ADVERTISEMENT

Fixing the Opt Out Problem

Here are a few suggestions.
Missing from your suggestions are holding schools, bowl sponsors and television networks responsible for supplying insurance coverage for every player participating providing full coverage for catastrophic injury that has a detrimental effect on draft status (or even simple detriment to future quality of life from a concussion or spinal injury to a walking okaying kickoff coverage.

Think Jake Butt who broke his leg in the Orange Bowl after the 2016 season. He doesn’t regret playing for his school, but one can’t deny his injury cost him 10s of million of dollars in lost income due to a far lower draft position than had he emerged from the game healthy. Simply shrugging and saying “sucks for him” isn’t a realistic answer.

I’ll admit that determining draft position 5 months before the draft is problematic, but the risk is very real. Given that the players are unpaid (relative to money generated) as the primary contributors to a product where millions of dollars are trading hands makes suggestions that players be obligated to provide this free labor ludicrous.
 
Why the personal attack? I bet youre a blast a parties.

Quitting on something? That's where you're being illogical. I'd question the character of a player risking their career by trying to play in a meaningless bowl game. Does Christian McCaffrey have character issues?
No personal attack, I specifically said you DO understand that. You seemed to be saying you couldn't see the argument.

Sorry then, I didn't mean it that way.

Not saying your view doesn't have merit. So does QUITTING on a commitment, breaking their word.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
Missing from your suggestions are holding schools, bowl sponsors and television networks responsible for supplying insurance coverage for every player participating providing full coverage for catastrophic injury that has a detrimental effect on draft status (or even simple detriment to future quality of life from a concussion or spinal injury to a walking okaying kickoff coverage.

Think Jake Butt who broke his leg in the Orange Bowl after the 2016 season. He doesn’t regret playing for his school, but one can’t deny his injury cost him 10s of million of dollars in lost income due to a far lower draft position than had he emerged from the game healthy. Simply shrugging and saying “sucks for him” isn’t a realistic answer.

I’ll admit that determining draft position 5 months before the draft is problematic, but the risk is very real. Given that the players are unpaid (relative to money generated) as the primary contributors to a product where millions of dollars are trading hands makes suggestions that players be obligated to provide this free labor ludicrous.
Why not stop playing midway through the regular season then? Or just quit on your team as soon as you think you are draft worthy?
 
Why not stop playing midway through the regular season then? Or just quit on your team as soon as you think you are draft worthy?
Oh, this will start happening. As will “opt outs” on playoff teams.

There’s no more inherent meaning — considered in the context of protecting a potential NFL career — in a playoff game (or a *series* of playoff games) than there is in the Liberty Bowl.
 
Whatever you say. You're just arguing to argue. There is the expectation that the players will actually play in games when healthy
Who's arguing to argue? I'm saying the bowl games suck but you're grasping at straws and attempting to manufacture justification.

No, there isn't an expectation by anyone but some fans. Coaches literally have been quoted as telling their players not to play in the Bowl game.

So I repeat, I'm for modifying the current situation to make it more enticing but when there's a black market, creating rules around it will not resolve it. You need to make the alternative option more enticing.
 
Last edited:
No personal attack, I specifically said you DO understand that. You seemed to be saying you couldn't see the argument.

Sorry then, I didn't mean it that way.

Not saying your view doesn't have merit. So does QUITTING on a commitment, breaking their word.
Fair enough. But a player never said or committed to playing a bowl game. The issue is we think they have and they haven't. They have agreed to play for the program and honestly, they could stop mid-season if they wanted. That would hinder their draft status.....but skipping the bowl game doesn't.
 
A 2nd or 3rd stringer that's been on the team and practiced his ass off and gone to class and all that might have an objection, if that's the criterion. I suspect you meant that they were dressed and in good standing and ready to play.
Yes, I meant dressed and in good standing and able to play.Participate in practice prior to the bowl.
 
