Could the Franklin American Mortgage Company Music City Bowl be coming to an Alumni Stadium near you? If one anonymous Athletic Director has his way, the answer to that question is a resounding YES!
"One athletic director I spoke with had a unique idea: suggesting only the best 16 bowl games should remain with the remaining "bowl games" held on campuses of the remaining bowl eligible teams - whether six or seven wins is required for bowl eligibility.
[snip]
Under the AD's scenario, once the 16 premier bowls are filled, every team that is bowl eligible would participate in an on-campus bowl game. If there is an odd number of teams that qualify, the lowest ranked team, based on the BCS rankings, would not play in an on-campus bowl game, but still would be allowed to conduct December practices like the other bowl teams."
[And no, I have no idea where BC would even host a bowl game, but thank you for asking. Well, I do, but I have no idea where the team would practice leading up to said bowl game. Practice bubble FTL.]
There are far too many bowl games to begin with, but I don't think hosting one at BC's Alumni Stadium in mid- to late-December is the answer to college football's postseason woes.
My question is when does a bowl game cease to be a bowl game?
If you are going to move as many as 19 second- and third-tier bowl games back to campus -- all of which BC has likely played in at one point in our program's history -- why even call them bowls? Why not simply reward 6-6 or better programs with an opportunity to schedule one more non-conference game at the end of the season against whichever two programs want to get together over the holidays?
Even better, since, you know, it's gets COLD in Boston in December and January.
Why not scrap all 19 of those second-rate bowl games and simply allow all Division I-A teams to schedule a 13th game at either the beginning (late August) or end (week after conference championships) of the season? Make bowl games actually be a reward for the top 32 teams in the country, and free up student-athletes on 38 other programs to spend more time on finals and with their families over the holidays. In the process, you'd allow schools to capture all of the value generated from the bowl games, eliminating these bowl subsidies that allow bowl directors to pull in six figures for hosting one football game a year.
One way to make bowl games more meaningful is to limit the number of bowl slots available, making the bowls more exclusive, selective affairs. But moving the rest back to campus? C'mon. Just give programs and conferences an extra game or two to make ESPN happy (increased inventory FTW!) and get rid of the migratory Meineke Car Care Bowl of whichever city they are sponsoring a bowl game in next year.