Bowl chances at 5-7

[DawgatAuburn]

If you are in the camp that Arnett has to make a bowl game to keep his job, does that count if he makes one at 5-7? I'm not gonna lie. I want to make a bowl game, even if we make it at 5-7.

As you probably know, the selection of 5-7 teams for bowl games is based off their APR. We are tied for 19th this year with Auburn and Boston College. I think we lose the tiebreaker so essentially that makes us 21st.

Of the 20 teams ahead of us, 11 of them either already have or will have six wins (Alabama, Ohio St, Missouri, Washington, Clemson, Wisconsin, etc). That puts us at 10th in the pecking order.

I don't know a great prediction tool for remaining games. I used the one on Warren Nolan. That actually has us winning three more games and getting to six, which would render this moot. It also predicts Auburn to get to 7 wins, and has Minnesota and Boise State also getting to 6 wins.

If you care, the teams ahead of us who will be trying to at least get to 5 wins are:

Apr Rank	School	W	L	Remaining Schedule	Projected wins	Proj Total
1	Northwestern	3	3	Nebraksa, Maryland, Iowa, Wisconsin, Purdue, Illinois	0	3
6	Cincinnati	2	4	Baylor, Oklahoma State, UCF, Houston, West VA, Kansas	3	5
8	Minnesota	3	3	Iowa, Mich State, Illinois, Purdue, Ohio State, Wisconsin	3	6
8	Wake Forest	3	3	Pitt, FSU, Duke, NC State, Notre Dame, Syracuse	2	5
13	Boise State	3	4	Wyoming, Fresno St, New Mexico, Utah State, Air Force	3	6
15	Iowa State	4	3	Baylor, Kansas, BYU, Texas, Kansas State	1	5
15	Rice	3	3	Tulsa, Tulane, SMU, UTSA, Charlotte, FAU	1	4
19	Auburn	3	3	Ole Miss, State, Vandy, Arkansas, New Mexico State, Bama	4	7
19	Boston College	3	3	Ga Tech, UConn, Syracuse, Va Tech, Pitt, Miami	2	5
19	Mississippi State	3	3	Arkansas, Auburn, Kentucky, Texas A&M, Southern Miss, Ole Miss	3	6

I know there will be a lot of opinions on making a bowl game at 5-7. We didn't earn it, just end the season already, we lose money on bowl games, blah blah blah. I hear ya. I'm for a bowl game for at least three reasons: 1) The players get to experience playing in a bowl no matter how minor it is; 2) The extra practices; 3) It make bowl season more interesting for me when we are part of it.

So treat this however you please. I'll be using the list above as a rooting guide and cheering AGAINST any of these teams getting to 5 wins so our chances of being invited go up.

 

[patdog]

We’ve already counted a 5-7 and a 3-7 in the bowl streak. So heck yeah it counts. I’ll take a bowl game any way we can get it. Especially if Warren us right and we win 6.

 

[greenbean.sixpack]

I'm all for a bowl at 5-7. In one of the later JWS years, we got left out of a bowl at 7-4 (IIRC).

 

[GloryDawg]

No way Arkansas and SC get to six wins. I guess their APR is not good or they don't expect them to get to five wins. No way they think those two get to six wins. I could be wrong. I have not looked at their schedule. Both are 2 and 5. They have to win four of their next five games or three of their next five games to get to five wins.

SC remaining schedule
A&M
Missouri
Vanderbilt
KY
Clemson
Jacksonville State.

Not in that order. SC might be able to pull it off.

 

[MSUDC11-2.0]

I'm all for a bowl at 5-7. In one of the later JWS years, we got left out of a bowl at 7-5 (IIRC).

It was actually 7-4 (1997). We started 7-2 and lost to Arkansas and Ole Miss in our last two games to get left out.

 

[DawgatAuburn]

No way Arkansas and SC get to six wins. I guess their APR is not good or they don't expect them to get to five wins. No way they think those two get to six wins. I could be wrong. I have not looked at their schedule. Both are 2 and 5. They have to win four of their next five games or three of their next five games to get to five wins.

There is no "they" expecting them to get to 5 or 6 wins. In the APR ranks, South Carolina is 23rd and Arkansas is (yikes) 92nd, so they are irrelevant in this. The teams on the chart above are ranked ahead of us in APR and would be placed into a bowl ahead of us if they are 5-7. South Carolina and Arkansas would be behind us if either of them were also 5-7.

