NCAA approves 3 year moratorium on new bowls

[huKSer]

If we are gravitating toward everyone getting a bowl, the playoff needs to expand to at least 8 or 16. Then every 5-7 or worse team can have their glorious Tampax Bowl participation trophy and the top teams can actually be rewarded.

Yikes. What a bizarre leap.

Not really. How else do we actually reward to top deserving teams if everybody goes bowling?

I don't like

I prefer

 

[Mierin]

I think the tension of the regular season is overrated.

I don't. There are two reasons I don't like watching the NFL. One of them is that so many of the teams make it to the playoffs, so they really only need to win 8 or 9 games during the season. I would hate it if 16 teams made the NCAA Playoffs. When I was a kid I used to actually pray for teams ahead of Nebraska to get knocked off. I watched every game between teams ranked ahead. I even figured out after we lost to Colorado which teams needed to lose to who for us to still make it to the championship game. All of that goes away if the playoffs expand that far. I'm okay with a 6 team playoff but not more. Last year I watched 1 NFL football game.

 

[Redux]

1) that wasn't at all responsive to my very specific question.

Your very specific question is worded so that any answer I give will be met with immediate dissmissal.
Who am i to say who should have won? That's the giant flaw with the BCS, we never got to see who should have been champion because the matchups were typically wrong and only included 2 of 3, 4, or 5 teams. Sometimes it got it right, but that isn't a good system.

I can verbatim say Alabama did not deserve tow in their title over LSU. They didn't even win their division and had an identical record as conference winner Okie State. I'm not interested in debating that game, point is Alabama shouldn't have been there. Neither should have we been there in 2001 against Miami.

You can now make the predictable rebbuttal of "well they won so clearly they deserved it". It's hogwash.

 

[Red Five]

What number of bowls is too many then? Are we really okay with 60+ so EVERY team gets post season play? I'm not.

60 sounds good to me.

How many bowl games do you think there should be? As recently as 1996 there were only 18 of them. Is that what you want?

Or should we go back to the 70s when the Big Ten only allowed 1 team to go to a bowl each year? I mean that made going to a bowl "mean something".

 

[Redux]

What number of bowls is too many then? Are we really okay with 60+ so EVERY team gets post season play? I'm not.

60 sounds good to me.
How many bowl games do you think there should be? As recently as 1996 there were only 18 of them. Is that what you want?

Or should we go back to the 70s when the Big Ten only allowed 1 team to go to a bowl each year? I mean that made going to a bowl "mean something".

25-30 is plenty in my oppinion.

Why should an 0-12 team face a 1-11 team in front of 1,500 fans in a 70,000 seat arena? Are you going to watch it? Hell, are the fans of those teams really gonna watch it?

 

[Red Dead Redemption]

What number of bowls is too many then? Are we really okay with 60+ so EVERY team gets post season play? I'm not.

60 sounds good to me.
How many bowl games do you think there should be? As recently as 1996 there were only 18 of them. Is that what you want?

Or should we go back to the 70s when the Big Ten only allowed 1 team to go to a bowl each year? I mean that made going to a bowl "mean something".

25-30 is plenty in my oppinion.
Why should an 0-12 team face a 1-11 team in front of 1,500 fans in a 70,000 seat arena? Are you going to watch it? Hell, are the fans of those teams really gonna watch it?

If advertisers/corporations are dumb enough to sponsor a game like that, let them do it. If you don't like it, then don't watch it. Obviously they think somebody will watch it. Why begrudge others an opportunity to experience a bowl game? What do you have against those players, band, family members and friends?

 

[Red Five]

What number of bowls is too many then? Are we really okay with 60+ so EVERY team gets post season play? I'm not.

60 sounds good to me.
How many bowl games do you think there should be? As recently as 1996 there were only 18 of them. Is that what you want?

Or should we go back to the 70s when the Big Ten only allowed 1 team to go to a bowl each year? I mean that made going to a bowl "mean something".

25-30 is plenty in my oppinion.

Why should an 0-12 team face a 1-11 team in front of 1,500 fans in a 70,000 seat arena? Are you going to watch it? Hell, are the fans of those teams really gonna watch it?

Who says they have to play at a 70k stadium. They could easily play somewhere like this that holds 20k.

Someone will watch it. The lowest rated bowl game last year drew almost 1.1M viewers. To put that in perspective, the average NBA game on ESPN for the 2014-15 season averaged 1.5M viewers.

 

[Redux]

What number of bowls is too many then? Are we really okay with 60+ so EVERY team gets post season play? I'm not.

60 sounds good to me.
How many bowl games do you think there should be? As recently as 1996 there were only 18 of them. Is that what you want?

