Should record be a factor in bowl invites?

[4down20]

I never really thought about it honestly. But the other day I was watching the Saban interview @ SEC media days, and he mentioned this in regards to SoS.

He said he'd like to see the Big5 only play the Big5, and was commenting on general SoS. He said the reason people don't want to do this is because of bowl games. You need 6 games to become bowl eligible. He said that if they took away the requirement to have 6 wins on a season and anyone could be invited to a bowl game, then teams would be more inclined to play only the Big5 or just play tougher schedules in general.

Here's the Q&A part:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HRI2ApaBFTI]Nick Saban at SEC Media Days - YouTube[/ame]

Most people don't realize the value of going to a bowl game. It goes beyond the money itself, which in some cases is a loss for schools. It's exposure, and it's more practice time for the team, because practice is limited. I kinda liked the idea that bowl games were a reward, but really that has kinda gone out the window.

So I guess I think it's probably a good idea.

 

[Jack_John_Mark]

I think we should just drop the whole concept of there being winners and losers and hand out every team a Natty at the end of the year.

We can call every bowl game the Championship.

That way every team will feel equal and the kids won't have to go on in life feeling like failures.

 

[jonvi]

I've enjoyed watching teams from "lesser" conferences play the big name schools. IMO, involving those schools has made CFB more interesting than we would have had if they were left out.

If Saban doesn't want to play these schools, why does Alabama play them during the season? It sounds like he's speaking out of both sides of his mouth.

 

[jonvi]

More in line with your question, I think a team should be above .500 in league play to quailify for a bowl game.....and yes, at least 6 wins on the season.

 

[4down20]

I've enjoyed watching teams from "lesser" conferences play the big name schools. IMO, involving those schools has made CFB more interesting than we would have had if they were left out.

If Saban doesn't want to play these schools, why does Alabama play them during the season? It sounds like he's speaking out of both sides of his mouth.

There are plenty of lesser teams in the Big5 IMO. Every conference has them.

Expecting a school to up and do something that would be harmful to them doing it alone is silly.

 

[jonvi]

There are plenty of lesser teams in the Big5 IMO. Every conference has them.

Expecting a school to up and do something that would be harmful to them doing it alone is silly.

If you don't mind, expand on that so I better understand the direction you are heading.

 

[4down20]

If you don't mind, expand on that so I better understand the direction you are heading.

If a team were to start doing that, they would just be adding more difficulty to the schedule than was needed. It would be like competing in a 100 yard dash with 10 lb sand bags tied to your ankles.

If everyone has the 10 lb sand bags tied to their ankles, then it's no problem.

Unless the teams were like Colorado, Iowa St etc.

 

[outofyourmind]

if a team has a consistent 6-6 record year after year, they aren't interested in making their schedule harder, I would imagine it's just the opposite.

 

[Codaxx]

I am all for this, but this would be applied all the way to the playoffs. He is basically saying not all 10 win records are the same. I completely agree with that. I dont think the committee will have the balls to think like that

 

[Red_Alert]

They should form a committee to see if they need to form a committee to do all of the scheduling for FBS teams (a la the NFL). Keep the conferences and their divisions intact, but take the inter-conference scheduling out of their hands as well as the individual teams ability to schedule their own OOC games.
FCS teams will not be in the pool. A team has to have a better than .500 record to qualify for a bowl. That would typically be at least (7-5).

That extra practice time for a bowl is worth it's weight in gold. Allow teams that don't become bowl eligible equal practice time during the bowl season if they choose. They can use it to get their underclassmen up to speed for the next season.

 

[jonvi]

They should form a committee to see if they need to form a committee to do all of the scheduling for FBS teams (a la the NFL). Keep the conferences and their divisions intact, but take the inter-conference scheduling out of their hands as well as the individual teams ability to schedule their own OOC games.
FCS teams will not be in the pool. A team has to have a better than .500 record to qualify for a bowl. That would typically be at least (7-5).

That extra practice time for a bowl is worth it's weight in gold. Allow teams that don't become bowl eligible equal practice time during the bowl season if they choose. They can use it to get their underclassmen up to speed for the next season.

