screwed based on how last year's team did. VT could end up being a good example of what I am talking about. Next year VT could be ranked in the Top 20 in the preseason polls, but not selected to play in a "bowl game" because of how it did this season. You can bet there would be quite a few posts on here talking about how it was a joke VT wasn't selected for a "bowl game" given all the buzz that had been generated for the program during the offseason because of the Franklin hire. Also, ticket purchasers could be upset because they think their team was "deserving" of a better bowl game or a more travel friendly bowl game. If people are still not attending these beginning season bowl games, then what has been accomplished by moving them? From the school's perspective, it could mean loss revenue of 1 game because every team may have to keep 1 slot free in case they are "selected" for a bowl game. Remember the only way schools can play 13 regular season games is if they agree to play 1 game at Hawai'i. Since the bowl games should be treated no differently than the neutral site games that exist now, there is no reason to modify the bylaws so teams can play a 13th regular season in Week 0 or Week -1 (aka the week before Week 0). If the NCAA keeps moving up the start date of the regular season, then it just moves up the start date of Fall practice so teams are starting Fall practice in mid to late-July. Not every school has indoor practice facilities to protect the players from the heat and humidity especially when they are in full pads. Schools could end up with another Junction Boys type situation.