calculater but 86 out of 120 is damn close to 70%

He went to ASU

[WarPig88]

This is the real nugget here, that bowl elitists gloss over.

Bowls have never meant you've accomplished anything.    They have *always* been meaningless exhibitions between teams, even when there were mere handfuls of bowls.    Far more often than not, bowl games had no bearing on the declaration of the National Title, but were exercises in celebrating a conference or two.

That was true until 1965 but not afterward. Since then, bowls absolutely decided the championship.

That's 5 decades of bowls being important by my count.

[WarPig88]

And three in Arkansas. Football season, Recruiting season and Spring football season.

Nolan Richardson says hi.

[ErieHog]

That was true until 1965 but not afterward. Since then, bowls absolutely decided the championship.

That's 5 decades of bowls being important by my count.

They really didn't, though.  The number of times where #1 and #2 faced each other, for supremacy, could be counted on one hand, even in that era, before the Bowl Alliance tried to change things--    bowls remained exhibitions for the top teams in the country to toot their own horns, and claim that  their bowl wins over another team, were better than the bowl wins of other prospective national title claimants--  and even the bowl alliance system failed to consistently give a meaningful game that produced a national champion, which is how we ended up with the Bowl Championship Series-- and then, even that replacement to the Bowl Alliance system wasn't enough, to the point where we've had to expand to a true playoff to address the questions.

To call bowls historically meaningful, is a willful attempt to burnish history with an unwarranted nostalgia for better days,  regardless of what actually happened.

[Seminole Indian]

He went to ASU

I had 84 not 86.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2015/5/6/8557399/new-college-football-bowl-games-yes-more

Slightly more than 65% of the 128 total FBS teams, so I just assumed he rounded up to make a stronger point.

[WarPig88]

They really didn't, though.  The number of times where #1 and #2 faced each other, for supremacy, could be counted on one hand, even in that era, before the Bowl Alliance tried to change things--    bowls remained exhibitions for the top teams in the country to toot their own horns, and claim that  their bowl wins over another team, were better than the bowl wins of other prospective national title claimants--  and even the bowl alliance system failed to consistently give a meaningful game that produced a national champion, which is how we ended up with the Bowl Championship Series-- and then, even that replacement to the Bowl Alliance system wasn't enough, to the point where we've had to expand to a true playoff to address the questions.

To call bowls historically meaningful, is a willful attempt to burnish history with an unwarranted nostalgia for better days,  regardless of what actually happened.

If #1 lost it's bowl game, then the champion was determined in another. Not sure why you are not recognizing that fact.

#1 and #2 rarely ever play for it all in basketball. Does that make the rest of the Championships irrelevant? Of course not.

The bowls have mattered for 50 years now.

[Inhogswetrust]

Little Rock leadership is foolish

Nothing new. Has been as long as I can remember and I'm 57.

[Inhogswetrust]

And three in Arkansas. Football season, Recruiting season and Spring football season.

And there is an overlap to all those...............Hogville trollers season................of course that is truly year round!

[ErieHog]

If #1 lost it's bowl game, then the champion was determined in another. Not sure why you are not recognizing that fact.

#1 and #2 rarely ever play for it all in basketball. Does that make the rest of the Championships irrelevant? Of course not.

The bowls have mattered for 50 years now.

The final two teams actually do play for it in basketball, and have, for about 45 years.  The championship is resolved in true head to head competition-- and really has since the NCAA tournament superceded the NIT.

The bowls are a laughable comparison.  They were only exhibitions, and, if we did not have the playoff now, would still be universally exhibitions.

They have never mattered.

[Inhogswetrust]

They really didn't, though.  The number of times where #1 and #2 faced each other, for supremacy, could be counted on one hand, even in that era, before the Bowl Alliance tried to change things--    bowls remained exhibitions for the top teams in the country to toot their own horns, and claim that  their bowl wins over another team, were better than the bowl wins of other prospective national title claimants--  and even the bowl alliance system failed to consistently give a meaningful game that produced a national champion, which is how we ended up with the Bowl Championship Series-- and then, even that replacement to the Bowl Alliance system wasn't enough, to the point where we've had to expand to a true playoff to address the questions.

To call bowls historically meaningful, is a willful attempt to burnish history with an unwarranted nostalgia for better days,  regardless of what actually happened.

But the fact that back then two, four and even sometimes more teams and their fans could legitimately argue they were or should have been NC's, made those bowls meaningful. The other bowls were more meaningful because that gave players and schools one more time on TV they wouldn't have had otherwise unlike now when it seems like all games are on TV. The more exposure factor for players and schools are not nearly as important in lower bowls now and thus less meaningful except for the extra practices coaches love to get.