With 40 bowl games and three 5-7 teams among the 80 participants, the 2015-16 bowl schedule is a bit wonky. Highlighting the wonkery: an all-Mountain West matchup of Colorado State and Nevada in the Nova Home Loans Arizona Bowl. It’s believed to be the first intra-conference bowl game since the 1979 Orange Bowl, a Big 8 vs. Big 8 meeting of entirely different circumstances.
Colorado State vs. Nevada in Arizona Bowl believed to be 1st non-playoff matchup of same leagues since 1979 Orange Bowl (OU-Nebraska)
— Brett McMurphy (@Brett_McMurphy) December 6, 2015
It’s also the first bowl not to be shown on national TV in more than 20 years.
This year's Arizona Bowl between Nevada & CSU is the first bowl game not aired on national TV since 1994's Freedom Bowl.
— Timothy Burke (@bubbaprog) December 6, 2015
Under that backdrop, Mountain West commissioner Craig Thompson released a lengthy screed Sunday evening, railing against a system he helped create.
For the first time in NCAA history, an insufficient number of deserving bowl-eligible teams (i.e., 6-6 record or better) are available to fill all the bowl games which make-up the current landscape (40 bowls plus the National Championship Game). As a result, a specific group of 5-7 teams ranked according to Academic Progress Rate was granted waivers to expand the bowl-eligibility pool and ensure no bowl game would go dark. Today, we have come to the unfortunate realization another dubious milestone has been reached - two teams from the same conference will face each other in a bowl game later this month. Neither of these developments is good for college football.
While the expansion of the pool to provide additional teams was a necessary step at the end of this season to protect the college football bowl partners, and one which the Mountain West supported for at this moment, a conference match-up in a bowl game did not have to happen. The NCAA decision to allow 5-7 teams to be added to the pool on an equal footing with 6-6 teams was flawed. Our Conference representatives argued steadfastly for an approach whereby all 6-6 teams would first be placed according to primary and secondary agreements among the conferences and bowl games. Our position was that only then would the safety net of 5-7 teams be activated for those games which had not yet secured participants - rather than allow those teams to fulfill conference agreements and usurp 6-6 teams from conferences with back-up agreements. The Mountain West cast its vote against the recommendation of the NCAA Football Oversight Committee (which did not include that parameter), and subsequently also voted in opposition to the action of the NCAA Council to approve that recommendation.
Understanding the implications of the NCAA verdict on Monday and with the knowledge neither of the primary or back-up conferences contracted as opponents in one of our bowl games would be able to provide a team, the Mountain West began immediately to work in earnest toward identifying a solution that would place teams in a manner that could avoid a conference match-up in a bowl game. We exchanged dozens of phone calls, texts and e-mails over the course of six days with numerous bowl games, other FBS conferences, the NCAA staff, the Football Bowl Association and our partners at ESPN Events. We spoke individually with our directors of athletics and convened that group collectively on multiple conference calls. We engaged throughout the week with members of the MW Board of Directors.
The Mountain West explored every possibility for placing the teams in question. We suggested swaps, alternative financial arrangements and creative options. Unfortunately, no one was willing to adjust and those efforts were to no avail. Following the outcome of last night’s games, it became clear there were 80 teams for 80 bowl slots and the only two openings still available for a pair of MW teams would match them in the same game.
It is a travesty the Mountain West has been forced into this situation. Clearly, the system is broken. There is an excess of bowl games due in part to a disparate allocation of openings vs. conference bowl histories. The result is teams with sub-.500 records participating in bowl games. There is consensus change is needed and this year’s outcome must not be repeated.
Thompson’s plan is all well and good, but don’t expect it to result in a reduction of bowl games. That would require turning down free money, something that’s never happened in college sports history.