| FTBL Bowl organization wants all games in expanded College Football Playoff played at bowl sites

The non-profit organization Bowl Season that represents the 43 postseason bowl games has asked the College Football Playoff that all games in an expanded playoff be played entirely within the bowl system. In addition, the organization has asked for a spot at the table in further CFP discussion.

In a letter dated Monday and obtained by CBS Sports that went out to the 130 FBS presidents, athletic directors, coaches and 10 FBS commissioners, the organization stated:

"An expanded playoff should include all playoff games being played within the traditional Bowl structure, not the home site of one of the participating teams. The Bowls would provide a neutral, competitively fair setting for these games as they have throughout their history."

As currently proposed, a 12-team playoff would include four first-round play-in games for eight teams at campus sites. The next two rounds in the quarterfinals and finals would be played at bowl sites. Those sites would presumably be the current New Year's Six bowls – Cotton, Fiesta, Orange, Peach and Rose -- though the specific sites have yet to be officially determined.

The letter is signed by Bowl Season executive director Nick Carparelli and chairman Mark Neville, executive director of the Holiday Bowl. All 43 bowl games are listed.

"To exclude Bowl games from any round of an expanded playoff would be harmful to Bowl Season, individual Bowls and their host communities, and post-season college football in general," the letter states. "The future direction of college football has reached a volatile point. As a leader and caretaker of college athletics, we appreciate your consideration of the key role the Bowls play in your university experience."

The expansion process has been fractionalized as CFP leaders prepare to meet Wednesday and Thursday in Irving, Texas, for the next round of talks. There has been pushback on whether the current four-team field will expand to eight or 12 or at all. SEC commissioner Greg Sankey -- part of a four-person subcommittee to make the 12-team proposal -- has stated he is fine with the four-team field if an expansion decision can't be made.

There have already been questions raised about those first-round, on-campus games due to potential missed final exams and issues with "winterization," preparing a campus stadium for freezing December temperatures. There is also a situation where a team playing a first-round game could end up on the field for a record 17 games in a season if it reaches the CFP National Championship.

Hancock recently told the Associated Press that a new playoff structure could begin as soon as the 2024 season if expansion is finalized. If not, the current contract will likely be honored through the 2025 season with the expanded playoff beginning in 2026.

Further fractionalizing discussions is how to value an expanded playoff. Several stakeholders want the current contract to expire in an effort to maximize the value of a new, expanded playoff with multiple bidders taking part in the TV rights.

Bowl executives have complained about the impact of a championship postseason since the BCS was established in 1998. Alabama coach Nick Saban has argued in the past that the season focusing on the playoff has been detrimental to the regular season and other traditional bowl games.

Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby has been vocal about how an expanded playoff will enhance the regular season.

"It's going to be very good for regular-season TV," Bowlsby told CBS Sports. "It's going to be very good for regular-season attendance. This time of year, Week 7 or 8, there's going to be 40 teams that have a legitimate rooting possibility of being in there. Another 3-4 weeks from now, there's still going to be 20-25 teams. That's a far cry from [saying] 'Who's in' and there are 4 or 5 teams that have a chance."

 
Of course bowls want playoff games....

Going to be a decision...
Do we want
"meaningful" playoff games
Or
"meaningless" bowl games

Coming to your TV soon
Been seeing your arguments about bowl games and have a question. All things being equal and the same two teams play but the game is labelled/marketed as a playoff or a bowl game does it change anything especially on the field in your view? Why or why not?
 
Been seeing your arguments about bowl games and have a question. All things being equal and the same two teams play but the game is labelled/marketed as a playoff or a bowl game does it change anything especially on the field in your view? Why or why not?
Yeah......changes a lot.....
Goes from being just a game...which is fine....nothing wrong with that....if you have vested interest...may be something you wont miss....( but even players see it and some will sit out..)
To
A step closer for one ....to being champion of sport..( even if one thinks the #8 team has no chance to beat the #1 team...of course that would never happen...ha-ha)....and ..one team goes home...one moves on closer to goal.........( & doubt you will see key players sit out)

Just myview...certainly not shared by all....

