New bowl selection process for losing teams

[TyBounce]

The new process will use Apr to determine which 5-7 teams will make bowl games. ....and those teams will get to select which bowl they go to rather than the bowl selecting the team.
https://www.seccountry.com/sec/ncaa-alters-bowl-selection-process

 

[rolltide]

of course total stupidity but that's college football for you

a 5-7 Nebraska that will travel 25-35k people will get shut out of a bowl while a 6-6 Akron, traveling 2500, go bowling. just another way for bowls to lose money

 

[RunLeeRun]

It's not a new process, they used the APR last year. They just added and asterisk to not skip any 6-6 teams. I remember Nebraska having the top rating among the remaining pool of teams when they were looking into which sub-500 teams were going to get in. Missouri was 2nd but declined to go bowling, so the next two teams in the APR rankings got in. There weren't even enough 6-6 teams to fill the 80 bowl spots, so nobody got skipped for a 5-7 team (which all three teams won their games). Also, I'm not sure the 5-7 teams get to pick their bowl game any more than any other team does. They get an invite and choose to go or not. Or that's how I read it.

 

[rolltide]

It's not a new process, they used the APR last year. They just added and asterisk to not skip any 6-6 teams. I remember Nebraska having the top rating among the remaining pool of teams when they were looking into which sub-500 teams were going to get in. Missouri was 2nd but declined to go bowling, so the next two teams in the APR rankings got in. There weren't even enough 6-6 teams to fill the 80 bowl spots, so nobody got skipped for a 5-7 team (which all three teams won their games). Also, I'm not sure the 5-7 teams get to pick their bowl game any more than any other team does. They get an invite and choose to go or not. Or that's how I read it.

i guess the difference is that bowls could previously have chosen a 5-7 nebraska over a 6-6 Colorado State but they cannot do this anymore....they must chose UL-Monroe first even despite paying more money for the right to choose the team they want

you are probably right in that it won't impact much ... some 6-6 teams will get left out (like UAB 2014) over another 6-6 team but nothing new there.

bowls pay a dickload of money and should be able to select 5-7 nebraska over 6-6 CSU if they chose to. Last year both Nebraska and Minnesota were chosen ahead of Colorado St and Nevada

if this was in effect last year Nebraska would have had to play Nevada instead of UCLA. the Bruins would have gotten Colorado St in Orlando.

Neb/UCLA put 35k in the stands ... no way UCLA/CSU would have gotten close to that number.

hurts the lower tier bowl's revenues and now it is almost advantageous to be the very worst bowl as you are likely to get a better traveling 5-7 power5 team than you are a pair of shit 6-6 mid-majors.

 

[WinOne]

Problem is we have far too many bowls to begin with. My thoughts are:
1) Lets cut it down to 25 bowl game
2) Teams must have a WINNING record (7-5 or better)
3) Teams must be AT LEAST .500 within their conference

If you schedule 4 cupcakes, and then go 2-6 in your conference to get to 6-6, you should not be rewarded with a bowl.

 

[sdf]

Problem is we have far too many bowls to begin with.

more bowls = more betting opportunities and more college football. IMO having more is not a bad thing, even if the game is Sun Belt quality.

 

[rolltide]

more bowls = more betting opportunities and more college football. IMO having more is not a bad thing, even if the game is Sun Belt quality.

that's what i say

who gives a shit about the "reward" ... it's my last shot at watching college football for 9 months. It's not like decreasing the amount of bowls factors into the national title

Hell i'd be fine if all 128 teams (or whatever the # is for 2016) got selected for a final non-conference game in December

 

[Conan]

I think that many if not most SEC teams with a 5-7 W/L record may never see the light of day with a system that uses academics to rate bowl selectivity.

 

[sdf]

I think that many if not most SEC teams with a 5-7 W/L record may never see the light of day with a system that uses academics to rate bowl selectivity.

SEC has academics?

 

[linebets]

[FONT=&quot]Top 5 FBS conferences ranked by their member schools' average ranking ([/FONT]according to Forbes)

1. BIG TEN Average Ranking: 126

The single biggest reason for the Big Ten's victory is Northwestern, who ranks as the 16th-best institution in the country. Other notable schools include Michigan (41), Illinois (68), Wisconsin (69) and Maryland (93). Nebraska (270) is by far the conference's outlier, as the conference's third-youngest member is only school ranked outside the top 200 (Iowa is 199).

2. ACC Average Ranking: 133

The ACC boasts a nation-high of six schools inside the top 100, led by Duke (22) and followed closely by Virginia (36) and Boston College (37). The conference would see a significant boost in their stock without the inclusion of Louisville (503), who ranks nearly 300 spots worse than their next lowest member, Pittsburgh (212).

3. PAC-12 Average Ranking: 163

Stanford is the highest-ranked FBS program. At No. 3 overall, the institution is the only FBS member ranked inside the top 10. Other Top 100 programs include Cal (35), UCLA (45), USC (71) and Washinton (75) but those are weighed down by five sub-200 rankings, including Arizona State (292), Oregon State (327) and Washington State (363).

4. SEC Average Ranking: 219

Avid SEC haters will be thrilled to see them sitting in fourth place, only ahead of the Big 12, in terms of power conference teams. Two Top 100 institutions are carrying the load, with Vanderbilt (47) and Florida (83) preventing college football's big boys from falling even further down the list. Georgia (102), Texas A&M (150) and LSU (191) sit in the middle of the pack while the likes of Kentucky (319), Ole Miss (332) and Mississippi State (353) round out the bottom.

5. BIG 12 Average Ranking: 277


The Big doesn't boast any Top 50 programs like each of the other five power conferences and Texas (82) is the only program in the Top 100. Baylor is the next closest at 197 but all eight of the other members are below 200, with two being below 400 in Texas Tech (403) and West Virginia (421).

 

[rolltide]

they don't rank based on the Forbes list of academics ... it's goes off the APR which is specific to graduation rate of athletes. has nothing to do with the average student's SAT score

if you really think San Jose State is a better academic institution than Rice or Illinois (who had lower APRs as 5-7 teams) then that explains a lot

 

[linebets]

they don't rank based on the Forbes list of academics ... it's goes off the APR which is specific to graduation rate of athletes. has nothing to do with the average student's SAT score

if you really think San Jose State is a better academic institution than Rice or Illinois (who had lower APRs as 5-7 teams) then that explains a lot

I think the Forbes list is based on ROI. I'm pretty sure no one(except maybe the NCAA?) thinks that San Jose State has better academics than pretty much any school because of APR.

I'm surprised the NCAA doesnt decide based off of average home attendance.

 

[outhousetim]

Well put. I am TIRED of seeing a team like Indiana, 2-6 in conference almost every year, be eligible to go to a bowl at 6-6 because they beat FIU, FZU and FZZZU. I'm okay with 6-6, but ONLY if said team is at least .500 in conference!

Problem is we have far too many bowls to begin with. My thoughts are:
1) Lets cut it down to 25 bowl game
2) Teams must have a WINNING record (7-5 or better)
3) Teams must be AT LEAST .500 within their conference

If you schedule 4 cupcakes, and then go 2-6 in your conference to get to 6-6, you should not be rewarded with a bowl.

 

[MackDonald]

Well put. I am TIRED of seeing a team like Indiana, 2-6 in conference almost every year, be eligible to go to a bowl at 6-6 because they beat FIU, FZU and FZZZU. I'm okay with 6-6, but ONLY if said team is at least .500 in conference!

Good to see you back in action "Outhouse". By the way, have you heard from the "Rodfather" lately ? Is he ok ?....I heard rumor he has some heath issues....

 

[outhousetim]

Hi there. Have seen that Rodfather was back in action a bit, but had some bowl/NFL losses.

For me, we travel extensively after the football season, and have been all over the place these past few months. Heading to France, then London in July, back east in the USA in late July, and Canada during the football season in September. This past April/May was my 39th and probably last year doing the NFL draft preview/review. Will possibly put on another college preview prior to this September. But life is great, and once we get back from overseas I know I'll be motivated for football to start.

Hope all is well with you, and everyone else here at the RX.