What determines if a game has value? If the team has a chance at making the Playoff? If they have a shot at making the Conference Championship game? If the team can still make a Bowl Game?
But wait some people say Bowl Games are meaningless. Only a few teams in each conference have a realistic shot at getting to the conference championship. Only a few teams in the country have a realistic shot at the Playoff. So I mean only like 8 percent of the games matter. All the other games and other teams are trash. Why bother? You might get hurt playing in a game that real fans won't watch because it makes their eyes bleed. Receiving NIL money and a scholarship to get a degree don't have as much value as an NFL contract so the obligation and commitment to play are less too. Not to mention the fans who buy tickets, what a bunch of chumps...learn to identify value better.
 
Frankly, outside of the 2 playoff bowl games today, aren't bowl games essentially meaningless? I bet when your team has a chance to win a national championship you won’t have any opt outs.

The bowl games as a whole will never have the same competitive interest as they once did, except for the ones fighting to win a title. Next year with 12 teams that will change the competitive interest for the fans and if players still opt out, then that’s just an added level of strategy teams (and fans) will need to deal with.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
It’s pretty simple 44 million or maybe break your leg while trying to beat Missouri .Doesn’t seem like a tough choice for Harrison or anyone else
 
  • Like
Reactions: vesuvius13
Why not stop playing midway through the regular season then? Or just quit on your team as soon as you think you are draft worthy?
Exactly!!... stop having humans playing any of the games! Have every player created in Ai and have virtual games!... no one gets hurt!..
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82IU and IU_Hickory
No need to fix it then, do away with bowl games, they are a
sham.
I think the bowl system has over expanded and led to a really diluted product over the years. I'd be really interested in looking at the ratings of the back half of bowl games to see if it is generating enough of a draw to make it worthwhile.

All in all its probably time to reimagine the what it is rather than blaming the young men that are or aren't participating.
 
I think the bowl system has over expanded and led to a really diluted product over the years. I'd be really interested in looking at the ratings of the back half of bowl games to see if it is generating enough of a draw to make it worthwhile.

All in all its probably time to reimagine the what it is rather than blaming the young men that are or aren't participating.
If they didn’t make money they wouldn’t be happening. These bowls draw more eyeballs than almost all CBB games each year I do believe.

EDIT: confirmed that the Cure Bowl (Miami Oh vs App St) outdrew IU vs. Kansas.
 
A number of people have posted in other threads about the Bowl Game Opt Outs and how they are affecting Bowl Games and making them look like Spring Practice Games. Here are a few suggestions.

1. make it a condition of scholarships and NIL Money that if you are a Healthy opt Out of a Bowl Game, You are required to repay the school all Scholarship and NIL Money received in the 30 Months prior to the Bowl Game. This will make guys Who are not first round locks to weigh the consequences of Opting Out and determine whether the cost of opting out is worth it.

2. This also gets rid of the backward thinking of Players on this subject. It has almost a status symbol to opt out. It's as if a Player is telling the NFl that You need to draft Me because I was so good that I opted out of a Bowl Game. This will prevent good college players Who may be lower round picks or free agents from opting out without taking a large financial risk.

3. Put some of the onus on the Players and Schools. Establish a rule that will make a School ineligible to compete for a National Championship or any Bowl Game for 2 years if 20% or more of their Scholarship Players opt out of a particular bowl game. This will make the Coaches pay more attention to the character of the players they recruit or sign out of the portal.
The problem with any of these actions is what happen to ND's Jaylen Smith blowing out his knee and taking two full years to recover. Something needs to be done but I haven't see a good answer yet that accounts for the injury threat unless players are given insurance to cover catastrophic injuries.
 
Those games aren't meaningless to programs like ours. That is the problem. The top of college football is already this way, there are no Cinderella stories. No Dusty May teams going deep in the tournament because they won't be invited to begin with. The top 16 teams will almost always be picked off a list of the same 25 schools every year with few exceptions. And for the schools not part of that 25, anything you attempt to build will be poached at the end of every year in the wide open free agency that occurs at the end of every season.

That dog sh*t GA/FSU bowl game becomes the norm for any program that doesn't already have a leg up on everyone else.

Why aren't they meaningless for a program like ours?

Does it really matter or have any meaningful impact on our program to go play in the Pinstripe bowl or whatever?

