Page 1 of 2
Is this what finally does it?
Posted:
Mon Dec 19, 2016 2:51 pmby ericdickerson4life
http://www.si.com/nfl/2016/12/19/christ ... g-sun-bowlWill the NCAA have to think about compensation (highly unlikely) or put pressure on the NFL to change its policy as to when a player is able to declare (more likely, but probably not)?
Bowl games are watered down already with WAY too many. Although, what else is there to watch on TV so give me that 6-6 team vs. that 7-5 team on Tuesday afternoon, so why not. But this might be the new trend moving forward. Not just for bowl games but for entire seasons.
Re: Is this what finally does it?
Posted:
Mon Dec 19, 2016 3:24 pmby mrydel
I will preface this by saying I do not condone participation trophies. You should earn what you deserve. But why all the problem with how many bowl games or who plays in them?
With the exception of the playoffs and perhaps 4-6 other bowl games, the bowl games themselves mean nothing. They hopefully make some money for some good causes, provide some fun and appreciation for the players, and every now and then a good game to watch.
Different coaches will approach the lesser bowls with different attitudes. Some are out to win. Some are out to enjoy.
The non participating schools miss out on the extra practice time. I would rather they have every school in a bowl game as long as it serves a charitable purpose. You do not need to watch or go if you do not want to. But no one will remember who wins this years Belk Bowl, or Pin Stripe Bowl. As stated before, only the playoffs and a few others have any type of meaningful implications. Let the players reap some reward for the work they put it. And if they choose not to play because they would rather be in position to earn several millions of dollars. So be it.
Re: Is this what finally does it?
Posted:
Mon Dec 19, 2016 3:35 pmby ericdickerson4life
Actually don't have a problem with bowl games. As you point out it gives extra practice time that is much needed, especially for younger teams. It is also a "reward" for the players and teams for their hardwork and dedication. No problem.
I guess my "IT" that I was referring to in the title has more to do with the way athletes use the sport. Will more sit out of bowl games as to not jeopardize their future? Will they sit out entire seasons? The NCAA will have to see if this is a trend or a one off approach. I think, it won't hurt the product too much if it's just bowl games and especially 2nd, 3rd or 8th tier games. But what if Fournette had decided to sit out the season? Or if they decided they wouldn't play in a New Year's day bowl. That hurts the product on the field. Get enough of those big named athletes doing it and it will affect the perception of the collegiate sport.
Re: Is this what finally does it?
Posted:
Mon Dec 19, 2016 3:46 pmby mrydel
As long as someone is going to pay them millions for in most cases a short lived career, I cannot fault them for sitting out.
Re: Is this what finally does it?
Posted:
Mon Dec 19, 2016 3:53 pmby AusTxPony
Doubtful any would sit out a Nat'l Playoff game, but at some point their futures become more important than the fans enjoyment. I get it. Plus, all these bowl games are rewards for the players who work their a's off for themselves and the fans.
Re: Is this what finally does it?
Posted:
Mon Dec 19, 2016 4:11 pmby No Quarter
Basically I agree with myrdelabout bowls but would take it a couple of steps further. I don't care if a bowl game has a charitable connection although that may appeal to some. My view is that any entity that wants to sponsor a bowl game should be able to do so if they can attract teams with an adequate payout and exposure and venue that people will visit. Team participation should be based on invitations and not the number of games won during the regular season. Bowls that are consistently unattractive because of limited revenue or any other reason wouldl not last.
The governing body can surely find something better to do.
Maybe some "bowls" could even be for teams that don't dress out players whose regular season eligibility is over. Take those players for the party, but let the game be out and out preparation for the next season.
Re: Is this what finally does it?
Posted:
Tue Dec 20, 2016 12:37 pmby PoconoPony
mrydel wrote:I will preface this by saying I do not condone participation trophies. You should earn what you deserve. But why all the problem with how many bowl games or who plays in them?
