I disagree. They were designed to give teams one last chance to go out a winner. (AND, to make money for their towns...)
All the haters were just waiting for this type of game…
- Thread starter NittanyChris
- Start date
I disagree. They were designed to give teams one last chance to go out a winner. (AND, to make money for their towns...)
Half the teams will go out a "loser" then including many that won their final meaningful game. I'd rather go out as a loser fighting in a playoff than winning a scrimmage against those that decided to play.
It's only for cities to make money. Fans just don't like to acknowledge that bowls were always stupid and it likely wasn't worth the money they spent
They had their useful role in another era, one which is long ago past. Totally meaningless after the BCS era started other than providing a venue.
It seems like lots of people still enjoy going to them. That is why there are so damned many. They make money
And teams sometime vote to stay home. I know ND has done that.
Agree, they have appeal to a lot of people. I think that will fall off slowly, but they will linger until no longer profitable. No idea how much sooner or later that will be.
I think any more it's about content for espn more so than anything else. Most schools travel poorly outside of the top 30 unless you have the outliers: 1) multi year losing team turns in 8-9 win season 2) team that never wins their conference gets the big bowl for them.
The current tie ins generally suck as well. If we have to have bowls, at least match up comparable teams.
My turnoff for the current bowl system is there are way too many of them. They used to be something that rewarded a good season. Now there are way too many 6 win teams in bowls played in empty stadiums.
And with the current trend of opt outs, they're losing their appeal quickly.
Bowl games are exhibition games with the best players sitting out.
My problem with them began decades ago. The Rose in particular with its stupid tie-in and no repeat almost 100% insured there would be no 1 vs 2 matchup. Yet there are still B10 fans that worship it as the holy grail.
Nebraska doesn’t have the fertile recruiting grounds of PSU. PSU has no equal in the NE.
They had meaning because their wasn't a playoff. FCS had a 12 team playoff in 1982. FBS is WAY late to the game. I understand bowls in the 60s but this needed to change decades ago
The Rose Bowl is the "best" bowl but they're all pointless in the grand scheme of things. A real playoff and you won't see Ohio State, Michigan, Wisconsin, etc fans still seeing the Rose Bowl how they once did
They absolutely do matter. Again, check the record books. Bowls are part of what makes CFB awesome and much better than the NFL.
DID.
They did matter.
Now, they only matter insofar as they allow younger players extra practice for next year.
Wrong. They still count in the record books. The players that choose to play in them still care. The fans still care. NFL scouts still care.
Interesting arguments. 20 and 21 show a lengthening pattern…and it is not good.
I am quite sure I have forgotten more about college football and
Interesting arguments. 20 and 21 show a lengthening pattern…and it is not good.
I am quite sure I have forgotten more about college football and Penn State football in particular than you ever knew.
Newsflash: Your opinion is in a distinct and growing minority. Most people who know sports, football, and Penn State football are amazed he still has the job. He has underachieved based upon the resources and brand of the program. That is the opinion of a the Letterman - including the ones who “count.”
And they (and many/most fans) are not enamored with the behavior of the team during his tenure either. Your swearing at me does not add credibility to your position.
According to coacheshotseat.com, Franklin is not top-20 in win percentage, he is at #29. Career is 0.662 with 0.679 at PSU.
https://www.coacheshotseat.com/WinningestActiveCoachesIA.htm
https://www.coacheshotseat.com/WinningestActiveCoachesIA.htm
Exactly! Standing on the podium in Indianapolis in 2016 Franklin says "this is just the beginning" and we are still waiting for the second act 6 years later.
a) every year is different
b) 2020 shouldn't be considered for anything other than how teams deal with a global pandemic (which hopefully won't come up again)
Very, very unlikely.
Being in the minority doesn't make me wrong.
I disagree with this assertion. Maybe this is what casual fans think, but people who actually know football know he's one of the best coaches in the game (he frequently makes those lists).
Also disagree. One conference championship, three 11 win seasons etc are all perfectly acceptable outcomes. And, your a Letterman now? Cool. Please provide your year of graduation and position.
I strongly disagree with this statement. You don't speak for "most fans"
Again, STFU.
