College Football 2015 Week 13 thread

Exactly. It's the same reason regional sports networks pay hundreds of millions of dollars for baseball broadcast rights.

 

Of all of the things that people grouch about when it comes to sports, in general, and college football, in particular, the number of bowl games is the one that most mystifies me. This is truly one of those times when, if you don't like it, you are free to change the channel.

 

Bowl games I can take or leave, depending on who is playing and the matchups. The only thing that really pisses me off about bowls is that ESPN owns them all.

 

People go out a lot during the bowl season. It's much better to have a football game, any game, on TV at the bar than a holiday special or NCIS rerun.

 

Logically, you are correct. Yet I hate the proliferation.

Propagates the "everybody gets a trophy" mentality? Hatred of ESPN? I can't figure out why I hate so many stupid bowls, but I do.

 

The one thing that irks me about the increasing number of bowl games is I remember when making a bowl used to actually be an accomplishment. Now, all you have to do is win half of your games. But I don't grouch too much about it because it means more college football to watch during the holidays when I'm just sitting on the coach anyway.

 

.500 might not even be required this year -- as of now there are 40 bowls scheduled and only 71 teams with six wins. (Fifteen teams have five wins.) NCAA meeting next week to figure out what to do.

With 40 bowls, NCAA to decide Monday how to fill expected vacancies - CBSSports.com

 

Which "coach" are you sitting on and why??

 

Mark Richt, obviously, so Miami won't take him.

 

Let's have fun with this ... Clemson is the best, obviously. El Cid beat Cocky. Charleston Southern beat El Cid. Charleston Southern also beat Coastal Carolina. Coastal Carolina plays El Cid Saturday in the FCS playoffs. Cocky is probably better than Furple, S.C. State, Presby and Wofford, but that's it.

 

I've often wondered about such.

There are tons of production costs involved with sending an entire broadcast crew to a bowl site and programming the game.

Wouldn't it be cheaper to just rerun a couple of "30 for 30" episodes instead? Are your ratings for the bowl in Shreveport, La., really so much higher than for your "30 for 30s" that the increased ad revenue will more than pay for these production costs? Is airing this bowl game between two 6-6 teams from Podunk markets really a "cash cow" . . . or is it more of an ego thing for the network so they can say they cover everything?

 

Same here. I find it laughable when a mediocre team gets to six wins and starts boasting, "We're bowl eligible again! We'll be going to our third straight bowl game!"

Meanwhile, the games they go to are the Weed Killer Bowl, the Ex-Lax Bowl and the Tidy-Bowl, all of which have existed for about three years. Not exactly three years' worth of Rose, Sugar and Orange.