to prepare for draft....wish i had gotten syracuse +7 before today. line down to wvu -1.5
Will Grier skipping bowl game for WVU
- Thread starter usc816
- Start date
Years to come Bowls will be a thing of the past. They're getting more irrelevant each passing year. 1st and 2nd rd picks will keep doing this more and more instead of playing in these glorified scrimmages.
Well, I don't like seeing the departures, but if these truly minor bowls go away as a result, some good will have come out of it. I mean, people want to see the teams that played the season, not what's left of the teams that played the season.
The thing that drives these bowls is money. When top players start sitting out fans will follow. I can understand these players for doing that and can sympathize with fans spending big travel dollars to see their teams compete with the best players. . I'd imagine after Griers announcement a few thousand WVU fans decided to watch it at home instead.
The fans are already withdrawing. Some of the bowl crowds are pathetic. But if the product is tainted, the TV audiences will dwindle also.
The thing is the NCAA has gotten away with a jacked up postseason for decades. We got a system now that has 130 teams and gives 4 measly bids. The other 126 teams get to fight over these ridiculous forgettable bowls named after some Company likely to be out of business the following year. Fans are seeing these bowls to be jokes now. This is going to be the NCAAS problem in the very near future.
There are too many bowls. It’s barely an accomplishment with 12 games a year. Even in a P5 conference you could schedule 4 cupcake teams and win 2/8 of your conference games and be bowl eligible
The Rose, Sugar, Fiesta and Peach are not meaningless bowls this year. Yes, only 4 schools get a chance at the big trophy, but 12 schools are in “big bowls”.
I wouldn’t turn down a Rose Bowl Championship.
If they are getting more irrelevant with each passing year, why are their numbers increasing each year?
I’m a college football fan. The off-season lasts FOREVER. So, I’ll never complain about having extra opportunities to watch games in December.
I'm with you on this. Sometimes periods during the off-season can be quite miserable when you really love college football.
Thankfully, the day teams with losing records qualified for Bowls was the day players don't need to lose their health for a dumb bowl!
As stated in another post, best way to protect bowls, players, and the prestige is to purchase insurance policies for every player in the bowl to guarantee players, viewers and full participation!
Personally I have no qualms at all with the bowls becoming more of a hybrid preview of next season’s talent and teams... I might even prefer it. The underclassmen and reserves and ultimately the team as a whole clearly benefit from the extra practices and experience more than the guys leaving for the pros. The only exception would be the playoff games because those teams/players still have unfinished business and the ultimate prize on the table.
Last edited:
I get your point, King, but the Camping World, despite its name, isn't really a bottom rung bowl. Whether it's the Camping World Bowl or some other bowl, this game, featuring two top-25 teams, would have always been a bowl game - even when there were fewer games. You'd have to go back an awful long way to find a time when a 16th ranked 8-3 team from a major conference didn't find themselves in a bowl game.
Now, if starting quarterbacks routinely start skipping suck bowls, they will, indeed, become meaningless bowl games. If Will Grier had led the Gamecocks to an 8-3 record and #16 ranking, I'd be pretty pissed if he skipped out on his team before the Outback or Capital One Bowl. I don't like this trend.
The problem is they wait to make these damn announcements AFTER fans have bought tickets, booked rooms and plane tickets. Just remember that when the school comes around begging next year for a donation. "Sorry school I don't think I can come to games anymore, I could fall down the steps and injure myself. I don't want to risk it. Hope you understand".
Don't remember the last time I watched the Pro Bowl.lol
I did back when it came after the super bowl, & I knew it would be 6 months till I see it again
Except for our spring game
It want be long before somebody in the playoffs decides to sit out. You could have teams not making in the playoffs that are a whole a lot better than teams that do with their team mate sitting out. NCAA along with NFL needs to get handle on this. It’s different if the players are hurt, but this is not the right way.
If the trend of superstars skipping bowl games expands, it will be money, or the lack thereof, that drives a change in that policy. As somebody said above, eventually, players will start skipping the playoffs, especially those who have already won a championship. Once those games become "meaningless," ESPN will step in and force a change in policy.
What change in policy? You can't force an individual play. We did away with involuntary servitude 150 years ago.
Isn’t there a couple more for West Virginia and N.C. State has at least two that are sitting out
Sure! The policy would be based on draft potential. If player could go in top two then insure accordingly. Not sure it's fair to insure 1 and not the rest. Odds of injuries is pretty small, odds of career ending even smaller, it's one game? But then the fact is the more bowls offers policies the cheaper they get and only provides better product on the field
Well it has to be perspective. So what are the odds of him getting hurt? 1 in 58,458 snaps with the likelihood of him being drafted at what level? Usually an invite likely less than $300k annually so I assume the policy to be about $6 with a rider of 52cents.
They know the players values and potential projections. Point is either there are way too many bowls (yes), but if they want the best production, the best players, and the most viewers then they need to consider protecting players. Or they will continue to not play, viewers dwindle and bowls fail
Insurance isn't unprecedented. Policies have been taken out on top prospects before. Only now, it doesn't seem to be enough to encourage participation.
Never said it was unprecedented or unpredictable. Many 4th year players had policies like Bush, Lienhart, I'm sure Wilkins, Ferrell, probably does. I know Spiller had a policy when he returned. I think Lattimore had a policy just because of history.
That said to get on topic, yes for whole team but it's not like many policies get executed. Therefore it is minimal risk to underwriting
I would agree. I guess the question would be how high the premiums are versus their affordability for the various bowls.
I don't really think that's the question? If the bowls can't afford it then don't expect good players to play, don't expect fans to show if best players are not playing and don't expect TV to pay dividends if viewers won't watch. So to offset this trend of players not playing in lower tier games, then insure their participation, which insures more interested fans, which drives Nelson ratings on TV, which elevates longevity of lower Bowls.
Bottomline is when the trend i reduci
reducing best players participation then lower viewers and likely decrease in wins for teams participating therefore having bowls lose money. I think there are too many bowls to start with, glamour is gone and when 5-7 team makes a bowl means you just have to practice more because your fans are not driving 800miles for another loss.
Well, respectfully, I really think the first clause of your second sentence makes it the question. Tell you the truth, I'm OK with losing bowls that go beyond, say, the top 20 or so teams in the country anyway.
Honestly, would you guys rather watch two fairly evenly matched teams minus a few stars who wouldn’t normally see each other in their conference schedule face off on a neutral sight or a matchup of a powerhouse vs an overmatched lower division opponent?... Surely the game between USC and UVA has more entertainment value than USC vs Akron, Coastal, or Marshall even if the reserves and next year’s starters play more snaps?... it seems to me that no real fan would be complaining about the opportunity at one more game and getting the backups and next year’s stars on the field for a preview and additional practice is just gravy.
I love bowl season and the amount of bowls does not bother me. If you don't want to watch a game because you think it is irrelevant then don't watch it, it is that simple.
The bowls are for the players. They get to travel and see places many may never have had the chance to see. If kids decide to skip then don't allow them to travel, but let those that worked hard earn their reward. Don't see any issue with amount of bowls, capitalism at its best. If people don't like, then don't watch and don't attend and the bowl will flounder.
