5-7 Bowl Teams

[KRAM1]

Just saw a report that states that since there will not be enough six win teams to fill all the bowl slots this year, that team APR will be used as the deciding factor in which 5-7 teams get the invites.  Interesting and out of the box thinking here...I like it.  At the moment the APR's stack up as follows based on 2013-2014 scores (latest available):

Nebraska: 985, Missouri: 976 (MO has stated they will not accept a bowl bid at 5-7), K State: 976 (still has a shot at 6 wins), Minnesota: 975, San Jose St: 975, Illinois: 973, and Rice: 973.

Pretty unique way to choose.  I have to hand it to the NCAA Division One Council for coming up with this concept.  Good on you!

Edited December 1, 2015 by KRAM1

[akriesman]

I know that a lot of people like the bowls.   But, I just hate the fact that 5-7 or even 6-6 teams are getting to bowl games.    I feel that it weakens the entire bowl system personally.

I will watch bowl games when UNT is invited.   And, I will watch the BCS championship games.   Outside of that, I am just not interested in any bowl.

[UNTflyer]

The number of bowls has become ridiculous, and there are eight more coming.  That will take us to 48. It's time to stop this nonsense.

16-team playoff with an automatic bid to all conference championship game winners (you need to have a game, Big 12).  10 automatic bids, plus 6 at-large bids automatically selected as the highest ranked conference championship losers or independents. 

And THAT'S IT!  No controversy, no speculation - we should know at the end of the last game who is in.

Still want bowl games?  Fine, cap it at 10 games - that lets 36 teams have some kind of post season with a total of 25 games.

 

 

 

Edited December 1, 2015 by UNTflyer

[GOMG2013]

They should invite top FCS schools to play if there isn't enough 6-6 teams.

[greenjoe]

48 bowls ?  That means 96 teams and their fans get to go someplace out of the ordinary to play a post season game.  92 teams.  And North Texas couldn't qualify even with that many bowls. 

 

I attended the first New Orleans Bowl when NT had a 5-7 season record.  Many thought a team with a losing record shouldn't go bowling.  Maybe so.  but my wife and I had a great time.  That and the 3 other New Orleans Bowls are some of our favorite NT memories. 

 

Maybe when the NCAA expands to 60 bowls we can go somewhere again.

 

GO MEAQN GREEN

Edited December 1, 2015 by greenjoe

[Matt from A700]

Seems ike every city wants to host a bowl game now. Why don't they condense the number of bowls and then have the remaining bowls at rotating sites every year?

[NT1978]

48 bowls ?  That means 92 teams and their fans get to go someplace out of the ordinary to play a post season game.  92 teams.  And North Texas couldn't qualify even with that many bowls. 

 

I attended the first New Orleans Bowl when NT had a 5-7 season record.  Many thought a team with a losing record shouldn't go bowling.  Maybe so.  but my wife and I had a great time.  That and the 3 other New Orleans Bowls are some of our favorite NT memories. 

 

Maybe when the NCAA expands to 60 bowls we can go somewhere again.

 

GO MEAQN GREEN

When that happens we will be invited to the Participation Bowl.

[southsideguy]

i remember back in the day growing up in El Paso and going to the Sun Bowl games-saw greats like johnny rogers, tony dorsett play there.  The teams were 8-4 at the worst at the bowl game.  Plus not tied to any conference just the best match up available.  5-7 bowl teams should not be allowed.

[10Eagle10]

48 bowls ?  That means 92 teams and their fans get to go someplace out of the ordinary to play a post season game.  92 teams.  And North Texas couldn't qualify even with that many bowls. 

 

I attended the first New Orleans Bowl when NT had a 5-7 season record.  Many thought a team with a losing record shouldn't go bowling.  Maybe so.  but my wife and I had a great time.  That and the 3 other New Orleans Bowls are some of our favorite NT memories. 

 

Maybe when the NCAA expands to 60 bowls we can go somewhere again.

 

GO MEAQN GREEN

 48 x 2 = 96

 

This year it's only 40 bowl games, so 80 teams. Kram is right...75 bowl eligible teams with 3 more possibilities (Kansas State, Georgia State, South Alabama). Kansas State is in either way since they're #2 on the APR list. It's super doubtful that South Alabama beats Appy State, and I only give Georgia State slightly better odds against GA Southern...so it looks like at least four 5-7 teams will be bowling. The NCAA Bowl Oversight Committee, led by Bowlsby, have stated that they will most likely place a freeze on any new bowl games and in future years may have bowl games go dark if there are not enough bowl eligible teams vs. having sub-.500 teams fill those vacancies.

[greenjoe]

Thanks.  I fixed my math error.

 

It's all that "carry the 1 stuff" that confuses me.  J

[oldguystudent]

Mizzou is the first 5-7 team to voluntarily reject any and all bowl bids.  I hope others follow suit.  It's my understanding that when you start playing in bowl games that are going to take 5-7 teams, it's a financial burden on the team.  I guess Missouri didn't see the extra practice time outweighing the financial cost with their coach on the way out.

[CMJ]

I don't go quite as drastic cutting bowls as Flyer, but I think only the top half of teams, at most, should play in them.  So, that would be...32 Bowl games?  Any more than that is overkill (and 32 is probably already). 

[greenminer]

I don't go quite as drastic cutting bowls as Flyer, but I think only the top half of teams, at most, should play in them.  So, that would be...32 Bowl games?  Any more than that is overkill (and 32 is probably already). 

Didn't you post something 1 or 2 years ago that compared the postseason slots afforded football vs. basketball in terms of %? 

Edited December 1, 2015 by greenminer

[CMJ]

Didn't you post something 1 or 2 years ago that compared the postseason slots afforded football vs. basketball in terms of %? 

I think I have in the past, but I believe Tasty did as well.

[oldguystudent]

Per Sagarin, there are 351 D1 basketball teams.  The NCAA has 68 teams.  The NIT has 32.  The CBI has 16. The CIT has 32.

That's 148/351 for just over 42% of teams in some form of post season play.  Credit or discredit CBI and CIT at will, but I've watched my own alma mater go three consecutive seasons starting in the CIT, moving on to the NIT, moving on to the NCAA, so I'm of the school that any and all post season appearance does help with image and recruiting.  However, the percentage in football is, in my opinion, so watered down as to render the vast majority of it all but irrelevant.

[Mean Green Matt]

They should invite top FCS schools to play if there isn't enough 6-6 teams.

They're a little busy playing for a true national championship decided on the field. 

[NM Green]

I can't believe some people want less football.  I love the bowls, but I am also someone who sat down this past weekend to watch WKU vs Marshall and the Southern Miss La Tech replay.  I can't get enough college football - the season is too short.

GMG

[greenit]

Why punish the G5 with fewer bowl opportunities?

[greenminer]

Why punish the G5 with fewer bowl opportunities?

Thoughts on adopting the Euro Soccer approach: don't do well and you're dropped to a lower division/conference?

[oldguystudent]

Thoughts on adopting the Euro Soccer approach: don't do well and you're dropped to a lower division/conference?

I like it in theory, but we'd probably be NAIA division 2 by now.

[forevereagle]

Thoughts on adopting the Euro Soccer approach: don't do well and you're dropped to a lower division/conference?

I have seen this suggested a lot. Not a fan myself. The problem is how does this apply to other sports? Do you relegate all sports based on football or do they maintain status based on their own performance? How would conferences/divisions and scheduling be handled? Out of conference scheduling would be even more difficult than it is now. Also, because of recruiting, I have doubts that we would ever see more than a handful of teams moving back and forth, not a lot of shuffling of many different teams. With pro teams, one trade for a lot of money can help them sign a lot of good players to help make the team better and move up. The top tier teams would always have the recruiting advantage (not that they don't today) and would likely have an even bigger advantage in this system. A lower division team won't have the ability to trade a good player to a high division to get more assets or money to make their team better, so they will likely stay where they are. 

It seems that we would need a complete overhaul to the conference system and every broadcast contract that currently exists. Just seems like it would take too much to make it happen. Additionally, the TV networks would not likely let this happen since it decreases their potential inventory.