[d4cohn]

There's lots of schadenfreude on bearinsider for those who like that sort of thing.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/85863

Get the popcorn (or Cheez-its) ready. :)

[d4cohn]

There's lots of schadenfreude on bearinsider for those who like that sort of thing.

https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/85863

Get the popcorn (or Cheez-its) ready. :)

[Phogge]

Driving home from a party I decided to turn on Starkey. He has gotten even worse. He’s about two plays behind in identifying where the ball is. After five minutes I turned it off and my wife and I discussed the relatives. Much more entertaining.

[Phogge]

Driving home from a party I decided to turn on Starkey. He has gotten even worse. He’s about two plays behind in identifying where the ball is. After five minutes I turned it off and my wife and I discussed the relatives. Much more entertaining.

[JohnR34231]

I don't really get it.
These are "meaningless exhibition games", until, of course, a Pac-12 team loses one. Then they suddenly become h.uge embarrassments for the conference. I know the Pac-12 record in them over the last year or so is awful, but if they are really meaningless, who cares?
Someone will no doubt explain it to me.

[JohnR34231]

I don't really get it.
These are "meaningless exhibition games", until, of course, a Pac-12 team loses one. Then they suddenly become h.uge embarrassments for the conference. I know the Pac-12 record in them over the last year or so is awful, but if they are really meaningless, who cares?
Someone will no doubt explain it to me.

[Austroturf]

I don't really get it.
These are "meaningless exhibition games", until, of course, a Pac-12 team loses one. Then they suddenly become h.uge embarrassments for the conference. I know the Pac-12 record in them over the last year or so is awful, but if they are really meaningless, who cares?
Someone will no doubt explain it to me.

So here's my two cents:

1) Not all bowl games are meaningless.  The CFP games and the NY6 bowl games definitely have value.  It is still a big thing to win a Rose Bowl, and I haven't heard of any players sitting this one out (though I admit the one or the other might have slipped past me).  The games leading up to the national championship are very meaningful for the programs and players involved.

2) There are far too many low-level bowls that pit teams against each other with barely winning records.  Although these bowl games do not carry much weight, they were often perceived as a season-ending reward for players (and fans); and if the venue was decent, the participating teams had fun, got some extra practices, maybe got to raise a trophy and generated some money for their conference.  

3) However, since the advent of players "sitting out" the post-season, the results of these lower-tier bowl games have become even more meaningless.  How important is a Sun Bowl if key players are not participating?  What will Stanford's victory (or loss) mean in the broader context of the 2018 season?  

4) Still, the results of the post-season are definitely used to advance certain narratives and stoke the promotional feuds for next season.  If the Pac-12 again produces a belly-flop in the post-season, nobody will remember that N'Keal Harry sat out the ASU game vs. Fresno State and essentially neutered the Sun Devil passing game.  And Cal's ugly near-miss yesterday will simply be another L for west coast pride.  SportCenter stated that the Cal-TCU game "set football back 50 years", which was a clear dig at the Pac-12 and the Big-12 by SEC-leaning sportscasters.  If the SEC, by contrast, piles up a lot of wins in equally meaningless bowl games, that narrative will be used to justify high pre-season rankings for the 14 teams in the conference.  

So are the bowl games meaningless?  Yes, many of them are.  Should we care?  Unfortunately, yes, because even losing meaningless games will be used against the Pac-12 when the 2018 season is written up and locked in the record books; and this will have a negative effect on everything from recruiting to pre-season rankings.  Winning still counts, regardless of the contest.

[Austroturf]

I don't really get it.
These are "meaningless exhibition games", until, of course, a Pac-12 team loses one. Then they suddenly become h.uge embarrassments for the conference. I know the Pac-12 record in them over the last year or so is awful, but if they are really meaningless, who cares?
Someone will no doubt explain it to me.

So here's my two cents:

1) Not all bowl games are meaningless.  The CFP games and the NY6 bowl games definitely have value.  It is still a big thing to win a Rose Bowl, and I haven't heard of any players sitting this one out (though I admit the one or the other might have slipped past me).  The games leading up to the national championship are very meaningful for the programs and players involved.

2) There are far too many low-level bowls that pit teams against each other with barely winning records.  Although these bowl games do not carry much weight, they were often perceived as a season-ending reward for players (and fans); and if the venue was decent, the participating teams had fun, got some extra practices, maybe got to raise a trophy and generated some money for their conference.  

3) However, since the advent of players "sitting out" the post-season, the results of these lower-tier bowl games have become even more meaningless.  How important is a Sun Bowl if key players are not participating?  What will Stanford's victory (or loss) mean in the broader context of the 2018 season?  

4) Still, the results of the post-season are definitely used to advance certain narratives and stoke the promotional feuds for next season.  If the Pac-12 again produces a belly-flop in the post-season, nobody will remember that N'Keal Harry sat out the ASU game vs. Fresno State and essentially neutered the Sun Devil passing game.  And Cal's ugly near-miss yesterday will simply be another L for west coast pride.  SportCenter stated that the Cal-TCU game "set football back 50 years", which was a clear dig at the Pac-12 and the Big-12 by SEC-leaning sportscasters.  If the SEC, by contrast, piles up a lot of wins in equally meaningless bowl games, that narrative will be used to justify high pre-season rankings for the 14 teams in the conference.  

