Looking like three new bowl games in 2020. One at Wrigley



I like it, it's not that far away.

More bowl games the better. Fun is fun!
 

Even crappy bowl games draw relatively stout ratings. The nation's appetite for college football is always whetted.
 

Wasn't the configuration of Wrigley for football a bit of an issue? Or have they found a way around that?
 


Wasn't the configuration of Wrigley for football a bit of an issue? Or have they found a way around that?

Going from memory here, it was something like the offense would always be going the same direction on the field -- there wasn't enough space for two complete endzones, so who ever is on offense is always going to the right.
 

Wasn't the configuration of Wrigley for football a bit of an issue? Or have they found a way around that?

They've basically rebuilt the lower bowl and outfield seating structures at Wrigley since that game, and the new setup allows for easy removals of components to allow a full field.
 


100% Agree. Bring 'em on!!

I'm with you. I love football and can never get enough! My appetite can never be quenches! Plus, what would I, as an educator, do with my long holiday break if I couldn't consume endless quantities of junk food while watching meaningless games attended by 5k people?!
 



More details. This is from Brett McMurphy Twitter. The tweet was included in the original post article:

Based on recommendations by the NCAA’s Competition Committee, there are expected to be three new bowl games added for the 2020 season, sources said.

In 2020, a record 43 bowls (including the College Football Playoff title game) would be held, meaning a record 65 percent of the 130 FBS schools (84 teams) will play in a bowl game.

The Competition Committee’s recommendations, expected to be approved Tuesday by the NCAA’s Football Oversight Committee, has also designated the maximum number of bowl tie-ins per conference. These numbers were based on each conference’s average number of bowl-eligible teams in the past four seasons (2014-17).

The number of proposed bowls allowed per conference beginning in 2020, the start of the new bowl cycle, will be as follows (the Power 5 tie-ins do not include one New Year’s 6 bid for each league):

League Maximum bowl tie-ins
ACC 10 (not including ACC’s Orange Bowl bid)
SEC 10 (not including SEC’s Sugar Bowl bid)
Big Ten 8 (not including Big Ten’s Rose Bowl bid)
Pac-12 7 (not including Pac-12’s Rose Bowl bid)
Big 12 6 (not including Big 12’s Sugar Bowl bid)
American 7
Conference USA 7
Mid-American 6
Mountain West 6
Sun Belt 5
Army & BYU each can secure its own automatic bowl tie-in, but the remaining independents (New Mexico State, UMass and Liberty) must hope for an at-large spot from a conference that can’t fill all of its allotments in a specific year. Notre Dame remains part of the ACC’s bowl lineup.

So what does all this mean? Based on multiple sources, here’s how the 2020 bowl landscape could shake out.

* The three new bowls? Chicago and Myrtle Beach are near locks to host two of the new bowl games.

The Chicago bowl, to be played at Wrigley Field, will feature the Big Ten against the ACC, sources said. To add the Chicago bowl in 2020, the Big Ten is expected to end its affiliation with the San Francisco Bowl (formerly Foster Farms Bowl) after 2019.

Myrtle Beach and ESPN officials have had ongoing discussions about starting this bowl game, sources said. The most likely conferences affiliated with Myrtle Beach could be Conference USA, the Sun Belt or the Mid-American. If the Sun Belt is involved, look for the league to cut ties in 2020 with either Arizona, Dollar General, Camellia or Cure, all part of the Sun Belt’s current bowl lineup.

The third new bowl? This isn’t as clear cut. Arizona State has shown interest in adding a bowl in Tempe. And a number of cities/communities have expressed interest in the past including Charleston, S.C., and Greenville, N.C. The only certainty is before a bowl can be created, it must have a contract with two conferences and/or BYU/Army.

* Which conferences increased their bowl tie-ins in the new bowl cycle? The SEC (hello Vegas!), Pac-12, Conference USA, Mid-American and Mountain West all will be able to add another bowl affiliation in 2020, compared with their current allotments.

The Pac-12 will get an additional bowl bid in two years even though just last week the league announced it would prohibit any conference teams with 5-7 records from accepting bowl bids. That should be fun. What also could be interesting is what the Pac-12 does with the San Francisco Bowl after it loses the Big Ten. Foster Farms ended its four-year naming rights agreement, so the San Francisco Bowl is currently without a naming rights sponsor and it’s doubtful the Pac-12 can find another Power 5 opponent for the bowl. Could that possibly open the door for the Mountain West to San Francisco since it’s losing its tie-in with the Las Vegas Bowl?

* Vegas, baby, Vegas! As I reported last week, the Las Vegas Bowl will feature the Pac-12 vs. another Power 5 school in Vegas’ new NFL stadium in 2020, ending the bowl’s 19-year run with the Mountain West at Sam Boyd Stadium. It’s not a done deal, but sources said it’s “very likely” the Pac-12’s opponent will be from the SEC. Since it’s Vegas, I’d bet on the SEC. I’m told the matchup could be the Pac-12’s second or third selection vs. the SEC’s third or fourth selection and the game obviously would be moved off the first Saturday of bowl season.

As far as the Mountain West, among its options on where to send its champion is the Arizona Bowl, but there could be other possibilities based on what other bowls may change conference affiliations. Also, it could end up in the new Arizona State bowl, if created.

* American champ? The American is exploring the idea of having a bowl that annually hosts its conference champion, when it’s not in a New Year’s 6 game. Although the AAC currently does not have a tie-in with the Liberty, the league is intrigued about the possibility of sending its champion to Memphis, sources said. The Liberty is currently affiliated with the SEC and Big 12.

