After a review of the bowl system this spring, college leaders say there are no plans to add any new bowl games while also keeping the eligibility standard of a 6–6 record, bowl executives were told at their annual conference this week in Nashville.https://t.co/jvlcGNaINL

— Ross Dellenger (@RossDellenger) April 20, 2023

What a shame. I think we could use a couple more meaningless bowls between a 6-6 team and a 5-7 team (because there are no 6-6 or better teams left) that would be attended by 12K fans and watched by almost nobody on TV.

It's over saturated. Should eliminate at least six bowls.

Sadly, I watch parts of every single bowl game and I STILL think they should require 7 wins to make a bowl and thus, have less bowl games.

Losing a bowl game and having a 6-7 record just leaves a sour taste in our mouth, yes?

I try to watch every bowl game just because I love watching college football no matter who is playing, but so many of them are bad games and I only watch for a while. We don't need more.

Just like we don't need more teams in the basketball tournament. I have seen different things talking about how some of the pro sports leagues have 50% of their teams make the playoffs but college football or basketball have small percentages but those teams are at least competitive with each other. the vast majority of 14, 15 and 16 seeds are not competitive and it would get worse if even more are added.

I'm not opposed to raising standards to 7-5. Makes more sense. 6-6 can fill a down year.

But… a bad bowl still draws more eyeballs than basic programming and many random pro sports matchups. ESPN wants the bowls so they make more bowls

Make EVERY team in FBS bowl-eligible. Call the new ones "Participation Bowls" and every team gets a trophy.

And Jill Biden will insist that every team is invited to the White House.

It's only fair.

Might as well also invite all March madness participants for men and women. At that rate Doc Jill will be shaking college athletes hands all day every day

In college football, expanding the number of bowl games may result in more games that are less competitive, and the appeal of a bowl season may be diminished if many games feature teams with lower rankings and records. Similarly, in college basketball, expansion of the tournament may result in more first-round games that will be less competitive and will not provide the excitement and drama that fans enjoy in the current format. But we still frequent online casinos to play, and recently I found information on https://casinosanalyzer.com/online-casinos/punt.casino and I'm eager to check out this casino in action. Balancing inclusivity with maintaining the overall quality of the competition is a challenge for sports organisers. Whilst expanding the field may provide more opportunities for teams and players, it is important to consider how this may affect the integrity and exciting nature of the competition. Many fans value the high stakes and competitive spirit of postseason play, and over-expanding the field can dilute this.

BearlyBeloved said:

---

Make EVERY team in FBS bowl-eligible. Call the new ones "Participation Bowls" and every team gets a trophy.

And Jill Biden will insist that every team is invited to the White House.

It's only fair.

---

Do you have to once again bring politics into the picture??? It doesn't add anything to the football board. We already have a board for that junk.

I'm just glad there is now a "Pop Tart Bowl."

Without fail every bowl season,

6-6 teams playing in the Dollar Genral Bowl in Mobile, AL

ESPN shows teams at Childrens hospital in Mobile.

ESPN announcer immediately says - "TELL ME there are too many bowl games!! That right there is what it's all about!!!"

If you think there are too many bowl games, you hate sick children.

Many times sports overlap into other areas, including culture, politics, finances, etc. That doesn't mean those things are not a part of sports or that the overlap should be off-limits.

xzmooel said:

---

In college football, expanding the number of bowl games could potentially lead to more games that are not as competitive, and the appeal of the bowl season could diminish if many of the games feature teams with lower rankings and records. Similarly, in college basketball, expanding the tournament could lead to more early-round matchups that are less competitive and may not provide the excitement and drama that fans enjoy in the current format.

The balance between inclusivity and maintaining the overall quality of competition is a challenging one for sports organizers. While expanding the field can provide more opportunities for teams and players, it's important to consider how it might impact the integrity and excitement of the events. Many fans appreciate the high stakes and competitiveness of postseason play, and expanding too much could potentially dilute that.

---

No that's not it. ESPN crunched the numbers & decided the expense of new games outweighed the profits. So, no new games.

cowboycwr said:

---

I try to watch every bowl game just because I love watching college football no matter who is playing, but so many of them are bad games and I only watch for a while. We don't need more.

Just like we don't need more teams in the basketball tournament. I have seen different things talking about how some of the pro sports leagues have 50% of their teams make the playoffs but college football or basketball have small percentages but those teams are at least competitive with each other. the vast majority of 14, 15 and 16 seeds are not competitive and it would get worse if even more are added.

---

March Madness gets it right. 64+4 with some Cinderellas