So are the bowl games meaningless?  Yes, many of them are.  Should we care?  Unfortunately, yes, because even losing meaningless games will be used against the Pac-12 when the 2018 season is written up and locked in the record books; and this will have a negative effect on everything from recruiting to pre-season rankings.  Winning still counts, regardless of the contest.

[BostonCard]

I can’t even muster the will for schadenfreude.  The game was punishment enough for the bears. Watching them self-flagellate is too much.

BC

[BostonCard]

I can’t even muster the will for schadenfreude.  The game was punishment enough for the bears. Watching them self-flagellate is too much.

BC

[JohnR34231]

I don't really get it.
These are "meaningless exhibition games", until, of course, a Pac-12 team loses one. Then they suddenly become h.uge embarrassments for the conference. I know the Pac-12 record in them over the last year or so is awful, but if they are really meaningless, who cares?
Someone will no doubt explain it to me.

So here's my two cents:

1) Not all bowl games are meaningless.  The CFP games and the NY6 bowl games definitely have value.  It is still a big thing to win a Rose Bowl, and I haven't heard of any players sitting this one out (though I admit the one or the other might have slipped past me).  The games leading up to the national championship are very meaningful for the programs and players involved.

2) There are far too many low-level bowls that pit teams against each other with barely winning records.  Although these bowl games do not carry much weight, they were often perceived as a season-ending reward for players (and fans); and if the venue was decent, the participating teams had fun, got some extra practices, maybe got to raise a trophy and generated some money for their conference.  

3) However, since the advent of players "sitting out" the post-season, the results of these lower-tier bowl games have become even more meaningless.  How important is a Sun Bowl if key players are not participating?  What will Stanford's victory (or loss) mean in the broader context of the 2018 season?  

4) Still, the results of the post-season are definitely used to advance certain narratives and stoke the promotional feuds for next season.  If the Pac-12 again produces a belly-flop in the post-season, nobody will remember that N'Keal Harry sat out the ASU game vs. Fresno State and essentially neutered the Sun Devil passing game.  And Cal's ugly near-miss yesterday will simply be another L for west coast pride.  SportCenter stated that the Cal-TCU game "set football back 50 years", which was a clear dig at the Pac-12 and the Big-12 by SEC-leaning sportscasters.  If the SEC, by contrast, piles up a lot of wins in equally meaningless bowl games, that narrative will be used to justify high pre-season rankings for the 14 teams in the conference.  

So are the bowl games meaningless?  Yes, many of them are.  Should we care?  Unfortunately, yes, because even losing meaningless games will be used against the Pac-12 when the 2018 season is written up and locked in the record books; and this will have a negative effect on everything from recruiting to pre-season rankings.  Winning still counts, regardless of the contest.

Good answer, but you seem to be saying they are meaningless, but then again they really aren't. I think they have to be one or the other.

[JohnR34231]

I don't really get it.
These are "meaningless exhibition games", until, of course, a Pac-12 team loses one. Then they suddenly become h.uge embarrassments for the conference. I know the Pac-12 record in them over the last year or so is awful, but if they are really meaningless, who cares?
Someone will no doubt explain it to me.

So here's my two cents:

1) Not all bowl games are meaningless.  The CFP games and the NY6 bowl games definitely have value.  It is still a big thing to win a Rose Bowl, and I haven't heard of any players sitting this one out (though I admit the one or the other might have slipped past me).  The games leading up to the national championship are very meaningful for the programs and players involved.

2) There are far too many low-level bowls that pit teams against each other with barely winning records.  Although these bowl games do not carry much weight, they were often perceived as a season-ending reward for players (and fans); and if the venue was decent, the participating teams had fun, got some extra practices, maybe got to raise a trophy and generated some money for their conference.  

3) However, since the advent of players "sitting out" the post-season, the results of these lower-tier bowl games have become even more meaningless.  How important is a Sun Bowl if key players are not participating?  What will Stanford's victory (or loss) mean in the broader context of the 2018 season?  

4) Still, the results of the post-season are definitely used to advance certain narratives and stoke the promotional feuds for next season.  If the Pac-12 again produces a belly-flop in the post-season, nobody will remember that N'Keal Harry sat out the ASU game vs. Fresno State and essentially neutered the Sun Devil passing game.  And Cal's ugly near-miss yesterday will simply be another L for west coast pride.  SportCenter stated that the Cal-TCU game "set football back 50 years", which was a clear dig at the Pac-12 and the Big-12 by SEC-leaning sportscasters.  If the SEC, by contrast, piles up a lot of wins in equally meaningless bowl games, that narrative will be used to justify high pre-season rankings for the 14 teams in the conference.  

So are the bowl games meaningless?  Yes, many of them are.  Should we care?  Unfortunately, yes, because even losing meaningless games will be used against the Pac-12 when the 2018 season is written up and locked in the record books; and this will have a negative effect on everything from recruiting to pre-season rankings.  Winning still counts, regardless of the contest.

Good answer, but you seem to be saying they are meaningless, but then again they really aren't. I think they have to be one or the other.

[OutsiderFan]

They are without meaning, but that doesn't stop people from reading in too much from their outcomes.