 

[Dawgg]

Good job putting this together. The tie-breaker is for the most recent season's (2021-2022) APR, which is bad for us.

2021-2022 APR:
Auburn: 1,000
Boston College: 991
Mississippi State: 969

So, unfortunately, you are correct that we lose the tie-breaker.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

I'm all for a bowl at 5-7. In one of the later JWS years, we got left out of a bowl at 7-5 (IIRC).

This is why the bowl streak is such a useless stat. BUT.....perception is reality, and people are idiots, so we need to promote the bowl streak.

I really hope, going forward, that non-playoff bowl games go away. Let those teams concentrate on recruiting while others are practicing. It'll also promote the in-season rivalries. But if they don't, we need to get away from win totals and start looking at more SOS type metrics to get in them.

 

[mcdawg22]

This is why the bowl streak is such a useless stat. BUT.....perception is reality, and people are idiots, so we need to promote the bowl streak.

I really hope, going forward, that non-playoff bowl games go away. Let those teams concentrate on recruiting while others are practicing. It'll also promote the in-season rivalries. But if they don't, we need to get away from win totals and start looking at more SOS type metrics to get in them.

You are a thief of joy.

 

[greenbean.sixpack]

I really hope, going forward, that non-playoff bowl games go away. Let those teams concentrate on recruiting while others are practicing. It'll also promote the in-season rivalries. But if they don't, we need to get away from win totals and start looking at more SOS type metrics to get in them.

I disagree. I don't understand why anyone wants less college football, it's the best sport going.

For whatever reason, college football has ceded much of December to the NFL, which makes no sense. Lots of folks have time off between Thanksgiving the New Year, let's fill more of that time with college football.

I'd love to see a Colorado/AF type bowl match up, even if both teams are 5-7.

We (college football fans - not necessary State fans) have had some outstanding games in 2023, it's been great season.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

I disagree. I don't understand why anyone wants less college football, it's the best sport going.

For whatever reason, college football has ceded much of December to the NFL, which makes no sense. Lots of folks have time off between Thanksgiving the New Year, let's fill more of that time with college football.

I'd love to see a Colorado/AF type bowl match up, even if both teams are 5-7.

We (college football fans - not necessary State fans) have had some outstanding games in 2023, it's been great season.

I say expand the playoff in that case.

 

[greenbean.sixpack]

I say expand the playoff in that case.

I'm all for that. Leach had a plan for it.

 

[dogmatic001]

I disagree. I don't understand why anyone wants less college football, it's the best sport going.

I agree with wanting as much college football as can be played. If every team in the country got a bowl game, that would be fine with me - from a fan's point of view, if it bothers you, don't watch it.

The whole bowl system is predicated on ******** anyway - there's no doubt payoffs from concerned parties have kept Div. I without a legitimate playoff for as long as they have. There's not any other argument that even begins to make sense. That said, I love college football and will watch it in whatever format is eventually offered.

Star players opting out and similar concerns will always be a problem I guess, but that's just part of the background noise.

 

[Perd Hapley]

Good job putting this together. The tie-breaker is for the most recent season's (2021-2022) APR, which is bad for us.

2021-2022 APR:
Auburn: 1,000
Boston College: 991
Mississippi State: 969

So, unfortunately, you are correct that we lose the tie-breaker.

Need a tutor-gate scandal at Auburn sometime in the next 6 weeks. Fortunately, their AD has a 100% success rate of implementing this at his previous stops.

 

[ETK99]

Save the money it'll cost for a low end bowl game and use it to buyout the staff.

 

[greenbean.sixpack]

Need a tutor-gate scandal at Auburn sometime in the next 6 weeks. Fortunately, their AD has a 100% success rate of implementing this at his previous stops.

I think we're the only program to self impose draconian penalties for reality minor infraction.

 

[Dawgg]

I really hope, going forward, that non-playoff bowl games go away.

This is a terrible take. Full stop.

One of the great things about college football is that, unlike the NFL, not everything has to matter on a national level. It's great when your team is relevant on the national level (we all experienced that in 2014), but it's not like we didn't find joy in other moments over the other 120+ years of Bulldog football.

