This is the first of an irregular
installment that hopes to clear up misconceptions about whatever topic strikes
me at the moment.
I spent the better part of this past Friday through Monday watching
football. Sure, Sunday was filled with the brand that openly pays players, but
the majority of that time was spent watching college bowl games. Sure, I may have neglected my dog, wife, kid,
hygiene, diet and mental and physical health, but I did get to watch a lot of
football, so it seems like a fair trade.
But as with most popular things (and despite vast sections of the
stadium filled with fans dressed as empty seats, make no mistake, bowl games
are popular), there are notions about them that are harder to break than an
addiction to something highly addictive.
Questions abound about the bowl system. Why aren’t there better
matchups? Why are there so many games? Who really cares who would win a game
between a 6-6 Illinois team and a 6-7 UCLA team? What did ESPN show before it
got the rights to virtually every bowl game in existence? Why are you using the
writing crutch of asking questions you intend to answer/ (Ok, so that’s not
specific to bowl games, but you were wondering). I’ll answer these and many
(i.e. maybe one) more below.
Why are there so many games?
The short answer is “Cash.” The longer answer is “Money.” For a
slightly longer answer, we turn to noted sports commentator and part time head
case Randy Moss who said “straight cash homie.” You get the idea. As with most
things in sports, money is the driving motivation. But who gets that money?
Well, it turns out the answer is “it depends.” In some cases, the games are
part of a larger event for a *cough* non-profit *cough* that donates the
revenues to charity. Of course, those events require large amounts of
administration and those administrators aren’t independently wealthy, so they
take a nice paycheck. The schools or their conferences get some of the money, most of which is spent paying to get the team and band to and from the game. In fact, a lot of schools actually lose money going to bowl games.
The other reason for all the games is because we keep watching. Yes, I
watched the Beef O’Brady’s Bowl and the Little Ceasers Bowl. ESPN is kind
enough to put them on during the holidays so we can turn them on to avoid
actually interacting with our families except to say “did you see that catch?”
or “come here and watch this catch,” or “come here and watch this catch, but
while you’re up can you get me a beer?” I know the games are glorified
exhibitions, but it beats whatever rerun of CSI: Omaha that’s on the other
channels.
Why aren’t there better
matchups?
This one’s easy. Outside of the
BCS National Championship Game, the Bowls don’t care about the matchups. After
the top two teams (I’ll leave the debate about how they’re selected to someone
else), the Bowls have a pre-determined order in selecting teams, often from
conferences they have pre-arranged agreements with. So the obvious follow up
question is “why am I still reading?” After that, you’d ask yourself “what
criteria do the bowls use to select their teams? We again return to the answer
to the first question, “cash.”
Bowl games are nothing more than events to draw tourists to a locale.
As such, the game’s primary importance is not television ratings or appeal to a
national audience. The primary factor for picking teams is “do they travel well”
as in “will they buy a lot of tickets and book a lot of hotel rooms and eat in
our city’s fine restaurants?” That’s why a team like Boise State (ranked #7)
gets sent to Las Vegas to play in a pre-Christmas Bowl while Virginia Tech
(ranked #11) gets to go to New Orleans for one of the Big Four bowl games.
How do they cram all that
graham?
I don’t know.
I don’t know.
Why does ESPN show virtually
every bowl game?
They’re a 24-hour sports network trying to fill inventory in December to
people are randomly off in the middle of the day, they don’t care about NBA or
College Basketball until after the Super Bowl is over and the need a sports fix.
What, you’d rather they were on HGTV?
What do the games actually mean?
They’re both meaningless exhibitions (to any rational sports fan) and
the determining factor of whether a team had a successful season or not (to everyone
else.) Of course, placing such emphasis
on one game to define how successful a season was is ludicrous. Even teams who lose
in a playoff format will tell you that while they were disappointed, perhaps devastated,
to not win the title, they still had a successful season.
Check back next time when The Unstupiding tackles (obligatory
unnecessary football phrase) another pressing issue that, in reality, has very
little to do with anything.
No comments:
Post a Comment