3 New Bowl Games

[Ryno aka Menace]

According to an article today in USA Today the NCAA will consider applications for three new bowl games later this month.Alas, I can't find a link to pass along --- I actually just read it in the paper. Remember when you had to do that?But the article said the three new games would be the Congressional Bowl, pitting Army or Navy against an ACC team in Washington D.C.; the imaginitavely-titled St. Petersburg Bowl (Big East vs. Conference USA) at Tropicana Field); and the Rocky Mountain Bowl (Mountain West vs. WAC at the University of Utah's stadium).That could bring the number of bowl games to 35 and make it nearly impossible to miss a bowl game as long as a team is qualified --- a .500 record is all that's needed.There were 32 bowl games last year and the article noted that seven bowl-eligible teams were left home and the NCAA will have to take into consideration if there's a danger in sanctioning too many games and running the risk of not having enough qualified teams. The NCAA will begin considering the issue April 29.

[zen]

everyone wants a piece of the pie

[GJGood]

I think we are about maxed out in the number of bowl games if they add three more but I'd like to see some of the tie-ins rearranged or more games open to "at-large" participants. Why don't teams from the West ever play bowl games in the East? If East meets West in the postseason it is almost always either in the west or part of the BCS.I'd love to see the MAC get a tie-in to a bowl game with either the Mountain West or WAC or even a mid-level Pac-10 team. I like to see interegional games and otherwise unlikely matchups in the postseason.

[GoZips88]

I think we are about maxed out in the number of bowl games if they add three more but I'd like to see some of the tie-ins rearranged or more games open to "at-large" participants. Why don't teams from the West ever play bowl games in the East? If East meets West in the postseason it is almost always either in the west or part of the BCS.I'd love to see the MAC get a tie-in to a bowl game with either the Mountain West or WAC or even a mid-level Pac-10 team. I like to see interegional games and otherwise unlikely matchups in the postseason.

Butt$ in $eat$ is my guess regarding West vs. East. Three more bowl games ... right between "Who Gives a Flip" and "Whoop-Tee-Do" in my interest/excitement scale.Silver lining is teams like Akron (ASSUMING a .500 or better achievement) may get a game against a team that wouldn't give them the time of day otherwise. All of the new bowls = a LOT of mediocre po$t-$ea$on football. Sure glad the MAC basketball season gets going about then.

[GJGood]

I think we are about maxed out in the number of bowl games if they add three more but I'd like to see some of the tie-ins rearranged or more games open to "at-large" participants. Why don't teams from the West ever play bowl games in the East? If East meets West in the postseason it is almost always either in the west or part of the BCS.I'd love to see the MAC get a tie-in to a bowl game with either the Mountain West or WAC or even a mid-level Pac-10 team. I like to see interegional games and otherwise unlikely matchups in the postseason.

Butt$ in $eat$ is my guess regarding West vs. East. Three more bowl games ... right between "Who Gives a Flip" and "Whoop-Tee-Do" in my interest/excitement scale.Silver lining is teams like Akron (ASSUMING a .500 or better achievement) may get a game against a team that wouldn't give them the time of day otherwise. All of the new bowls = a LOT of mediocre po$t-$ea$on football. Sure glad the MAC basketball season gets going about then.

I understand what you are saying about the lower tier bowl games, but at the same time you have to acknowledge that very mediocre teams from BCS conferences have going to bowl games for decades. Why not have teams that finish in 3rd in 4th in non-BCS leagues make it to the postseason when team that finish 7th and 8th in BCS leagues do?I also don't see what the games hurt. It is not like we are including mediocre teams in a tournament to determine a national champion or anything it is just a reward for a winning and at least somewhat successful season, not to mention a chance for a program to practice and theoretically improve before the next season. It is really a "win-win" situation, isn't it?The games that excite me the most are the ones that are close. I don't care if its the Fiesta Bowl or the International Bowl. Although, I will admit I do like to see interregional matchups, teams meeting for the first time in their histories, and non-BCS against BCS school type games. Just a quirk of mine I guess.

[Zipsrifle]

Oddly enough, I don't know if I like more bowl games for the MAC schools at this point in time. Right now, a Bowl game is a BIG DEAL for a MAC school, and I for one would like to keep it that way. We all know that MAC schools don't travel well, and making a Bowl game a run of the mill event will just contribute to lack-luster attendance at bowl games and continued bashing of the MAC schools. At this point in time, any team outside of the two teams who play for the MACC won't travel to a bowl game unless it is within a day's drive, just my opinion of MAC fans. This means the MCB or the International Bowl would likely fare well, but a bowl out west wouldn't. The top teams in the confrence may travel better as they are likely wanting to make a splash on the national stage, but the upper-middle MAC teams kinda know they will get thumped. I know if Akron went 7-5 and went to a bowl game in Colorado or something, it would require some thought. But if they went 7-5 and went to Toronto, no brainer!As for the "bad" schools in the BCS confrences going to bowl games, I think we all agree that some changes need to be made before we get away from this. Again money talks and BULL$#!+ walks, and those "Bad" schools still travel well, which is why they go to the bowl games.

[ZachTheZip]

Congressional Bowl and St. Petersburg bowls approvedThe MAC will be the backup for the Congressional bowl for both sides. That means that if both Navy and Army are ineligible, the MAC will play an ACC team, or if the ACC doesn't have a ninth bowl-eligible team (very likely), the MAC will play either Army/Navy or an at-large team.

[Blue & Gold]

Congressional Bowl and St. Petersburg bowls approvedThe MAC will be the backup for the Congressional bowl for both sides. That means that if both Navy and Army are ineligible, the MAC will play an ACC team, or if the ACC doesn't have a ninth bowl-eligible team (very likely), the MAC will play either Army/Navy or an at-large team.

St. Pete is beautiful! I'd be all for that!

[UAZipster0305]

Congressional Bowl and St. Petersburg bowls approvedThe MAC will be the backup for the Congressional bowl for both sides. That means that if both Navy and Army are ineligible, the MAC will play an ACC team, or if the ACC doesn't have a ninth bowl-eligible team (very likely), the MAC will play either Army/Navy or an at-large team.

St. Pete is beautiful! I'd be all for that!

Easy travel from CAK too.How 'bout we dome the Info and have a bowl game in Akron...call it the Rubber Bowl! Hell, forget the dome and bring one of the ACC/SEC teams up here in December to play in our weather!