Started By
Message
It seems odd to be named the 'Champion' of a bowl game
Posted on 1/2/17 at 4:50 pm
Posted on 1/2/17 at 4:50 pm
Was it always this way or is this a product of our participation trophy culture.
9
Posted on 1/2/17 at 4:52 pm to weagle99
I agree. It has always seemed odd to me too, to be called "champions" of one game.
Posted on 1/2/17 at 4:53 pm to weagle99
Well if you win the bowl game, then by definition you are the champion of it
Posted on 1/2/17 at 4:53 pm to weagle99
It makes me cringe
Posted on 1/2/17 at 4:55 pm to weagle99
it's a little weird, especially for the smaller bowl games. Even something like the Citrus like we just won is a little eh. A NY6 Bowl isn't so bad bc it took a lot to get there.
Posted on 1/2/17 at 4:57 pm to weagle99
and yet it's not as odd as being called "Champions of Life"
Posted on 1/2/17 at 4:59 pm to weagle99
St pete Champs!
Posted on 1/2/17 at 4:59 pm to weagle99
Not if you are the Champions of Life.
Posted on 1/2/17 at 5:03 pm to weagle99
Should be "Winners of...," not Champions.
There is only one National Championship game wherein a "Champion" will be crowned, and that game is played next Monday.
Every other reference as the winner of another bowl game as a "Champion" is a misuse of the word.
There is only one National Championship game wherein a "Champion" will be crowned, and that game is played next Monday.
Every other reference as the winner of another bowl game as a "Champion" is a misuse of the word.
This post was edited on 1/2/17 at 5:05 pm
Posted on 1/2/17 at 5:12 pm to weagle99
quote:
Was it always this way or is this a product of our participation trophy culture.
It has always been like this. There were multiple "Champions" most years according to which poll you would count. National Champion was more or less a matter of opinion. We can't blame them for this one.
Page 1 of 1
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News