Bowl Season is a Joke

[Golsen82]

Did they have as many key players opt out?

I think someone here said maybe 1 opt out? Sounds like they were mostly full strength

 

[cway313]

Who knows nowadays? How many starters are going to be brought in from the portal? Could be as many as a quarter of the starters.

And yes, some members who are JV this year will be varsity next year. It's been that way forever. Would you still start your JV team over varsity in the current year if your varsity guys are available?

The reinforcements have been coming for 3 years now. Wouldn't recommend holding your breath. We will see the same guys that weren't good enough in "meaningless" game vs Rutgers next year. Maybe a QB and some new DT but the bulk of yesterday is your 2024 starters. That is troubling to me.

 

[TemplarCane]

Yeah - wasn't sure about all that and appreciate the clarity.

You’re welcome. NIL is wild west show right now. They are allegedly is a rule against pay for play, deals are not supposed to be tied to schools, but schools have collectives? Baffling.

 

[gacaneaddict]

The bowls in 2023 matter no more or less than they did in 2016. The difference now is that most here don't even think we have chance to win. Nobody is hanging banners for the Almanac Direction Bowl. The issue is we didn't field a competitive team and after 2 years a few players on our second team shouldn't be significantly inferior to Rutgers.

Few 2nd team players? We lost by 7 after a terrible pick short field TD, and a blocked punt for a TD. We had more first downs and more yards, but it wasn't competitive?

We started a 3rd team QB.
We were down 2 of our top 3 RB's after 3 plays.
We were down a top 3 WR. We were down our best all purpose player and return man.
We were down our 2 best OL.

We were down our best DT. We were down our top 3 safeties. We were down our top reserve LB. We were down our 2nd team DE's. Bain and Wayne played like every snap.

disingenuous to say we played a few 2nd teamers. We played numerous 2nd teamers and some 3rd stringers as well as people playing new positions.

That bowl lineup we trotted out goes 4-8. It's ok to say that a basically full Rutgers team played a severely depleted Miami team, and we lost 31-24. Miami will look much different as a team in 2024 than what we rolled out on the bowl.

 

[cway313]

Few 2nd team players? We lost by 7 after a terrible pick short field TD, and a blocked punt for a TD. We had more first downs and more yards, but it wasn't competitive?

We started a 3rd team QB.
We were down 2 of our top 3 RB's after 3 plays.
We were down a top 3 WR. We were down our best all purpose player and return man.
We were down our 2 best OL.

We were down our best DT. We were down our top 3 safeties. We were down our top reserve LB. We were down our 2nd team DE's. Bain and Wayne played like every snap.

disingenuous to say we played a few 2nd teamers. We played numerous 2nd teamers and some 3rd stringers as well as people playing new positions.

That bowl lineup we trotted out goes 4-8. It's ok to say that a basically full Rutgers team played a severely depleted Miami team, and we lost 31-24. Miami will look much different as a team in 2024 than what we rolled out on the bowl.

K.

 

[Rellyrell]

No one is saying the teams aren't playing hard. The complaint is it's not the same teams. It's like watching the JV teams play instead of the varsity. They're both playing hard (or should be), but it's not the same teams.

Or you watch the Three Stooges with Curly for years, and then all of a sudden Shemp appears.

The narrative for that game was Alabama didn't care about being there. Yes, they lost to an 11-2 OU team....who was a 17.5 point underdog. The point is Alabama's players were checked out - whether it was a hangover from the "kick six" against Auburn or not being in the Championship game.

Well, UK & Clemson starters are playing w/ a couple of their transfers/draft eligible guys opting out.

I think bowl games is also a great opportunity to showcase ur young kids, as well.

 

[canes732]

Let me start off by saying that it's possible that next year's CFB playoff expansion has a positive impact on the post-season product.

Honest question, does anyone really give a **** about bowl games anymore?

