Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

I agree with Entropy

of course, many Husker fans drove from Nebraska to the Rose Bowl

I haven't been deflecting, I've been including pertinent aspects of this topic. 

The question, "Do SEC teams benefit from home-field advantage in bowls?" isn't a yes/no answer.  If Florida has an advantage in the Sugar Bowl, would you then argue its advantage is the equal of LSU's?  If a season hasn't lived up to expectations and you wind up in the Gator Bowl vs an unsexy team like Indiana, I'd argue there's no home-field advantage. 

Even the Big 8 champs going down to Miami to play Miami was probably more about climate than home-field advantage.  If you're incorporating climate INTO home-field advantage....ehhh.  These aren't bowl games being played in 95 degree weather, guys.  It's usually about 75 and cooler at night. 

I'm not railing against having important bowls up north, I just don't think it would take.  Beyond the freezing fans in the non-domes (hmm, I wonder why domes are a thing?!?), you'd honestly just get worse football.  I don't care if you were raised in Duluth, MN, you're not going to be at your best in 2 degree weather compared to 65 degree weather. 

You're deflecting again in bringing up the notion that fewer fans would go to northern bowls.  That is not the issue.  The issue is: does Florida have an advantage playing Michigan in the Orange Bowl?  Does LSU have an advantage playing Oklahoma in the Sugar Bowl?
Not every SEC bowl team has such clear-cut advantages.  But to say that Kentucky has no significant advantage over Indiana when they play in a bowl game in Florida doesn't negate the other examples.
In general, on average do SEC teams have an advantage come bowl season?  That's the question.  Everything else you keep bringing up is just a deflection from answering that question.

i'd venture to say an 8th ranked team is going to struggle vs a #1 ranked team more often than not, regardless of location. perhaps @ftbobs can provide those stats? say 8v1 anywhere, 8v1 with each at home, and 8v1 neutral.

AP #8 vs AP (100 being completely out of the poll):

When were bowls meant to be "rewards for a good season"?  My understanding was that bowls were created to bring people to events and bring in ticket money.  I understood some teams took it as a reward for a good season, but I'm not sure they were ever meant to be that.

When were bowls meant to be "rewards for a good season"?  My understanding was that bowls were created to bring people to events and bring in ticket money.  I understood some teams took it as a reward for a good season, but I'm not sure they were ever meant to be that.

I think mid-60s that is a significant aspect of what they were.  Teams that had large followings were obvious preferred over others.  I think even today making a minor bowl is a reward for having a half decent season.

When were bowls meant to be "rewards for a good season"?  My understanding was that bowls were created to bring people to events and bring in ticket money.  I understood some teams took it as a reward for a good season, but I'm not sure they were ever meant to be that.

It has to do with when the final rankings/mythical national champion was selected.  

No, that wasn't as big a deal back in the day as it has become, BUT among the top few teams who knew they were ranked in the top few, yes, they'd like to be determined as "the best," yet it was voted on, THEN they'd play their bowl.  No chance to impress or move up.
Once the vote started being taken after the bowls, that last game became an opportunity.  That's all.

I think they were back in the day as there weren't as many and they weren't handed out like participation trophies

That may be what they were, or how they were viewed by some, but that's not what they were "meant" for.  To me, the difference matters because different schools viewed bowls differently and their motivations came from what the bowls were, which were money making ventures.  Therefore, some viewed it as insignificant.