But still needs to be rewards for accomplishments in season....such as home game or game locations...

And bowls were fine ...before there were just so many games on tv...they were a december treat...day after day...weekday nights... but now... with so many games on tv during regular season...

Again..just my opinion....
 
Been seeing your arguments about bowl games and have a question. All things being equal and the same two teams play but the game is labelled/marketed as a playoff or a bowl game does it change anything especially on the field in your view? Why or why not?
It's an argument that lacks any foundation. He's, literally, arguing for participation rewards.

All that proposal from the Bowl Org. means is the proposed 12 teams would be playing in the top six bowl games. If the Cotton is a meaningless bowl game and now it's a quarterfinal, it's still a meaningless game.

Yeah......changes a lot.....
Goes from being just a game...which is fine....nothing wrong with that....if you have vested interest...may be something you wont miss....( but even players see it and some will sit out..)
To
A step closer for one ....to being champion of sport..( even if one thinks the #8 team has no chance to beat the #1 team...of course that would never happen...ha-ha)....and ..one team goes home...one moves on closer to goal.........( & doubt you will see key players sit out)

Just myview...certainly not shared by all....

But still needs to be rewards for accomplishments in season....such as home game or game locations...

And bowls were fine ...before there were just so many games on tv...they were a december treat...day after day...weekday nights... but now... with so many games on tv during regular season...

Again..just my opinion....
Georgia beating Kentucky in the Peach Bowl versus Georgia beating Kentucky in the quarterfinals. The result is still the same.

All that's done by tacking playoff on the game is now "Kentucky participated" in the playoffs. A participation trophy.

Participation trophies are born in meaningless games, here, what would be a meaningless bowl game or playoff game.

But yeah, they participated! Hoorah!!
 
@50+yeartidefan did you watch the UGA vs Cincy game last season?
No!!! Only thing I can align with about this is maybe the players see it a little differently so no one sits out or they prepare better. I doubt the results on the field change much. If you labelled the game bowl or playoff UGA vs UK would not make me feel any different.

Now the marketing machine can market things differently for programs that need that. School X was in the playoffs. Of course they can market that their school was also in a bowl game. Bama markets we have been to and won more bowl games than anyone. We do the same thing for CFP. Maybe helpful for recruiting?
 
@SoCalPatrick Hey, while I realize there's still a little glue left stop beating my dead horse! 😈
Am i it
It's an argument that lacks any foundation. He's, literally, arguing for participation rewards.

All that proposal from the Bowl Org. means is the proposed 12 teams would be playing in the top six bowl games. If the Cotton is a meaningless bowl game and now it's a quarterfinal, it's still a meaningless game.


Georgia beating Kentucky in the Peach Bowl versus Georgia beating Kentucky in the quarterfinals. The result is still the same.

All that's done by tacking playoff on the game is now "Kentucky participated" in the playoffs. A participation trophy.

Participation trophies are born in meaningless games, here, what would be a meaningless bowl game or playoff game.

But yeah, they participated! Hoorah!!
so what happens when ky upsets uga in semifinals. ( or other teams. Not necessarily those 2)
Ooop. Ur argument flops. As usual!!!!
 
No!!! Only thing I can align with about this is maybe the players see it a little differently so no one sits out or they prepare better. I doubt the results on the field change much. If you labelled the game bowl or playoff UGA vs UK would not make me feel any different.

Now the marketing machine can market things differently for programs that need that. School X was in the playoffs. Of course they can market that their school was also in a bowl game. Bama markets we have been to and won more bowl games than anyone. We do the same thing for CFP. Maybe helpful for recruiting?
They like parcipation trophys. I like competition for championshipS

Just a matter of perceived accomplishments
Nfl, nba, mlb all expanded playoffs to expand a quest for champions

Maybe some just like new orleans bowl.
I really dont have a problem with it. If thsts what they like
 
Back
Top Bottom