Maybe I'm just a casual fan nowadays, or perhaps it's just because we've stunk for 20 years and I've become numb to our inevitable bowl losses... but I absolutely did not care about the Pinstripe Bowl yesterday. I don't care about bowl games enough to critique coaching decisions, personnel decisions, offensive play calling, refs, etc... it all feels trivial now. When you subtract the players who will be selected in the top 3-4 rounds of next years NFL draft as well as transfer portal casualties, the games lose some degree of meaning. Even some of the high-profile bowls have begun to feel more like spring games than conference championship games. It has become common to see third-string QBs facing off against each other! Guys on the field are auditioning for PT and NIL, willing to go anywhere that will throw them a bone.

Again, maybe I'm just numb. Maybe this is copium. Maybe I'm wrong.

But, if the players don't care about a bowl game, why the fvck should I?

The bowls outside of the playoff have been ruined by 1 the playoff and 2 the portal opening before the bowls happen. But yes u still want to win the games. All the ncaa has to do is open the portal after bowl season but they still wanna act like school matters so they want kids to get to the next spots for spring semester

 

[NC_Canes_11]

The first idea is great.

However, I don't think it matters when you open the portal. If a kid knows he's going to the portal, he's not going to risk injury and play.

I don’t disagree. It’s not a permanent fix, it’s a band aid. The kids who are wanting to leave and don’t know where they are going, might take a chance to improve their stock. It would eliminate that mad rush for non elite guys to be first in, to hopefully get a spot elsewhere before bigger fish decide. Bc once you’ve gotten a spot on another team, you aren’t playing in the bowl.

I would also imagine it would free up more time for game planning without portal visits, etc. They could make it a dead period. Point being, you have to make bowl game prep the most important thing for the coaching staff and players.

 

[CaneinBroward]

Well, UK & Clemson starters are playing w/ a couple of their transfers/draft eligible guys opting out.

I think bowl games is also a great opportunity to showcase ur young kids, as well.

I'm sure all of the non-playoff bowl games have their share of opt-outs. And yes, it is a way to showcase the up and comers.

I guess I'm just old school. I'd rather see the guys who were getting first team reps all season in the last game of the year. Leave the showcase of the up and comers in the spring.

 

[gacaneaddict]

The reinforcements have been coming for 3 years now. Wouldn't recommend holding your breath. We will see the same guys that weren't good enough in "meaningless" game vs Rutgers next year. Maybe a QB and some new DT but the bulk of yesterday is your 2024 starters. That is troubling to me.

Mario has 1 full class on campus (#7), and they are true freshman. Reinforcements for 3 years?

QB-100% no maybe
OL-6'5 300 pound starting C, #1 6'8 340 JUCo OL
WR-Best WR class in 20'years at Miami? We are chasing some portal WRs too.

DE-Get 2 really good starters back in Mesidor and Kelly
DL-2 portal takes already singed best DT class in 20 plus years with big athletic bodies than can play early

S-Get Harris back, already got a portal S
Think we get a CB and another S

 

[NC_Canes_11]

Preface:

A.
Coaching stunk.
We weren't prepared.
We played like ****.
I WANTED TO WIN THIS GAME. I'm ****ed.

Ok, that's out of the way.
Now I can respond to the OP....

B.
I agree, something has to change regarding the secondary bowls.
@NC_Canes_11 had the pay idea that may coerce some players to play.
Some of these games are now overhyped scrimmages.

What's that saying...both A and B can be true??

I’ve made my thoughts on part A clear, the game didn’t matter, but all your points are still correct.

Supposedly Minnesota paid their QB $30k to play in the bowl. Worked out well for them. Now I don’t think NIL money for it will ever catch on in a meaningful way, bc bowls don’t matter. But revenue sharing can, and will work.

All it takes is one bowl game to publicly announce that they are asking the NCAA and their partners to allow it, and the internet would do the rest. The dominos would start to fall. I think players everywhere would be jumping on social media saying they’d play for money. And then one conference, ad partner, etc. announces it’s support, it’s either hop on board or get left behind.

