College football is officially in a new era. With the 12-team College Football Playoff now firmly in place, the sport has taken a major step toward inclusivity and expanded access to a national championship. But while the playoff has created more excitement at the top, it has also exposed a growing problem beneath it: the bowl system is breaking down.
This season alone, 10 teams opted out of bowl games, citing reasons that range from coaching changes and roster turnover to a lack of motivation or outright frustration with being excluded from the playoff. In Notre Dame’s case, the decision stemmed from disappointment over not making the CFP. Other programs chose to look ahead rather than treat a bowl appearance as a meaningful achievement.
That trend has sparked a larger conversation: are bowl games becoming obsolete, or does college football need to rethink how and when they are played?
The 12-Team CFP Has Helped — But It’s Also Created New Friction.
The expanded playoff has been controversial from the start. Last season, much of the criticism centered on seeding and the first-round byes. Teams that earned byes often looked sluggish when they finally took the field at neutral sites, while teams that played opening-round games at home benefited from momentum, crowd energy, and game-day rhythm.
That imbalance remains an issue. A team like Georgia being forced into a shared-crowd environment at the Superdome, while an opponent rides the energy of a home stadium a week earlier, doesn’t feel like a true reward for earning a bye.
This year, however, the anger has shifted toward the representation of the Group of Five. With programs like Tulane and James Madison earning playoff spots, many fans and media voices have argued that these teams don’t “belong” on the same stage as Power Conference programs.
However, that argument overlooks the broader context — and diverts attention from the actual issue.
The Bowl System Is the Real Problem
The bowl system was designed for a different era of college football, one where bowl games were rewards, not inconveniences. In today’s NIL landscape, the transfer portal, opt-outs, and coaching turnover have led to many bowls no longer holding meaning for players or programs.
Instead of scraping bowls altogether, there’s a smarter solution:
Move Bowl Games to the Beginning of the Season
The fix is simple but bold:
Play all bowl games in Week Zero and Week One.
Make the opening weeks of the season “Bowl Week.”
- All bowl games with conference tie-ins are played before the regular season begins in full.
- Conference affiliations rotate annually, preserving tradition while keeping matchups fresh and exciting.
- Fans are already traveling for Labor Day weekend — why not capitalize on that window?
- Teams are at full strength, players are motivated, and opt-outs are virtually eliminated.
Once the bowls are complete, the focus shifts entirely to the regular season and the playoff race. No more meaningless postseason exhibitions. No more teams treating bowls as a nuisance.
If a program has a down year and finishes 7–5 or 8–4, that’s fine. Not every season needs a postseason appearance.
Why This Creates Better Matchups and More Buy-In
Rotating bowl tie-ins would also solve another major issue: brand fatigue.
Too often, the same programs are locked into the same bowls year after year. Alabama in the Sugar Bowl. Georgia in the Sugar Bowl. Rinse, repeat.
Why not rotate?
Take the Liberty Bowl in Memphis, for example. With SEC and Big 12 tie-ins, fans could see:
- Alabama vs. Kansas State
- Georgia vs. Arizona State
- Tennessee vs. Texas Tech
- Vanderbilt vs. BYU
Let different cities experience different brands. Let bowl games feel fresh again.
The Group of Five Debate Isn’t Going Away
As for the CFP itself, the system will never be perfect.
With 136 FBS programs competing for 12 playoff spots, someone will always be left out. That’s unavoidable. Even if the field expands to 16, 24, or 32 teams, the complaints won’t stop.
The NFL comparison doesn’t work. The NFL has 32 teams, divided into two conferences with clear divisions. College football has dozens of conferences, wildly uneven resources, and no salary cap.
Some have suggested giving the Group of Five its own playoff. In theory, it sounds clean. In reality, it fails.
Who’s watching?
Where’s the money coming from?
How does it grow?
Without shared revenue, marketing investment, and national exposure, a Group of Five playoff would struggle to gain relevance. That’s why those programs would rather compete for access to the CFP — even if the odds are long.
The Future Is Super Leagues — and Everyone Knows It
The uncomfortable truth is that college football lacks guardrails. The sport is drifting toward two super leagues, whether anyone wants to admit it or not. Power conferences are expanding. Media deals are consolidating. Revenue gaps are widening.
Eventually, the structure will force itself into balance — either through super leagues, expanded playoffs, or bowl games doubling as early-round playoff contests.
If the CFP expands again, using bowl games as playoff games makes far more sense than clinging to outdated postseason exhibitions.
There is no perfect system. There never will be.
But moving bowl games to the start of the season would:
- Restore their relevance
- Improve matchups
- Increase fan interest
- Allow the playoff to stand on its own
College football doesn’t need fewer games.
It needs better timing, clearer purpose, and smarter structure.
Until that happens, the bowl system will continue to erode — and no amount of expansion will fix that on its own.
Show Your Support
Show your school pride with officially licensed NCAA gear—jerseys, hats, hoodies, and more—available now through our Fanatics affiliate link. Whether you’re tailgating, heading to the game, or watching from home, make sure you’re geared up like a true fan.
Click here to shop NCAA fan gear now and support Sports View 360 with every purchase!
(As an affiliate partner, we may earn a commission from qualifying purchases—thank you for supporting independent college football coverage!)