It's hard to imagine a game being meaningful that sees a Cal WR - who isn't projected to be drafted - sitting out preparing for what, Cal's Pro Day?  Both teams were playing their #3/#4 QBs.  Meaningful games are never played with the #3/#4 QBs facing each other.

ESPN did a masterful job of never showing the crowd trying to make sure the viewing audience never thought "damn, if the fans of the teams playing don't care about this game, why should I be watching?"

Cal's entire offensive coaching staff seems ready to be cashiered and 8/11 starters return on defense in 2019 and TCU won't be playing with a QB that three for 28 yards in its last game of 2018. How in the hell can anyone use the Cheez it Bowl as any kind of basis for how TCU and Cal can be projected to perform in 2019?  Exhibition games are meaningless.

[OutsiderFan]

They are without meaning, but that doesn't stop people from reading in too much from their outcomes.

It's hard to imagine a game being meaningful that sees a Cal WR - who isn't projected to be drafted - sitting out preparing for what, Cal's Pro Day?  Both teams were playing their #3/#4 QBs.  Meaningful games are never played with the #3/#4 QBs facing each other.

ESPN did a masterful job of never showing the crowd trying to make sure the viewing audience never thought "damn, if the fans of the teams playing don't care about this game, why should I be watching?"

Cal's entire offensive coaching staff seems ready to be cashiered and 8/11 starters return on defense in 2019 and TCU won't be playing with a QB that three for 28 yards in its last game of 2018. How in the hell can anyone use the Cheez it Bowl as any kind of basis for how TCU and Cal can be projected to perform in 2019?  Exhibition games are meaningless.

[Mick]

So here's my two cents:

1) Not all bowl games are meaningless.  The CFP games and the NY6 bowl games definitely have value.  It is still a big thing to win a Rose Bowl, and I haven't heard of any players sitting this one out (though I admit the one or the other might have slipped past me).  The games leading up to the national championship are very meaningful for the programs and players involved.

2) There are far too many low-level bowls that pit teams against each other with barely winning records.  Although these bowl games do not carry much weight, they were often perceived as a season-ending reward for players (and fans); and if the venue was decent, the participating teams had fun, got some extra practices, maybe got to raise a trophy and generated some money for their conference.  

3) However, since the advent of players "sitting out" the post-season, the results of these lower-tier bowl games have become even more meaningless.  How important is a Sun Bowl if key players are not participating?  What will Stanford's victory (or loss) mean in the broader context of the 2018 season?  

4) Still, the results of the post-season are definitely used to advance certain narratives and stoke the promotional feuds for next season.  If the Pac-12 again produces a belly-flop in the post-season, nobody will remember that N'Keal Harry sat out the ASU game vs. Fresno State and essentially neutered the Sun Devil passing game.  And Cal's ugly near-miss yesterday will simply be another L for west coast pride.  SportCenter stated that the Cal-TCU game "set football back 50 years", which was a clear dig at the Pac-12 and the Big-12 by SEC-leaning sportscasters.  If the SEC, by contrast, piles up a lot of wins in equally meaningless bowl games, that narrative will be used to justify high pre-season rankings for the 14 teams in the conference.  

So are the bowl games meaningless?  Yes, many of them are.  Should we care?  Unfortunately, yes, because even losing meaningless games will be used against the Pac-12 when the 2018 season is written up and locked in the record books; and this will have a negative effect on everything from recruiting to pre-season rankings.  Winning still counts, regardless of the contest.

1.  The Sun Bowl is tied for the second oldest bowl after the Rose Bowl.  It was founded in 1935, as were the Orange and Sugar Bowls.  Cotton Bowl came along two years later.

2.  The Bowls give each team an extra month's worth of practice.  That is not insignificant.

3.  The Bowls give some fans and most players a fun post-season time in their preferred sport.

4.  Many of the Bowls are in vacation spots...or at least warm weather spots.

5.  There's a lot of good players on mediocre teams.  They stand out in the Bowls.

All that said...I'll watch the Sun Bowl, the Rose Bowl and the NCG.  other than that, not for me.  But I'm as old as the hills...

[Mick]

So here's my two cents:

1) Not all bowl games are meaningless.  The CFP games and the NY6 bowl games definitely have value.  It is still a big thing to win a Rose Bowl, and I haven't heard of any players sitting this one out (though I admit the one or the other might have slipped past me).  The games leading up to the national championship are very meaningful for the programs and players involved.

2) There are far too many low-level bowls that pit teams against each other with barely winning records.  Although these bowl games do not carry much weight, they were often perceived as a season-ending reward for players (and fans); and if the venue was decent, the participating teams had fun, got some extra practices, maybe got to raise a trophy and generated some money for their conference.  

3) However, since the advent of players "sitting out" the post-season, the results of these lower-tier bowl games have become even more meaningless.  How important is a Sun Bowl if key players are not participating?  What will Stanford's victory (or loss) mean in the broader context of the 2018 season?  

4) Still, the results of the post-season are definitely used to advance certain narratives and stoke the promotional feuds for next season.  If the Pac-12 again produces a belly-flop in the post-season, nobody will remember that N'Keal Harry sat out the ASU game vs. Fresno State and essentially neutered the Sun Devil passing game.  And Cal's ugly near-miss yesterday will simply be another L for west coast pride.  SportCenter stated that the Cal-TCU game "set football back 50 years", which was a clear dig at the Pac-12 and the Big-12 by SEC-leaning sportscasters.  If the SEC, by contrast, piles up a lot of wins in equally meaningless bowl games, that narrative will be used to justify high pre-season rankings for the 14 teams in the conference.  