If you're telling me that you'd trade the Snow Bowl in 2000 or the 2011 Gator Bowl win over Michigan or Dak's send off in the 2015 Belk Bowl just to see Georgia, Alabama, or Ohio State get an additional postseason game, then that's just ridiculous.

 

[ckDOG]

5-7 gives me no confidence in the future of this program unless someone wants to assure me we are landing a top 15 class and hitting the portal wisely. Any takers?

 

[dawgstudent]

It was actually 7-4 (1997). We started 7-2 and lost to Arkansas and Ole Miss in our last two games to get left out.

It's still amazing to me going into our last 3 SEC games - State controlled their destiny in 97, 99, and 00 to win the West. The one year we didn't - we won the West.

 

[FlotownDawg]

If we are 5-7, we should fire the coaching staff instead of preparing for a bowl game. I guess a new coach could use bowl prep to evaluate the roster. That would be the only good to come out of it.

 

[Villagedawg]

I'm all for a bowl at 5-7. In one of the later JWS years, we got left out of a bowl at 7-4 (IIRC).

1997 after a 1 point OT loss to Ole Miss who was also 7-4. Liberty took them over us.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

This is a terrible take. Full stop.

One of the great things about college football is that, unlike the NFL, not everything has to matter on a national level. It's great when your team is relevant on the national level (we all experienced that in 2014), but it's not like we didn't find joy in other moments over the other 120+ years of Bulldog football.

If you're telling me that you'd trade the Snow Bowl in 2000 or the 2011 Gator Bowl win over Michigan or Dak's send off in the 2015 Belk Bowl just to see Georgia, Alabama, or Ohio State get an additional postseason game, then that's just ridiculous.

Well, it's my take. I stand by it, and have for years.

Of course I wouldn't trade those bowl wins. They happened. That was the system back then. And I agree with your statements about the national level up until 2014. When there was no national title game, and even when there was ONE BCS game, I agree with you. That's why I've said over and over that I think the best era of college football was 1998-2010. We got a clear national champion, but we also had rewards for all the other spots. So in that vein I agree with you.

But fast forward to now, this is simply a different time. The money is bigger, players hold out of bowl games. It's clear they are dead. They do not matter, the reward isn't there. The playoff showed this, even though it was a small playoff. The 2011 LSU/Bama rematch illustrated the corruption, then it was downhill after that. I just do not see the point anymore.

So, in summation, getting rid of the 6-win eligibility and using a SOS metric would ensure teams played good matchups, which is what everyone wants. We didn't want to do that back in the day, because it took away from possible bowl eligibility. The bowl games will now begin to happen during the year. I'd much rather get a week 2 scenario this year (Bama/Texas, aTm/Miami, State/Zona, etc.) more often than a bunch of bowl games that are nothing but TV time fillers. And regarding MSU, once every 5-7 years, we'll probably make the playoff and I guarantee you that experience will be better than any mid-level bowl game.

That's my rationale, and you obviously disagree, but it's far from a terrible or illogical take. I think many agree.

 

[Perd Hapley]

So, in summation, getting rid of the 6-win eligibility and using a SOS metric would ensure teams played good matchups, which is what everyone wants.

I’m going to go on a tangent off this general point and say that I think college football as a whole needs to adopt more thinking like this and get the hell away from the overall W-L record being the ultimate trump card when comparing teams with wide variation in schedule, injuries, etc. Doesn’t matter if its for a CFP bid or just a bowl game invite, 17 the record. The purists will say you’re “destroying the importance of the regular season” if you do that, but its nonsense. It brings it closer to an NCAA tourney “who’s gonna make it” vibe in November where you have more teams in contention….and wider speculation. But to get there, you have to have the old heads stop thinking anything short of an undefeated season is a failure for their blue blood program.

Last year, it made my head hurt hearing everyone say that TCU deserved to be in the CFP because they only had 1 loss compared to Bama’s 2 losses. There wasn’t a soul on earth that didn’t know for certain that Alabama would absolutely drag TCU by at least 4 TD’s on a neutral field with 3 weeks to prepare. Because objectively, people saw that Bama lost in the waning seconds / OT on the road to 2 top 10 teams, and the 3rd best team on the schedule (MSU!) wasn’t as good as K-State. TCU did deserve the bid over Bama, because they did have the best win, and because they at least made their conference title game. But it had nothing to do with the record.

