CollegeFootballPoll.com Message Board

Anybody else have no clue who to pick this bowl season? I could see a number of scenarios playing out. About half of the bowl games, I have no idea who will win. It's basically a toss-up. I'm forced to put Michigan in the middle of the pack and, judging by their recent performances, I have no idea whether or not they will win. I could easily see Texas coming up with their biggest game of the year, basically at home, against an Oregon team which has had some jekyll and hyde performances. Utah State has a lockdown defense, so will they stifle Jordan Lynch and their 70%-QB-Power offensive scheme? But if they do, can they score enough? Buffalo vs. San Diego State in Boise, Idaho? It's a MAC team who has looked shaky against some of the better competition on the schedule against Rocky Long who has been pretty futile in bowl games. Wisconsin's huge offensive line against South Carolina's athletic defensive front should be a battle for the ages, but I can't pretend to know which one will come out on top there. Michigan State and Stanford should be a 10-7 game, but which team scores 10 is a complete mystery. Boise State is coachless and hasn't looked great against good teams playing a reeling 6-6 Oregon State team with an NFL QB-WR combo who have disappeared against good pass defenses in Hawaii.

No idea . Toughest bowl season I've seen.

Not only are they hard to pick, seems there are a lot of games I will watch and have no real interest in. This is a lame duck year.

The Oregon perspective is that people are pretty pumped up about this game. Many Duck fans use the Bowls as a part of family vacations and have a "been there, done that" attitude about travelling to Los Angeles or Phoenix. San Antonio is a new venue for them and down a bit or not, Texas is still an all time Top 5 football program. We beat them last time we met, in 2000, but our overall record vs. Texas is 1-5, so we have some ground to make up. A victory would also be good for recruiting as we pull quite a few players out of Texas.

Old Ducker wrote:The Oregon perspective is that people are pretty pumped up about this game. Many Duck fans use the Bowls as a part of family vacations and have a "been there, done that" attitude about travelling to Los Angeles or Phoenix. San Antonio is a new venue for them and down a bit or not, Texas is still an all time Top 5 football program. We beat them last time we met, in 2000, but our overall record vs. Texas is 1-5, so we have some ground to make up. A victory would also be good for recruiting as we pull quite a few players out of Texas.

That's going to be what is missed when the bowls go away. The fans vacation, the chance to open up new recruiting relationships and above all, the chance to play a postseason game.

I didn't make mention of the Las Vegas Bowl pitting Fresno State against USC. Fresno's defense is extremely weak and should be exploited, but with Orgeron stepping down before the bowl game, it's a complete mystery as to which USC team can show up. The Liberty Bowl is also one that I couldn't put a lot of points on. I'm going with Rice just because they are multi-faceted offensively, but talent-wise I'd give a slight edge to the Bulldogs who did suffer through a pretty tough schedule.

I switched my 1 pointer to Middle Tennessee. I originally had Navy, but I'm having a gut feeling about the Blue Raiders in this one. They're on a winning streak and C-USA teams tend to not get the benefit of the doubt and lately they've been outperforming expectations in bowl season. They should at least score against Navy. That, and after getting snubbed at 8-4 a year ago, they ought to be pumped up for this one. MTSU does have a poor rushing defense, however.

I'm feeling Virginia Tech in an upset over UCLA. No particular reason, just that Beamer has done well in bowl games (excluding a couple BCS losses). Logan Thomas can be pretty brutal, but VT still has one of the top defensive units in the nation which should keep them in the game. Weather could play a factor as El Paso seems to have a tendency to get kind of windy this time of year. If the weather wasn't ideal, I would figure that would play into Virginia Tech's strength.

donovan wrote:Not only are they hard to pick, seems there are a lot of games I will watch and have no real interest in. This is a lame duck year.

