Those cities make a buttload off of people traveling. I doubt that'll ever happen.Or just get rid of the bowl games after the 12 team playoffs come. Only thing that is good for bowl games is betting on them.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Those cities make a buttload off of people traveling. I doubt that'll ever happen.Or just get rid of the bowl games after the 12 team playoffs come. Only thing that is good for bowl games is betting on them.
I’ve wondered myself why we shouldn’t make that change.Or simply move the portal to after bowl games.
So players can transfer at semester (which usually ends well before winter break)I’ve wondered myself why we shouldn’t make that change.
I guess that makes sense. It would be just too tight of a timeline to expect them to wait until January to start the process of finding a new home. I was just reading an article where Saban talked about how Alabama had 10 guys hit the portal, some of whom would have gotten playing time in the bowl game. Saban said he gave all 10 the option to still play in the game (even while remaining in the portal) and none of them took him up on the offer.So players can transfer at semester (which usually ends well before winter break)
No longer an amateur sport, strip the players of ncaa status, put the NIL group into their own "semi-pro" league. Open a new D1 "student-athlete" division, frame it like the fcs, no crossover games with NIL. If players want to transfer out to the NIL league, let them, but once out, they are not allowed back. Bring back the sit out a year rule of they transfer.This Sports Illustrated article says in the future bowls may pay players to participate. I assume the increasing number of players opting out is part of the reason for the potential change.
Bowl game sponsors are getting creative in the era of NIL, striking deals with participants that may both stave off bowl opt-outs as well as provide a work-around to the NCAA policy prohibiting pay-for-play.
This could open the door to a more standard operating procedure of bowls directly paying players, potentially steering the money paid to conferences and schools toward athletes.
“We are really eager to have that conversation,” Carparelli says. “We think we can be a great solution for the commissioners. We know they are under increased pressure to find ways to put money in the pockets of student-athletes especially with the rapidly escalating television revenue. They are not able to pay players directly. If they were to desire bowls to make payments directly to players instead of conferences and schools, we can do that.”
Several holiday college basketball tournaments have paid participating players through NIL deals. But bowl checks would be more sizable. Bowl payouts range widely, from the Bahamas Bowl’s $225,000 and the New Mexico Bowl’s $1 million, to the Quick Lane Bowl’s $2 million and the Valero Alamo Bowl’s $8.2 million.
Traditionally, payouts go directly to conferences of participating teams. Leagues then normally distribute that revenue among their members.
“The payouts from bowl games could certainly be directed entirely to the players instead of the conferences if that’s what the commissioners wanted,” Carparelli says.
While there may not be a "need" for the bowl games, the bowl games are affiliated with the respective conference(s), and generate revenue for the conference (divided equally within the B1G). Therefore, I think they'll keep them around as long as they're financially viable.I think the biggest concern for the future of the bowl games is what happens with the conferences. This talk of conferences continually expanding and merging, not to mention the expansion of the playoffs, it may get to the point there will no longer be a need for the bowl games.