Another example - this week we are 3-3 and going on the road to play a 2-5 team with a loss to BYU….and we’re almost a double digit underdog.

17 the records and fully embrace that mentality. Play games against good teams as often as you can. Scrap these G5 / FCS cupcake games as much as possible for the P5, and help those smaller schools make their brand better by also adding more competitive contests to their schedules.

And, keep the bowl games. Just ditch the record requirements, or at least reduce them substantially to encourage teams to play stronger schedules.

 

[greenbean.sixpack]

And regarding MSU, once every 5-7 years, we'll probably make the playoff and I guarantee you that experience will be better than any mid-level bowl game.

I respect your opinion, but even in the age of a 12 team playoff, I'll doubt will seriously challenge for a spot more than once every 10-15 years.

Since 2010, the best era of MSU football since WW2, we've won 10 regular season games once and eight regular season games six times.

 

[Dawgg]

Well, it's my take. I stand by it, and have for years.

Of course I wouldn't trade those bowl wins. They happened. That was the system back then. And I agree with your statements about the national level up until 2014. When there was no national title game, and even when there was ONE BCS game, I agree with you. That's why I've said over and over that I think the best era of college football was 1998-2010. We got a clear national champion, but we also had rewards for all the other spots. So in that vein I agree with you.

But fast forward to now, this is simply a different time. The money is bigger, players hold out of bowl games. It's clear they are dead. They do not matter, the reward isn't there. The playoff showed this, even though it was a small playoff. The 2011 LSU/Bama rematch illustrated the corruption, then it was downhill after that. I just do not see the point anymore.

So, in summation, getting rid of the 6-win eligibility and using a SOS metric would ensure teams played good matchups, which is what everyone wants. We didn't want to do that back in the day, because it took away from possible bowl eligibility. The bowl games will now begin to happen during the year. I'd much rather get a week 2 scenario this year (Bama/Texas, aTm/Miami, State/Zona, etc.) more often than a bunch of bowl games that are nothing but TV time fillers. And regarding MSU, once every 5-7 years, we'll probably make the playoff and I guarantee you that experience will be better than any mid-level bowl game.

That's my rationale, and you obviously disagree, but it's far from a terrible or illogical take. I think many agree.

Fair enough. You have your opinion and you're entitled to it. Couple things though:
1. We got a clear national champion from 1998-2010? We got a system with "Championship" in the title and in 2007 we got a "Championship Game", but you could make the argument that a lot of those years were murky.
1998 - #2 could have been Ohio State or Florida State.
2000 - Was a mess and probably should have had Washington in the Orange Bowl vs OU (Washington had beaten Miami and Miami had beaten FSU, but FSU gets in?).
2003 - LSU and OU get passed over for a 2-loss Michigan because of the archaic Rose Bowl structure.
2004 - USC and OU get in because of their preseason ranking. OU gets destroyed while Auburn gets stuck with VT in the Sugar Bowl.
2007 - Was another mess with a ton of 2 loss teams. It was basically Ohio State and shake the magic eightball. This time it landed on LSU.
2008 - You could make a case that USC, Florida, OU, and Utah all had claims to be in that game.
2010 - This one they probably got right since TCU was still G5 back then, but looking back you could make the argument that TCU was probably better than Oregon.

So, it's easy to look back on that era with nostalgia, but it was objectively worse at defining an accepted national champion.

2. 5-7 Years? In the past 25 years, we've had a top 12 ranking going into the final weekend of the season once (2014). To be fair, we could have gotten there in 2017 if Breeland Sparks hadn't intentionally broken Nick Fitzgerald's leg and we would have won the Egg Bowl. In any case, that's not even doing the math to figure out conference champs vs at-large bids. Being generous and even expanding to 16 teams, that's going to be a once a decade (or more) situation.

3. I would still rather see 3/4 of Mississippi State's roster play a 'meaningless bowl game' against 3/4 of some other team's roster than not play at all in the 10-15 postseasons between playoff appearances. I understand you don't see it that way though.

 

[theoriginalSALTYdog]

If you are in the camp that Arnett has to make a bowl game to keep his job, does that count if he makes one at 5-7? I'm not gonna lie. I want to make a bowl game, even if we make it at 5-7.

As you probably know, the selection of 5-7 teams for bowl games is based off their APR. We are tied for 19th this year with Auburn and Boston College. I think we lose the tiebreaker so essentially that makes us 21st.

