How are 5-7 teams getting selected before 6 and 7 win teams? That should not be possible. Why are the only 2 mountain west bowl teams playing against EACH OTHER? Why is 9-3 Utah in the Las Vegas Bowl, with worse PAC 12 teams in better bowls? This isn't right and should be corrected by next season.
Not sure it would be more just for my company to pay a bunch of money to host a bowl just to have some committee tell me I must invite Akron and Troy. I've always been a fan of more and more free college football around the holidays, but now we've seen it go too far. Need to trim a few of the lowest tier bowls. No reason a 5-7 team should ever have to be considered.
Either let every team play bowl games or cut these bowl games in half. I think it's either all or nothing.
yep and the bowl committee and its sponsors have the final say once the potential participants are laid out.
The issue I'm complaining about is the opposite. 5-7 teams should never, under any circumstances, get a bowl bid over other teams. Nebraska is the one getting a participation award simply because they travel well.
From the Utah camp's perspective, only Arizona and Arizona State have worse bowls. Even still, they would trade with Arizona State for a fresh opponent (keep in mind Utah has played BYU many times in recent history before joining the Pac 12, and that Mormons hog all the tickets to the Las Vegas Bowl). Teams with more losses in bowls Utah coveted: USC, UCLA, Washington, Washington State. To a lesser extent, even Cal.
UW is in an at large bowl, so not better. So is Cal. WSU is better than Utah. USC obliterated Utah. UCLA beat Utah.
Like I said, they'd rather have UW's bowl and opponent than the one they got. WSU, USC, and UCLA all finished with more losses.
I've always been more football the better, but this is getting out of hand. The bowl names are getting outrageous too.