Unfortunately, that was my main reaction when the bowl pairings were leaking out to the press. A lot of uninteresting games between teams that either were expected to win 6, 7, or 8 games and not win the big ones or against teams with disappointing seasons. Head-coachless teams can always act as sort of a buzzkill and you never know exactly how they'll respond, but that happens every year. As a college football obsessee, I use "uninteresting" in a relative context, but you know what I mean

There's no real surprising team that you might be excited to see either, as in a team that shouldn't have gotten to the postseason but had a shockingly successful year. Tulane and Duke were probably the biggest surprises of the entire college football season as far as records go, although Auburn should certainly be in that discussion. Tulane though is a marginally-talented team that has looked spotty at times throughout the year and Duke has a big mismatch on their hands. The Dukies should be able to score, but I'm feeling A&M by about 20 in this one. I'm still taking ULL even with the two mediocre losses to close out the year which mostly happened due to the fact that Broadway was injured and they were starting a freshman backup. Broadway is still a little iffy for the bowl game, but I think he's likely on pace to play in it.

Spence wrote:

Old Ducker wrote:The Oregon perspective is that people are pretty pumped up about this game. Many Duck fans use the Bowls as a part of family vacations and have a "been there, done that" attitude about travelling to Los Angeles or Phoenix. San Antonio is a new venue for them and down a bit or not, Texas is still an all time Top 5 football program. We beat them last time we met, in 2000, but our overall record vs. Texas is 1-5, so we have some ground to make up. A victory would also be good for recruiting as we pull quite a few players out of Texas.

That's going to be what is missed when the bowls go away. The fans vacation, the chance to open up new recruiting relationships and above all, the chance to play a postseason game.

The bowls are not going away, unless it gets to at least a 32 team playoff, and I don't think that will happen.

We will see. I think they will go away at 16 team. I don't see 32 ever working. I think TV's goal with playoffs has always been the elimination of the bowls that they lose a ton of money on. The playoff games will cost more and more for the TV rights under competitive bids and the bowls won't be able to survive. That is how I see it anyway.

I think at first you will see a few of the really less popular bowls go away. Most people will agree they didn't need those because most now think there are too many. Then when they start ponying up more money for the playoffs, they will eliminate more and more until they are gone. The playoffs games are the only games TV is going to want to invest in.

It will take a while though ... espn shelled out a ridiculous amount for exclusive rights to the 3 game playoff we'll be subjugated to for several years.

Maybe they complain enough to get more games.

But as it stands, they locked themselves into a long haul for an absurd figure.

.

.

.

Cane from the Bend wrote:It will take a while though ... espn shelled out a ridiculous amount for exclusive rights to the 3 game playoff we'll be subjugated to for several years.

Maybe they complain enough to get more games.

But as it stands, they locked themselves into a long haul for an absurd figure.

.

.

.

Yes, I think that was with full intentions on amending it with more games.

Presently, the deal stands as: $470 million a year, for 12 years, to cover 3 games (starting next year's post season)

They may get what they want ... 16 teams will not be hard for them to achieve; especially when the upper ranks of football go on to split divisions with the smaller conferences.

The talk has already begun ... and with another year to make excuses for themselves; they will have the opportunity to make that separation happen.

It may be a bad move overall, though.

Big football is prosperous because of the depth it offers us.
Remove the smaller schools and the choices become limited.

There are still a lot of tickets sold at non BCS venues, because these teams have a Div I status.
Once that goes away, you're going to lose a bunch of home revenue ... and many TV viewers.

If ties are severed; they may not be able to thread them back together when things go sour ... and they will.

.

.

.

I think they will eventually expand the field with the "mega conference" route, maybe merging the non-BCSers with the top teams in the FCS and either giving them their low-key bowl games or a playoff system of their own.

That could happen . . . but it won't be a bowl system . . . and they'll receive smaller broadcasr revenue; because it will not be commonly televised.

.

.

.

Bowls have already gone away. Just because you have a post season game and call it a bowl does not make it a bowl by the original definition.

The days of exhibition bowl games are coming to a close IMO.