Online Now 986

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

On this Board 713
Record: 4947 (7/23/2012)

Online now 1060
Record: 7381 (3/13/2012)

Boards ▾

The Lions' Pride

Black shoes, basic blues. No names, all game

Ticket Exchange

Buy, sell and swap tickets

Reply

Each of the bowls so far that I have seen

  • ... have been absolutely empty. Saying they've been sparse would be a gross overstatement.

    Who can support bowls like this? Who cares if kids don't get the experience of playing in front of 10,000 people? They really need to get rid of some of these crap bowls.

    signature image

    psubills62 ●

  • I don't know if they should get rid of them as much as they should relocate some of them.

    Maybe some of these should be played on a college campus with a true home team.

    If winning was easy even losers would do it.

    Lang06

  • I think 8 wins minimum for a bowl game... and cut the bowls in about half... It sucks watching so many bad teams.... and all games are run from December 29-Jan 3rd. Also keep the original names... Citrus Bowl and Peach Bowl will never die!!!!!

    signature image signature image signature image

    PENN STATE FOREVER

    philafan

  • Lang06 said...

    I don't know if they should get rid of them as much as they should relocate some of them.

    Maybe some of these should be played on a college campus with a true home team.

    I completely agree with the second part of this statement. A lot of the schools playing now have small fan bases, add on top of that the bad economy, and that equals empty seats.

    I heard that all of the bowls are having trouble selling tickets (Besides Rose, NC, Sugar, Fiesta) The Orange Bowl is having issues as well

    signature image signature image signature image

    Psu2011

  • Not 100%, but I think the Orange has a recent history of being a tough sell ... Considering the Big East/ACC tie in and Florida state/Miami sucking lately.

    Either way if the bowl game was played at oenn state I think 100k would be there ... Split the revenue sponsor the hell out of it and call it a day.

    If winning was easy even losers would do it.

    Lang06

  • The bottom line is that bowls are played out. In a playoff world, America doesn't care as much about consolation games anymore.

    signature image signature image signature image

    tdiddy

  • Someone on Twitter mentioned that the Texas state championship had a higher attendance than any bowl thus far (around 43k, I think)

    blerms

  • 8 wins is a good standard IMHO. If they keep it to actually good teams there will be much bigger interest. The big time bowls still have good attendance.

    Zackattack7

  • psubills62 said...

    ... have been absolutely empty. Saying they've been sparse would be a gross overstatement.

    Who can support bowls like this? Who cares if kids don't get the experience of playing in front of 10,000 people? They really need to get rid of some of these crap bowls.

    Check out the "crowd" at the Independence Bowl today (NC vs. Mizzou). Nobody's there! Never seen anything like it, except at Pitt.

    sinking

    Rain seems to have kept a few people away.

    Rain seems to have kept a few people away. http://yfrog.com/nzor7alj

    yfrog.com

    PennSt8er

  • philafan said...

    I think 8 wins minimum for a bowl game... and cut the bowls in about half... It sucks watching so many bad teams.... and all games are run from December 29-Jan 3rd. Also keep the original names... Citrus Bowl and Peach Bowl will never die!!!!!

    Uhhh $$$$$$$$$$$$$.

    They make a LOT more money for people watching the games than from people attending them. The minimum wins will never go up and the # of bowls will only go up.

    beck881psu ●

  • bmorepsu said...

    Uhhh $$$$$$$$$$$$$.

    They make a LOT more money for people watching the games than from people attending them. The minimum wins will never go up and the # of bowls will only go up.

    I think they've maxed out the # of bowls at this point. Unless they want 5 win teams to be eligible. I think there's been maybe one eligible team the last two years that hasn't attended a bowl.

    signature image

    psubills62 ●

  • Lang06 said...

    I don't know if they should get rid of them as much as they should relocate some of them.

    Maybe some of these should be played on a college campus with a true home team.

    Most of these teams haven't earned a bowl trip. Since when do teams deserve to be rewarded for going 0.500, especially when most likely one of those wins was against an FCS team?

    signature image

    psubills62 ●

  • psubills62 said...

    I think they've maxed out the # of bowls at this point. Unless they want 5 win teams to be eligible. I think there's been maybe one eligible team the last two years that hasn't attended a bowl.

    I'm sure you're right. Mathematically, that makes sense going by the # of teams in FBS and the # of bowl games. I should have said that the number of bowls won't decrease. They're obviously making big advertising dollars from each game.

    beck881psu ●

  • bmorepsu said...

    I'm sure you're right. Mathematically, that makes sense going by the # of teams in FBS and the # of bowl games. I should have said that the number of bowls won't decrease. They're obviously making big advertising dollars from each game.

    I will say that I forgot USC had a bowl ban the last two years, so I guess usually 2 teams are left out. Though with the way things are going, I have to believe there will always be at least one team with a bowl ban per year.

    signature image

    psubills62 ●

  • I believe the only eligible team left out in the past two years was Temple, believe it or not.. Also, UCLA is playing in the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl with a record of 6-7 no

    signature image signature image signature image

    Psu2011

  • Psu2011 said...

    I believe the only eligible team left out in the past two years was Temple, believe it or not.. Also, UCLA is playing in the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl with a record of 6-7 no

    Well they made the PAC-12 championship game ... They were one win away from going to Pasedena.

    Haha, I wish I was kidding.

    If winning was easy even losers would do it.

