Started By
Message
Myth: "The BCS/CFP ruined college football by making all other bowl games irrelevant."
Posted on 1/4/21 at 8:33 pm
Posted on 1/4/21 at 8:33 pm
(ETA: Altered title to make it clear I don't agree with the premise.)
I have never understood this opinion.
In any given year, how many bowl games would have a realistic impact on the MNC? Every once in a while you might have a #1 vs #3 matchup that would leave the door open for an upset and #2 having a chance to win a different game and move up. Usually, though, #1 was playing a much easier opponent and there was little chance of an upset.
In any case, all but (at most) 2-3 bowls were exhibition anyway, just like now. A nice trip, PR for the schools, and a chance to lock in a high finish and gain momentum for the next year.
To my eye, all that has happened is that the CFP games are elevated much higher, but not at the expense of the others.
If there is anything driving lower bowl apathy, it's the sheer volume of games with barely qualifying teams, along with the opt-outs, and a general fragmenting of entertainment.
What am I missing?
I have never understood this opinion.
In any given year, how many bowl games would have a realistic impact on the MNC? Every once in a while you might have a #1 vs #3 matchup that would leave the door open for an upset and #2 having a chance to win a different game and move up. Usually, though, #1 was playing a much easier opponent and there was little chance of an upset.
In any case, all but (at most) 2-3 bowls were exhibition anyway, just like now. A nice trip, PR for the schools, and a chance to lock in a high finish and gain momentum for the next year.
To my eye, all that has happened is that the CFP games are elevated much higher, but not at the expense of the others.
If there is anything driving lower bowl apathy, it's the sheer volume of games with barely qualifying teams, along with the opt-outs, and a general fragmenting of entertainment.
What am I missing?
This post was edited on 1/4/21 at 8:38 pm
24
Posted on 1/4/21 at 8:36 pm to Ag Zwin
Nope,political BS did
Posted on 1/4/21 at 8:37 pm to Ag Zwin
quote:
What am I missing?
Nothing, I've said basically the same thing on this board several times. I think a culture shift and players being more cognizant of money has been what killed bowl games, not the system we use to determine national titles, because, like you said, the number of meaningful games in the national title race during bowl season hasn't decreased. The system is just an easy place to point the finger to draw attention to expand the playoffs again so more money can be made. Adding 4 more teams to the playoffs doesn't make the other bowls more meaningful, but rather less.
I do agree that when the number of bowls essentially doubled, simply making a bowl no longer meant much when you can go 2-6 in your conference, beat 3 directional nobodies, and an FCS team and make a bowl. I remember not too terribly long ago teams going 7-4 or 8-3 and not getting invited to bowls. I remember when getting invited to a NYD was a big freaking deal. It's sad so many people don't care about bowl games anymore.
This post was edited on 1/4/21 at 8:39 pm
Posted on 1/4/21 at 8:38 pm to Ag Zwin
A&M fans should be happy for their season and winning their bowl.... but let’s real A&M hasn’t played much less won anything of significance in a very long time.. for elite programs playing a N6 bowl it is a letdown. I’m not a fan of it but it is what it is.
UGA, LSU, UF have had multiple opt outs leading up to a “big game” like a sugar, fiesta, etc. Again not supporting it it just stating all bowls not in the playoffs have significantly lost value.
UNC isn’t remotely elite and playing in the orange meant nothing to their best players, those days were fans threw oranges to the field celebrating a potential bid for that bowl are long gone.
UGA, LSU, UF have had multiple opt outs leading up to a “big game” like a sugar, fiesta, etc. Again not supporting it it just stating all bowls not in the playoffs have significantly lost value.
UNC isn’t remotely elite and playing in the orange meant nothing to their best players, those days were fans threw oranges to the field celebrating a potential bid for that bowl are long gone.
This post was edited on 1/4/21 at 8:41 pm
Posted on 1/4/21 at 8:39 pm to Ag Zwin
quote:
What am I missing?
The fact that before the BCS/CFP fewer programs actually cared about the MNC. The goal for most teams was to win the conference, go to a good bowl game and, if they were lucky, get voted #1 by one of the major polls. ESPN changed all that. Over the last 20 years it became more about who was #1 than it did anything else. Less attention was paid to the other bowl games as a result. Now they are all but irrelevant.
Posted on 1/4/21 at 8:42 pm to Ag Zwin
Utilizing current scientific methods
[Dramatic music]
College football does not need any changes.
[Dramatic music]
College football does not need any changes.
Posted on 1/4/21 at 8:44 pm to Ag Zwin
They were already terrible.
Posted on 1/4/21 at 8:45 pm to Ag Zwin
You’re missing nothing except maybe that it’s really all talk. Who gives two poops? It’s just a bunch of ‘stay off my lawn’. If someone doesn’t care about the games move the eff on and don’t care about them but obviously they don’t keep expanding the number because no one is interested. People bitch and moan about weak non-conference matchups then when provided with some interesting non-cons suddenly it’s ‘who cares?’.
In summation, don’t like ‘em, don’t watch ‘em. No one cares that you don’t care.
In summation, don’t like ‘em, don’t watch ‘em. No one cares that you don’t care.
Posted on 1/4/21 at 8:45 pm to Ag Zwin
I agree with you. In the years Ohio State didn’t make the playoffs almost no one opted out (only Denzel Ward I believe) and the team played just as hard as they did during the season. It’s a culture issues at schools and the programs with a lot of opt outs aren’t moving up the ladder.
Posted on 1/4/21 at 8:46 pm to Ag Zwin
I think that the playoff may’ve made participation in the top bowl outside the bracket a bit worse but I don’t think it is the primary reason.The primary reason is the NFL changing the rookie draft pick pay scale considerably some time in the mid-10s with a significant drop off in expected contract value by the end of the first round. An injury can potentially cost a player a ton of money and the bowl games are exhibitions. Furthermore, I think social media has changed the context for player contact with the public. In the 00s, it was not uncommon for a litany of players to not play - sometimes under vague “NCAA eligibility issue” disclaimers - and nobody really knew why. Now the players just get on the twitters and tell everyone they’re peacing out and prepping for the combine.
Posted on 1/4/21 at 8:47 pm to Ag Zwin
Having 35 bowl games is what made the vast majority of bowl games irrelevant.
There needs to be a dozen bowl games, that’s all. Get it back to where making a bowl means something. Like it used to be.
There needs to be a dozen bowl games, that’s all. Get it back to where making a bowl means something. Like it used to be.
Posted on 1/4/21 at 9:06 pm to Ag Zwin
quote:
my eye, all that has happened is that the CFP games are elevated much higher, but not at the expense of the others. If there is anything driving lower bowl apathy, it's the sheer volume of games with barely qualifying teams, along with the opt-outs, and a general fragmenting of entertainment. What am I missing?
Opt outs are caused by the playoff games being elevated at the expense of others.
Posted on 1/4/21 at 9:13 pm to Ag Zwin
Bowls have always been shite. Unless it was Sugar, Orange, Fiesta or Rose, no one cared much even back then. The thing that's changed is they've added a shitload more bowls now which makes it even worse.
And players are leaving for the NFL earlier today than they did in the AP era. You almost never heard of players leaving after their Soph year for the NFL when I was young. People usually stayed through their senior season, no matter how good they were. (Not sure if the rules were different back then or what).
The playoff era is far superior to the old AP or BCS system. In fact, it needs to go to 8 teams. Then we'd have 6 or 8 bowls on top of that for teams to fight over their final ranking in the top 25.
And players are leaving for the NFL earlier today than they did in the AP era. You almost never heard of players leaving after their Soph year for the NFL when I was young. People usually stayed through their senior season, no matter how good they were. (Not sure if the rules were different back then or what).
The playoff era is far superior to the old AP or BCS system. In fact, it needs to go to 8 teams. Then we'd have 6 or 8 bowls on top of that for teams to fight over their final ranking in the top 25.
Posted on 1/4/21 at 9:13 pm to Ag Zwin
4 and 5 win bowl teams killed bowl games
Posted on 1/4/21 at 9:57 pm to Ag Zwin
quote:
If there is anything driving lower bowl apathy, it's the sheer volume of games with barely qualifying teams, along with the opt-outs, and a general fragmenting of entertainment.
This is what did it. The product has been diluted to nothingness.
Posted on 1/4/21 at 10:52 pm to Ag Zwin
Actually, it has. Playoffs are the ONLY thing that matters to many of these kids. 35% of the five stars have gone to the same three teams, because they are always in the playoffs
No other games matter ... look at the opt outs, which are here to stay
No other games matter ... look at the opt outs, which are here to stay
This post was edited on 1/5/21 at 7:30 am
Posted on 1/4/21 at 11:42 pm to Ag Zwin
Problem is the players believe it as well. Otherwise you wouldn't have opt outs.
Posted on 1/5/21 at 7:55 am to Ag Zwin
quote:Them's fighting words! Just ask Tulsa.
Myth: "The BCS/CFP ruined college football by making all other bowl games irrelevant."
Posted on 1/5/21 at 8:11 am to Ag Zwin
quote:
Myth: "The BCS/CFP ruined college football by making all other bowl games irrelevant."
Bowls are irrelevant only to people who don't care about them. That't players and Fans. And it really depends on expectation. But that would happen without BCS/CFP. If you think you have a chance to go undefeated and you go 8-9 wins, you'd less likely to be happy with your bowl placement.
I'd much rather have 1 champion over 2-3 teams claiming it.
Also, frick USC for claiming '03. Bitches didn't earn it on the field.
Posted on 1/5/21 at 8:43 am to Ag Zwin
What you're seeing now is a really a return to normal.
For most of their existence, bowl games didn't really matter. There weren't very many and were exhibitions that paired teams that rarely met in the regular season and gave players a chance to go places they otherwise might not get to see.
The Rose Bowl paired the Big-10 vs Pac-10.
The SEC champ went to the Sugar.
The Southwestern Conference went to the Cotton
The Big-8 (now the Big-12) went to the Orange.
In addition to those, you had the Liberty, Gator, Sun, and Citrus and that was it. The NCAA wouldn't even allow more games to be created. Notre Dame didn't play in bowls until 1970 and IIRC, if you were Big 10 it was Rose Bowl or bust.
Bowls didn't count towards final rankings. AP didn't permanently change to awarding titles after the bowls until 1968. UPI (now the Coach's poll) didn't do so until 1974.
They were supposed to be fun and not so serious but when the polls made that change, they became a lot more important. Come in ranked top 5, lose, and you might finish outside the top 10 - which gets coaches at high level programs fired.
Now for those high level teams, the goal is the playoffs once again returning the bowls to their secondary status.
Pretty good short article here.
For most of their existence, bowl games didn't really matter. There weren't very many and were exhibitions that paired teams that rarely met in the regular season and gave players a chance to go places they otherwise might not get to see.
The Rose Bowl paired the Big-10 vs Pac-10.
The SEC champ went to the Sugar.
The Southwestern Conference went to the Cotton
The Big-8 (now the Big-12) went to the Orange.
In addition to those, you had the Liberty, Gator, Sun, and Citrus and that was it. The NCAA wouldn't even allow more games to be created. Notre Dame didn't play in bowls until 1970 and IIRC, if you were Big 10 it was Rose Bowl or bust.
Bowls didn't count towards final rankings. AP didn't permanently change to awarding titles after the bowls until 1968. UPI (now the Coach's poll) didn't do so until 1974.
They were supposed to be fun and not so serious but when the polls made that change, they became a lot more important. Come in ranked top 5, lose, and you might finish outside the top 10 - which gets coaches at high level programs fired.
Now for those high level teams, the goal is the playoffs once again returning the bowls to their secondary status.
Pretty good short article here.
This post was edited on 1/5/21 at 8:46 am
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News