So are the bowl games meaningless?  Yes, many of them are.  Should we care?  Unfortunately, yes, because even losing meaningless games will be used against the Pac-12 when the 2018 season is written up and locked in the record books; and this will have a negative effect on everything from recruiting to pre-season rankings.  Winning still counts, regardless of the contest.

1.  The Sun Bowl is tied for the second oldest bowl after the Rose Bowl.  It was founded in 1935, as were the Orange and Sugar Bowls.  Cotton Bowl came along two years later.

2.  The Bowls give each team an extra month's worth of practice.  That is not insignificant.

3.  The Bowls give some fans and most players a fun post-season time in their preferred sport.

4.  Many of the Bowls are in vacation spots...or at least warm weather spots.

5.  There's a lot of good players on mediocre teams.  They stand out in the Bowls.

All that said...I'll watch the Sun Bowl, the Rose Bowl and the NCG.  other than that, not for me.  But I'm as old as the hills...

[JohnR34231]

Bottom line, I think, is that whether something is meaningful or meaningless is in the eye of the beholder.

There is certainly a substantial portion of the world's population that thinks all American football is pretty meaningless.

[JohnR34231]

Bottom line, I think, is that whether something is meaningful or meaningless is in the eye of the beholder.

There is certainly a substantial portion of the world's population that thinks all American football is pretty meaningless.

[82lsju]

1) Not all bowl games are meaningless.  The CFP games and the NY6 bowl games definitely have value.  It is still a big thing to win a Rose Bowl, and I haven't heard of any players sitting this one out (though I admit the one or the other might have slipped past me).  The games leading up to the national championship are very meaningful for the programs and players involved.

Re: NY6 games

LSU has two players skipping the Fiesta Bowl

Greedy Williams
Ed Alexander

https://sports.yahoo.com/college-footbal...23415.html 

Michigan has four players skipping the Peach Bowl (Bushell-Beaty a recent addition to the list)

Juwann Bushell-Beatty 
Rashan Gary 
Devin Bush Jr. (he cites a hip injury)
Karan Higdon 

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/colle...414164002/

Nick Bosa left OSU earlier in the year when he was injured to heal and train for the draft, no idea if he would have been healthy enough to play in the Rose Bowl if he had remained with the team.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc...658347002/

Clemson QB Kelly Bryant decided to transfer and left the team after their fourth game when he was replaced as the starter.  He's going to Missouri

https://www.stltoday.com/sports/college/...58669.html

[82lsju]

1) Not all bowl games are meaningless.  The CFP games and the NY6 bowl games definitely have value.  It is still a big thing to win a Rose Bowl, and I haven't heard of any players sitting this one out (though I admit the one or the other might have slipped past me).  The games leading up to the national championship are very meaningful for the programs and players involved.

Re: NY6 games

LSU has two players skipping the Fiesta Bowl

Greedy Williams
Ed Alexander

https://sports.yahoo.com/college-footbal...23415.html 

Michigan has four players skipping the Peach Bowl (Bushell-Beaty a recent addition to the list)

Juwann Bushell-Beatty 
Rashan Gary 
Devin Bush Jr. (he cites a hip injury)
Karan Higdon 

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/colle...414164002/

Nick Bosa left OSU earlier in the year when he was injured to heal and train for the draft, no idea if he would have been healthy enough to play in the Rose Bowl if he had remained with the team.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc...658347002/

Clemson QB Kelly Bryant decided to transfer and left the team after their fourth game when he was replaced as the starter.  He's going to Missouri

https://www.stltoday.com/sports/college/...58669.html

[Austroturf]

1) Not all bowl games are meaningless.  The CFP games and the NY6 bowl games definitely have value.  It is still a big thing to win a Rose Bowl, and I haven't heard of any players sitting this one out (though I admit the one or the other might have slipped past me).  The games leading up to the national championship are very meaningful for the programs and players involved.

Re: NY6 games

LSU has two players skipping the Fiesta Bowl

Greedy Williams
Ed Alexander

https://sports.yahoo.com/college-footbal...23415.html 

Michigan has four players skipping the Peach Bowl (Bushell-Beaty a recent addition to the list)

Juwann Bushell-Beatty 
Rashan Gary 
Devin Bush Jr. (he cites a hip injury)
Karan Higdon 

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/colle...414164002/

Nick Bosa left OSU earlier in the year when he was injured to heal and train for the draft, no idea if he would have been healthy enough to play in the Rose Bowl if he had remained with the team.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc...658347002/

Clemson QB Kelly Bryant decided to transfer and left the team after their fourth game when he was replaced as the starter.  He's going to Missouri

https://www.stltoday.com/sports/college/...58669.html

I knew about Bosa, which was a mid-season thing.  Kelly Bryant's decision to transfer was also early season.  The decisions by the LSU and Michigan players about this specific bowl season are a bit of a surprise.  They must feel really good about their draft-stock or really demotivated about their bowl destiny.  I guess this also shows that a NY6 Bowl is only meaningful in relation to something else (i.e., the CFP).

