Talk:List of NCAA Division I FBS football bowl records

Why is Idaho's record and bowls listed at the bottom of the table instead of within the table itself? I can't seem to figure why they get special notes here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 170.115.248.25 (talk) 18:10, 9 March 2022 (UTC)

OK - Bowl season is starting. I think it will be easier if we wait until after all the games are played before we update this page. OK? JefeDeJefes 13:36, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

Hold on - I'm about to enter the table. I was just using the other table as a model. I am new to this. - —Preceding unsigned comment added by JefeDeJefes (talk • contribs) 13:59, August 28, 2006

Ok, now I am starting. I will get it all done within a couple days. JefeDeJefes 19:21, 28 August 2006 (UTC)


 * I marked it under construction so it won't get deleted for being incomplete. - CobaltBlueTony 19:26, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

How to count ties in winning percentage?
I question the calculation of winning percentages on this page. Ties are counting as losses. Plotinus75 00:26, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Oregon State should be #4 on bowl winning % —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.146.194.42 (talk) 08:40, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Ties should be accounted as a half a win in the winning percentage. Basically this formula will be used (W+[T/2])/(W+L+T). Reorion (talk) 05:09, 17 January 2008 (UTC)

Sortable Table?
I thought it might be a good idea to have the alphabetical table be sortable, but when I made it, it looked pretty ugly. I don't have time now, but if someone else wanted to try to make it functional and nice-looking, that would make this page even better. --SuperNova |T|C| 05:52, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to see how each team compares to other conferences and/or other teams played in bowl games. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Toml721 (talk • contribs) 04:09, 28 December 2014 (UTC)

redundant sections
Given that the first table is sortable on all columns, no new information is presented in the third and fourth sections. The last two tables could be deleted, which would have the benefit of reducing the possibility of inconsistencies (which have already occurred) when updates are made. Z1perlster (talk) 18:02, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

major bowls
Given that about half of FBS (I-A) teams now play in bowl games each season, a bowl just isn't what it used to be. I propose adding a table to this page, or perhaps creating a new page, which would contain teams' records in major bowls. In my view, "major bowls" are Orange, Rose, Sugar, Cotton (pre-BCS), Fiesta (BCS), and the BCS NCG. Z1perlster (talk) 18:06, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

past bowl games
Have not found a table of the past bowl games that Arkansas has played in (like the one under Air Force Falcons). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.112.23.58 (talk) 17:41, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Lock it!
We need to get this article freaking locked. There is obviously way too much vandalism going on. AlaGuy (talk) 08:31, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

NCAA "sanctioned" bowl games
I'm not sure if this is the best terminology. At least one bowl game counted on this list predates the creation of the NCAA (Michigan's total of 39 bowl games includes the 1902 Rose Bowl, but the NCAA was not created until 1906); there are probably others but I'm not interested in going through to check. Also, I'm curious at what point the NCAA started "sanctioning" bowl games? Do NCAA teams ever play in "non-sanctioned" games? cmadler (talk) 17:56, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

Ditto. Seems to me this is a pretty questionable list; there are 120+ teams listed, 34 bowls exempted... because they weren't "an NCAA sanctioned Div-1/FBS bowl game". The 'Big 5' weren't sanctioned by the NCAA for years, and the FBS didn't exist until, what, 1982? If that's the criteria, Rose Bowl appearances before that criteria existed shouldn't be listed. These rules basically say that today's podunk bowls are OK, but those in the past aren't. Include all bowl games for these teams, or delete the article. --BooksXYZ (talk) 21:14, 18 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I think we should remove the word sanctioned from the title. A comment can be added in the intro or something about when the NCAA started sanctioning bowl games. But this would be a quicker way to fix this problem, and would not detract from the article at all.Millertime246 (talk) 21:07, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

This page is a mess
Wow, this page has some problems.

OK, I can say that the list in the "notes" section is indeed exhausting: I will admit that whoever went through ever bowl game by every team and noted which were not Division 1 sanctioned was very dedicated.

The problem is, since then the references have gotten mixed up, and as someone mentioned it looks like it was done by vandals. I did not realize this until AFTER I had completely re-done the entire reference section. It was completed using some fancy-but-broken HTML tags instead of the usual function, and was causing the table to sort incorrectly. I fixed this, but it was very labor intensive, and it will be quicker to re-organize the references than to fix the entire table again. I am placing the page under construction until I can get them sorted out; if you want to help, please do so, but I should have it complete in a day or two. littlebum2002 21:04, 19 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I fixed the problem, and reverted the references back. Someone had added a reference with the same name as another, which threw them all off by one. I also added a "notes" column; this allows the table to sort correctly, and makes it more aesthetically pleasing. Now that it can sort correctly, I will also remove the redundant tables at the bottom. littlebum2002 12:41, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

USC Record
USC has played in 51 bowls, winning 34 and losing 17 of them. Due to NCAA actions, there were some vacated games. 14 wins were vacated, including the 2005 Orange Bowl win. While it is not often cited, this NCAA resource makes it clear that the NCAA also vacated the 2006 Rose Bowl loss: http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/football_records/2015/bowls.pdf

The NCAA mandated record should therefore be 33-16. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Embowaf (talk • contribs) 23:24, 28 December 2015 (UTC)