 

[NJshoreCane]

The bowls in 2023 matter no more or less than they did in 2016. The difference now is that most here don't even think we have chance to win. Nobody is hanging banners for the Almanac Direction Bowl. The issue is we didn't field a competitive team and after 2 years a few players on our second team shouldn't be significantly inferior to Rutgers.

It is an issue but i didn’t see that as the point of the OP.
Maybe this thread doesn’t go sideways real fast if it had been posted 2 days ago.

Timing…right?

 

[cway313]

It is an issue but i didn’t see that as the point of the OP.
Maybe this thread doesn’t go sideways real fast if it had been posted 2 days ago.

Timing…right?

I have commented on multiple different topics throughout thread.

 

[Rellyrell]

I'm sure all of the non-playoff bowl games have their share of opt-outs. And yes, it is a way to showcase the up and comers.

I guess I'm just old school. I'd rather see the guys who were getting first team reps all season in the last game of the year. Leave the showcase of the up and comers in the spring.

I agree w/ this, as well.

 

[NJshoreCane]

I have commented on multiple different topics throughout thread.

Got it.
I was in early.

The “timing” comment was referring to the OP.

 

[Rellyrell]

I’ve made my thoughts on part A clear, the game didn’t matter, but all your points are still correct.

Supposedly Minnesota paid their QB $30k to play in the bowl. Worked out well for them. Now I don’t think NIL money for it will ever catch on in a meaningful way, bc bowls don’t matter. But revenue sharing can, and will work.

All it takes is one bowl game to publicly announce that they are asking the NCAA and their partners to allow it, and the internet would do the rest. The dominos would start to fall. I think players everywhere would be jumping on social media saying they’d play for money. And then one conference, ad partner, etc. announces it’s support, it’s either hop on board or get left behind.

I’ve long been a proponent that these bowl games need to incentivize players; best way to incentivize are money opportunities. These games are sponsored by big brands; well, let’s get some NIL opportunities from these same companies.

 

[TheOriginalCane]

I think The Portal is just as, if not more responsible for the opt outs than anything. The portal is an issue.

Definitely agree. And I'm not sure there IS an answer, since a lot of players ANNOUNCED they would be entering the Portal even before the Portal opened. So it's uncertain how changing the date would change the opt-out.

The bowl games are played between December 16th and January 8th this year (though the only game past January 1st is the national championship game).

The Portal ENTRY window is between December 4th and January 2nd this year.

Early Signing Day was December 20th.

Most schools start enrolling players early in January. Miami classes start January 16th. The last day to register is January 24th.

So if you push the portal entry back by two weeks, you would STILL have time for players to opt out. There were 7 bowl games on December 16th this year, but only two had P5 type teams. And if you push the Portal date back two weeks, you narrow the timeframe for evaluating and deciding where to go, as visits would be really tight prior to enrollment deadlines.

It's just...hard...to figure out any real calendar that works.

 

[NC_Canes_11]

Well, UK & Clemson starters are playing w/ a couple of their transfers/draft eligible guys opting out.

I think bowl games is also a great opportunity to showcase ur young kids, as well.

Winning these games between 7-6 teams does not matter anymore. Bowl games should be starters first half, freshman/young guys second half.

If you’re trying to get to 10 wins like Zona last night, or NC ST, or in a NY6 game, different story. But there is zero reason why the young kids didn’t play yesterday when the starters weren’t playing well.

 

[Southern Oz]

Best regular season in sport.
Worst post season.

Bowl games are not good.

 

[WeBallinBoyz]

Best regular season in sport.
Worst post season.

Bowl games are not good.

Clearly Clemson and Kentucky didn’t get the memo.

Nor did Arizona/OU, or NC state/Kansas St, or Boston College, or Georgia Tech, or USC, or UCLA, or Texas Tech, or Northwestern, or Duke…

Miami is too good for bowl games I guess. Maybe that’s why we never win them.