    Lang06

  • I'm in the boat that thinks they need to do away with some of these "lesser" bowl games and only have about 20 or so at the most. There's no need to have 30+ bowl games where nearly half of all the Division IA teams can play in the post-season. Don't get me wrong, I love watching football, especially college, but the bowl games being played right now really aren't necessary.

    signature image

    PSUjosh11 ●

  • I would prefer a 32 team playoff system, utilizing all or most current bowl games, that would have a purpose.

    If winning was easy even losers would do it.

    Lang06

  • Lang06 said...

    I would prefer a 32 team playoff system, utilizing all or most current bowl games, that would have a purpose.

    I can agree with that.

    signature image

    PSUjosh11 ●

  • Lang06 said...

    I would prefer a 32 team playoff system, utilizing all or most current bowl games, that would have a purpose.

    A 32 team playoff will never happen. That would add five games at the end of the season for the eventual champion and runner up, which would mean that you would have teams playing 18 or even 19 games (if they play Hawaii and get the additional game). The NCAA wants to keep the total number of games at no more than 15... with some prodding, you may be able to get it to 16, but certainly not 18.

    I think the best system that would make everybody reasonalbly happy is to keep everything the way it is, eliminate the championship game and have the 4 BCS bowl games as the first round of an 8 team playoff. There would be 5 automatic bids (the Big East would lose their's), and 3 at large. The at large teams would be decided strictly by BCS ranking with no conference having more than 2 teams in the playoffs.

    This year's playoff would be as follows:

    1) LSU (SEC Champ)
    2) Oklahoma St. (Big XII Champ)
    3) Oregon (Pac-12 Champ)
    4) Wisconsin (Big Ten Champ)
    5) Clemson (ACC Champ)
    6) Alabama (At Large)
    7) Stanford (At Large)
    8) Boise St. (At Large, Arkansas gets passed over because the SEC already has 2 teams)

    Not too bad... it gives the little guy a chance to shine (Boise St.) but keeps most of the undeserving teams out of the fold (Big East slop). That would only add two additional games at the end of the season instead of 4, which the NCAA would like. The Bowls would be happy because they would be intact, and the conferences would be happy because it means more $$$$$$$$. The only one I really see being unhappy is the Big East, but you can't lose the three best schools in your conference and expect to keep that auto-bid, especially when you were close to losing it anyways.

    getmyjive11

  • getmyjive11 said...

    A 32 team playoff will never happen. That would add five games at the end of the season for the eventual champion and runner up, which would mean that you would have teams playing 18 or even 19 games (if they play Hawaii and get the additional game). The NCAA wants to keep the total number of games at no more than 15... with some prodding, you may be able to get it to 16, but certainly not 18.

    I think the best system that would make everybody reasonalbly happy is to keep everything the way it is, eliminate the championship game and have the 4 BCS bowl games as the first round of an 8 team playoff. There would be 5 automatic bids (the Big East would lose their's), and 3 at large. The at large teams would be decided strictly by BCS ranking with no conference having more than 2 teams in the playoffs.

    This year's playoff would be as follows:

    1) LSU (SEC Champ)
    2) Oklahoma St. (Big XII Champ)
    3) Oregon (Pac-12 Champ)
    4) Wisconsin (Big Ten Champ)
    5) Clemson (ACC Champ)
    6) Alabama (At Large)
    7) Stanford (At Large)
    8) Boise St. (At Large, Arkansas gets passed over because the SEC already has 2 teams)

    Not too bad... it gives the little guy a chance to shine (Boise St.) but keeps most of the undeserving teams out of the fold (Big East slop). That would only add two additional games at the end of the season instead of 4, which the NCAA would like. The Bowls would be happy because they would be intact, and the conferences would be happy because it means more $$$$$$$$. The only one I really see being unhappy is the Big East, but you can't lose the three best schools in your conference and expect to keep that auto-bid, especially when you were close to losing it anyways.

    Maybe teams don't need to play 12 regular season games, 9 is enough.

    If winning was easy even losers would do it.

    Lang06

  • I can't believe the bowls are still using the 6 game win req't, that was based on the old 11 game sked. The new limit should be 7 wins.. You can then eliminate about 5-10 teams, and a couple of terrible bowls. UCLA in a bowl is unbelievable....

    arringfortt11

  • psubills62 said...

    ... have been absolutely empty. Saying they've been sparse would be a gross overstatement.

    Who can support bowls like this?

    You answered your own question -- these bowls are supported by eyeballs like yours on the tv screen. If you don't watch, then advertising dries up and the bowls disappear because bowl sponsors and tv contracts dry up and there is no revenue at all.

    So, you've got no business complaining about it when they exist just for folks like you.

    This post was edited by jetli on 12/27/2011 at 2:44 PM

    jetli

  • Lang06 said...

    Maybe teams don't need to play 12 regular season games, 9 is enough.

    There isn't a school out there that wants less games. Less games = less money. It would never happen in today's college football.

    getmyjive11

  • jetli said...

    You answered your own question -- these bowls are supported by eyeballs like yours on the tv screen. If you don't watch, then advertising dries up and the bowls disappear because bowl sponsors and tv contracts dry up and there is no revenue at all.

    So, you've got no business complaining about it when they exist just for folks like you.

    I have every right to complain. How long do you think I watch them? I've typically only watched for a few minutes, seen camera views of the crowds in some of them and then turned the channel. I don't care about any team that's played so far.

    signature image

    psubills62 ●

Penn State
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports