I'm saying they'd want to change at least one of those. Either play somewhere else (Dallas) or play a P5.
I believe Nebraska had the Highest APR of the 5-7 teams which is what let them in. But yeah too many bowl games.
Yes, I thought they could only take 5-7 team if and only if there were not enough qualifying teams. I am sure there are some 6 win teams that had too many FCS schools, perhaps?
Yes, but they were selected for a bowl before\over Colorado State (7 wins) and Nevada (6). That's not right.
Correct, but the pool of teams was decided before selection, so the 5-7 teams like Nebraska were chosen over a 7 win Colorado State, for example.
I think that's only with bowls when a conference they have an agreement with can't supply an eligible team. Bowls without a conference tie-in have no restriction, which is what should be changed.
Or maybe that is true, but the way things worked out it forced the Las Vegas Bowl to select two teams from the same conference? Just read all the rules, is why I say that now.
It's Utah/BYU in the LV Bowl. The Arizona Bowl is what you are talking about. It's all about fanbase when you get to at large spots.
I'm for more bowls. I like football. If I don't like the teams in them, I don't watch. The market will eventually correct itself. Even BP money runs out eventually.
How many bowls have come and gone now? How many actually make money? We're living what "market correction" looks like. Much like evolution, there is no finished product but rather an unpleasant, merciless, godless parade of mostly failure.
Lol at the BP part. Heck, Birmingham would probably resort to taking out of the city school's budget if they had to.
Wikipedia has a list of over 60 going back many years. The number of bowl games seems like a problem that has little or no need of being solved.
