BCS and now playoffs ruined bowls?

[zappaa]

Interesting topic...the BCS bowls and now playoffs offer great viewing and excitement.
They also add drama to the regular season.

At the same time the system has rendered 99% of the bowls irrelevant.
No fan bases travel, no one is at the games, I'm sure TV viewership is minute.
How long will sponsors and cities continue to lend support with no fan interest?

Whadaya think?:D

 

[Abro1975]

The Bowls , other than the top 2 or4teams were alway pretty much meaningless, except for the players.
Solution=expand bowls to an FCS type format. 24 teams, incorporate all the bowls.
Then no p!Ayers would Leave early and much fewer coachs would switch early.

 

[RU_Planning]

Interesting topic...the BCS bowls and now playoffs offer great viewing and excitement.
They also add drama to the regular season.

At the same time the system has rendered 99% of the bowls irrelevant.
No fan bases travel, no one is at the games, I'm sure TV viewership is minute.
How long will sponsors and cities continue to lend support with no fan interest?

Whadaya think?:D

It seems to me that there are many more bowls now than their used to be, even 8 years ago. However I could be wrong.

Army played a 5-7 North Texas in the "Heart of Dallas Bowl". They played in the regular season already, although they lost the first time. How many other awful games are there like this?

There were always only a handful of bowl games that really mattered and I don't think the BCS Playoff negatively affects those bowls. If there were 24 bowls instead of 40 I think the perception would be much different.

 

[tico brown]

It seems to me that there are many more bowls now than their used to be, even 8 years ago. However I could be wrong.

Army played a 5-7 North Texas in the "Heart of Dallas Bowl". They played in the regular season already, although they lost the first time. How many other awful games are there like this?

There were always only a handful of bowl games that really mattered and I don't think the BCS Playoff negatively effects those bowls. If there were 24 bowls instead of 40 I think the perception would be much different.

Was going to say the same thing but this did the job.

 

[RUinBoston]

I've argued that lower tier bowls should be floating....the location chosen based on the teams available. OR allow one of the teams to just play at home. I know it takes away from the 'pagentry'. But how much pageantry do these crappy bowls have? Another option is to add excitement by creating some sort of point system, so that a particular conference is declared the 'winner' of bowl season based on their teams performance in bowls versus expectations or something. Anyway, I agree...something has to be done.

 

[zappaa]

One of my proudest moments as an RU fan was watching us destroy Cincinnati in 2005 with bowl reps in bright yellow sport coats present.
I know we were in a bowl drought, but it seems to me that irrelevant bowl meant a hell of a lot more then that it would today

 

[Crazed_RU]

The problem does not reside with teams like Army. I'm sure they were psyched to be in that bowl game, especially after beating Navy. The problem is when you have a team like Texas A&M, or Ole Miss playing in a bowl game that they see as below them. They and their fans come with a half-hearted effort and it pulls everything down.

 

[TheB1GTerp]

Interesting topic...the BCS bowls and now playoffs offer great viewing and excitement.
They also add drama to the regular season.

At the same time the system has rendered 99% of the bowls irrelevant.
No fan bases travel, no one is at the games, I'm sure TV viewership is minute.
How long will sponsors and cities continue to lend support with no fan interest?

Whadaya think?:D

TV money is still the most important. ESPN/Fox need content and while all these people are on vacation having football on TV is huge.

I am not sure why you said 99% of the bowls are irrelevant, they always have been, even more so in the past. Only 1 bowl, which was the championship really mattered.
More people are traveling, but less per game. There are more bowl games.

So like whoever wins championship has to travel three times.
#1 Travel to conference championship
#2 Travel to Playoff Round #1
#3 Travel to Championship

So you may see less people at some games, but remember that's three games. So if you just had no conference championship and no first round. There is no way the championship attendance would be greater than the sum of those three games.

Also I am 99% sure there will be 8 team playoff with a computer ranking system. Rank teams #1-10.

Spots #1 through #5 for conference champions of power 5.
#6-#7 for at large bids based on computer rankings or a stupid committee.
#8 Best Group of five conference champion based on computer rankings or a stupid committee.

First round would be home games
#1 vs. #8
#2 vs. #7
#3 vs #6
#4 vs. #5

Then basically you state that only those spots really earned are #1-#5 as conference champions. Therefore for balance spots #6-#8 are inserted for balance and that #9 should not have a big complaint because they would NOT have won their conference.

Then after first round, use the same system we have now. That would then put a big premium on conference championships.

Bowls have been and will always be cash grabs and for the alumni, they aren't really important. It's just nice to see your team one last time some place sunny.

 

[RU_Planning]

The problem does not reside with teams like Army. I'm sure they were psyched to be in that bowl game, especially after beating Navy. The problem is when you have a team like Texas A&M, or Ole Miss playing in a bowl game that they see as below them. They and their fans come with a half-hearted effort and it pulls everything down.

I wasn't taking a Army, I was taking one at North Texas.

If there were less bowls, you wouldn't have that problem with mediocre P5 schools.

 

[RURM85]

While agreed that there are too many bowls and the system needs to be revamped (i.e. no reason for 5-7 teams and maybe even 6-6 teams to play in bowl games), I'm watching some bowls that generate fan bases that show up and probably some decent TV ratings relatively speaking. Yesterday's Russell Athletic Bowl and Texas Bowl saw good crowds due to programs with fan bases that travel well. West Virginia fans showed up and with a game in Orlando there was decent attendance even though upper decks showed empty seats. The Texas Bowl saw a Texas team against a well traveled KS program.

Completely disagree with a majority of the media's message that these bowls are meaningless and nothing more than exhibitions, except for the playoffs. For schools, players, family members, friends, students and fans, these games provide meaning and for many seniors provide an opportunity to showcase talent to NFL scouts in a big game.

 

[redlinehw]

As interest in bowls declines the number of bowls will greatly decrease. There will only be a few bowls (in addition to playoff) that teams, fans, and tv care about. My guess would be approx 6-8 bowls in addition to the playoffs. Fewer bowls but much more interest & $.

 

[Extra Point]

For me, the more college football games the better. Some bowl games have teams that I don't care about, so I don't get that excited anticipation for the game to finally start. I love any bowl game that has a B1G team playing because they represent the dominance of the conference and of course any bowl Rutgers plays in I can hardly sleep the night before in anticipation. So for me I don't think there are too many bowls and winning one isn't irrelevant to me.
PS- The Indiana vs Utah game was fantastic. Talk about David almost beating Goliath.

 

[bac2therac]

there are too many bowls, for one they have given bowl games out to the lowest level schools imaginable...when ODU is getting a bowl you know there is something wrong.

Get rid of 10-12 bowls and it will start to have more meaning because it becomes an accomplishment to make a bowl again. Going 5-7 or 6-6 is not all that hard...look at RU 3 years ago in that awful Flood season going to the Pinstripe..an example of a school not deserving a bowl.

cue the usual refrain, I will watch any college football game and there isnt enough bowls...great..but doesnt mean the bowls are becoming more meaningless and its a participation trophy...cue the "how dare you say that..I want you to these players from these 5-7 schools playing in a bowl and say its meaningless to their face.., how dare you ..lmfao"

 

[IMARUFAN]

I totally agree with the OP.

I'm probably the only person on earth who feels this way, but I wish the BCS and Playoff system would just go away.

I LOVED watching bowls in the past. And New Years Day was the best college football watching day of the year.

Traditional matchups between league champions as you had in the Rose or Sugar Bowls were must see T.V. I'll watch the playoffs this year of course, but most of the games are boring me to tears and I'm not even waching them.

(P.S. Get off my damn lawn.)

 

[RUfinal4]

It is more about too many bowls then the playoffs making them meaningless.

Where the playoff hurts is that teams find out about 7-10 days later their bowl destination then 20 years ago. When a fan base finds out in early December that their team plays 2-3 weeks later makes travel arrangements tough. You also have more pre xmas bowls then 20 years ago because tv tries to organize it where each bowl has no competition vs other games at the same time.

This saturday there are 2 games at 11am then the playoffs at 3 and 7. On Monday you have 2 1pm games before games at 5 and 8:30. When I was a kid you would have had 2-3 games on Jan 1st at noon, 3, and 8. You had like 7-10 games on Jan 1 where now you have 4 games.

 

[NorthNJRUFan]

Tv viewership is not minute. The bad bowl games get better ratings than the best highest ranked ncaa hoops games.

That in itself is why the bowls will stick around. And they should. There is a great demand for them compared to any other form of live entertainment outside of NFL

 

[Yeah Baby]

Interesting topic...the BCS bowls and now playoffs offer great viewing and excitement.
They also add drama to the regular season.

At the same time the system has rendered 99% of the bowls irrelevant.
No fan bases travel, no one is at the games, I'm sure TV viewership is minute.
How long will sponsors and cities continue to lend support with no fan interest?

Whadaya think?:D

Great thoughts. I think the smaller bowls will fade out or something else will change. If you are not P5 you may drop a level IMO. That could be 5-10 years away though.

 

[Queztastic]

I totally agree with the OP.

I'm probably the only person on earth who feels this way, but I wish the BCS and Playoff system would just go away.

I LOVED watching bowls in the past. And New Years Day was the best college football watching day of the year.

Traditional matchups between league champions as you had in the Rose or Sugar Bowls were must see T.V. I'll watch the playoffs this year of course, but most of the games are boring me to tears and I'm not even waching them.

(P.S. Get off my damn lawn.)

I'm with you. Give me the awesome New Year's day bowl lineup back. Give me 8 games on one day with overlapping games on at the same time. It was like the first few days of March Madness where there are constant games all the time. My preference would have been to keep this the same, and then go to a "plus one" where #1 vs #2 (after the 1/1 bowls were complete) would play for the national championship.

(Yes, I know that we are never going back)

 

[Upstream]

It seems to me that there are many more bowls now than their used to be, even 8 years ago. However I could be wrong.

There are 14 new bowls since 2006:

Texas Bowl (2006)
Birmingham Bowl (2006)
New Mexico Bowl (2006)
St Petersburg Bowl (2008)
Military Bowl (2008)
Hearth of Dallas Bowl (2010)
Pinstripe Bowl (2010)
Quick Lane Bowl (2014)
Miami Beach Bowl (2014)
Camellia Bowl (2014)
Boca Raton Bowl (2014)
Bahamas Bowl (2014)
Arizona Bowl (2015)
Cure Bowl (2015)

In the same period, 3 bowls were closed down:

Houston Bowl (2006)
International Bowl (2010)
Little Caesars Pizza Bowl/Motor City Bowl (2014)


So, yeah, there are a lot more new bowls. The total number of bowls went from 29 to 40 in 10 years. Plus the national championship game was added as a non-bowl.

 

[zappaa]

Tv viewership is not minute. The bad bowl games get better ratings than the best highest ranked ncaa hoops games.

That in itself is why the bowls will stick around. And they should. There is a great demand for them compared to any other form of live entertainment outside of NFL

What are the numbers?

 

[Upstream]

What are the numbers?

http://awfulannouncing.com/2016/even-lesser-bowl-games-are-dominating-tv-ratings.html

 

[mdh2003]

http://awfulannouncing.com/2016/even-lesser-bowl-games-are-dominating-tv-ratings.html

And there is the answer to the yearly bowl questions.

Looking forward to same posts next year by the same people. Rinse, repeat.

 

[bac2therac]

There are 14 new bowls since 2006:

Texas Bowl (2006)
Birmingham Bowl (2006)
New Mexico Bowl (2006)
St Petersburg Bowl (2008)
Military Bowl (2008)
Hearth of Dallas Bowl (2010)
Pinstripe Bowl (2010)
Quick Lane Bowl (2014)
Miami Beach Bowl (2014)
Camellia Bowl (2014)
Boca Raton Bowl (2014)
Bahamas Bowl (2014)
Arizona Bowl (2015)
Cure Bowl (2015)

In the same period, 3 bowls were closed down:

Houston Bowl (2006)
International Bowl (2010)
Little Caesars Pizza Bowl/Motor City Bowl (2014)


So, yeah, there are a lot more new bowls. The total number of bowls went from 29 to 40 in 10 years. Plus the national championship game was added as a non-bowl.

I would eliminate every single one of these

 

[bac2therac]

And there is the answer to the yearly bowl questions.

Looking forward to same posts next year by the same people. Rinse, repeat.

I do not think people are question the ratings as much as whether the games are meaningful, we already now have players starting to skip bowl season

 

[Upstream]

I would eliminate every single one of these

And you would eliminate 5 of the 9 bowl games that Rutgers has played in (with another 2, International and Garden State, already eliminated).

 

[Armor and Sword]

The Group of 5 schools want their own playoff. I think eventually, the bowls will be replaced by a larger playoff and or an NIT-type playoff of those who don't make to FCS playoff.

http://www.espn.com/college-footbal...ficials-considering-playoff-non-power-5-teams

 

[mdh2003]

I do not think people are question the ratings as much as whether the games are meaningful, we already now have players starting to skip bowl season

Well then, your question is meaningless, at least for now.

If the article is correct, these stupid games are meaningful enough for people to watch them over just about anything else. And they are meaningful to ESPN, never known for charity, or I suspect you would be complaining about those guys in the white raincoats saying "It's a Mahhhk!!" right about now.

Unless, like me, you have been banished to some circle of hell and had to endure The Polar Express on a loop since thanksgiving, there is literally not much on TV during this time. And those that are on get whipped by the crappy bowls. It's not that hard a concept. But carry on...

 

[zappaa]

The TV numbers indicate the bowls are at the top or near for cable. They have won the night for cable sports.
The actual number of viewers is still pitiful.

 

[Armor and Sword]

And they are meaningful to ESPN, never known for charity, or I suspect you would be complaining about those guys in the white raincoats saying "It's a Mahhhk!!" right about now.

The AFL ditched the raincoats. The umpires now wear lime green jerseys and shorts and look more like the Oregon soccer team. But they still do the cool hand signals for goals and behinds. And Aussie rules is on some obscure sports network now sandwiched between NBCSN and YES.

 

[Upstream]

The TV numbers indicate the bowls are at the top or near for cable. They have won the night for cable sports.
The actual number of viewers is still pitiful.

But from the perspective of a cable sports channel, the viewership for a low-level bowl is still better than whatever that channel could air if the bowl didn't exist. So the cable sports channel would still rather support the bowl game over the non-bowl alternative.

 

[c_husk]

Interesting topic...the BCS bowls and now playoffs offer great viewing and excitement.
They also add drama to the regular season.

At the same time the system has rendered 99% of the bowls irrelevant.
No fan bases travel, no one is at the games, I'm sure TV viewership is minute.
How long will sponsors and cities continue to lend support with no fan interest?

Whadaya think?:D

I heard Sirius college radio host talking about it yesterday morning. The morning host Taylor S. said the TV ratings on ESPN are still pretty good, that is why they renew the bowls. The ratings are better then what they would get for a regular show in that time slot.

 

[MulletCork]

It's just like the NFL with Thursday night games, there is just so much dilution when you have too much of anything. There are just so many bowl games and so many BAD bowl games.

Also, like Crazed_RU said above, you get some games where teams just don't show up. They don't want to be there and feel they are better than the bowl they got slotted in. Meanwhile they might be up against a team that is psyched to be at the game, and you get a crummy game sometimes. Also, there is so much sloppy play too, with layoffs and whatnot.

 

[zappaa]

I heard Sirius college radio host talking about it yesterday morning. The morning host Taylor S. said the TV ratings on ESPN are still pretty good, that is why they renew the bowls. The ratings are better then what they would get for a regular show in that time slot.

It's better than poker or college basketball I guess.

 

[RUScrew85]

While agreed that there are too many bowls and the system needs to be revamped (i.e. no reason for 5-7 teams and maybe even 6-6 teams to play in bowl games), I'm watching some bowls that generate fan bases that show up and probably some decent TV ratings relatively speaking. Yesterday's Russell Athletic Bowl and Texas Bowl saw good crowds due to programs with fan bases that travel well. West Virginia fans showed up and with a game in Orlando there was decent attendance even though upper decks showed empty seats. The Texas Bowl saw a Texas team against a well traveled KS program.

Completely disagree with a majority of the media's message that these bowls are meaningless and nothing more than exhibitions, except for the playoffs. For schools, players, family members, friends, students and fans, these games provide meaning and for many seniors provide an opportunity to showcase talent to NFL scouts in a big game.

Well the system is really Capitalism that drives the crappy bowls. As long as there's a channel and advertisers willing to pay and teams willing to go there will be crappy bowls. One of the costs of Freedom I guess. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:

 

[theRU]

If they dont make $$$$ they dont do it. its that simple. Its cheaper for them to pay for bowl games to get their content than probably paying Seinfeld to run a rerun marathon...and it gets more eyes (advertising revenue)

 

[RU-05]

I think the TV ratings show there is enough demand to warrant these games.

And I think when you are that team, you much prefer to be there then the alternative.

But a 5-7 team in a bowl game is hard to not make fun of.

 

[Source]

Outside of the championship game, and perhaps the major bowl games, the "honor" of being chosen to play in a bowl game has long since been reduced to the equivalent of playing an extra game on your schedule. It's programming during December for the sports networks that have sprung up the last quarter century. When it had more meaning, the dozen or so bowls meant only about 1 in 5 schools got to go. Today, it's so watered down that almost every .500 team goes AND in the last two years, sub-.500 teams get invited.

That's the trade off having a championship system. I guess you could attempt to go back to the old days and let the minor bowls put together their own match-ups instead of having the current conference tie-ins, but I don't think that's going to happen.

What I do see happening is that a Bowl, like the Pinstripe Bowl in NYC, or the old Continental Tire/Meineke/Belk Bowl in Charlotte will take a "local" team in the hopes they provide a sizable crowd and match them up with an interesting opponent to try and create an interesting match up for TV viewers and ratings.

The downside of that is what some Rutgers fans have complained about..... always winding up in your own backyard for post season play if you don't qualify for a major bowl.

 

[cicero grimes]

Interesting topic...the BCS bowls and now playoffs offer great viewing and excitement.
They also add drama to the regular season.

At the same time the system has rendered 99% of the bowls irrelevant.
No fan bases travel, no one is at the games, I'm sure TV viewership is minute.
How long will sponsors and cities continue to lend support with no fan interest?

Whadaya think?:D

It's an interesting question and thanks for posting. Personally I find myself watching more regular season games because of the playoff implications then I had prior to the playoff (and I watched a ton). I have not watched any bowls so far this year but will DVR the playoff games. I tend to agree with you that the majority of the bowls are not worth watching any longer. I did watch all the bowls prior to the playoff and BCS because the NC was usually decided in them. For me, they have become exhibition games.

 

[albanyknight]

I am off this week and love football. But I just can't get myself interested in these bowl games, even the ones with Big Ten teams playing.

I find it much more enjoyable to binge watch series shows on Netflix.

 

[MozRU]

What are the numbers?

From the article:
"All of these games have either won the night in sports on cable or come very close."

Nobody college football going toe to toe with the NBA and NHL. Bowls are going no where.