I think the 12 team playoff expansion is reasonable. Anything more than that really begins to degrade the importance of the regular season. IU has all the opportunities any team needs every single season, you win games you'll advance to the real post season.

Regular season college football is great because of the importance of every game.

The rest of the non playoff bowls (going forward) are completely useless, IMO and should all die off.
 
Why aren't they meaningless for a program like ours?

Does it really matter or have any meaningful impact on our program to go play in the Pinstripe bowl or whatever?

I think the 12 team playoff expansion is reasonable. Anything more than that really begins to degrade the importance of the regular season. IU has all the opportunities any team needs every single season, you win games you'll advance to the real post season.

Regular season college football is great because of the importance of every game.

The rest of the non playoff bowls (going forward) are completely useless, IMO and should all die off.

More meaningful for two reasons: 1. We rarely get to go to them so there is still a novelty there for a program like ours and 2. It is extra practice time we rarely get to take advantage of utilizing.

If we starred going to them more often than not the novelty would wear off pretty quickly.

I agree that the rest of the bowls should probably die off in the long run and yes, Indiana has the opportunity to go out and win games like anyone else, but you and I both know that those 12 spots are going to be filled by the same programs on a regular basis and it is going to be worse than the past because of NIL IMO.
 
Meaningless bowl games are going the way of the NIT. The NIT used to mean something when only the conference champions got into the NCAA tournament.

If teams are not playing in the championship tournament they're playing in an exhibition game. More and more they are going to start opting out. Game over.
 
I agree that the rest of the bowls should probably die off in the long run and yes, Indiana has the opportunity to go out and win games like anyone else, but you and I both know that those 12 spots are going to be filled by the same programs on a regular basis and it is going to be worse than the past because of NIL IMO.

Well ok, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the meaningfulness of any of the non playoff bowls.
 
Meaningless bowl games are going the way of the NIT. The NIT used to mean something when only the conference champions got into the NCAA tournament.

If teams are not playing in the championship tournament they're playing in an exhibition game. More and more they are going to start opting out. Game over.
Hey bruh. More people watched App St vs. Miami Oh’s bowl game than watched the IU-KU hoops game.
 
  • Like
Reactions: IU_Hickory
Hey bruh. More people watched App St vs. Miami Oh’s bowl game than watched the IU-KU hoops game.

It's a chicken and egg thing.

Bowls are becoming less meaningful because of players dropping out.

It's ok for players to drop out because bowls are less meaningful.

Obviously (as you pointed out) lots of fans think bowls are still meaningful given how many still watch them.

Injuries are just as likely in the regular season as they are in a bowl game. Given the number of games during the season, it is 12 times more likely for a player to get injured during that span than during a bowl game.
 
Last edited:
Well ok, but I'm not sure what that has to do with the meaningfulness of any of the non playoff bowls.

It is a change in what is valued. We are in a transition period. The bowls are still meaningful right now to some programs. When you go to the 12 team playoff then that almost disappears overnight. The teams that were most suffering from players not giving a shit about the bowls are the ones who are more likely to have a chance at being part of the playoffs.

Winning the NIT is still a deal for a bunch of mid major teams. Not as big of a deal as making and winning one game in the 68 team NCAA tournament, but still relevant for them. For a school like Indiana it is the losers bracket that no one wants to play in. In football, we are the type of program that is still happy to have won enough games to be part of a tournament that doesn't matter. That is what the other bowl games are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 82hoosier
You may be right. I have to admit that I did not watch a single bowl game before yesterday..

It is unlikely for me to watch any game that IU isn't involved in but I wouldn't miss watching a bowl game that IU was playing in (regardless of which bowl). However, I sometimes miss watching IU in regular season games.

If bowl games didn't draw a crowd (in-person or on tv) then they would go away.
 
I also will watch the Hoosiers in any bowl game, as will pro prospects who opt out of playing in the game.
 
