1. Because ESPN has nothing better to show on afternoons in December.

2. Because of the extra practice that the teams in the bowls are allowed.

3. Because somebody is still under the impression, if not delusion, that a team's fans are interested in any bowl game that team is in, even if it is the Whothehellcares.com Lose Money Bowl.

4. The sponsors probably don't mind, either - otherwise they wouldn't put up the money for the naming rights.

There should be a new policy: any bowl game whose TV rating is less than the lowest of the four NCAA soccer semi-finals shouldn't have its licensing renewed. (You can't compare it to the finals, as there are quite a few people who will watch just the championship game.)

If you ask me, what they should do is, allow each team not in the playoff to play an additional game against a nonconference FBS opponent, either at a neutral "bowl" site or at one of the team's home fields. That way, everybody gets the same amount of additional practice. Right now, the NCAA is just punishing teams with losing records.

> Actually, I don't think any of them have to accept the bowl bid.

I wouldn't be surprised if at least some conferences mandate that they do accept.
Besides, with the bowl game comes those extra days of practice, and I am assuming that in most cases, schools in bowl games make money from them.

> > > Actually, I don't think any of them have to accept the bowl bid.
> > I wouldn't be surprised if at least some conferences mandate that they do accept.
> > Besides, with the bowl game comes those extra days of practice, and I am assuming that in most cases, schools in bowl games make money from them.
> I don't know how other conferences work but the revenue from a bowl game, minus expenses, is shared equally among all
> the schools in the conference. I would bet that with the minor bowls, the participating schools are barely breaking even if
> not losing money. It costs about the same to send a team to a minor bowl as it does for a New Years 6 bowl game.

Which could explain any conference demands that its teams play in any bowl games to which they are invited.
> Coaches definitely like the extra practice time. A bowl game is a transition game. It's as much the first game of the next
> season as it is the last game of the current season, especially if there are a lot of departing players opting out. In some
> cases, there are interim coaches because the head coach took another job or even been fired. Depending on the bowl, the
> players are going to have different levels of enthusiasm. I wonder what the enthusiasm level will be for the Orange Bowl
> teams after they got snubbed by the CFP.

My first response to this thread was going to be, "Since it is a de facto game for the returning players, how hard would it be to leave out the seniors?" - then I realized you are asking each team to play with only something like 75 players, only 60 or so of which are on scholarship (and let's not forget about the players now in the transfer portal; practicing with them for "next season" is more than meaningless - it's tipping them off as to what the team will be doing next season).