• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

Corporate Ruin of New Year's Football

Redleg

Red Shirt
5 Year Member
I found the NYD bowls ( and a few near NYD) very entertaining to watch regardless of who played and who opted out. They might be meaningless but the "intrigue" of which SEC team would win it all was meaningless to me as well.
 
Last edited:

Quality Czech

Recruit
15 Year Member
I'm gonna disagree with this take. The product we have today is still corporate driven. The fans wanted a playoff, but that's not what we received. What we have now is an invitational designed to maximize profits. I said this in another post, but a playoff implies there's some sort of guaranteed access. Unfortunately, we haven't gotten away from polls declaring the National champion, because polls are used to decide who gets to play for the National championship. The only guarantee a team has to be in the CFP is to be ranked high enough at the end of the season. What we have here is the classic case of the powers-that-be trying to please two different camps at the same time. That type of thinking never works over the long run.

Assuming the FBS level joins every other collegiate sport in every other division and creates a true playoff with automatic berths, I think we'll look back on the CFP as a huge and greedy disaster. It didn't really change all that much from what we had previously, it just amplified the problem of relying on polls and public opinion.

With all that said, if a true playoff never happens, then I'm all for going back to the old days, tie conferences into specific bowl games, let those bowl games negotiate TV deals on their own, and create old-school New Year's Day drama again.
Love, love, LOVE this take!

The CFP does NOTHING for college football, but a LOT for ESPN and their interests (cough SEC cough).

If you can’t have a real playoff, then go back to independent bowl games - the more, the better - and let college football return to its traditional amateur roots...
 

Porkchopexpress

Junior Varsity
10 Year Member
Love, love, LOVE this take!

The CFP does NOTHING for college football, but a LOT for ESPN and their interests (cough SEC cough).

If you can’t have a real playoff, then go back to independent bowl games - the more, the better - and let college football return to its traditional amateur roots...
The CFP really is the worst of both worlds. It's neutered the most prestigious bowl games, and made a mockery of what a true playoff should be. Meanwhile, ESPN (Disney) is in the corner laughing so hard that they use $100 bills to wipe away the tears.
 

KSBV

Recruit
2 Year Member
The guy started his article by calling it the "tee-vee" which made me instantly think he was an out-of-touch 90 year old man.

Football is still very enjoyable to watch. If a kid wants to skip out on a meaningless bowl game, than go ahead and let him. It's a chance for the backup to shine. And truthfully, we have too many bowls as-is. I would rather see us either embrace a full playoff system like the NFL (and the losers stay home) or just go back to having like 10-15 bowl games that actually mean something. Right now, we're in the squishy middle with 40+ bowls featuring 0.500 MAC teams playing against the 9th best team from the Big XII or ACC. It's just stupid.

Either give us real playoffs or go back to a day full of Oklahoma-Penn State and Florida-USC exhibition style bowls.
Back in 1967 and 1968, the Huskers went 6-4, but went to a bowl game neither year. In those days there were a lot fewer bowls. As I recall, the only bowls were: Rose, Cotton, Orange, Sugar, Sun, Liberty, Gator, and Blue Bonnet. There may have been 1 or 2 more, but that was it.
 

solesrfr

Pura Vida!
5 Year Member
I don't know, I enjoyed the bowl games this year and on NYD the same as every year since the 70's. Even better now that there is more bowls. Really nothing has changed other than the name that precedes the bowl name. Guess I just don't see what all the angst is about, OSU vs Utah was just as fun of a Rose Bowl to watch as the 1990 USC Michigan Rose Bowl.



C
 

70county

Red Shirt
15 Year Member
I’m sorry but I totally disagree that this is corporate driven. The CFP has been fan driven from day 1. The demand to get away from polls declaring champions was unilaterally identified as the number 1 problem with college football. The commen solution was to take the best two teams after the bowl game and let them playoff. The fans demanded four teams and got it. Now we want 8 or 16. We are our own worst enemy.

I could not agree more. We are reaping what we sowed.

