This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

College football Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject College football, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of college football on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.College footballWikipedia:WikiProject College footballTemplate:WikiProject College footballcollege football articles Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

The information is not necessarily wrong, because if one conference does not have enough bowl eligible teams than the bowl may pick another bowl eligible team. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.227.56.93 (talk) 04:45, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This information is obviously wrong. I haven't checked through this thoroughly yet, but upon first glance you can see that the Insight Bowl information is wrong. It says the Big 12 #6 will face the Big 10 #6, yet Arizona State from the Pac 10 played in that bowl this year. I'll try to fix whatever I find but someone may want to look over this page. VegaDark 10:13, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

• There are a lot of shakeups in the bowl system after this year. The Big XII is dropping the Fort Worth and Champs Sports bowls, and picking up the Gator and one other - maybe the Insight. I don't know all the details myself but we should probably be clear in the article to have all of this year's matchups or all of next year's matchups correct. (ESkog)^(Talk) 19:23, 3 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • UPDATE: The data posted is correct as per the NCAAfootball.net website as of July 1, 2006. In addition, I have posted information for three new games - the International (Toronto), New Mexico (Albuquerque) and Birmingham Bowls - onto the site. NoseNuggets 6:01 PM US EDT July 1 2006.
  1. 6 does not necessarily mean the 6th place team from a conference. It can also merely mean that they get the 6th selection out of all bowls affiliated with that conference and they can then take any bowl team eligible that still has not been selected to a bowl. This makes sense for bowls because for example say the Armed Forces Bowl in a CUSA year gets a #4 pick, they would much rather get one of the Texas teams in the selection process that is more regional to Fort Worth, than to end up with Marshall or Southern Miss type school that has a long travel distance.--Rangers85 15:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
• There MUST be something wrong. This page lists the PapaJohn's Bowl as featuring the SEC #3-4 when http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PapaJohns.com_Bowl lists the PapaJohn's Bowl as featuring the SEC's "lowest-ranked bowl-eligible team". This connection MAY be for future games but the NCAA own site http://www.ncaa.org/wps/ncaa?ContentID=2928 lists CUSA as the opponent for the Big East in the 2008 PapaJohn's Bowl.24.250.230.239 (talk) 16:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)dswieter[reply]
  • I'd like to know where all the bowl tie-ins information came from. I found these sources: [1], [2], and [3], none of which confirm the numbers listed in the article. These sources even conflict each other. BlueAg09 (Talk) 21:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • The issue is that, other than the major bowls, the bowl tie-ins shuffle every year. The tie-ins for about a third to half of the bowls literally change every year, and quite a large number of tie-ins don't happen, if, for example, not enough schools from a conference qualify for bowl-eligiblity. While the Capital One Bowl has always featured the top non-BCS playing schools from the Big Ten and the SEC, the Liberty, Independence, and Music City bowls have tie-ins that either change from year to year or that cannot be fufilled because not enough schools qualify. It may have been right when the article was first written, but over the years it appears the article has not been updated. ESPN.com usually runs the full list every year for that years bowl games. It would be fairly easy to clean this up for the most recent season. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 05:17, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• More info from http://www.sunbeltsports.org/HomePage.dbml says that they grabbed two more berths, not yet reported by NCAA in their list (but given by oother media sources). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.165.46.150 (talk) 14:31, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Conference USA does not have a picking order but picks their teams regionally for their bowls. No information is provided for a order of picking outside of the Liberty and Hawaii bowl. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.110.181.82 (talk) 20:34, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I finished a large number of edits; this information should be correct for the upcoming 2009-10 season. Since it appears that all relevant information is referenced, I would be willing to push this article for Featured List candidacy if some editors helped me with it. Dafoeberezin3494 (talk) 04:53, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Take down the last section. It is entirely based on opinion and worded terribly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.111.158.86 (talk) 03:23, 31 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The chart of bowl games does not match the list later in the article. Perhaps I will fix this, but as of now the charts do not match each other. --Jayron32 06:52, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bids to bowl games change constantly. I think it would be beneficial to create a new page for each bowl season, so that people can reference the tie-ins from previous years and information for upcoming years can be added as it is available.

There are pages for separate college football seasons for teams, for bowl games, for polls & rankings ... for just about everything. I could easily see the justification for creating a separate page for each season. Information would not simply be lost as new tie-ins are created and others end.

Any comments? Mdak06 (talk) 01:58, 5 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've placed this question on the Wikipedia Project College Football talk page, with the discussion starting here. Mdak06 (talk) 12:57, 15 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Simply - Yes. For reference, that discussion did not seem to solve the current time-sensitive problem. See the suggestion below on naming each season, or placing this content each year within the bowl season articles. Group29 (talk) 21:29, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

In case anyone wants to get started, I found these [4] and [5] and [6]. --Jayron32 04:52, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That section is a mess. Wholly unsourced and really pretty much a lot of WP:CRYSTAL. I'm going to remove it. If we have some reliable sources, then we can look at whether or not it is too prediction oriented. Right now, trying to talk about what may or may not happen in a season 5 years from now is not too solid. Niteshift36 (talk) 22:09, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with what you did. Too much WP:CRYSTAL....William 15:45, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've been seeing lots of articles in recent weeks reporting conferences' deals with bowls (like the SEC today). Especially with the College Football Playoff matchups getting solidified, we should be in good shape to take a good stab at a reasonably well-referenced list at what's known so far. Whatever was deleted can likely be restored and fixed. Woodshed (talk) 02:19, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Before we even discuss what can be restored, we should discuss what should be restored. Taking a stab at what may be the possible match-ups 6 years from now doesn't strike me as terribly encyclopedic. Niteshift36 (talk) 12:02, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Plenty of reliable sources are reporting on six-year contracts that have been signed. Woodshed (talk) 14:18, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Simply being covered by a reliable source isn't the criteria for inclusion. when Justin Bieber buys a hat, reliable sources report it. That doesn't mean we include it. I just question how useful this is. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:04, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure those are generally reliable sources, but I do understand your point. I'll nominate Super Bowl L for PROD later. Woodshed (talk) 15:17, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Entertainment Weekly, MTV and the NY Daily News would all be reliable sources without question, yet all three would report everything JB does. Nominate what you like, but I'd say the coverage of Super Bowl L at this point is much more significant and the topic more notable than say the possibilities for the 2019 Idaho Potato Bowl. Just my opinion, I could be wrong.Niteshift36 (talk) 19:24, 13 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This article has some good information, but it also can be found elsewhere. It seems to be specific to a recent season, but the title would indicate a comprehensive study or history of the subject. Unlike most of the college football season or bowl game articles, this one really struggles to be relevant without a caring set of contributors. Continuing this time-sensitive current structure seems more like a task for Sisyphus. The content likely should be a section in the relevant bowl season articles (yyyy-yy NCAA football bowl games), or if big enough to be its own named yearly article (yyyy Bids to college bowl games) Group29 (talk) 21:22, 24 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you are just looking for a list of college football bowl games, there is an article called "List of college bowl games" here on Wikipedia which lists the various bowls by status as a potential college football playoff game or by age of the bowl game if otherwise. You are better off just going to the article for the specific bowl game you want, and searching for a the matchup for a specific season. Bowl game bids change every year due to changes in conference tie-ins. Also, the owners/organizers of the bowl games have the ability to choose the participating schools regardless of conference tie-ins if they believe that certain schools will bring in a larger audience/fanbase, and thus more revenue from visiting fans + corporate sponsors. This is all very confusing to a casual fan/follower who is not too familiar with the structure of college football, so I don't blame you for being confused. Leiwang7 (talk) 01:53, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]