Eleven Warriors

PHONE'S RINGING -- IT'S URBAN ON THE LINE

•Football Schedule•Basketball Schedule•Forum•About•Contact

Home Field Semifinals Still Alive

By 11W Staff - 30 April 2012
7 Comments

"One said the commissioners left the meetings split about "60-40" in favor of using bowl sites." (si.com)

Source sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/stewart_mandel/04/30/bcs-playof...

Follow @11W

Comments

hodge on 30 Apr 2012 - 1:56pm #

Thank God. Maybe one of these days the powers-that-be will understand that nobody will go to Pasadena to see Wisconsin and Florida play in the Rose Bowl. Dear Christ, why is this so hard to figure out? And how is it fair to the Big Ten if our "home" bowl is the Rose Bowl? I'm not a proponent of bitching and moaning about how unfair the system is to our conference (yes, I know I'm doing it right now, Leon Festinger is smiling at my Cognitive Dissonance), but this is starting to get rediculous.

Maestro on 30 Apr 2012 - 1:59pm #

Playoffs without home games will NEVER get my approval. I know that means nothing, but it's my prerogative.

vacuuming sucks

Jason Staff on 30 Apr 2012 - 2:33pm #

I think the commissioners are going to find out really quickly that it's too cost-prohibitive for fanbases to travel to two neutral sites in back-to-back weeks to cheer on their teams.

Heck, universities already take a bath having to eat unsold ticket costs when they're traveling to one neutral site game a year.

Run_Fido_Run on 30 Apr 2012 - 2:58pm #

That's a good point - maybe what will save home-site semifinals.

And I didn't understand the point about some were making about smaller cities not having the capacities to accomodate semifinal event travel, hotel, restaurant, tourism traffic. If they sell out their fball games, they're already accomodating whatever numbers of people come to their cities during big regular season games. Granted the semifinal contests might attract extra crowds of people who go there just to hang around the stadium, but how much more could that be?

In the BCS era, the top two schools going into the bowls were almost always schools with huge stadiums and major followings:

1998: No. 1 Tennessee; No. 2 Florida State

1999: No. 1 Florida State; No. 2 Virginia Tech

2000: No. 1 Oklahoma; No. 2 Florida State

2001: No. 1 Miami (FL); No. 2 Nebraska

2002: No. 1 Miami (FL); No. 2 Ohio State

2003: No. 1 Oklahoma; No. 2 LSU

2004: No. 1 USC; No. 2 Oklahoma

2005: No. 1 USC; No. 2 Texas

2006: No. 1 Ohio State; No. 2 Florida

2007: No. 1 Ohio State; No. 2 LSU

2008: No. 1 Oklahoma; No. 2 Florida

2009: No. 1 Alabama; No. 2 Texas

2010: No. 1 Auburn; No. 2 Oregon

DJ on 30 Apr 2012 - 4:41pm #

I don't see how there can even be 60%.

Why in the world wouldn't college commissioners want games on-campus? Think about how much tax revenue alone a semi-final game would produce in Columbus, Ohio. (And make no mistake, there are going to be numerous Ohio State semi-final appearences in the coming years.) Why cut places like Arizona, California, New Orleans, and Miami in on our hustle? It's not good business.

The BC$ can keep their title game and all the other games. (Hopefully they'll raise the minimum win number to 7 too.)

If nothing else: Marionaire.

johnblairgobucks on 30 Apr 2012 - 8:30pm #

The SEC proposes using: Citrus Bowl, Orange Bowl, Beef O' Brady Bowl, Sugar Bowl and Outback Bowl as sites.

Pac 12 wants the Fiesta Bowl, Rose Bowl, Emerald Nut Bowl, Sun Bowl and Poinsettia Bowl

Texas says the Big 12 thinks all the Playoff games tied into the Bowls should be played at the Cotton Bowl and Jerry's World.

Big East wants to funnel games through the Pinstripe Bowl

And seriously the Big 10's only venue would be in Detroit. Detroit blows. Why can't Delaney and Big 10 movers and shakers develop a Bowl Game somewhere in Big 10 Country?