I wonder if all these bowl sponsors, and the TV/Streaming networks, are getting good ROI's on these watered down bowl games? If they are, nothing is going to change. That means the schools and the NCAA are also getting paid, and ultimately, that's pretty much all they care about. But assuming "they" aren't getting good ROI any more, and "they" are open to changing it...here are some ideas.

1. Reduce the number of bowl games...This will inherently have better teams, with better records, in the games. I watched longer stretches of more games, for games that had 9 and 10 win teams in them, than I did 6-6 and 7-5 type teams. I'm just one person, and a very casual college football fan, but I think its fair to assume the interest would be higher across the board if all the teams were 8+ win type teams.
2. Attempt to work with the NFL to make all the bowl games "exposure events"...If I'm any sort of borderline NFL kid, or someone that's thinking about transferring, and I get the chance to workout and then play in front of 30 NFL representatives for a week...good chance I'm thinking longer and harder at playing in that bowl game.
3. Have them all in warm weather, in between Christmas and New Years. This is probably a small thing, but again, if I'm a borderline NFL or transfer kid, the prospect of playing Clemson or Arizona in Orlando is quite a lot different than playing Eastern Michigan in Detroit.
4. With less bowls, maybe there's more money to help facilitate more travel for family and friends. Again, if I'm a kid that's on the fence about playing, but all of my family and a few of my closest friends can all accompany me for a few days, after Christmas, in Florida... that makes the game a lot more appealing.

There are some pretty simple steps that could be taken. But in the end, its all about the money. Who's making it, and how on the field performance effects it.
 
A number of people have posted in other threads about the Bowl Game Opt Outs and how they are affecting Bowl Games and making them look like Spring Practice Games. Here are a few suggestions.

1. make it a condition of scholarships and NIL Money that if you are a Healthy opt Out of a Bowl Game, You are required to repay the school all Scholarship and NIL Money received in the 30 Months prior to the Bowl Game. This will make guys Who are not first round locks to weigh the consequences of Opting Out and determine whether the cost of opting out is worth it.

2. This also gets rid of the backward thinking of Players on this subject. It has almost a status symbol to opt out. It's as if a Player is telling the NFl that You need to draft Me because I was so good that I opted out of a Bowl Game. This will prevent good college players Who may be lower round picks or free agents from opting out without taking a large financial risk.

3. Put some of the onus on the Players and Schools. Establish a rule that will make a School ineligible to compete for a National Championship or any Bowl Game for 2 years if 20% or more of their Scholarship Players opt out of a particular bowl game. This will make the Coaches pay more attention to the character of the players they recruit or sign out of the portal.
The bowl games should rebrand to early season matchups. Teams could be selected a year in advance and let the fanbases secure travel plans and what-not. I would watch the Outback Bowl with much more interest if it was in September and it forces good match-ups early in the year.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: jsenleo
I wonder if all these bowl sponsors, and the TV/Streaming networks, are getting good ROI's on these watered down bowl games? If they are, nothing is going to change. That means the schools and the NCAA are also getting paid, and ultimately, that's pretty much all they care about. But assuming "they" aren't getting good ROI any more, and "they" are open to changing it...here are some ideas.

1. Reduce the number of bowl games...This will inherently have better teams, with better records, in the games. I watched longer stretches of more games, for games that had 9 and 10 win teams in them, than I did 6-6 and 7-5 type teams. I'm just one person, and a very casual college football fan, but I think its fair to assume the interest would be higher across the board if all the teams were 8+ win type teams.
2. Attempt to work with the NFL to make all the bowl games "exposure events"...If I'm any sort of borderline NFL kid, or someone that's thinking about transferring, and I get the chance to workout and then play in front of 30 NFL representatives for a week...good chance I'm thinking longer and harder at playing in that bowl game.
3. Have them all in warm weather, in between Christmas and New Years. This is probably a small thing, but again, if I'm a borderline NFL or transfer kid, the prospect of playing Clemson or Arizona in Orlando is quite a lot different than playing Eastern Michigan in Detroit.
4. With less bowls, maybe there's more money to help facilitate more travel for family and friends. Again, if I'm a kid that's on the fence about playing, but all of my family and a few of my closest friends can all accompany me for a few days, after Christmas, in Florida... that makes the game a lot more appealing.