[Austroturf]

1) Not all bowl games are meaningless.  The CFP games and the NY6 bowl games definitely have value.  It is still a big thing to win a Rose Bowl, and I haven't heard of any players sitting this one out (though I admit the one or the other might have slipped past me).  The games leading up to the national championship are very meaningful for the programs and players involved.

Re: NY6 games

LSU has two players skipping the Fiesta Bowl

Greedy Williams
Ed Alexander

https://sports.yahoo.com/college-footbal...23415.html 

Michigan has four players skipping the Peach Bowl (Bushell-Beaty a recent addition to the list)

Juwann Bushell-Beatty 
Rashan Gary 
Devin Bush Jr. (he cites a hip injury)
Karan Higdon 

https://www.freep.com/story/sports/colle...414164002/

Nick Bosa left OSU earlier in the year when he was injured to heal and train for the draft, no idea if he would have been healthy enough to play in the Rose Bowl if he had remained with the team.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nc...658347002/

Clemson QB Kelly Bryant decided to transfer and left the team after their fourth game when he was replaced as the starter.  He's going to Missouri

https://www.stltoday.com/sports/college/...58669.html

I knew about Bosa, which was a mid-season thing.  Kelly Bryant's decision to transfer was also early season.  The decisions by the LSU and Michigan players about this specific bowl season are a bit of a surprise.  They must feel really good about their draft-stock or really demotivated about their bowl destiny.  I guess this also shows that a NY6 Bowl is only meaningful in relation to something else (i.e., the CFP).

[Austroturf]

Bottom line, I think, is that whether something is meaningful or meaningless is in the eye of the beholder.

There is certainly a substantial portion of the world's population that thinks all American football is pretty meaningless.

Yes, this is a fair assessment.  My perspective on the significance or insignificance of a bow game revolves around two factors:
1) the significance of the match-up and
2) the significance of the result

On point one, many of the match-ups in the lower-tier bowls are truly meaningless.  Yesterday's offensively-challenged INT-fest was a prime example.  Cal was the lowest-seeded Pac-12 team, while TCU was tied with Baylor for lowest-seeded Big-12 team.  Not a significant match-up.  There's no rivalry, no past history, no narrative to make this more than two teams from the lower-middle tier of their conferences.  That said, it's not less significant than a typical regular season game; but bowl games are supposed to be something on a higher level (ostensibly).    

On point two, the outcomes of these games lack significance from a couple of perspectives.  The winner does not advance to a further round; there's no division or conference championship on the line; and, um, a W does not further the quest for bowl-eligibility (just had to throw that in there).  Now with more and more players sitting out the games, a further dimension of meaning has slipped away.  If teams increasingly enter these contests at diminished strength, what does it mean to beat Stanford or Pitt?  ASU most likely lost its game because of Harry's decision to skip the post-season. 

My overall dissatisfaction with the NCAA FBS post season is that there seem to be more and more meaningless match-ups; and the outcomes of these match-ups are declining in significance, particularly with the new trend for players to skip the post-season.  All in all, not a good trend.

[Austroturf]

Bottom line, I think, is that whether something is meaningful or meaningless is in the eye of the beholder.

There is certainly a substantial portion of the world's population that thinks all American football is pretty meaningless.

Yes, this is a fair assessment.  My perspective on the significance or insignificance of a bow game revolves around two factors:
1) the significance of the match-up and
2) the significance of the result

On point one, many of the match-ups in the lower-tier bowls are truly meaningless.  Yesterday's offensively-challenged INT-fest was a prime example.  Cal was the lowest-seeded Pac-12 team, while TCU was tied with Baylor for lowest-seeded Big-12 team.  Not a significant match-up.  There's no rivalry, no past history, no narrative to make this more than two teams from the lower-middle tier of their conferences.  That said, it's not less significant than a typical regular season game; but bowl games are supposed to be something on a higher level (ostensibly).    

On point two, the outcomes of these games lack significance from a couple of perspectives.  The winner does not advance to a further round; there's no division or conference championship on the line; and, um, a W does not further the quest for bowl-eligibility (just had to throw that in there).  Now with more and more players sitting out the games, a further dimension of meaning has slipped away.  If teams increasingly enter these contests at diminished strength, what does it mean to beat Stanford or Pitt?  ASU most likely lost its game because of Harry's decision to skip the post-season. 

My overall dissatisfaction with the NCAA FBS post season is that there seem to be more and more meaningless match-ups; and the outcomes of these match-ups are declining in significance, particularly with the new trend for players to skip the post-season.  All in all, not a good trend.

[JohnR34231]

Bottom line, I think, is that whether something is meaningful or meaningless is in the eye of the beholder.

There is certainly a substantial portion of the world's population that thinks all American football is pretty meaningless.

Yes, this is a fair assessment.  My perspective on the significance or insignificance of a bow game revolves around two factors:
1) the significance of the match-up and
2) the significance of the result

On point one, many of the match-ups in the lower-tier bowls are truly meaningless.  Yesterday's offensively-challenged INT-fest was a prime example.  Cal was the lowest-seeded Pac-12 team, while TCU was tied with Baylor for lowest-seeded Big-12 team.  Not a significant match-up.  There's no rivalry, no past history, no narrative to make this more than two teams from the lower-middle tier of their conferences.  That said, it's not less significant than a typical regular season game; but bowl games are supposed to be something on a higher level (ostensibly).    

