[NU Sports] FW: NU alum says PSU deserves Bowl, but not Pitt (& NU)

Wed Nov 30 07:28:40 CST 2011

The bowls exist thanks to TV money, and you can thank ESPN for that (33 of
the 35 bowls are on ESPN networks).  ESPN can do that thanks to its huge
subscriber fees (which we're all more than willing to help pay).
Conferences are also more than willing to sign contracts with new bowls as
they need a place to send as many of their teams as possible (since new
bowls must have agreements to fill both of its spots).  In terms of ticket
sales, the required allotments that the schools must pay for take care of
that; any extra tickets sold are essentially pure profit (for the
"non-profit" entity).  And though there is a lot of complaining the fact is
that there is enough demand (from schools/conferences to send teams there)
and TV (to pay for it) that the system works, even with 35 bowls/70 slots.
As you mentioned, to fund those ticket allotments, there is a bit of
"trickle down" from the BCS bowls, with the shared revenue from the bigger
bowls distributed to other conference members and sometimes used to pay for
those allotments in a lesser bowl.

Is this all the BCS's fault?  No.  I argue that these bowls would exist
with or without the BCS.  I suspect that sentiment is strong to go towards
the idea that was recently floated regarding the BCS that it only determine
the 1 vs. 2 title game and let the other bowls determine their own
participants, much like the "good old days."  If this occurs, I don't see
the lesser bowls going anywhere as long as ESPN sees the TV demand there.
Also, I agree with others that we won't likely see expansion much beyond
the current 35 games as we're already way too close to not having enough
eligible teams.

If you hate all of this, I'd say don't blame it on the BCS but on the bowl
system in general.  It may have tradition but it's also nonsensical,
backwards, and involves way too much politicking.  I just try not to think
about everything behind it all too much and focus on supporting the 'Cats
however I can and also enjoying some games during the holidays.

Jonathan

--
Jonathan Hodges
Contributor, HailToPurple
Web: http://www.hailtopurple.com/jhodges/
Twitter: @hailtopurple
Email: j-hodges at alumni.northwestern.edu

On Wed, Nov 30, 2011 at 1:20 AM, SjT (Stephen J. Truog)
<sjtruog at yahoo.com>wrote:

> >I'm with you though, I like having the option of watching the various
> bowls. This is one case where I say the free market should be free to act.
> If the bowls can't pay for themselves they will disappear and if they can
> pay
> >for themselves they are not hurting anyone.
>
>
> I'm curious as to how many are making money, exactly. Most of them are now
> played in front of half-empty stadiums and garner so-so ratings. They seem
> more like "Welfare Bowls" propped up by the excess that is the B(C)S (which
> itself is propped up by a house of cards covering their dwindling gate and
> low ratings for bowls on a Tuesday night featuring Stanford vs. VaTech or
> some 7-5 Big Least "champ"). So I'm not sure the free market is in effect
> here ... it's a pyramid scheme propped up by the Cartel that is on life
> support largely based on the greatness of the regular season for college
> football.
>
> I do know that I, as a great fan of college football, used to watch just
> about every bowl out there -- or at least some small part of it. Now I
> barely catch snippets of the Big Ten games. I couldn't tell you anything
> about the Cotton or Peach bowl games last year, yet alone the Fight
> Weedwackers Pizza Bowl. It seems there's a new one every year and it seems
> like the quality of teams in the games (including the B(C)S games) gets
> worse each year.
>
> As for whether they're hurting anyone, I guess that depends on your view
> of the B(C)S. :) But for now, they get NU more practice time for next year,
> and the Big Ten at least has good bowl ties and plays top-tier conferences
> to make the matchups have a shot at being worth watching.
>
> GO CATS!!!
> -SjT
>
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> STEPHEN J. TRUOG
> sjtruog at yahoo.com
> GO CATS!!! GEAUX SAINTS!!!
> Super Bowl XLIV Champions!
> ________________________________
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>  From: Jim Leonard <jleonard518 at yahoo.com>
> To:
> Cc: "'nwu-sports at tssi.com'" <nwu-sports at tssi.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 9:54 AM
> Subject: Re: [NU Sports] FW: NU alum says PSU deserves Bowl, but not Pitt
> (& NU)
>
> That's an interesting idea, Mike. What if non-bowl teams could start fall
> camp a week earlier and have 10 extra sessions in pads? I wonder how many
> coaches would pass on a minor bowl game.
>
> I'm with you though, I like having the option of watching the various
> bowls. This is one case where I say the free market should be free to act.
> If the bowls can't pay for themselves they will disappear and if they can
> pay for themselves they are not hurting anyone.
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Mike Nolan <nolan at tssi.com>
> To: "Weinbaum, Willie" <Willie.Weinbaum at espn.com>
> Cc: "'nwu-sports at tssi.com'" <nwu-sports at tssi.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, November 29, 2011 10:46 AM
> Subject: Re: [NU Sports] FW: NU alum says PSU deserves Bowl, but not Pitt
> (& NU)
>
> > http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/11333/1193289-87.stm
>
> Well, if you start with the premise that there are
> 'a ridiculous number of bowls', as he does,
> then concluding that 6-6 teams shouldn't be in bowl
> games is probably not unreasonable.
>
> As long as ESPN and others are willing to shell out
> for TV rights for bowl games, I don't see any meaningful
> shrinkage in the number of games.
>
> With 120 FBS teams, 35 bowl games is probably about as
> many as the current rules can handle without running
> into the risk that there aren't enough bowl-eligible
> teams to fill all the bowls.
>
> Personally, I like bowl games, because each bowl
> has its own story, even the mismatches.  And if
> college football has proven anything, it is that
> you cannot assume the favored team will win.
>
> I do, however, have concerns about the fact that 70
> out of 120 teams get extra practices.  This creates
> 'haves' and 'have nots'.
>
> Perhaps the NCAA should allow ALL 120 FBS teams to
> practice in December, not just the bowl-eligible ones.
> --
> Mike Nolan
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nwu-sports site list
> nwu-sports at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/nwu-sports
> _______________________________________________
> nwu-sports site list
> nwu-sports at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/nwu-sports
> _______________________________________________
> nwu-sports site list
> nwu-sports at tssi.com
> http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/nwu-sports
>