Which I think is sort of the right idea. I know to a degree there has always been some type of conference/bowl tie-ins, but I think it would be better if there were fewer bowls, a higher eligibility requirement as far as wins, and then have the bowls and teams negotiate at the end of the year. That gives both the bowls and the schools a little more say in where they are going/taking.
If the liberty bowl wanted to take a team regionally close to the game, they theoretically could instead of having to take, say, Oregon State because they are where the conference tie in said they should play based on order of finish. If WVU wanted to play in Charlotte as opposed to San Diego, they theoretically could, again if the tie-ins were not what we see today.
It wouldn’t be perfect and somebody would end up playing somewhere they weren’t happy about, but that happens more often than not nowadays, and some of the discontent would be alleviated by just getting to go bowling because getting to one would be tougher and more meaningful.
