People mock meaningless bowls

[18IsTheMan]

How meaningful were yesterday's games for A&M, JMU and Tulane? They were every bit as meaningless as the Turd City Bowl.

Folks deride the bowl system for giving us games nobody wants to see. Who wanted to see Ole Miss and Oregon practically sexually assault JMU and Tulane? Who wanted to see a crappy game between ok, not, great teams like Miami and A&M?

"What else can I be when I live in a world of fools such as this."

 

[Viennacock]

How meaningful were yesterday's games for A&M, JMU and Tulane? They were every bit as meaningless as the Turd City Bowl.

Folks deride the bowl system for giving us games nobody wants to see. Who wanted to see Ole Miss and Oregon practically sexually assault JMU and Tulane? Who wanted to see a crappy game between ok, not, great teams like Miami and A&M?

"What else can I be when I live in a world of fools such as this."

One thread wasn't enough?

 

[Dabo's Weenie]

In the spirit of the season, I am choosing to not complain about everything that isn't exactly as I want and heed the the sage advice of a legendary wise man who encourages all to "find some joy".

Merry Christmas everyone.

 

[gamecock stock]

One thread wasn't enough?

This is his 3rd thread in two days on this subject.

And I don't understand how he compares a game between 2 TOP 10 P4 schools (Miami and TAM) that was a ONE TOUCHDOWN difference to a couple of Top 10 teams (Ole Miss and Oregon) blowing out 2 non-P4 teams by 31 and 17 points (except 17 points is arguably not a blowout). Those last two games, even if the difference was only a field goal, he would say the same thing, no matter what. I did not watch those last 2 games because they involved non-P4 teams. Trying to say that the Miami-TAM game was similar to the Ole Miss-Tulane and Oregon-James Madison games is laughable. He is smarter and a better poster than that. Not only do we need to go to 16-team playoffs but, they need to involve only P4 teams.

 

[Viennacock]

This is his 3rd thread in two days on this subject.

And I don't understand how he compares a game between 2 TOP 10 P4 schools (Miami and TAM) that was a ONE TOUCHDOWN difference to a couple of Top 10 teams (Ole Miss and Oregon) blowing out 2 non-P4 teams by 31 and 17 points (except 17 points is arguably not a blowout). Those last two games, even if the difference was only a field goal, he would say the same thing, no matter what. I did not watch those last 2 games because they involved non-P4 teams. Trying to say that the Miami-TAM game was similar to the Ole Miss-Tulane and Oregon-James Madison games is laughable. He is smarter and a better poster than that. Not only do we need to go to 16-team playoffs but, they need to involve only P4 teams.

I think he's trying to set gamecockcentral.com record for most post started . He's going to start to believe he's right if he keeps posting it.

Personally, I don't care if it's all p4 schools. Just give me the best 12 teams. If it's a division 3 school, i'm good.

There is no way four teams is better for any of the interested parties.

- fans- more games. I'll take a bad playoff game vs a bowl (non-playoff) game with many opt-outs.

NCAA- $$

Players / coaches they certainly want a shot at the playoffs. More teams = higher probability.

TV- more is better $$

No good reason to go backwards. They simply need to change the selection process and all will be fine. Personally, I like the computer ratings. The eye test is over-rated and an excuse to be overly subjective.

 

[Traildust57]

Naw....

 

[Piscis]

This is his 3rd thread in two days on this subject.

And I don't understand how he compares a game between 2 TOP 10 P4 schools (Miami and TAM) that was a ONE TOUCHDOWN difference to a couple of Top 10 teams (Ole Miss and Oregon) blowing out 2 non-P4 teams by 31 and 17 points (except 17 points is arguably not a blowout). Those last two games, even if the difference was only a field goal, he would say the same thing, no matter what. I did not watch those last 2 games because they involved non-P4 teams. Trying to say that the Miami-TAM game was similar to the Ole Miss-Tulane and Oregon-James Madison games is laughable. He is smarter and a better poster than that. Not only do we need to go to 16-team playoffs but, they need to involve only P4 teams.

The Miami/aTm ONE TOUCHDOWN difference was the only touchdown scored in the entire game. That isn't exactly compelling football to watch.

