This is why I refuse to buy season tickets. To many cup cake games (which Arkansas has a reputation of losing) just for the simple fact that the school wants to make money.
The bigger schools generally schedule these mismatches, also known as “paycheck games,” to guarantee both the ticket-sale and concession revenue from a home game and an easy win that gets them one step closer to the six victories needed to qualify for a postseason bowl game (which brings with it another payday).
FBS schools should only be allowed to play FBS schools. If you want to be the best, play the best and beat the best! This has started to become all about the money and is sucking the life/fun out of college football.
Sorry, but money usually wins in any circumstances. I agree that the paid win games should not be there and it might be good to go back to an 11game schedule But IMO college sports got out of hand a long time ago.
I don’t think Arkansas has a reputation for losing cupcake games. I can recall three in 25 years: Citadel, UL Monroe, & Toledo. Toledo was a pretty good team. Colorado St, though a Mtn West member, is not what most consider a cupcake. Might have been once upon a time, but not lately. Michigan lost to App St a few years ago. Alabama under Saban lost to ULM. Lots of schools have done it from time to time.
We know we’re way below where we should be right now, but let’s not change history.
As for these rental games: no one likes them, but when it there’s a requirement for 6 wins to get to a bowl & tickets for cupcakes still bring in $3-5M per game, we’re going to have them. Personally, I’d like to cut back to an 11 game or even 10 game season & let everyone play in a bowl game. Bowl games don’t mean what they once did. Just make them the one game at the end of the year with a previously unscheduled opponent at a neutral site. Pit two teams of roughly equal strength against each other. Places like Mobile, Chattanooga, & Shreveport can all have a game. A few spots can have two. The New Orleans Bowl & the Sugar Bowl, for example.
That would require 65 bowl games, Chip. Which is not all that far from where we are now, but really, is anyone going to travel to see 0-11 UTEP against 1-10 Old Dominion? Oops, Old Dominion and UTEP are (somehow) in the same conference. Make that 1-10 San Jose State instead.
At least that way Little Rock could finally get a bowl game.
I’m not that old, but I heard about it. I do remember the Bicentennial Bowl, which was played in 1975 between two NAIA teams. Pretty disastrous there too. Attendance 2,000.
I’m not that old, but I heard about it. I do remember the Bicentennial Bowl, which was played in 1975 between two NAIA teams. Pretty disastrous there too. Attendance 2,000.
It had poured rain for hours and WMS was an ankle deep mud hole. I remember the Governor of Arkansas Faubus made a speech and said “come on down, the duck hunting is fine”
Agreed, big money is the focus. With big money, comes increased corruption, and we can all see it is getting worse.
Prime example of big money is Texas A&M. They are selling their souls to win a national championship in football.
Level playing field is gone. Only a few teams over the past several years have been in the picture for the National Championship &/or Big Bowl Games. Arkansas’ lone opportunity was 2011 Sugar Bowl. Since 2011, there have been 28 big money games which equals 56 opportunities for teams to participate. However, there have only been 27 different teams in those games, not 56. Bama has been in 8 of those 56 opportunities.
It makes no sense to continue to have such a large population of teams in Div I when only a handful ever have a legitimate shot at a big money game.
We will see where the future takes us, but viewers cutting the cord and game attendance declining will affect revenue streams and who knows what else.
It would be great if Power 5 teams would only play Power 5 opponents, but this isn’t just a problem with college football, but name the sport and Power 5 teams are playing Group of 5 or lower opponents. Obviously, those sports play more games, but it’s still larger schools picking on smaller schools, in many cases so they can have home games (which is what scheduling non-Power 5 teams allow in football as well). Remember, with the exception of basketball (and at some schools, maybe baseball), football foots the bill for all the other sports, some of which Title IX requires. Unfortunately, that makes creampuff opponents necessary.
In a perfect world, the only “creampuffs” on Arkansas’ schedule would be Rutgers, Arizona, Kansas and Syracuse (or some of that ilk from the other four Power-5 conferences), but don’t hold your breath.
Wait a minute - you’re just now realizing that college football is a BUSINESS that has to make money? More specifically, in almost every case, college football is THE revenue generator for the ENTIRE athletic programs (mens and womens) on campus? So, of course it’s imperative to have as many home games to generate income as possible. And who will agree to playing a game at your place without requiring a visit by your team in return? The so-called “cup cakes”.
Beyond that, they do serve a purpose - they allow reserves to play, which enables them to adjust to the college game while allowing fans to get a look at the newcomers.
And, as for just playing other Power 5 teams - what you may be forgetting (or, you just don’t give a damn) is that these road paychecks are vital to the survival of non-power 5 schools, who do NOT command high ticket prices, nor have lucrative TV deals as do the SEC, Big 10, etc. Eliminating games against the Big Boys will sign a death certificate to many of the smaller programs.
I don’t mind them, so long as there is some balance to the non-conference schedule, and there usually is. This year is an aberration due to Michigan dumping us in favor of Notre Dame, which isn’t our fault. We usually have at least one “name” opponent (TCU, Tech, USC, Boise, Texas, etc.), one other “decent” opponent (Tulsa, Colorado State, UTEP, etc), and then two real cupcakes. And that’s consistent with the way most of the other Power 5 schools schedule. Most especially, in the SEC West, which has been THE hardest division over the past 10+ years in aggregate. When you face Alabama, Auburn, LSU, Ole Miss and Miss. State each year, plus Georgia or Florida or Tennessee or S. Carolina, etc, you’re already playing more really tough teams than 80% of the other Power 5 teams face in their entire schedule, including their Non-conference games.
Arkansas played a lot of cupcakes when Frank Broyles was the coach in the 60s, and played almost nothing but cupcakes non-conference from the time the Ole Miss series went into hiatus until the games against Pac 8(10?)(12?) teams in the 70s. That continued to be true when the schedule went to 11 games and then to 12 games.
The extra games were added for revenue, and you will almost always make more money from two years of cupcakes with lots of empty seats than you are likely to with a home and home with a Power Five opponent.
The SEC mandate now is to play at least one Power Five game a year. If you require every non-conference game to be against a Power Five team you are very likely only going to have six home dates a year, versus seven or eight. The ticket sales portion of your revenue is going to drop, a lot, unless you significantly raise ticket prices across the board for all home games.
I have a theory that if the CFP stays at 4 games, eventually the number of cupcake games will decrease. Conferences will get tired of being left out of the playoff and teams will start loading up their non-con schedules so they at least have a shot at getting in if they win. Then its just an arms race as teams try to match the SOS of the teams they are competing against.
I doubt they are completely eliminated by this, because there is some benefit to being able to play backups, and for small schools to get a big payday, but I think the number of them will decrease because teams know that even if they end up having a perfect season, they could get left out of the CFP if they don’t play other tops schools (e.g. UCF 2017).
I wouldn’t mind seeing the playoff expanded, but if schedules improve due to a 4 team format, I say stick with it.
I’m being partially facetious in wanting every team in a bowl, but not entirely, Jeff. But, you’re right, no one would go to those games, but no one goes to the low-level bowls, now. The only reason I sorta favor everyone getting a bowl is because I know we’re never going back to a reasonable number of bowls that reward good teams. If I had my preference, there’d be no more than maybe 15-20 bowls.
However, the purpose of the “What-in-the-hell.com bowls” today is to fill ESPN’s weeknight schedule in December. Attendance is almost meaningless to the driving force behind them. (I’m pretty sure some schools lose money going to bowls now.) If we’re going to do away with the honor getting to a bowl, I"d just as soon see everyone go. That way Do-wop Tech’s 6-6 record against the likes of SW Idaho Teachers no longer allows them to squeeze out a 5-7 SEC team.
What I really fear is the expansion of the playoff to 8 or more teams. You can bet the G-5 schools will all scream that their “champion” gets a slot. A 6-6 ASU or Ohio Univ can get in over a 9-3 or even 10-2 SEC team.
I’m being partially facetious in wanting every team in a bowl, but not entirely, Jeff. But, you’re right, no one would go to those games, but no one goes to the low-level bowls, now. The only reason I sorta favor everyone getting a bowl is because I know we’re never going back to a reasonable number of bowls that reward good teams. If I had my preference, there’d be no more than maybe 15-20 bowls.
However, the purpose of the “What-in-the-hell.com bowls” today is to fill ESPN’s weeknight schedule in December. Attendance is almost meaningless to the driving force behind them. (I’m pretty sure some schools lose money going to bowls now.) If we’re going to do away with the honor getting to a bowl, I"d just as soon see everyone go. That way Do-wop Tech’s 6-6 record against the likes of SW Idaho Teachers no longer allows them to squeeze out a 5-7 SEC team.
What I really fear is the expansion of the playoff to 8 or more teams. You can bet the G-5 schools will all scream that their “champion” gets a slot. A 6-6 ASU or Ohio Univ can get in over a 9-3 or even 10-2 SEC team.
I liked the World Series a lot more when the two league champions played. It did not matter if the second or third team in one league had a better record than the champ of the other, the concept was, the two champs played each other. I would much prefer an 8 team playoff for the football championship. And the second or third place team in any one conference would not play in the playoff, they are not champs.
This is exactly what I’m saying! Why should any individual pay $90+ to watch Arkansas play Eastern Illinois, North Texas, or Tulsa, plus the $500+ donation fee? If you have a family of 4 you just wasted $1,200+ on tickets to useless games. This goes for all schools that play the FCS schools just to get closer to 6 wins. Either you love or hate them… at least Notre Dame only plays one FCS team this year. They might play a lesser power 5 team, but at least it’s a team out of the power 5 conference. That is how it should be… 1 cup cake game a year. I’d like to see the to 50 teams play each other and battle it out every weekend. College football is starting to become more like the NFL. All about the $$. I don’t watch the NFL, MLB or NBA for that specific reason. But hey that’s just me.
Well, to each his own. However, we have to decide what we want as the “champion.” In baseball where the best team usually wins between 50-60% of its games & the worst one still wins 40%, I like a World Series to determine the champion whether its in a 2 team series or a 6 or 8 team format. However, in football the best team is usually easier to determine. A 10-2 or 11-1 SEC 2nd place team is better than the SBC champion & is arguably the best team in the country. I’d rather a team like that have the shot at the title or at having the honor to be in the playoff than a team who is a champion of a league who can’t beat anyone outside their league.
If we want to declare the “National Champion” as the team who plays best during the tournament, then that’s what we can do. We do that in basketball. But we need to understand that “champion” & “best” aren’t necessarily the same thing. I prefer a system that tries to make them one & the same. But like I said, to each his own.