Or should we go back to the 70s when the Big Ten only allowed 1 team to go to a bowl each year? I mean that made going to a bowl "mean something".

25-30 is plenty in my oppinion.Why should an 0-12 team face a 1-11 team in front of 1,500 fans in a 70,000 seat arena? Are you going to watch it? Hell, are the fans of those teams really gonna watch it?

If advertisers/corporations are dumb enough to sponsor a game like that, let them do it. If you don't like it, then don't watch it. Obviously they think somebody will watch it. Why begrudge others an opportunity to experience a bowl game? What do you have against those players, band, family members and friends?

See page 1, the negatives far outweigh the bad.
And why should a team that won 0 games go bowling? This is exactly my point from before. If you don't have to actually win X amount of games to go bowling what the hell is the point?

 

[Redux]

What number of bowls is too many then? Are we really okay with 60+ so EVERY team gets post season play? I'm not.

60 sounds good to me.
How many bowl games do you think there should be? As recently as 1996 there were only 18 of them. Is that what you want?

Or should we go back to the 70s when the Big Ten only allowed 1 team to go to a bowl each year? I mean that made going to a bowl "mean something".

25-30 is plenty in my oppinion.

Why should an 0-12 team face a 1-11 team in front of 1,500 fans in a 70,000 seat arena? Are you going to watch it? Hell, are the fans of those teams really gonna watch it?

Who says they have to play at a 70k stadium. They could easily play somewhere like this that holds 20k.

Someone will watch it. The lowest rated bowl game last year drew almost 1.1M viewers. To put that in perspective, the average NBA game on ESPN for the 2014-15 season averaged 1.5M viewers.

Well, when we get to 60+ bowls and nobody is watching, let me know the numbers.

 

[cm husker]

1) that wasn't at all responsive to my very specific question.

Your very specific question is worded so that any answer I give will be met with immediate dissmissal.
Who am i to say who should have won? That's the giant flaw with the BCS, we never got to see who should have been champion because the matchups were typically wrong and only included 2 of 3, 4, or 5 teams. Sometimes it got it right, but that isn't a good system.

I can verbatim say Alabama did not deserve tow in their title over LSU. They didn't even win their division and had an identical record as conference winner Okie State. I'm not interested in debating that game, point is Alabama shouldn't have been there. Neither should have we been there in 2001 against Miami.

You can now make the predictable rebbuttal of "well they won so clearly they deserved it". It's hogwash.

I actually agree that Alabama shouldn't have been there. That could have been fixed with a simple rule that you have to win your conference to be eligible for the NC game.

The problem is, in your playoff world, they are there no matter what. Why is it so much more tragic then for the BCS to seed them #2 despite over an identical record team?

My issue is, people freak about the BCS letting FSU in over Miami in 2000. But again, the one undefeated team that year was Oklahoma and they ended up winning it all. Therefore, no real controversy in the end.

I don't really care how many times KSU got screwed or a non-P5 school didn't get a BCS game. The playoff isn't going to fix those controversies anyway.

P.s. I know you're too young to remember most games and seasons in Husker history, but you lose a lot of credibility when you argue NU shouldn't have been in the NC game in '01.

 

[cm husker]

What number of bowls is too many then? Are we really okay with 60+ so EVERY team gets post season play? I'm not.

60 sounds good to me.
How many bowl games do you think there should be? As recently as 1996 there were only 18 of them. Is that what you want?

Or should we go back to the 70s when the Big Ten only allowed 1 team to go to a bowl each year? I mean that made going to a bowl "mean something".

25-30 is plenty in my oppinion.Why should an 0-12 team face a 1-11 team in front of 1,500 fans in a 70,000 seat arena? Are you going to watch it? Hell, are the fans of those teams really gonna watch it?

If advertisers/corporations are dumb enough to sponsor a game like that, let them do it. If you don't like it, then don't watch it. Obviously they think somebody will watch it. Why begrudge others an opportunity to experience a bowl game? What do you have against those players, band, family members and friends?

See page 1, the negatives far outweigh the bad.
And why should a team that won 0 games go bowling? This is exactly my point from before. If you don't have to actually win X amount of games to go bowling what the hell is the point?

what list on page one? Are you referring to your quotes from a book about the BCS, which have little to do with this?

 

[cm husker]

What number of bowls is too many then? Are we really okay with 60+ so EVERY team gets post season play? I'm not.

60 sounds good to me.
How many bowl games do you think there should be? As recently as 1996 there were only 18 of them. Is that what you want?

Or should we go back to the 70s when the Big Ten only allowed 1 team to go to a bowl each year? I mean that made going to a bowl "mean something".

