Started By
Message
1
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:05 pm to Number 31
I've discussed it on here a couple of times before and it's not the popular opinion. I've never believed more football = better. I believe better football = better. I think people mostly just enjoy the March Madness-like Bowl picks that 40+ Bowls allows us. I wouldn't mind 20 or so Bowls full of P5's and the good G5's. I realize this means Arkansas would have been left out of the last two Bowl seasons, but I'll remove my emotion from it. It would also maybe slightly correct how lopsided and unfair some of the match-ups tend to be.
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:09 pm to UFFan
quote:But where will Auburn play then?
Boo hoo for the Birmingham
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:10 pm to Porcine Human
Why wouldn't that have been allowed?
I can't imagine a lawsuit could be filed over that.
I can't imagine a lawsuit could be filed over that.
This post was edited on 8/6/16 at 2:13 pm
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:10 pm to ReauxlTide222
Nowhere. They'd get to stay home for the holidays.
This post was edited on 8/6/16 at 2:11 pm
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:11 pm to VagueMessage
I would actually go as far as 8-4. That is a definitive winning record. It would also ensure nothing but quality matchups.
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:18 pm to UKWildcats
If you went with 8–4, there would have been exactly 50 teams for 25 Bowls for the 2015 Bowl season. That's not a whole lot of a drop-off and it's an increase in quality of the games. 9–3 would mean that every Bowl winning team had a 10-win season, but I understand if 9 wins is a little too extreme for most.
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:22 pm to East Coast Band
Interesting idea.
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:22 pm to VagueMessage
quote:
VagueMessage
Well I disagree with you, but you eloquently stated your case, so
to that.Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:25 pm to Number 31
There's nothing wrong with 40+ Bowl games. I immensely enjoy trying to perfect my Bowl bracket (I did super well last season), but from a standpoint of concern for the integrity of the game, it would obviously be better to have fewer Bowls featuring better teams. But we all know CFB is about money, so we don't even have to worry about it.
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:27 pm to UFFan
Besides Kentucky and maybe Mississippi State fans I'm pretty sure everyone would like to do away with 6-6 teams going bowling
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:29 pm to OBReb6
I like how you completely ignored both my post right above yours as well as your historical spot in this conference. Admirable multitasking.
This post was edited on 8/6/16 at 2:30 pm
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:45 pm to OBReb6
Missouri turned down a bowl invite last year and this board threw a fit because it meant less money in the yearly bowl pool for the SEC total.
I have no problem with bowl games with 5-7 6-6 teams in general. The bottom line is it allows programs to have a couple more weeks of practica and exposure.
It doesn't lessen other teams accomplishments. If the promoters want to pay for them...Let them have them. If you don't want to watch them, don't.
Its very simple.
I have no problem with bowl games with 5-7 6-6 teams in general. The bottom line is it allows programs to have a couple more weeks of practica and exposure.
It doesn't lessen other teams accomplishments. If the promoters want to pay for them...Let them have them. If you don't want to watch them, don't.
Its very simple.
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:48 pm to kilo
quote:
Missouri turned down a bowl invite last year and this board threw a fit because it meant less money in the yearly bowl pool for the SEC total.
I personally thought it was highly commendable.
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:50 pm to VagueMessage
I was ok with it. I'm glad Mizzou is trying to have higher expectations for the football program.
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:52 pm to UFFan
I always thought SOS should play into bowl placement/qualification as well. A 6-6 SEC team (especially one in the West) isn't exactly the same as a 6-6 team from a lower conference.
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:53 pm to BluegrassBelle
Agree completely. All 6-6 teams are not created equally.
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:53 pm to VagueMessage
quote:25 bowls over the course of the month of December would be perfect. Culminating in the national championship on New Year's Day, you could essentially have a bowl game a day allowing fans to focus entirely on one game, or even have two or three on Saturdays and one or two on Friday evenings....a lot of scheduling possibilities to consider but it could all be a significant improvement over the current glut of bowls.
If you went with 8–4, there would have been exactly 50 teams for 25 Bowls for the 2015 Bowl season. That's not a whole lot of a drop-off and it's an increase in quality of the games. 9–3 would mean that every Bowl winning team had a 10-win season, but I understand if 9 wins is a little too extreme for most.
Posted on 8/6/16 at 2:58 pm to UKWildcats
Obviously, there wouldn't always be an even 50 teams for a nice and tidy 25 Bowls. You'll have more some years, fewer the others. Some teams would end up being left out some years, while a couple of 7–5 teams end up getting in some years. I guess you could lower it to 20 if you wanted to make absolute sure only 8+ wins received Bowl bids. Regardless, I don't think 20–25 Bowls is subjecting anyone to football famine, especially since each one would feature a team that was likely challenging its conference for the title.
Posted on 8/6/16 at 3:00 pm to UFFan
Absolutely not.
And yes, I realize that means we wouldn't have gone bowling in Saban's first year.
And yes, I realize that means we wouldn't have gone bowling in Saban's first year.
Page 2 of 5
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News