On point two, the outcomes of these games lack significance from a couple of perspectives.  The winner does not advance to a further round; there's no division or conference championship on the line; and, um, a W does not further the quest for bowl-eligibility (just had to throw that in there).  Now with more and more players sitting out the games, a further dimension of meaning has slipped away.  If teams increasingly enter these contests at diminished strength, what does it mean to beat Stanford or Pitt?  ASU most likely lost its game because of Harry's decision to skip the post-season. 

My overall dissatisfaction with the NCAA FBS post season is that there seem to be more and more meaningless match-ups; and the outcomes of these match-ups are declining in significance, particularly with the new trend for players to skip the post-season.  All in all, not a good trend.

Yeah, I can't argue with the notion that the more bowls are created that match two mediocre teams, and the more players decide to sit them out because they think playing might hamper their pro careers, the less significant the bowl games become.

[JohnR34231]

Bottom line, I think, is that whether something is meaningful or meaningless is in the eye of the beholder.

There is certainly a substantial portion of the world's population that thinks all American football is pretty meaningless.

Yes, this is a fair assessment.  My perspective on the significance or insignificance of a bow game revolves around two factors:
1) the significance of the match-up and
2) the significance of the result

On point one, many of the match-ups in the lower-tier bowls are truly meaningless.  Yesterday's offensively-challenged INT-fest was a prime example.  Cal was the lowest-seeded Pac-12 team, while TCU was tied with Baylor for lowest-seeded Big-12 team.  Not a significant match-up.  There's no rivalry, no past history, no narrative to make this more than two teams from the lower-middle tier of their conferences.  That said, it's not less significant than a typical regular season game; but bowl games are supposed to be something on a higher level (ostensibly).    

On point two, the outcomes of these games lack significance from a couple of perspectives.  The winner does not advance to a further round; there's no division or conference championship on the line; and, um, a W does not further the quest for bowl-eligibility (just had to throw that in there).  Now with more and more players sitting out the games, a further dimension of meaning has slipped away.  If teams increasingly enter these contests at diminished strength, what does it mean to beat Stanford or Pitt?  ASU most likely lost its game because of Harry's decision to skip the post-season. 

My overall dissatisfaction with the NCAA FBS post season is that there seem to be more and more meaningless match-ups; and the outcomes of these match-ups are declining in significance, particularly with the new trend for players to skip the post-season.  All in all, not a good trend.

Yeah, I can't argue with the notion that the more bowls are created that match two mediocre teams, and the more players decide to sit them out because they think playing might hamper their pro careers, the less significant the bowl games become.

[threepointer]

Funniest thread I have seen in some time.

"Is it possible to throw an interception on a coin toss?"

https://bleacherreport.com/cheez-it-bowl...trash-pile

[threepointer]

Funniest thread I have seen in some time.

"Is it possible to throw an interception on a coin toss?"

https://bleacherreport.com/cheez-it-bowl...trash-pile

[terry]

The TCU person who got called for the penalty in overtime was the Assistant A.D. for Communications (i.e. the Sports Information Director), Mark Cohen. 

What in the world was he doing out on the field???

https://www.star-telegram.com/sports/col...10200.html

[terry]

The TCU person who got called for the penalty in overtime was the Assistant A.D. for Communications (i.e. the Sports Information Director), Mark Cohen. 

What in the world was he doing out on the field???

https://www.star-telegram.com/sports/col...10200.html

[Farm93]

The TCU person who got called for the penalty in overtime was the Assistant A.D. for Communications (i.e. the Sports Information Director), Mark Cohen. 

What in the world was he doing out on the field???

https://www.star-telegram.com/sports/col...10200.html

Remember, TCU almost won the game at the end of the 4th quarter.   So a Sports Info type person would be on the sideline to help coordinate post-game interviews, bring out the Cheez-It Bowl Champion T-Shirts and Hats, etc.  Then once down there he more or less had nothing to do in OT and just stayed ready to celebrate the win with the team.

On that INT it looked likely TCU would win right there.   The Asst. AD just got too excited.  
Lucky for him the team moved the ball enough to get that FG to end the game in 1 OT.

[Farm93]

The TCU person who got called for the penalty in overtime was the Assistant A.D. for Communications (i.e. the Sports Information Director), Mark Cohen. 

What in the world was he doing out on the field???

https://www.star-telegram.com/sports/col...10200.html

Remember, TCU almost won the game at the end of the 4th quarter.   So a Sports Info type person would be on the sideline to help coordinate post-game interviews, bring out the Cheez-It Bowl Champion T-Shirts and Hats, etc.  Then once down there he more or less had nothing to do in OT and just stayed ready to celebrate the win with the team.

On that INT it looked likely TCU would win right there.   The Asst. AD just got too excited.  
Lucky for him the team moved the ball enough to get that FG to end the game in 1 OT.

[doublespiral]

SportCenter stated that the Cal-TCU game "set football back 50 years"

Cal would actually need it to set the sport back 80 years to get a Rose Bowl victory... :)

[doublespiral]

SportCenter stated that the Cal-TCU game "set football back 50 years"

Cal would actually need it to set the sport back 80 years to get a Rose Bowl victory... :)

[terry]

The TCU person who got called for the penalty in overtime was the Assistant A.D. for Communications (i.e. the Sports Information Director), Mark Cohen. 