25-30 is plenty in my oppinion.
Why should an 0-12 team face a 1-11 team in front of 1,500 fans in a 70,000 seat arena? Are you going to watch it? Hell, are the fans of those teams really gonna watch it?

Who says they have to play at a 70k stadium. They could easily play somewhere like this that holds 20k.

Someone will watch it. The lowest rated bowl game last year drew almost 1.1M viewers. To put that in perspective, the average NBA game on ESPN for the 2014-15 season averaged 1.5M viewers.

Excellent points

 

[Redux]

1) that wasn't at all responsive to my very specific question.

Your very specific question is worded so that any answer I give will be met with immediate dissmissal.Who am i to say who should have won? That's the giant flaw with the BCS, we never got to see who should have been champion because the matchups were typically wrong and only included 2 of 3, 4, or 5 teams. Sometimes it got it right, but that isn't a good system.

I can verbatim say Alabama did not deserve tow in their title over LSU. They didn't even win their division and had an identical record as conference winner Okie State. I'm not interested in debating that game, point is Alabama shouldn't have been there. Neither should have we been there in 2001 against Miami.

You can now make the predictable rebbuttal of "well they won so clearly they deserved it". It's hogwash.

I actually agree that Alabama shouldn't have been there. That could have been fixed with a simple rule that you have to win your conference to be eligible for the NC game. The problem is, in your playoff world, they are there no matter what. Why is it so much more tragic then for the BCS to seed them #2 despite over an identical record team?

My issue is, people freak about the BCS letting FSU in over Miami in 2000. But again, the one undefeated team that year was Oklahoma and they ended up winning it all. Therefore, no real controversy in the end.

I don't really care how many times KSU got screwed or a non-P5 school didn't get a BCS game. The playoff isn't going to fix those controversies anyway.

P.s. I know you're too young to remember most games and seasons in Husker history, but you lose a lot of credibility when you argue NU shouldn't have been in the NC game in '01.

Your first point is bunk. How do you know Oklahoma beats FSU? You don't because they didn't play. Exactly why the BCS was a sham. Thanks for proving it.

Nebraska didn't deserve to be in that game, if you think they did you are one of the few I've met. Using your BCS logic, Nebraska proved it by getting embarassed.

 

[Redux]

What number of bowls is too many then? Are we really okay with 60+ so EVERY team gets post season play? I'm not.

60 sounds good to me.
How many bowl games do you think there should be? As recently as 1996 there were only 18 of them. Is that what you want?

Or should we go back to the 70s when the Big Ten only allowed 1 team to go to a bowl each year? I mean that made going to a bowl "mean something".

25-30 is plenty in my oppinion.Why should an 0-12 team face a 1-11 team in front of 1,500 fans in a 70,000 seat arena? Are you going to watch it? Hell, are the fans of those teams really gonna watch it?

If advertisers/corporations are dumb enough to sponsor a game like that, let them do it. If you don't like it, then don't watch it. Obviously they think somebody will watch it. Why begrudge others an opportunity to experience a bowl game? What do you have against those players, band, family members and friends?

See page 1, the negatives far outweigh the bad.And why should a team that won 0 games go bowling? This is exactly my point from before. If you don't have to actually win X amount of games to go bowling what the hell is the point?

what list on page one? Are you referring to your quotes from a book about the BCS, which have little to do with this?

Yes, the ones that outline how it harms the actual university by sending a team. How does it have very little to do with it? Oh, because it actually outlines the issue, got it.

 

[Red Dead Redemption]

What number of bowls is too many then? Are we really okay with 60+ so EVERY team gets post season play? I'm not.

60 sounds good to me.
How many bowl games do you think there should be? As recently as 1996 there were only 18 of them. Is that what you want?

Or should we go back to the 70s when the Big Ten only allowed 1 team to go to a bowl each year? I mean that made going to a bowl "mean something".

25-30 is plenty in my oppinion.Why should an 0-12 team face a 1-11 team in front of 1,500 fans in a 70,000 seat arena? Are you going to watch it? Hell, are the fans of those teams really gonna watch it?

If advertisers/corporations are dumb enough to sponsor a game like that, let them do it. If you don't like it, then don't watch it. Obviously they think somebody will watch it. Why begrudge others an opportunity to experience a bowl game? What do you have against those players, band, family members and friends?

See page 1, the negatives far outweigh the bad.
And why should a team that won 0 games go bowling? This is exactly my point from before. If you don't have to actually win X amount of games to go bowling what the hell is the point?

I'm not arguing for a winless team to go bowling. I'm just saying don't be so elitist.