The G5 teams in the playoff are nothing more than affirmative action in college football. People dream of a Cinderella run by a team like they see in the NCAA basketball tournament, but that isn't going to happen in football. People say G5 teams have to be included or they will sue. Who, exactly, will they sue? The playoff is basically an invitational postseason tournament put on by Disney. They can invite whoever they want.

6 teams would be plenty in the playoff.

 

[kidrobinski]

The Miami/aTm ONE TOUCHDOWN difference was the only touchdown scored in the entire game. That isn't exactly compelling football to watch.

Disagree. Defense is a component and possibly the most significant aspect of the game as well. I love football; I thought it was a great game and highly entertaining.

 

[Piscis]

Disagree. Defense is a component and possibly the most significant aspect of the game as well. I love football; I thought it was a great game and highly entertaining.

I like watching great defense, that wasn't great defense. That was offense incompetence. The teams combined for 11 of 30 on third down and Beck threw for 103 yds. Reed was the leading rusher for aTm with 27 yards. aTm had -4 punt return yards. Miami missed 3 fgs.

Again, that wasn't great defense, that was awful offense.

 

[Go Gamecocks]

6 teams would be plenty in the playoff.

That's reasonable with the level of disparity in the Top 12,

It solves the problem of #5 or #6 complaining about not being in the Top 4.

Give #1 & #2 a bye first week.

Nice little 3 weekend tourney.

No one listens to me.

 

[Thunderstick]

"...They simply need to change the selection process and all will be fine. Personally, I like the computer ratings. The eye test is over-rated and an excuse to be overly subjective."

I think the sausage man is onto something here!

 

[kidrobinski]

I like watching great defense, that wasn't great defense. That was offense incompetence. The teams combined for 11 of 30 on third down and Beck threw for 103 yds. Reed was the leading rusher for aTm with 27 yards. aTm had -4 punt return yards. Miami missed 3 fgs.

Again, that wasn't great defense, that was awful offense.

Ok chief

 

[gamecock stock]

The Miami/aTm ONE TOUCHDOWN difference was the only touchdown scored in the entire game. That isn't exactly compelling football to watch.

The G5 teams in the playoff are nothing more than affirmative action in college football. People dream of a Cinderella run by a team like they see in the NCAA basketball tournament, but that isn't going to happen in football. People say G5 teams have to be included or they will sue. Who, exactly, will they sue? The playoff is basically an invitational postseason tournament put on by Disney. They can invite whoever they want.

6 teams would be plenty in the playoff.

It was a low scoring game, much like Indiana v Ohio State. I enjoyed both. Don't misunderstand, I like high scoring close games as much as the next person does. But I'm fine with low scoring games. As Bear Bryant said, "Offense sells tickets; defense wins championships".

As I've said many times, do not invite non-P4 teams. The Big Guys better get smart if they don't want to see the SEC and BIG secede to establish their own playoffs between those 2 conferences, That action is circulating in the rumor mill.

I don't disagree with you that 6 teams is enough. But I realize, and I think you do too, that they are not going to reduce the number of playoff participants. They will increase the number. I just hope they stop at 16.

 

[Piscis]

It was a low scoring game, much like Indiana v Ohio State. I enjoyed both. Don't misunderstand, I like high scoring close games as much as the next person does. But I'm fine with low scoring games. As Bear Bryant said, "Offense sells tickets; defense wins championships".

As I've said many times, do not invite non-P4 teams. The Big Guys better get smart if they don't want to see the SEC and BIG secede to establish their own playoffs between those 2 conferences, That action is circulating in the rumor mill.

I don't disagree with you that 6 teams is enough. But I realize, and I think you do too, that they are not going to reduce the number of playoff participants. They will increase the number. I just hope they stop at 16.

Like I said, I like seeing good defensive play. I never enjoy those Big 12 shootout games that end up with scores like 53-47. Indiana/Ohio State was a much better game than Miami/aTm because the offense in that game was at least entertaining to watch.

There is no place at all in the playoff for any G5 team. The G5 DEI type inclusion started with Cincinnati/Bama a few years ago. Bama pretty well sleepwalked to a 27-7 win. The CFP committee should have learned from that game to not put G5 teams in the playoff.