Of the 20 teams ahead of us, 11 of them either already have or will have six wins (Alabama, Ohio St, Missouri, Washington, Clemson, Wisconsin, etc). That puts us at 10th in the pecking order.

I don't know a great prediction tool for remaining games. I used the one on Warren Nolan. That actually has us winning three more games and getting to six, which would render this moot. It also predicts Auburn to get to 7 wins, and has Minnesota and Boise State also getting to 6 wins.

If you care, the teams ahead of us who will be trying to at least get to 5 wins are:

Apr Rank	School	W	L	Remaining Schedule	Projected wins	Proj Total
1	Northwestern	3	3	Nebraksa, Maryland, Iowa, Wisconsin, Purdue, Illinois	0	3
6	Cincinnati	2	4	Baylor, Oklahoma State, UCF, Houston, West VA, Kansas	3	5
8	Minnesota	3	3	Iowa, Mich State, Illinois, Purdue, Ohio State, Wisconsin	3	6
8	Wake Forest	3	3	Pitt, FSU, Duke, NC State, Notre Dame, Syracuse	2	5
13	Boise State	3	4	Wyoming, Fresno St, New Mexico, Utah State, Air Force	3	6
15	Iowa State	4	3	Baylor, Kansas, BYU, Texas, Kansas State	1	5
15	Rice	3	3	Tulsa, Tulane, SMU, UTSA, Charlotte, FAU	1	4
19	Auburn	3	3	Ole Miss, State, Vandy, Arkansas, New Mexico State, Bama	4	7
19	Boston College	3	3	Ga Tech, UConn, Syracuse, Va Tech, Pitt, Miami	2	5
19	Mississippi State	3	3	Arkansas, Auburn, Kentucky, Texas A&M, Southern Miss, Ole Miss	3	6

I know there will be a lot of opinions on making a bowl game at 5-7. We didn't earn it, just end the season already, we lose money on bowl games, blah blah blah. I hear ya. I'm for a bowl game for at least three reasons: 1) The players get to experience playing in a bowl no matter how minor it is; 2) The extra practices; 3) It make bowl season more interesting for me when we are part of it.

So treat this however you please. I'll be using the list above as a rooting guide and cheering AGAINST any of these teams getting to 5 wins so our chances of being invited go up.

What are the chances at 4-8 because that will be our record.

 

[Tall Dawg]

It’s a shame there weren’t an additional 10+ bowl games in 1997 like now.

 

[Perd Hapley]

I think we're the only program to self impose draconian penalties for reality minor infraction.

I don’t know that it was self-imposed in the traditional sense. The NCAA more or less set the penalties. We had the tutor get sideways with the school and turning us in, which put is on the defensive. Believe there was a back and forth and we found out what the NCAA was going to accept, and we proposed / implemented it.

The handling of that situation was when I first knew Moorhead was in way over his head. The whole deal with the non-consecutive game suspensions was total BS. Even if was allowed, you’re sending the message to your players that some games are more important / critical than others, completely undermining the “only the next game or next play matters” which you have to have to keep good culture and buy-in from the whole roster. The only move there is to sit everyone for the first 8 games, and let the chips fall where they may. The message is “these guys 17ed up big time, they let the team down, they are paying the price, next man up for these 8 games”. That’s how you build a culture where your LB isn’t cold cocking your starting QB in bowl practice.

 

[greenbean.sixpack]

I don’t know that it was self-imposed in the traditional sense. The NCAA more or less set the penalties. We had the tutor get sideways with the school and turning us in, which put is on the defensive. Believe there was a back and forth and we found out what the NCAA was going to accept, and we proposed / implemented it.

The handling of that situation was when I first knew Moorhead was in way over his head. The whole deal with the non-consecutive game suspensions was total BS. Even if was allowed, you’re sending the message to your players that some games are more important / critical than others, completely undermining the “only the next game or next play matters” which you have to have to keep good culture and buy-in from the whole roster. The only move there is to sit everyone for the first 8 games, and let the chips fall where they may. The message is “these guys 17ed up big time, they let the team down, they are paying the price, next man up for these 8 games”. That’s how you build a culture where your LB isn’t cold cocking your starting QB in bowl practice.