The problem with "mob rule" so to speak.

I think you're spot on.
The desire for the corporate dollar from advertising is why the sec has been singled out and pushed so hard that it’s the only conference espn has to worry about…job complete. This has nothing to do with what fans wanted, it’s what the fans got.
 

Husker In Oklahoma

All American
15 Year Member
I don't know, I enjoyed the bowl games this year and on NYD the same as every year since the 70's. Even better now that there is more bowls. Really nothing has changed other than the name that precedes the bowl name. Guess I just don't see what all the angst is about, OSU vs Utah was just as fun of a Rose Bowl to watch as the 1990 USC Michigan Rose Bowl.



C
Maybe so, but back then, there was usually something to play for, depending on what happened earlier, and later in the day. Utah/Ohio State were playing for nothing.
 

solesrfr

Pura Vida!
5 Year Member
Maybe so, but back then, there was usually something to play for, depending on what happened earlier, and later in the day. Utah/Ohio State were playing for nothing.

Outside of only one or maybe two bowl games it was always that way. So all other bowls were playing for nothing then too, no more than two or three teams had a shot at the NC on any given year.

If the Rose bowl was not hosting a #1 or #2 ranked team it was no different than this year, they were only playing for the Rose Bowl Championship.



C
 

Beerchamp

Recruit
2 Year Member
The problem with "mob rule" so to speak.

I think you're spot on.
I'm gonna disagree with this take. The product we have today is still corporate driven. The fans wanted a playoff, but that's not what we received. What we have now is an invitational designed to maximize profits. I said this in another post, but a playoff implies there's some sort of guaranteed access. Unfortunately, we haven't gotten away from polls declaring the National champion, because polls are used to decide who gets to play for the National championship. The only guarantee a team has to be in the CFP is to be ranked high enough at the end of the season. What we have here is the classic case of the powers-that-be trying to please two different camps at the same time. That type of thinking never works over the long run.

Assuming the FBS level joins every other collegiate sport in every other division and creates a true playoff with automatic berths, I think we'll look back on the CFP as a huge and greedy disaster. It didn't really change all that much from what we had previously, it just amplified the problem of relying on polls and public opinion.

With all that said, if a true playoff never happens, then I'm all for going back to the old days, tie conferences into specific bowl games, let those bowl games negotiate TV deals on their own, and create old-school New Year's Day drama again.
Whom do you think would have been declared this years National Champion, Alabama or Georgia?
 

jmatlock

calling all pals....pals
10 Year Member
Back in 1967 and 1968, the Huskers went 6-4, but went to a bowl game neither year. In those days there were a lot fewer bowls. As I recall, the only bowls were: Rose, Cotton, Orange, Sugar, Sun, Liberty, Gator, and Blue Bonnet. There may have been 1 or 2 more, but that was it.
What’s worse pal a 6-4 husker team missing a bowl or a husker team unable to qualify for one of 43 bowls?
 

Quality Czech

Recruit
15 Year Member
I don't know, I enjoyed the bowl games this year and on NYD the same as every year since the 70's. Even better now that there is more bowls. Really nothing has changed other than the name that precedes the bowl name. Guess I just don't see what all the angst is about, OSU vs Utah was just as fun of a Rose Bowl to watch as the 1990 USC Michigan Rose Bowl.



C
Agree 100%. Nothing wrong with watching two teams playing for pride/bragging rights. I watched as much of every non-CFP bowl game I possibly could. My wife watched with me and was equally entertained by the games.
 

Husker In Oklahoma

All American
15 Year Member
Outside of only one or maybe two bowl games it was always that way. So all other bowls were playing for nothing then too, no more than two or three teams had a shot at the NC on any given year.

If the Rose bowl was not hosting a #1 or #2 ranked team it was no different than this year, they were only playing for the Rose Bowl Championship.



C
Not how I recall it. I remember several New Year’s Day games where as many as 4-5 different teams could win it if things fell right. Sometimes, they did.
 
Top