* What makes sense (so it will never happen): What if the Group of 5 designated that the four Group of 5 conference champions that didn’t advance to the New Year’s 6 bowl meet annually in two bowls each year? They could be paired based on highest rankings (1 vs. 2, 3 vs. 4 or 1 vs. 4, 2 vs. 3) or geography.

They could involve current bowls that host Group of 5 games such as New Orleans, Gasparilla (Tampa), Mobile, Frisco or Arizona. It would guarantee those two bowls always featured two conference champions.

The NCAA is expected to officially announce any changes to the current bowl formats by July 1.
 

Stating the obvious - more games means more teams. there have already been years when there were not enough 6-win teams to fill out the existing bowl roster. adding more games increases the odds that there will not be enough 6-win teams available, and the result will be more 5-win teams in bowl games. for better or worse.
 

Stating the obvious - more games means more teams. there have already been years when there were not enough 6-win teams to fill out the existing bowl roster. adding more games increases the odds that there will not be enough 6-win teams available, and the result will be more 5-win teams in bowl games. for better or worse.

The Pac 12 passed a rule that prohibits teams with less than 6 wins to accept bowls bids. I hope the Big 10 follows suit.
 

The Pac 12 passed a rule that prohibits teams with less than 6 wins to accept bowls bids. I hope the Big 10 follows suit.

I like that. I'm surprised though. Don't conferences make money when teams are in bowl games?
 



I like that. I'm surprised though. Don't conferences make money when teams are in bowl games?

I'm with you...more bowls? Ugh. I think the payouts on the lower bowls can create break-even or in the red situations when all is said and done.
 


I'm with you...more bowls? Ugh. I think the payouts on the lower bowls can create break-even or in the red situations when all is said and done.

It bugs me when teams get into bowl games with 5 wins. Sounds like we are in the minority on Gopherhole.

I do enjoy watching the bowl games but I would like if the Big 10 had the requirement for 6 wins like PAC.
 

The participation trophies just keep being handed out...
 

December games in Chicago, Detroit, Greenville, Shreveport, Boise, Fort Worth? One only has to look in the stands to see that those aren't "participation trophies" those are punishments!

Gotta remember that there are no guarantees that the Bowl Games listed now will still be there when December rolls around. Some already are having troubles lining-up sponsors.
 

All conferences should prohibit five win teams from going to bowls. Then they would be forced to reduce the number of bowls.
 

I would like it if the MOA would sponsor a bowl before Christmas. They could promote holiday shopping.
The problem is that it would be difficult to attract a mid tier bowl game. I'd go unless it was a matchup like Central Michigan vs. Rice.

Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
 


The Pac 12 passed a rule that prohibits teams with less than 6 wins to accept bowls bids. I hope the Big 10 follows suit.

Why? It just takes a month of practice away from your lower tier teams. They're shooting themselves in the foot, no reason for the B1G to also shoot themselves in the foot.
 

I get the whole "If a team doesn't get at least 6-6 on the season they don't deserve a bowl" argument, and I think adding more bowls is not a good idea (as much as I think it would be cool to have a bowl game in US Bank stadium). However, I'm not against what they have in place right now. If there aren't enough 6-6 teams to fill bowls, I'd rather have some 5-7 teams (with good APR) fill in so that all the teams who did earn a bowl trip get to play. I'd rather have 5-7 teams filling in every once and a while than having 6-6 teams lose out on a bowl game through no fault of their own just because not enough other teams did well.
 

Why? It just takes a month of practice away from your lower tier teams. They're shooting themselves in the foot, no reason for the B1G to also shoot themselves in the foot.

When you only win 5 games (or less) you should stay at home and feel shame, not be "rewarded" with a bowl and 10-15 extra practices.
 

When you only win 5 games (or less) you should stay at home and feel shame, not be "rewarded" with a bowl and 10-15 extra practices.

I understand where you're coming from, but I think it would be stupid for the B1G to ban it because that would take away development time from our players. We really needed that CMU bowl a couple of years ago, and it seemed to pay dividends in the following season.
 

I understand where you're coming from, but I think it would be stupid for the B1G to ban it because that would take away development time from our players. We really needed that CMU bowl a couple of years ago, and it seemed to pay dividends in the following season.

If a Big 10 team is 5-7, it actually means they are probably 4-7 against Power 5 teams as 1 of the 5 wins would likely be against a 1-AA/FCS team. Teams like that just do not deserve to go to bowls, plain and simple.

As for the extra practice and game (against another mediocre team in a non-tropical city), they may be better off resting, lifting weights and having film study. Certainly would reduce the chance of injury.
 

They should consider having a DQ Blizzard Bowl at Wrigley. I'd rather see B1G teams go bowling in places that are sunny an warm. For goodness sake, why not consider US Bank Stadium and put it indoors? Dilly Dan can have a new career as the face of the Dilly Bar.
 

They should consider having a DQ Blizzard Bowl at Wrigley. I'd rather see B1G teams go bowling in places that are sunny an warm. For goodness sake, why not consider US Bank Stadium and put it indoors? Dilly Dan can have a new career as the face of the Dilly Bar.

They should have one out of sight out on Lake Superior on the ice!
 

Unless you are in the playoff then no bowl really means anything other than two teams playing one another. I just view them all as another regular season non-conference game, only at the end of the season instead of the beginning. I can take them or leave them.
 

They've basically rebuilt the lower bowl and outfield seating structures at Wrigley since that game, and the new setup allows for easy removals of components to allow a full field.

I may be wrong but I think that the field fit, but barely, and the distance from the field to the brick outfield wall was minimal and did not meet NCAA regulations. Reminds me of the old Met Stadium where John Gilliam would catch those TD passes feet from the wall along the 3rd baseline. I can't remember anyone getting hurt there but it did present a risk of injury.
 




Top Bottom