What in the world was he doing out on the field???

https://www.star-telegram.com/sports/col...10200.html

Remember, TCU almost won the game at the end of the 4th quarter.   So a Sports Info type person would be on the sideline to help coordinate post-game interviews, bring out the Cheez-It Bowl Champion T-Shirts and Hats, etc.  Then once down there he more or less had nothing to do in OT and just stayed ready to celebrate the win with the team.

On that INT it looked likely TCU would win right there.   The Asst. AD just got too excited.  
Lucky for him the team moved the ball enough to get that FG to end the game in 1 OT.

I understand why the Asst. AD was on the TCU sideline. There are dozens of non-participants on the sidelines at every college football game. I've even been the sideline myself a few times. But in all of the thousands of football games every year, how many times does someone come off the sideline out onto the field and plow into a ref? It never happens. No matter how exciting it was, it was just a ridiculous thing to do.

[terry]

The TCU person who got called for the penalty in overtime was the Assistant A.D. for Communications (i.e. the Sports Information Director), Mark Cohen. 

What in the world was he doing out on the field???

https://www.star-telegram.com/sports/col...10200.html

Remember, TCU almost won the game at the end of the 4th quarter.   So a Sports Info type person would be on the sideline to help coordinate post-game interviews, bring out the Cheez-It Bowl Champion T-Shirts and Hats, etc.  Then once down there he more or less had nothing to do in OT and just stayed ready to celebrate the win with the team.

On that INT it looked likely TCU would win right there.   The Asst. AD just got too excited.  
Lucky for him the team moved the ball enough to get that FG to end the game in 1 OT.

I understand why the Asst. AD was on the TCU sideline. There are dozens of non-participants on the sidelines at every college football game. I've even been the sideline myself a few times. But in all of the thousands of football games every year, how many times does someone come off the sideline out onto the field and plow into a ref? It never happens. No matter how exciting it was, it was just a ridiculous thing to do.

[CTcard]

Both teams were playing their #3/#4 QBs.  

The QB situation was rather … odd, for both teams. 

TCU's starter to begin the season was Shawn Robinson. He was a top recruit who had transferred among 3 high schools. As a soph, he started the first 7 games this year, got injured, then announced he was transferring. 
Their next guy was another soph, Collins, who came in for 4+ games, went 1-3, and got injured. 
So, in came the fifth year senior Muehlstein. He was all that was left for TCU and had never attempted a pass in his career. He actually played okay, leading them to two wins to get bowl eligible. 
In the CheezIt Bowl he managed a PER of 6, which is the lowest I immediately remember for a QB playing a major portion of a game. 
[The other guy who came in briefly was highly recruited frosh Justin Rogers who is recovering from injuries, first an ACL tear and then "drop foot" - which seems to be he cannot keep his foot in proper position.]
So, while nominally TCU was playing a third and fourth string QB, it was all they had. 

Then there's cal. 
Ross Bowers was the starter in 2017. He apparently won the job again for 2018, played about a half in their first game vs UNC - never to be seen again. Last heard from he was one of seven bears who announced they are transferring out. 
Garbers was their starter, though often spelled by Brandon McIlwain who can't throw but is a runner. In the bowl, Garbers was apparently benched for the three INTs in the first half. 
McIlwain was apparently not available because he is being changed into a WR (and no, it is not entirely clear to me why that means he was unavailable - it's cal). So in came the fifth year senior Forrest - who hadn't yet appeared in a game this year but did have 28 career pass attempts (which was 28 more over four years than TCU's guy had). He proceeded to throw two more INTs, and charged to a PER of 50. 
I was wondering if Forrest was getting the chance to play the second half as a reward for his loyalty to the program - or whether Garbers (and McIlwain?) were actually injured.

[CTcard]

Both teams were playing their #3/#4 QBs.  

The QB situation was rather … odd, for both teams. 

TCU's starter to begin the season was Shawn Robinson. He was a top recruit who had transferred among 3 high schools. As a soph, he started the first 7 games this year, got injured, then announced he was transferring. 
Their next guy was another soph, Collins, who came in for 4+ games, went 1-3, and got injured. 
So, in came the fifth year senior Muehlstein. He was all that was left for TCU and had never attempted a pass in his career. He actually played okay, leading them to two wins to get bowl eligible. 
In the CheezIt Bowl he managed a PER of 6, which is the lowest I immediately remember for a QB playing a major portion of a game. 
[The other guy who came in briefly was highly recruited frosh Justin Rogers who is recovering from injuries, first an ACL tear and then "drop foot" - which seems to be he cannot keep his foot in proper position.]
So, while nominally TCU was playing a third and fourth string QB, it was all they had. 

Then there's cal. 
Ross Bowers was the starter in 2017. He apparently won the job again for 2018, played about a half in their first game vs UNC - never to be seen again. Last heard from he was one of seven bears who announced they are transferring out. 
Garbers was their starter, though often spelled by Brandon McIlwain who can't throw but is a runner. In the bowl, Garbers was apparently benched for the three INTs in the first half. 
McIlwain was apparently not available because he is being changed into a WR (and no, it is not entirely clear to me why that means he was unavailable - it's cal). So in came the fifth year senior Forrest - who hadn't yet appeared in a game this year but did have 28 career pass attempts (which was 28 more over four years than TCU's guy had). He proceeded to throw two more INTs, and charged to a PER of 50. 
I was wondering if Forrest was getting the chance to play the second half as a reward for his loyalty to the program - or whether Garbers (and McIlwain?) were actually injured.