I think if you remove all of the coaches who only have coached for <3 years (i.e. too little data to know if a real pattern), he ends up in the top 20. But regardless, he is closer to the top than the median.
That would move him up to #26, which is not top-20. You did say "top-20", did you not? I know the odds are astronomical, but could you possibly be wrong?
You wouldn’t think that if Franklin could get there. The Outback bowl is irrelevant.
What part of "I think" do you not understand? Jesus Christ you are a dick.
The point remains the same he is in the top 26 (if you prefer) of 131 coaches. That's the top 20%. My point stands even if you want to quibble of me not having the win/loss percentages of every coach in the country memorized.
You could also remove also G5 and say he's in the top 16 of all P5 coaches.
The point remains the same. He is in the upper echelon of coaches whether you like it or not.
It seems impossible for him to be 'upper echelon". It truly does.
He is an excellent recruiter, but he is not very smart. And it is evident in his inability to bring in smart coordinators and position coaches, and when he mismanages a game.
And you're not very smart if you think pointing out that he has NOT YET made a time management error this year. That is simply because he hasn't had a chance to screw it up....yet.
I disagree with everything that you wrote there.
You can define upper echelon however you like (it is obvious a qualitative term) but top 20% in win% is quite good especially since first 2 years (arguably more than that) were handicapped by unjust sanctions.
He has had some great coordinators so I'm not sure where this comment is coming from.
So in a one score Purdue game in which PSU won in the last minute, you don't think there was clock management involved in that game. IIRC, PSU scored in the last two minutes of each half (or something similar) for the first five(?) halves. That doesn't happen without good clock management.
PSU beats 50% of the teams they play simply by showing up.
if Saban‘s successor wins 75% of his games, is he a great coach? Of course not.
If Indiana’s,s coach wins 75%, he’s Vince Lombardi.
Just pointing yet another one of those (rare according to you) statements you start slinging around where you are WRONG. You stated "top-20" when he is in fact most definitely NOT.
And as in the past, when you are clearly WRONG and it is right there in black and white, you try to weasel out of it. That is a huge credibility issue regardless of the topic being discussed.
You have been wrong a lot. What is rare is for you to admit it, I don't think that has ever happened.
He is top 20%. The thesis isn't changed by the semantics. I'm not weaseling out of anything.
I am very rarely wrong. In this case, I admitted that I got a detail slightly wrong but again it doesn't affect the point I was making.
Based on the lack of performance the previous 2 seasons I think most were anticipating an 8-4 or 9-3 season, which appeared to be realistic. The early performance of the team seemed to be better than anticipated to many, which led to an increase of expectations. Fully understandable to get excited.
Others saw signs that the same or similar problems still had not been addressed. Again, fully understandable.
If a team is very lucky, they are presented with an opportunity to make a statement that can carry them to the next level. You might get one or two such matchups during a typical season but some seasons the situation just does not present itself. The most important thing is to have the team prepared so that they are ready to capitalize on that opportunity.
That opportunity was squandered away in the most humiliating way. This was more than just a loss to a conference rival, this could have been a monumental milestone for the program.
Others saw signs that the same or similar problems still had not been addressed. Again, fully understandable.
If a team is very lucky, they are presented with an opportunity to make a statement that can carry them to the next level. You might get one or two such matchups during a typical season but some seasons the situation just does not present itself. The most important thing is to have the team prepared so that they are ready to capitalize on that opportunity.
That opportunity was squandered away in the most humiliating way. This was more than just a loss to a conference rival, this could have been a monumental milestone for the program.
It's completely right.
Coaches at Ohio State, Alabama, and even PSU win over 50% of their games the second they sign their contract.
Those at Indiana, Rutgers, so forth are going to lose 60% of their games no matter what they do.
You pretending otherwise is just ridiculous.
He is garbage. He Feast on bad teams and loses to top 25 caliper competition. His teams play soft.
This is another way of saying "this season is going better than most people expected" which makes it laughable that people are unhappy with Franklin.
They're counted in the record books so stupid people spend money to go to the games.
Bowls are not part of what makes college football great--let's have two 5-7 teams battle it out for nothing but pride.
Confused I agree--all bowl games played by teams outside the playoff are irrelvant.