We painted Ross Bjork as a buffoon, but looking back on it, he fought the allegations against Freezus tooth and nail and in the end, the penalties were fairly minor in relation to the publicly well documented egregious infractions. Had Rosebowl not found the calls to the escort service, Freezus wouldn't have been fired. I shudder to think what we would have done, likely rolled over and self imposed the death penalty.

 

[patdog]

We painted Ross Bjork as a buffoon, but looking back on it, he fought the allegations against Freezus tooth and nail and in the end, the penalties were fairly minor in relation to the publicly well documented egregious infractions. Had Rosebowl not found the calls to the escort service, Freezus wouldn't have been fired. I shudder to think what we would have done, likely rolled over and self imposed the death penalty.

Crazy thing is, a lot of Mississippi fans (even a lot of otherwise very reasonable ones) hate Bjork because he “didn’t stand up to the NCAA” and swear the penalties were crippling. It’s like they’re living in some alternate universe.

 

[greenbean.sixpack]

Crazy thing is, a lot of Mississippi fans (even a lot of otherwise very reasonable ones) hate Bjork because he “didn’t stand up to the NCAA” and swear the penalties were crippling. It’s like they’re living in some alternate universe.

TAMU wouldn't have hired him if they thought he didn't fight the NCAA, right?

 

[patdog]

TAMU wouldn't have hired him if they thought he didn't fight the NCAA, right?

He had no problem telling the NCAA to go screw themselves over the TX NIL law.

 

[greenbean.sixpack]

I don’t know that it was self-imposed in the traditional sense. The NCAA more or less set the penalties. We had the tutor get sideways with the school and turning us in, which put is on the defensive. Believe there was a back and forth and we found out what the NCAA was going to accept, and we proposed / implemented it.

The handling of that situation was when I first knew Moorhead was in way over his head. The whole deal with the non-consecutive game suspensions was total BS. Even if was allowed, you’re sending the message to your players that some games are more important / critical than others, completely undermining the “only the next game or next play matters” which you have to have to keep good culture and buy-in from the whole roster. The only move there is to sit everyone for the first 8 games, and let the chips fall where they may. The message is “these guys 17ed up big time, they let the team down, they are paying the price, next man up for these 8 games”. That’s how you build a culture where your LB isn’t cold cocking your starting QB in bowl practice.

I don't know man, 8 games for something many college student do and certainly most college athletes have done? Hell, half their tests are taken away from the classroom and "proctored" by someone from the AD. two or three games seems more fitting, no one actually thinks they are going to school for an edumcation.

.

 

[BulldogBlitz]

Want to be the discussion on all the sports shows about how many useless and Meaningless bowls....let's get that publicity rolling in at 5-7.

 

[Ranchdawg]

I’m going to go on a tangent off this general point and say that I think college football as a whole needs to adopt more thinking like this and get the hell away from the overall W-L record being the ultimate trump card when comparing teams with wide variation in schedule, injuries, etc. Doesn’t matter if its for a CFP bid or just a bowl game invite, 17 the record. The purists will say you’re “destroying the importance of the regular season” if you do that, but its nonsense. It brings it closer to an NCAA tourney “who’s gonna make it” vibe in November where you have more teams in contention….and wider speculation. But to get there, you have to have the old heads stop thinking anything short of an undefeated season is a failure for their blue blood program.

Last year, it made my head hurt hearing everyone say that TCU deserved to be in the CFP because they only had 1 loss compared to Bama’s 2 losses. There wasn’t a soul on earth that didn’t know for certain that Alabama would absolutely drag TCU by at least 4 TD’s on a neutral field with 3 weeks to prepare. Because objectively, people saw that Bama lost in the waning seconds / OT on the road to 2 top 10 teams, and the 3rd best team on the schedule (MSU!) wasn’t as good as K-State. TCU did deserve the bid over Bama, because they did have the best win, and because they at least made their conference title game. But it had nothing to do with the record.

Another example - this week we are 3-3 and going on the road to play a 2-5 team with a loss to BYU….and we’re almost a double digit underdog.

17 the records and fully embrace that mentality. Play games against good teams as often as you can. Scrap these G5 / FCS cupcake games as much as possible for the P5, and help those smaller schools make their brand better by also adding more competitive contests to their schedules.

And, keep the bowl games. Just ditch the record requirements, or at least reduce them substantially to encourage teams to play stronger schedules.

Everyone has tired of cheating Alabama.