Proposals to End Meaningless, Boring, Poorly Attended Bowl Games

[Couchpotato]

If you've watched any of these silly, minor/obscure bowl games involving teams with mediocre records (6-6, 5-7), you've noticed that in many cases the stadiums have been half empty or worse. A few of them have looked like the stadiums had less than 1/3 of the seats occupied. The TV ratings for those games have been quite low, with several of them attracting fewer than 2 million viewers, and with some of them attracting fewer than 1 million viewers (LINK).

Here are four proposals that would end the mediocre bowl games and would improve the overall quality of the bowl games:

-- Require that a team must have a winning record to be eligible for a bowl game--not just a .500 record, much less a sub-.500 record, but a winning record (7-5, 8-4, etc.).


Most people have zero interest in who wins in a bowl game between a 6-6 team and 7-5 team, or between two 6-6 teams. But, a game between two 7-5 teams, or between a 7-5 team and an 8-4 team, or between an 8-4 team and a 9-3 team, has some appeal.

So you're proposing cancelling a decent number of bowl games then. There wouldnt be enough teams to fill the slots for the bowls.

-- Prohibit players from opting out of bowl games.

How? The players aren't under contract. They aren't being paid to play.

-- If a bowl game draws fewer than 1 million viewers for two years in a row, cancel it.

I dont think the NCAA is going to cancel a bowl game that sponsors are willing to throw money at. Why would they?

-- If a bowl game does not fill at least 50% of the seats in the stadium for two years in a row, cancel it.

See above. The NCAA makes it's money from the TV deals (not tied to viewership) and sponsorships (not tied to fan attendance). Im guessing the NCAA couldnt care less if anyone shows up to these games or watches them on TV so long as the TV deals and sponsorships keep coming in.


The solution to this problem is splitting up the league. 135 schools is far too many. Over 100 of them have zero chance to ever compete for let alone win a National title that's why these "post season" bowl games mean nothing to the fans or the players other than the trip they get to take because of them. Divide it up into 4-5 divisions. Then have post season championships for each division. Top 2-4 teams move up to the higher division each year and a corresponding number move down from the bottom of the upper division. Everyone would theoretically be able to build their programs and eventually win a title in the top division. It would make the regular season as well as the post season far more interesting for everyone involved. The big name schools would never let this happen but it would be great for the fans.

 

[Couchpotato]

I think players opting out is the biggest problem. Take Penn State. The coaches and players are always talking about how much they appreciate the fans. Then they get invited to a bowl game. The fans have to make travel and lodging arrangements at highly inflated prices because of the short notice. Then they have to do those electronic phone tickets which are total bullshit. And then about 3 days before the game, the players (who love the fans so much) start opting out. By game time, 8 or 9 players are out. They wait because if the school doesn't sell out, that bowl will be reluctant to invite them again. So, they rip off their fans (who they love so much) so they can make their team look more desirable to bowl committees. The bottom line is, fans are insulted by their team's exploitation of them. Fuck bowl games. I've been to 40 of them and I'll never go again. TV is fine

Explain to me why a player who's draft eligible (typically who's opting out) would risk career ending injury for a meaningless game? Im sure they do appreciate the fans but not millions of dollars worth of appreciation. If I would have gotten drafted last in the 1st round but got injured and drop just one spot to first in the second round that game costs me almost 3 million dollars. So explain why they should play....

 

[frigidweirdo]

Soccer is 2 minutes of action packed into 1 hour.

And yet is way more popular than football which is 2 hours of advertisements interrupted by some people trying to get brain damage.

 

[wamose]

Explain to me why a player who's draft eligible (typically who's opting out) would risk career ending injury for a meaningless game? Im sure they do appreciate the fans but not millions of dollars worth of appreciation. If I would have gotten drafted last in the 1st round but got injured and drop just one spot to first in the second round that game costs me almost 3 million dollars. So explain why they should play....

I'd rather not try to explain loyalty, commitment and gratitude to you. I don't think you'd get it.

 

[Harry Dresden]

And yet is way more popular than football which is 2 hours of advertisements interrupted by some people trying to get brain damage.

not in this country it isnt yet....

 

[Couchpotato]

I'd rather not try to explain loyalty, commitment and gratitude to you. I don't think you'd get it.

No chance in hell you give up millions of dollars out of loyalty to people you don’t know. And btw it’s a fucking game. It’s entertainment that’s it. Those players don’t owe you shit. They put in the work, time and money in order to get to a point where they can earn life changing money. You are not entitled to anything from them. It’s ludicrous.

 

[Couchpotato]

wamose

You can disagree all you want but you are delusional if you think anyone believes you're potentially giving up millions of dollars to play in a meaningless game so that random fans who wont remember your name next year and certainly wont be cutting you a check if you get hurt wont be disappointed that you didnt play..