I never understood why teams were not allowed to practice after the season the same as teams that do get the invite. Making a toilet bowl is not a great accomplishment. It is an accomplishment...just not all that special. I agree those practices help out a bunch.

 

[Red_Alert]

I never understood why teams were not allowed to practice after the season the same as teams that do get the invite. Making a toilet bowl is not a great accomplishment. It is an accomplishment...just not all that special. I agree those practices help out a bunch.

It would balance things out to where the lesser teams are not falling further behind. It would even enhance them somewhat as they could tell their seniors that their playing time is done (just like spring practice) and let their guys who'll be playing the next season practice as the #1 unit.

It would enhance parity across the board, IMO.

 

[4down20]

I'm in favor of allowing non bowl teams extra practices. The bowl game itself will still bring in some valuable experiences that will be missed, but the practices would lessen it.

 

[Red_Alert]

I'm in favor of allowing non bowl teams extra practices. The bowl game itself will still bring in some valuable experiences that will be missed, but the practices would lessen it.

And that is the actual reward for qualifying for a bowl game. Also any senior regular season starters playing in the bowl game would negate many advantages. Only a regular season underclassman starter would see any benefit from playing in the game.

 

[Red_Alert]

I say let all teams practice as they wish until the final bowl game is played. Then it's time out until spring practice.

 

[trojanfan12]

I don't have an issue with requiring 6 wins or better to play in a bowl. The bowl game should be a reward for a successful season. 6 wins is barely a successful season.


My issue is with how some teams choose to try to get those 6 wins. If a team schedules a combination of 3-4 cupcakes/FCS schools to set themselves up to only need 2 or 3 conference wins to be bowl eligible, that is a problem, imo.


I'd rather see scheduling rules made that address that. Perhaps FCS schools not counting towards the bowl eligibility wins and having requiring at least 1 OOC game vs. a BCS school.

I agree with allowing all teams to have extra practices, not just bowl teams.

 

[4down20]

I don't have an issue with requiring 6 wins or better to play in a bowl. The bowl game should be a reward for a successful season. 6 wins is barely a successful season.


My issue is with how some teams choose to try to get those 6 wins. If a team schedules a combination of 3-4 cupcakes/FCS schools to set themselves up to only need 2 or 3 conference wins to be bowl eligible, that is a problem, imo.


I'd rather see scheduling rules made that address that. Perhaps FCS schools not counting towards the bowl eligibility wins and having requiring at least 1 OOC game vs. a BCS school.

I've been in favor of not counting FCS schools to be bowl eligible. That would take care of FCS games instantly.

But he is talking a bit beyond that as his reasoning.

SEC already implemented a rule about playing at least 1 BCS team a year.

 

[mrwallace2ku]

I don't have an issue with requiring 6 wins or better to play in a bowl. The bowl game should be a reward for a successful season. 6 wins is barely a successful season.


My issue is with how some teams choose to try to get those 6 wins. If a team schedules a combination of 3-4 cupcakes/FCS schools to set themselves up to only need 2 or 3 conference wins to be bowl eligible, that is a problem, imo.


I'd rather see scheduling rules made that address that. Perhaps FCS schools not counting towards the bowl eligibility wins and having requiring at least 1 OOC game vs. a BCS school.

I agree with allowing all teams to have extra practices, not just bowl teams.

Making sense again TF...I agree.

 

[Tin Man]

I like the idea of a state's flagship university periodically scheduling the lesser in-state school teams to give their programs a paycheck and some exposure, and I do not believe doing this should reflect poorly upon the flagship school or lessen that chances for an invitation to a premier bowl. With 12-game regular seasons, that still leaves 11 games against other opponents from which to gauge the team's merits and relative rank among their peers. Eleven is plenty for that purpose.

 

[Bandwagonbo2]

My opinion is that bowls should be a reward for an above decent to great year. Give us 20 bowls only and make the big ones count like they used to for something by having them all played on New Years day. If you didnt get a New Years day bowl back in the day, you had a down year(most programs felt this way anyway).

Give us 7-8 win teams as the cutoff for a bowl. this bullshit with 35 or more bowls and a team with a losing record is revolving into the "everyone gets a trophy" situation and frankly, it sickens me to see it. Make a bowl mean something again and fuck all this political correctness bullshit.