[ADPinWDC]

I don't really get it.
These are "meaningless exhibition games", until, of course, a Pac-12 team loses one. Then they suddenly become h.uge embarrassments for the conference. I know the Pac-12 record in them over the last year or so is awful, but if they are really meaningless, who cares?
Someone will no doubt explain it to me.

So here's my two cents:

1) Not all bowl games are meaningless.  The CFP games and the NY6 bowl games definitely have value.  It is still a big thing to win a Rose Bowl, and I haven't heard of any players sitting this one out (though I admit the one or the other might have slipped past me).  The games leading up to the national championship are very meaningful for the programs and players involved.

2) There are far too many low-level bowls that pit teams against each other with barely winning records.  Although these bowl games do not carry much weight, they were often perceived as a season-ending reward for players (and fans); and if the venue was decent, the participating teams had fun, got some extra practices, maybe got to raise a trophy and generated some money for their conference.  

3) However, since the advent of players "sitting out" the post-season, the results of these lower-tier bowl games have become even more meaningless.  How important is a Sun Bowl if key players are not participating?  What will Stanford's victory (or loss) mean in the broader context of the 2018 season?  

4) Still, the results of the post-season are definitely used to advance certain narratives and stoke the promotional feuds for next season.  If the Pac-12 again produces a belly-flop in the post-season, nobody will remember that N'Keal Harry sat out the ASU game vs. Fresno State and essentially neutered the Sun Devil passing game.  And Cal's ugly near-miss yesterday will simply be another L for west coast pride.  SportCenter stated that the Cal-TCU game "set football back 50 years", which was a clear dig at the Pac-12 and the Big-12 by SEC-leaning sportscasters.  If the SEC, by contrast, piles up a lot of wins in equally meaningless bowl games, that narrative will be used to justify high pre-season rankings for the 14 teams in the conference.  

So are the bowl games meaningless?  Yes, many of them are.  Should we care?  Unfortunately, yes, because even losing meaningless games will be used against the Pac-12 when the 2018 season is written up and locked in the record books; and this will have a negative effect on everything from recruiting to pre-season rankings.  Winning still counts, regardless of the contest.

Agree -- with 8+ guys sitting out, Sun Bowl is a good shot for the "next guy up to get live reps".  
And Shaw likes being in Texas for the H.S. recruiting game.  We got a LOT of good talent from Texas 
(A.Luck, W.Little, T.Speights, Solly Thomas, K.Smith.... )

[ADPinWDC]

I don't really get it.
These are "meaningless exhibition games", until, of course, a Pac-12 team loses one. Then they suddenly become h.uge embarrassments for the conference. I know the Pac-12 record in them over the last year or so is awful, but if they are really meaningless, who cares?
Someone will no doubt explain it to me.

So here's my two cents:

1) Not all bowl games are meaningless.  The CFP games and the NY6 bowl games definitely have value.  It is still a big thing to win a Rose Bowl, and I haven't heard of any players sitting this one out (though I admit the one or the other might have slipped past me).  The games leading up to the national championship are very meaningful for the programs and players involved.

2) There are far too many low-level bowls that pit teams against each other with barely winning records.  Although these bowl games do not carry much weight, they were often perceived as a season-ending reward for players (and fans); and if the venue was decent, the participating teams had fun, got some extra practices, maybe got to raise a trophy and generated some money for their conference.  

3) However, since the advent of players "sitting out" the post-season, the results of these lower-tier bowl games have become even more meaningless.  How important is a Sun Bowl if key players are not participating?  What will Stanford's victory (or loss) mean in the broader context of the 2018 season?  

4) Still, the results of the post-season are definitely used to advance certain narratives and stoke the promotional feuds for next season.  If the Pac-12 again produces a belly-flop in the post-season, nobody will remember that N'Keal Harry sat out the ASU game vs. Fresno State and essentially neutered the Sun Devil passing game.  And Cal's ugly near-miss yesterday will simply be another L for west coast pride.  SportCenter stated that the Cal-TCU game "set football back 50 years", which was a clear dig at the Pac-12 and the Big-12 by SEC-leaning sportscasters.  If the SEC, by contrast, piles up a lot of wins in equally meaningless bowl games, that narrative will be used to justify high pre-season rankings for the 14 teams in the conference.  

So are the bowl games meaningless?  Yes, many of them are.  Should we care?  Unfortunately, yes, because even losing meaningless games will be used against the Pac-12 when the 2018 season is written up and locked in the record books; and this will have a negative effect on everything from recruiting to pre-season rankings.  Winning still counts, regardless of the contest.

Agree -- with 8+ guys sitting out, Sun Bowl is a good shot for the "next guy up to get live reps".  
And Shaw likes being in Texas for the H.S. recruiting game.  We got a LOT of good talent from Texas 
(A.Luck, W.Little, T.Speights, Solly Thomas, K.Smith.... )