Expanding to 16 will mean more teams with no chance of winning will get in the playoff. Some posters here are all about expanding the playoff until SC can get in. Backing into an expanded playoff instead of actually getting better and earning a spot in a legitimate playoff fits perfectly with the way some fans see success in SC football. Unless the SEC and B1G get guarantees of multiple spots in a 16 team playoff, I can see them breaking away. The bad thing about that would be that whatever playoff the SEC and B1G are in would be full of rematches.

 

[JohnnySolo]

I use games like that to try and see if I can read the defense pre snap and after snap.

 

[gamecock stock]

Like I said, I like seeing good defensive play. I never enjoy those Big 12 shootout games that end up with scores like 53-47. Indiana/Ohio State was a much better game than Miami/aTm because the offense in that game was at least entertaining to watch.

There is no place at all in the playoff for any G5 team. The G5 DEI type inclusion started with Cincinnati/Bama a few years ago. Bama pretty well sleepwalked to a 27-7 win. The CFP committee should have learned from that game to not put G5 teams in the playoff.

Expanding to 16 will mean more teams with no chance of winning will get in the playoff. Some posters here are all about expanding the playoff until SC can get in. Backing into an expanded playoff instead of actually getting better and earning a spot in a legitimate playoff fits perfectly with the way some fans see success in SC football. Unless the SEC and B1G get guarantees of multiple spots in a 16 team playoff, I can see them breaking away. The bad thing about that would be that whatever playoff the SEC and B1G are in would be full of rematches.

Since there are currently 12 playoff spots, Miami and Texas A&M deserved to be in the playoffs since both were Top 10 teams. At least it was a close game and nothing like that Bama -Cincy game a few years ago. I personally enjoyed the Miami-TAM game.

I agree that going to 16 means more teams with no chance at winning. 19% of College basketball teams go to the Big Dance. 21% of college baseball teams make it to the end-of-the-year tournament. If football expands to 16, which I would like to see and think would be enough, that would represent only 12% of the teams. And, of course, in the pros, 40%+ make the playoffs. So, even at 16, the football people would still be exclusive compared to others. I enjoy watching sports.. It's a free country. Nobody is forced to watch any of these games. I watched the Miami -TAM game. But I did not watch the games that James Madison and Tulane played in. Like I said, I am all for going to 16, but with no non-P4 teams. And I draw the line at 16, even though going to 32 would dramatically increase Carolina's chances of making the playoffs. But even if they go to 32 including non-P4 teams, I will pick and choose which games I watch, like I did this past Saturday. And who knows, expansion may eventually mean more TV money for the schools, And that's not bad,

 

[atl-cock]

The Miami/aTm ONE TOUCHDOWN difference was the only touchdown scored in the entire game. That isn't exactly compelling football to watch.

The G5 teams in the playoff are nothing more than affirmative action in college football. People dream of a Cinderella run by a team like they see in the NCAA basketball tournament, but that isn't going to happen in football. People say G5 teams have to be included or they will sue. Who, exactly, will they sue? The playoff is basically an invitational postseason tournament put on by Disney. They can invite whoever they want.

6 teams would be plenty in the playoff.

Technically, who administers this, the NCAA or Disney?

Does the SoCon basketball champion (either/both genders) expect to dance more than one round? Same in G5 football. Or have a G5 16-team playoff.

 

[Viennacock]

Since there are currently 12 playoff spots, Miami and Texas A&M deserved to be in the playoffs since both were Top 10 teams. At least it was a close game and nothing like that Bama -Cincy game a few years ago. I personally enjoyed the Miami-TAM game.

I agree that going to 16 means more teams with no chance at winning. 19% of College basketball teams go to the Big Dance. 21% of college baseball teams make it to the end-of-the-year tournament. If football expands to 16, which I would like to see and think would be enough, that would represent only 12% of the teams. And, of course, in the pros, 40%+ make the playoffs. So, even at 16, the football people would still be exclusive compared to others. I enjoy watching sports.. It's a free country. Nobody is forced to watch any of these games. I watched the Miami -TAM game. But I did not watch the games that James Madison and Tulane played in. Like I said, I am all for going to 16, but with no non-P4 teams. And I draw the line at 16, even though going to 32 would dramatically increase Carolina's chances of making the playoffs. But even if they go to 32 including non-P4 teams, I will pick and choose which games I watch, like I did this past Saturday. And who knows, expansion may eventually mean more TV money for the schools, And that's not bad,

Why not non-p4 schools? Pick the 16 best teams, period. If one happens to be non-p4, so be it.