With the exception of the playoffs and perhaps 4-6 other bowl games, the bowl games themselves mean nothing. They hopefully make some money for some good causes, provide some fun and appreciation for the players, and every now and then a good game to watch.
Different coaches will approach the lesser bowls with different attitudes. Some are out to win. Some are out to enjoy.
The non participating schools miss out on the extra practice time. I would rather they have every school in a bowl game as long as it serves a charitable purpose. You do not need to watch or go if you do not want to. But no one will remember who wins this years Belk Bowl, or Pin Stripe Bowl. As stated before, only the playoffs and a few others have any type of meaningful implications. Let the players reap some reward for the work they put it. And if they choose not to play because they would rather be in position to earn several millions of dollars. So be it.
I generally agree with you on the approach; however, I would like to see the books for the many teams that attend these "lesser" bowls which means all but 5 or 6. Most bowls do not appear to pay enough to cover the cost of participating in the bowl. Hence, the school picks up the difference in the tab which can be hundreds of thousands of dollars depending on distance, cheerleaders, bands...etc. Then the question is who actually picks up the tab and why should football players be rewarded when such is not afforded to the other sports teams.
Re: Is this what finally does it?
Posted:
Tue Dec 20, 2016 1:01 pmby whitwiki
Keep the bowls of you want, but it should not fall on the schools to buy all the tickets to the game. Make the sponsors do that. See how profitable they are then...
Re: Is this what finally does it?
Posted:
Tue Dec 20, 2016 1:29 pmby Stallion
better yet-cut 10 bowls and make bowls bid for preferred dates and times-you could substantially increase bowl revenue-I can't believe this hasn't been done decades ago
Re: Is this what finally does it?
Posted:
Tue Dec 20, 2016 3:52 pmby CA Mustang
No Quarter wrote:Team participation should be based on invitations and not the number of games won during the regular season.
So teams would go regardless of record, as long as they are invited? So we would be seeing Oregon, Michigan State and Note Dame playing this month, because some bowls surely would have invited them before the season began.
Re: Is this what finally does it?
Posted:
Tue Dec 20, 2016 4:56 pmby Charleston Pony
CA Mustang wrote:No Quarter wrote:Team participation should be based on invitations and not the number of games won during the regular season.
So teams would go regardless of record, as long as they are invited? So we would be seeing Oregon, Michigan State and Note Dame playing this month, because some bowls surely would have invited them before the season began.
and that would push the G5 programs to the FCS level because very few would be attractive to whatever bowls continued to exist
Re: Is this what finally does it?
Posted:
Tue Dec 20, 2016 4:59 pmby deucetz
Expanding the playoff race is going to get more top players to play after the season. Hopefully this forcing the NCAA to expand sooner than later. I hope more athletes forgo their bowl, so they can speed up the process.
Re: Is this what finally does it?
Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2016 7:22 amby Insane_Pony_Posse
AusTxPony wrote:Doubtful any would sit out a Nat'l Playoff game.
Should a player that bails on the national playoffs get a
championship ring if his team goes on to win the National Championship?
Is North Texas State really going to a bowl game with a losing record?
According to some of you guys at what point would the cutoff be?
Should a 1-11 team get a bowl birth?
Re: Is this what finally does it?
Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2016 8:11 amby mrydel
Why not. There are only about 40 teams being excluded now, and they are the ones that need the extra time the most. As I mentioned earlier, other than the playoffs and maybe 3 or 4 others, none of the bowls gave any significance. Just let the kids reap some swag and get some extra practice time.
I do agree with what someone else said about it should not cost the school any money. There would need to be good sponsors to foot the bill. If there are not enough sponsors then you would have to stop somewhere.
Re: Is this what finally does it?
Posted:
Wed Dec 21, 2016 8:41 amby Digetydog
mrydel wrote:As long as someone is going to pay them millions for in most cases a short lived career, I cannot fault them for sitting out.
On the one hand, I think the players agreed to accept a scholarship in return for finishing out their career.
On the other hand, every game is an enormous risk. For players who are likely to get drafted, I think they are making the right decision.