Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
< Prev.  Page of 9  Next >

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up

Posted: 12/5/2012 10:09 AM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 


i think what has dumb sec fans confused about the facts is going 8-1 the last 9 years in the cotton bowl.

and having a winning record in the rose bowl.

sometimes we struggle to understand clear facts.noidea
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/5/2012 10:10 AM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 


You guys are without question the world's biggest whiners.

At the SECCG on Saturday, Georgia fans outnumbered Alabama fans at least 2:1. I have not heard ONE SINGLE Bama fan whine about that. yet that's all you guys DO is whine about this thing or that thing being "unfair" to you. Grow the hell up.

It costs a lot of money to buy tickets to a bowl game, get a hotel room, pay for your meals and transportation, and so on. No one wants to then spend their time locked up inside because it's 20 degrees outside.

Are you just dumber than a rock?
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/5/2012 10:12 AM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 



Sweatloaf wrote:
buckeyemark wrote: I think it helps playing in your own region because it increases the odds that you have played in that stadium before.

Oh dear lord, here's one of the best I have ever seen -- "Guys we can WIN THIS GAME! I know where the bathrooms are! We have been in this stadium before!"
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/5/2012 10:18 AM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 


Chicago outdoors?

Great...

Lets have the weather have a significant influence on the game instead of letting the players have a nice, comfortable venue in which to display their skills.  rolleyes

Nobody wants to watch that junk man.  Nobody wants to go to Chicago in January for their vacation (many fans use the bowl trip as a vacation....budgets and all that).  Miami, New Orleans, SoCal and Arizona are much more vacation friendly in January.

The B1G could start bowls up north and put their teams in them anytime they get ready.  They are the almighty B1G remember?  So do it or stop whining about bowl locations.

Will the excuses for losing ever end?

I guess bama had a great advantage over Michigan in Dallas to start the season too?

eek1
Real Eyes
Realize 
Real Lies


Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/5/2012 10:20 AM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 



Zman32 wrote:
AceTommyBoy wrote: The Big Ten conference championship game only had 40,000. No one wants to travel to watch a game in the north.

Seriously, who cares where the games are played? The Big Ten doesn't lose bowl games because of location, they lose because of inferior coaches and players.
I can't imagine anyone being any more ignorant. Having the bowls in your front yard isn't an advantage? OK, so let's throw all logic aside and come up with a reasonable explanation why having the bowls in the south isn't a huge advantage to the southern teams. I'm waiting.
It isn't a huge advantage. Big 10 teams travel very well, so there is rarely a home field advantage for the southern teams. Teams arrive at the bowl location a week or two before the game, so there is no jet lag. Northern teams play in warm weather the first 6 weeks of the season so it's not like they aren't used to playing in warm weather. And at most of the bowls the weather isn't what we would consider warm, more like pleasant.

So now I ask you, what advantage do the southern teams have?
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/5/2012 10:26 AM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 



gopitt04 wrote:
Zman32 wrote:
AceTommyBoy wrote: The Big Ten conference championship game only had 40,000. No one wants to travel to watch a game in the north.

Seriously, who cares where the games are played? The Big Ten doesn't lose bowl games because of location, they lose because of inferior coaches and players.
I can't imagine anyone being any more ignorant. Having the bowls in your front yard isn't an advantage? OK, so let's throw all logic aside and come up with a reasonable explanation why having the bowls in the south isn't a huge advantage to the southern teams. I'm waiting.
It isn't a huge advantage. Big 10 teams travel very well, so there is rarely a home field advantage for the southern teams. Teams arrive at the bowl location a week or two before the game, so there is no jet lag. Northern teams play in warm weather the first 6 weeks of the season so it's not like they aren't used to playing in warm weather. And at most of the bowls the weather isn't what we would consider warm, more like pleasant.

So now I ask you, what advantage do the southern teams have?
they don't suck
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/5/2012 10:49 AM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 


You put the SEC 1st place team vs. the SEC 6th place team and it is  a sellout.

Alabama vs. South Carolina......easy sellout.

Hell, you put the SEC 5th place vs. the SEC 6th place and it is a sellout.

LSU vs. South Carolina.....easy sellout.

You coulda put UT and AU in Atlanta and drew more than 40K......even this year.

lol
RidgeRoadRattler wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- AceTommyBoy wrote:

The Big Ten conference championship game only had 40,000. No one wants to travel to watch a game in the north.

Seriously, who cares where the games are played? The Big Ten doesn't lose bowl games because of location, they lose because of inferior coaches and players.

---------------------------------------------

The Big Ten Championship game featured a 6th place team! Who wants to watch that?
Real Eyes
Realize 
Real Lies


Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/5/2012 11:22 AM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 


Lotta differing arguments here:

1) sounds like 1 part just wants, say, Gators to have to sleep in hotel the same # of days as their opponent at the Outback bowl (hypothetical).  3 hour busride = 3 hour flights.  heck the bus is prolly worse.

2) sounds like the issue isnt teams as much as fans.  Florida in Outback creates larger ticket demand in FL, thus driving up prices, potentially pushing out opponents fans (who have hotel and flights to pay for as well).   HOWEVER, that is driven by fans alone.  OSU prolly has enough wealthy alum, let alone southern based alum, to offset that.  so its borderline insignificant. 

3) IF the NC game were in Indy, or NYC, fans would go regardless of the weather.  SEC or whovever fans arent going to say its too cold to go to the magnificent mile, or times square.  So the NC game could in fact be played in a colder climate.  

ALL other bowl games are meaningless anyways.  The only person who should care about the capitol one bowl are bowl sponsors.  

Parting note:  I went to Tempe for the 2002 game.   We sat and drank by the pool all day, and went to bars at night.   

If i was in Chicago, or St. Louis, or wherever, id probably sit at the hotel indoor pool, or at a bar during the day too.  Id go as far as to say the museums and culture in Chicago, or NYC are MUCH better than Tempe, or Orlando, or even LA.  

Sugar Bowl is the only bowl where the game itsself is secondary to the trip.  

SEC CCG is in Atlanta, the BIGGEST CITY in the southeast.   BiG CCG is in Indy, the 11th largest city in the Midwest.  I guaran-dam-tee you if that game is in Chicago, attendance is 20% higher the last two years.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:13 PM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 



buckeyemark wrote: I think it helps playing in your own region because it increases the odds that you have played in that stadium before.

In 1996 Arizona State beat UCLA in the Rose Bowl. Pac 12 teams are familiar with the Rose Bowl. SEC teams are familiar with the Super Dome. Texas A&M, Arkansas, etc... are familiar with Jerry World.

I think there is a psychological element too. When Ohio State had LSU down 10-0 in the Super Dome the Tigers didn't panic.

So, familiarity and staying calm are important in bowl games.

Big 10 is true road warriors in virtually every bowl game.
cincydawg4 wrote: Stipulating that it is an advantage, I'm asking how many points do you think it is worth?

Bear in mind that home field advantage in college football during a season is 3-5 points, generally speaking.  That is playing in front of a crowd that is likely 85-90% friendly fans who are trying to make noise and alter the play of the opponent.

I'm just asking how many points do you think it is for Georgia to play Nebraska in Orlando for Georgia's side.  Why do you think that offers an advantage?  Shorter plane flight?  More fans in attendance?  Is it one point?
The last I checked all football fields have the same measurements. Maybe your coaches should use the same tape measure ploy Gene Hackman did in Hoosiers.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:15 PM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 



Zman32 wrote: So clear this up. Because people would rather be in the south in the winter makes it fair that all the bowls are played in warm weather? What bullsh!t. If we played every game at home I'm sure our record would be better..actually I'd guarantee our record would be better. For a NC we played LSU in their home..just how "fair" is that? Go on about your records when you play the bowls in your front yard. You obviously think you need the advantage. It isn't about the fans, it is about the money so they let the southern teams have home field and the rest of the world isn't supposed to notice.
I don't know of any D1 team that has played a bowl game on their home field.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:18 PM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 



buckeyemark wrote: You go into the Super Dome, or the Rose Bowl for the first time and tell me it's no worse than having played there before.

Your example of Ohio State @ Penn State is not valid because Ohio State plays @ Penn State every two years so they are familiar with the stadium.

Take Ohio State winning Fiesta Bowl v. Miami, Kansas State, and Notre Dame in old stadium, but getting crushed by Florida, and losing to Texas in the new stadium.

UF had never played in that stadium either.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:26 PM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 



RidgeRoadRattler wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- AceTommyBoy wrote:

The Big Ten conference championship game only had 40,000. No one wants to travel to watch a game in the north.

Seriously, who cares where the games are played? The Big Ten doesn't lose bowl games because of location, they lose because of inferior coaches and players.

---------------------------------------------

The Big Ten Championship game featured a 6th place team! Who wants to watch that?
H
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/5/2012 2:50 PM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 



Sweatloaf wrote: N/midwest should start the CFBO5.0* league & leave real football to the men. 

anyone who can run the 40 in under 5.0 cannot participate

Real men can read, write and pick their father out of a lineup.

_____________________________________________
Michigan is French for "I quit!"

Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/5/2012 8:13 PM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 



Sweatloaf wrote:
gopitt04 wrote:
Zman32 wrote:
AceTommyBoy wrote: The Big Ten conference championship game only had 40,000. No one wants to travel to watch a game in the north.

Seriously, who cares where the games are played? The Big Ten doesn't lose bowl games because of location, they lose because of inferior coaches and players.
I can't imagine anyone being any more ignorant. Having the bowls in your front yard isn't an advantage? OK, so let's throw all logic aside and come up with a reasonable explanation why having the bowls in the south isn't a huge advantage to the southern teams. I'm waiting.
It isn't a huge advantage. Big 10 teams travel very well, so there is rarely a home field advantage for the southern teams. Teams arrive at the bowl location a week or two before the game, so there is no jet lag. Northern teams play in warm weather the first 6 weeks of the season so it's not like they aren't used to playing in warm weather. And at most of the bowls the weather isn't what we would consider warm, more like pleasant.

So now I ask you, what advantage do the southern teams have?
they don't suck
Maybe not but their fans sure do.  Thanks for reinforcing that.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/5/2012 10:23 PM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 



trurebel wrote: You put the SEC 1st place team vs. the SEC 6th place team and it is  a sellout.

Alabama vs. South Carolina......easy sellout.

Hell, you put the SEC 5th place vs. the SEC 6th place and it is a sellout.

LSU vs. South Carolina.....easy sellout.

You coulda put UT and AU in Atlanta and drew more than 40K......even this year.

lol
RidgeRoadRattler wrote:

---------------------------------------------
--- AceTommyBoy wrote:

The Big Ten conference championship game only had 40,000. No one wants to travel to watch a game in the north.

Seriously, who cares where the games are played? The Big Ten doesn't lose bowl games because of location, they lose because of inferior coaches and players.

---------------------------------------------

The Big Ten Championship game featured a 6th place team! Who wants to watch that?
I suppose where you are from math doesn't work well. Auburn couldn't sell their allotment of tickets for their BCSNCG. Now, don't get too embarrassed, it happens to schools like OSU that go to BCS games quite often.

However, think about this. Little ole SEC school Auburn that hasn't played in a BCS Championship Game or BCS games that I recall, couldn't get enough fans to travel all the way to Arizona? I guess those trailers aren't as portable as you think. wink

_____________________________________________
Michigan is French for "I quit!"

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 12/5/2012 10:37 PM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 



buckeyemark wrote: I think if your team ALWAYS had to go to California, Arizona, Texas, Louisiana, or Florida for a bowl game, and the closest location Florida is a 1-2 day car ride you would understand.

In bowl season Big 10 plays SEC teams in Louisiana or Florida.
Did you know that SC and Michigan are both flying to Tampa, and UGA and UNL are both flying to Orlando as well?
Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/5/2012 10:48 PM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 


I understand that.

My point was playing in the old stadium may have helped Ohio State since they were familiar with it. Playing in the new stadium did not benefit either team. I think teams are more comfortable with stadiums they are familiar with.
18of21 wrote:
buckeyemark wrote: You go into the Super Dome, or the Rose Bowl for the first time and tell me it's no worse than having played there before.

Your example of Ohio State @ Penn State is not valid because Ohio State plays @ Penn State every two years so they are familiar with the stadium.

Take Ohio State winning Fiesta Bowl v. Miami, Kansas State, and Notre Dame in old stadium, but getting crushed by Florida, and losing to Texas in the new stadium.

UF had never played in that stadium either.
Reply | Quote
  • Zman32
  • All-Conference
  • 4992 posts this site
Avatar

Posted: 12/5/2012 10:52 PM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 


I'm sure players would like a vacation but if you fail to see the advantage of home field then you're just ignorant.
Reply | Quote
  • OSUalum
  • Sophomore
  • 946 posts this site
Avatar

Posted: 12/5/2012 11:35 PM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 


Sure... good luck with that.  Why drop $1000-$1,500 per person to go spend time in the sun and pre game tailgate near palm trees when you can spend that much and FREEZE YOUR ARSE OFF!   Who will be the other person sitting across the filed on the opposite 50 yard line seat Bill?    bangheadbangheadbanghead
BillsPA wrote: Some bowl games should also be located in the North and Midwest as well as the south. FANS will travel to a game no matter where it's located.

NFL is having a future superbowl in the New York stadium... no reason college should not have some of the bowls above the mason dixon line.

It is 2012, not 1912. Progress is needed.
"THE" OSUalum!!!!!!!

Reply | Quote

Posted: 12/6/2012 8:54 AM

Re: Bowl games locations... wake up 



buckeyemark wrote: I understand that.

My point was playing in the old stadium may have helped Ohio State since they were familiar with it. Playing in the new stadium did not benefit either team. I think teams are more comfortable with stadiums they are familiar with.
18of21 wrote:
buckeyemark wrote: You go into the Super Dome, or the Rose Bowl for the first time and tell me it's no worse than having played there before.

Your example of Ohio State @ Penn State is not valid because Ohio State plays @ Penn State every two years so they are familiar with the stadium.

Take Ohio State winning Fiesta Bowl v. Miami, Kansas State, and Notre Dame in old stadium, but getting crushed by Florida, and losing to Texas in the new stadium.

UF had never played in that stadium either.
Mark, I was at that game. Call me crazy, but UF looked pretty comfortable to me. So what you are really saying is.......neither team had an advantage.
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
< Prev.  Page of 9  Next >