Did more than 3 out of the 15-30 bowl games per season EVER have even the slightest NC implication even BEFORE the BCS (1998)?
... and if NC implications is the criteria for designating games as being meaningful, then 75% of all college football games played in November by schools in the FBS from now are just exhibition games.
Again, the BCS and CFP are major changes since then that people have become acclimated to. Do you recall the BCS complaints? I do and we've gradually been weaned off the more subjective system of bowls selecting titles. This is no different, except players were still bound to schools and not allowed to earn income on the very thing the school monopolized; the players star ability.
In contrast, NIL, portal, and the adjunct effect of opt-outs have blown up in the space of two years and we've had to go cold turkey, and some fans haven't seen the writing on the wall yet. The genie is permanently out. Heupel's doing the right thing; his philosophy is back the player's best interest, pair them with financial and NFL advisors, and guide them to their best decision. Again, are you sending your son to him or Dabo and Saban sputtering about sitting out the whole year and sky-yelling about NIL?
Those November games are contracted, scheduled games; you have to play them. Bowl games are elective. Let's not make this hard.