There are some pretty simple steps that could be taken. But in the end, its all about the money. Who's making it, and how on the field performance effects it.
The ratings are great. ESPN is making boatload of cash because they have the broadcast rights to more than 90% of all of the bowl games. As I posted either earlier in this thread, or in a different thread, the Appalachian State versus Miami of Ohio bowl game got more eyeballs on TV than the Indiana versus Kansas basketball game did.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Baller23Boogie
The ratings are great. ESPN is making boatload of cash because they have the broadcast rights to more than 90% of all of the bowl games. As I posted either earlier in this thread, or in a different thread, the Appalachian State versus Miami of Ohio bowl game got more eyeballs on TV than the Indiana versus Kansas basketball game did.
Where you seeing the IU/KU numbers...doesn't really refute your point, but most games similar to IU/KU get 2+ million sets of eyeballs. That bowl game you mentioned was a little lower than that. But surprisingly close.

To my original point, if those numbers are considered a good ROI for the bowls, TV networks, etc... and that filters down to schools and conferences getting paid...nothing is going to change any time soon.
 
Where you seeing the IU/KU numbers...doesn't really refute your point, but most games similar to IU/KU get 2+ million sets of eyeballs. That bowl game you mentioned was a little lower than that. But surprisingly close.

To my original point, if those numbers are considered a good ROI for the bowls, TV networks, etc... and that filters down to schools and conferences getting paid...nothing is going to change any time soon.
12/16 ratings

Also, 10 million watched Georgia drub FSU
 
A number of people have posted in other threads about the Bowl Game Opt Outs and how they are affecting Bowl Games and making them look like Spring Practice Games. Here are a few suggestions.

1. make it a condition of scholarships and NIL Money that if you are a Healthy opt Out of a Bowl Game, You are required to repay the school all Scholarship and NIL Money received in the 30 Months prior to the Bowl Game. This will make guys Who are not first round locks to weigh the consequences of Opting Out and determine whether the cost of opting out is worth it.

2. This also gets rid of the backward thinking of Players on this subject. It has almost a status symbol to opt out. It's as if a Player is telling the NFl that You need to draft Me because I was so good that I opted out of a Bowl Game. This will prevent good college players Who may be lower round picks or free agents from opting out without taking a large financial risk.

3. Put some of the onus on the Players and Schools. Establish a rule that will make a School ineligible to compete for a National Championship or any Bowl Game for 2 years if 20% or more of their Scholarship Players opt out of a particular bowl game. This will make the Coaches pay more attention to the character of the players they recruit or sign out of the portal.
Is this where I'm supposed to put my idea about making all college sports semi-professional?

1) Make athletes hire lawyers/agents to negotiate contracts that have a limit to the number of games that the athlete has to play. 13 (12 regular season and a bowl) for football to start . . . more for a 16 team playoff . . . 40 for basketball.

2) Have tuition included as part of the player's compensation package. Make it taxable. Put the package and player on par with all other students. Get colleges and universities out of athletics. Let them focus on education.

3) Let the free market determine the player's value. Put in contracts penalties (liquidated damages) for the player's early out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tony Warwick
Is this where I'm supposed to put my idea about making all college sports semi-professional?

1) Make athletes hire lawyers/agents to negotiate contracts that have a limit to the number of games that the athlete has to play. 13 (12 regular season and a bowl) for football to start . . . more for a 16 team playoff . . . 40 for basketball.

2) Have tuition included as part of the player's compensation package. Make it taxable. Put the package and player on par with all other students. Get colleges and universities out of athletics. Let them focus on education.

3) Let the free market determine the player's value. Put in contracts penalties (liquidated damages) for the player's early out.
That's pretty much where i was coming from in my initial post. in the real world of contracts there is a penalty or financial consequence to each party for failure to perform. 20 years ago, the University and the NCAA held all the cards and the Players were at at a disadvantage. The pendulum has no swung too far the other way, and the Players can make unilateral decisions that negatively affect the School without risk of penalty or loss.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sope Creek
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT