NCAA Fixing Bowl System

[TeamRamRod1]

The Division I Council solidified the process for placing eligible teams into bowl games for the 2016-17 season during its Wednesday meeting in Indianapolis.

The Council determined that all bowl-eligible teams with 6-6 records must be selected for a bowl game before any teams with a 5-7 record can be considered.

After all bowl-eligible teams are selected, the 5-7 teams – which will be considered alternates – will be deemed eligible in descending order from the highest multiyear Academic Progress Rate in the Football Bowl Subdivision for the most recent reporting year. Those teams will then select the bowl in which they will participate.

If two or more teams have a tie in the multiyear APR, then the highest APR for the most recent single year will break the tie. This process will continue until all the bowl slots are filled.

The Division I Football Oversight Committee studied the issue and made the recommendation to the Council.

“It’s impossible to project how many eligible bowl teams we will have,” said Bob Bowlsby, chair of the football oversight committee and commissioner of the Big 12 Conference. “We think we have a selection process in the postseason that makes sense and is fair to the schools and the bowls.”

Last season, only 77 teams were eligible for the 80 bowl slots by the established criteria. The remaining three slots were filled by 5-7 teams. Those alternate teams (University of Nebraska, Lincoln; University of Minnesota, Twin Cities; and San Jose State University) were selected by the bowls in which they appeared.

In April, the Council placed a moratorium on the certification of new bowl games. No new bowl games will be played before the 2020 football season.

The new process will be effective for the 2016-17 bowl season.

http://www.ncaa.com/news/football/a...otball-council-adjusts-bowl-selection-process

 

[DocTwo]

The best fix would be to get rid of at least half of them.

If you don't have at least a.500 conference record and a winning overall record, you don't belong in a bowl.

 

[matthew.monroedc]

We've only finished with a 500 record or better in conference twice since 1996 and only 4 times since 86. It's gotten even harder to do so since we moved to a round robin schedule. We may never get back to a bowl if that happened

 

[DocTwo]

We've only finished with a 500 record or better in conference twice since 1996 and only 4 times since 86. It's gotten even harder to do so since we moved to a round robin schedule. We may never get back to a bowl if that happened

Neither will a bunch of other schools. That's the whole idea. Make it an accomplishment, earned on the field, not by scheduling.

If the NCAA basketball tournament worked like the bowls do, you'd have 180 teams in the tourney.

Bowls for teams that finish at or below .500 are the equivalent of participation trophies.

 

[Bleedblue&red]

6 or more wins should make you eligible if you our a Division 1 team.

 

[rasta_meta]

Neither will a bunch of other schools. That's the whole idea. Make it an accomplishment, earned on the field, not by scheduling.

If the NCAA basketball tournament worked like the bowls do, you'd have 180 teams in the tourney.

Bowls for teams that finish at or below .500 are the equivalent of participation trophies.

Yep. I remember one year under Mason we finished 7-4 and still didn't get into a bowl because there weren't that many of them.

 

[DocTwo]

Yep. I remember one year under Mason we finished 7-4 and still didn't get into a bowl because there weren't that many of them.

We finished 6-5 under Mase twice (1991 and 1994) and didn't get in, but we did get in at 7-4 in 1992. No other 7-4 records under Mase.

 

[rasta_meta]

We finished 6-5 under Mase twice (1991 and 1994) and didn't get in, but we did get in at 7-4 in 1992. No other 7-4 records under Mase.

Well shit. My memory must be going.

Maybe it is because I thought we were going to win 7 games in one of those 6-5 seasons and lost the last game and I haven't let it go in my mind.

 

[rolliss]

We've only finished with a 500 record or better in conference twice since 1996 and only 4 times since 86. It's gotten even harder to do so since we moved to a round robin schedule. We may never get back to a bowl if that happened

But if we do, what have we accomplished other than to gain a month of practice? That's the KSU way because they never win their bowl game. It gives us coach potatoes a pile of football games to watch which I love. But I don't think it's good for football. Like someone posted above, they have become participation trophy's.

 

[TeamRamRod1]

may be participation trophies if you will but we're not in a spot to be all about the principle.

 

[matthew.monroedc]

I don't really agree, selling going to bowl games is a big part of building a program and climbing up the ladder, especially in a power five conference. There is hardly any REAL parity is CFB as it is now and giving the best 40-50 teams an extra month of practice would only help those teams that have won consistently for decades. I would love to see the scholarship numbers reduced to 75-80. Some actual parity nationally would be good for the sport and reduce the burden with title nine on some of the leagues that can't pay out 30 million a year

 

[swcjhawk]

Bowl games are great, I probably watch about 70% of them and love that first Saturday full of bowl games of teams I'm not familiar with. Despite the participation trophy comments from a couple of geezers on here, going .500 in CFB is an accomplishment...just look how tough it's been for KU for basically the last half century.

 

[rolliss]

Bowl games are great, I probably watch about 70% of them and love that first Saturday full of bowl games of teams I'm not familiar with. Despite the participation trophy comments from a couple of geezers on here, going .500 in CFB is an accomplishment...just look how tough it's been for KU for basically the last half century.

Just because KU hasn't been to many bowls doesn't mean it's a big accomplishment for a school to get to a game as a .500 team. It's just a big accomplishment for KU to do it. The guy down the road showed the way. Just schedule a bunch of total patsies in the non con part of the season and learn how to go 3-6 in conference play. Boom. Six and 6 and your in.

 

[jameshawk67]

I love bowl games. Watch pretty much all of them. If KU was 5-7 and made a bowl game, my butt would be traveling to the game even if it was on Christmas Day in Fairbanks Alaska.

 

[TeamRamRod1]

I love bowl games. Watch pretty much all of them. If KU was 5-7 and made a bowl game, my butt would be traveling to the game even if it was on Christmas Day in Fairbanks Alaska.

Tim Horton's Johnny Horton North To Alaska Bowl

 

[DocTwo]

Well shit. My memory must be going.

Maybe it is because I thought we were going to win 7 games in one of those 6-5 seasons and lost the last game and I haven't let it go in my mind.

LOL, nope. In 1991 and 1994 when we went 6-5, we beat MU to finish both seasons.

 

[DocTwo]

Bowl games are great, I probably watch about 70% of them and love that first Saturday full of bowl games of teams I'm not familiar with. Despite the participation trophy comments from a couple of geezers on here, going .500 in CFB is an accomplishment...just look how tough it's been for KU for basically the last half century.

It's not an accomplishment when over half of the D1A teams do it. And many of them do it by beating up on 1AA schools.

 

[MusicCityJayhawk]

I have always thought that American Standard should sponsor the Toilet Bowl, pitting the two worst teams against eachother.

I don't care who is in the game, it would be interesting to watch.

Now, before you say it, I know it will never happen for 1000 different reasons. I am just saying I would love to watch it.

 

[OtisLivingston]

It's not an accomplishment when over half of the D1A teams do it. And many of them do it by beating up on 1AA schools.

It's an accomplishment for our program.

 

[BillyBuoy]

DocTwo,
I agree that doing what 50% of what all other D1 FB teams do doesn't sound that spectacular. But when your favorite FB team hasn't been able to play that well consistently for quite sometime, it's a definite step up / improvement from below that mark. It's a lot about perspective of where you are now. The latter Mangino years were definitely a lot more fun, a lot more hope going into a season. Shoot, we expected to beat KSU.

So I think a lot of us KU FB fans currently aspire to that goal, of having a non-spectacular 6-6 record. Bring on the 1AA schools for a while. Now OU fans would be firing their coach for that. Texas did.

I agree with Otis. It's an accomplishment for KUFB to gain respectability. Personally, I'd be very happy to have KU FB be bowl eligible every year. Then undoubtedly I'd get greedy and hope for regular forays into post season with an 8-4 or 9-3 record, or even better. So for us near the D1 FB bottom, a 6-6 record sounds pretty good, at the moment.

 

[RMHawk]

The best fix would be to get rid of at least half of them.

If you don't have at least a.500 conference record and a winning overall record, you don't belong in a bowl.

Totally agree. For all of them after 10 or so should be labled what they are "The (fill in the sponsor) Reward for Mediocrity Bowl".

 

[JKPHawk]

I agree that it's a little ridiculous how many there are, but any football fan can tell the difference in prestige between the bowls. It's great for the fans who want to watch their team one more time in a (usually) interesting place.