 

[gamecock stock]

Why not non-p4 schools? Pick the 16 best teams, period. If one happens to be non-p4, so be it.

If the computer picks them as one of the 16, sure. I'm fine with that. But I want to get away from the human subjective eye test.

 

[Piscis]

Technically, who administers this, the NCAA or Disney?

Does the SoCon basketball champion (either/both genders) expect to dance more than one round? Same in G5 football. Or have a G5 16-team playoff.

Disney owns the CFP. There has never been an NCAA Championship for the top division of college football.

Remember when Davidson made their miraculous run to the elite 8 in 2008. A basketball team only needs two or three great players to be able to play with any team in the country.

 

[Traildust57]

I like watching great defense, that wasn't great defense. That was offense incompetence. The teams combined for 11 of 30 on third down and Beck threw for 103 yds. Reed was the leading rusher for aTm with 27 yards. aTm had -4 punt return yards. Miami missed 3 fgs.

Again, that wasn't great defense, that was awful offense.

fine line...

 

[adcoop]

Why not non-p4 schools? Pick the 16 best teams, period. If one happens to be non-p4, so be it.

Both of the Non-P4 schools were in bad matchups this year, but they deserved to be there based on the rules. The rules were top 5 highest rated Conference Champions get in. It's not their fault that the ACC completely sucked, not only on the field, but how their tiebreakers worked which got Duke into the Championship game with 5 losses. The structure is designed to get one P-4 team in there which I think many wouldn't mind. However, getting two bad playoff matchups back-to-back is a bad look and an illustration how the system can falter if you have a weak P-4 conference. Personally, I don't think Virginia would have fared any better than those Group of 5 schools.

 

[atl-cock]

It was a low scoring game, much like Indiana v Ohio State. I enjoyed both. Don't misunderstand, I like high scoring close games as much as the next person does. But I'm fine with low scoring games. As Bear Bryant said, "Offense sells tickets; defense wins championships".

As I've said many times, do not invite non-P4 teams. The Big Guys better get smart if they don't want to see the SEC and BIG secede to establish their own playoffs between those 2 conferences, That action is circulating in the rumor mill.

I don't disagree with you that 6 teams is enough. But I realize, and I think you do too, that they are not going to reduce the number of playoff participants. They will increase the number. I just hope they stop at 16.

Disney owns the CFP. There has never been an NCAA Championship for the top division of college football.

Remember when Davidson made their miraculous run to the elite 8 in 2008. A basketball team only needs two or three great players to be able to play with any team in the country.

I attended Davidson for a couple of years in the late '70s before transferring to USC.

Bill Beradley at Princeton in the early '60s comes to mind.

 

[Viennacock]

Both of the Non-P4 schools were in bad matchups this year, but they deserved to be there based on the rules. The rules were top 5 highest rated Conference Champions get in. It's not their fault that the ACC completely sucked, not only on the field, but how their tiebreakers worked which got Duke into the Championship game with 5 losses. The structure is designed to get one P-4 team in there which I think many wouldn't mind. However, getting two bad playoff matchups back-to-back is a bad look and an illustration how the system can falter if you have a weak P-4 conference. Personally, I don't think Virginia would have fared any better than those Group of 5 schools.

Agreed. Not their fault. Fix the rules.

 

[KingWard]

How meaningful were yesterday's games for A&M, JMU and Tulane? They were every bit as meaningless as the Turd City Bowl.

Folks deride the bowl system for giving us games nobody wants to see. Who wanted to see Ole Miss and Oregon practically sexually assault JMU and Tulane? Who wanted to see a crappy game between ok, not, great teams like Miami and A&M?

"What else can I be when I live in a world of fools such as this."

This is easily fixed. Meaningless bowls are also fixable.

 

[KingWard]

One thread wasn't enough?

Ah, the Me,Too thread is a scourge of the board. I was so distressed when I started one awhile back that I got somebody out of bed when I couldn't take it down.

 

[SouthernBelly]

That's reasonable with the level of disparity in the Top 12,

It solves the problem of #5 or #6 complaining about not being in the Top 4.

Give #1 & #2 a bye first week.

Nice little 3 weekend tourney.

No one listens to me.

You married?

 

[will110]

How meaningful were yesterday's games for A&M, JMU and Tulane? They were every bit as meaningless as the Turd City Bowl.

Folks deride the bowl system for giving us games nobody wants to see. Who wanted to see Ole Miss and Oregon practically sexually assault JMU and Tulane? Who wanted to see a crappy game between ok, not, great teams like Miami and A&M?

"What else can I be when I live in a world of fools such as this."

If you didn't want to see it, I assume you didn't watch? If you didn't watch, why complain about it?

Millions of other college football fans were happy to have meaningful games on December 20.

 

[sclawman77]

Camera just showed the makeshift bleachers for the Rate bowl between Minnesota and New Mexico. It's being played at the Diamondbacks park in Phoenix. There are high school games on Friday nights with more seating and more attendance than this game.

 

[Uscg1984]

Camera just showed the makeshift bleachers for the Rate bowl between Minnesota and New Mexico. It's being played at the Diamondbacks park in Phoenix. There are high school games on Friday nights with more seating and more attendance than this game.

But it's not about in-person attendance, is it? It sounds like you watched it on TV (I did too), which is why they exist. As long as the ratings are decent and ESPN can continue to sell ad time during the broadcasts, these games aren't going anywhere. They know that desperate college football fans like us are a captured market this time of year.

 

[sclawman77]

But it's not about in-person attendance, is it? It sounds like you watched it on TV (I did too), which is why they exist. As long as the ratings are decent and ESPN can continue to sell ad time during the broadcasts, these games aren't going anywhere. They know that desperate college football fans like us are a captured market this time of year.

Right, I watched a few minutes of it out of sheer boredom. Was just making an observation. They aren't going away-you're right.

 

[USCEE82]

But it's not about in-person attendance, is it? It sounds like you watched it on TV (I did too), which is why they exist. As long as the ratings are decent and ESPN can continue to sell ad time during the broadcasts, these games aren't going anywhere. They know that desperate college football fans like us are a captured market this time of year.

Watched some of the Gator Bowl. It too was half empty. Sad. It used to be a decent bowl destination. I went in '87 for the Cocks vs LSU. Place was packed. Way fewer bowls back then.

 

[Uscg1984]

Watched some of the Gator Bowl. It too was half empty. Sad. It used to be a decent bowl destination. I went in '87 for the Cocks vs LSU. Place was packed. Way fewer bowls back then.

Yes, that was really disappointing to see. As you say, it's a decent bowl in a decent destination. I'm not sure the poor attendance can be blamed on there being too many bowls, though - Mizzou and Virginia were only playing in _one_ bowl. I expected both fanbases to give a good showing, but that was not the case. I don't know how many opt-outs the two schools had, but perhaps that played a roll. People don't get as excited about "exhibition" games.

 

[Traildust57]

TV!

 

[Traildust57]

Don't!

 

[Piscis]

TV!

Fans in the stands are the canary in the coal mine for the TV networks, or should be. When people don't care about going to the game, they don't care as much about watching the game. It won't happen overnight, but the TV audiences will track with the in person audiences as far as interest.

 

[sclawman77]

Independence Bowl between Coastal and LA Tech-refs have literally thrown a flag on every other play. There has to be 30+ penalties between both teams. Free the game-let it finish already in peace.

 

[kidrobinski]

Fans in the stands are the canary in the coal mine for the TV networks, or should be. When people don't care about going to the game, they don't care as much about watching the game. It won't happen overnight, but the TV audiences will track with the in person audiences as far as interest.

Doubt it.

 

[kidrobinski]

Independence Bowl between Coastal and LA Tech-refs have literally thrown a flag on every other play. There has to be 30+ penalties between both teams. Free the game-let it finish already in peace.

I was moved for some reason to watch the South Carolina at Notre Dame game from 1984 yesterday. Three things stood out:

1. Allen Mitchell sucked. Royally.
2. We played like we cared. VERY different from today’s game.
3. Man I miss the fire ant defensive scheme.

One other thing: the bloody refs called a penalty what seemed like every other play, sometimes in every play succession. Also you were allowed to play pass defense back then too; it was nice.

 

[Traildust57]

That was two generations ago....there in lies the difference.