Quite frankly I’m tired of giving up home field to the south. And its time to keep the money that Big Ten fans spend going to the south here in the north. It’s time to either move a BCS to the north or start a 5th BCS in the north. Either move the Fiesta or sugar to the north and make those pansies from the south travel to the cold. They do it in the NFL and it works fine. Personally I would love to see Texas or any team form the SEC play in Green Bay in January. I would really love to see them play each other because we all know that none of their fans would want to travel to the north to watch it so Big Ten fans could buy up all the tickets and chant over rated or go Big Ten through the whole game its time we stop giving up our biggest advantage and that’s the weather.
Time for the Big Ten to host a BCS
- Thread starter keokuk1
- Start date
Won't work. Most fans treat a bowl game like a vacation and want to escape the winters. It would suck to have to go to Green Bay or some similar city instead of a place like California, Arizona and Florida. Besides, Iowa has a pretty favorable record playing these southern teams down south.
First off yes it would work. Your telling me that if Iowa is play in a BCS you wouldn't go to the game give me a break, and as far as people traveling to the south for vacation to bad go on a vacation next month, and lastly if the Big Ten said it wants a BCS it would happen bank on it.
I find it boring to go to these same cities. There is nothing exciting about Phoenix, Jacksonville or even Orlando for me. Your not even guaranteed great weather. San Fransisco, New York City, Southern California, the Pacific Northwest would all be enjoyable locations to attend a bowl game. Many of these places have temperate climates and are more interesting for 3 or 4 days than Orlando, Jacksonville, or Tempe. If Chicago had a dome stadium, I think Chicago would work well.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
Sure, Big Ten fans would still go, but I doubt that people from Florida, Alabama, California, etc. are going to want to come up here in January.
"Too bad, go on vacation next month." Really? You really think that would fly? Sure, people will spend big bucks to go to the game, then pay more big bucks for a separate vacation. Come on man.
It could possibly work. But it would have to be in a destination city like Denver, Chicago, or maybe New York City. As cool as it would be for the northern teams to have one game that would give them a little advantage, the bowl games are more than just football. It's a getaway for most fans.
I guess my point is people would have to make a choice but if Iowa was playing in a BCS that choice at least would be a no brainer. Its not like Iowa go's to a BCS every year. And as for the southern teams wanting to travel north who cares don't come it would just mean a bigger home field. Somehow though I feel that if Florida was playing in the NC there fans wouldn't like it but most of them would come or the SEC fan base isn't as ravid a fan base as they have been saying for all this time.
Last edited:
tm3308
Well-Known Member
You do realize that this flies in the face of the bowl business model? SEC teams not bringing a lot of fans means a lot of empty seats, and also not much of a boost in local economy (which is a BIG factor in bowl selections). Who cares? The bowl committees will care a great deal if SEC fans don't want to come north. Which is exactly why this will never work.
OMG you guys are acting as if the Midwest is the worst thing in the world in the winter time. We are talking BCS not a lower tier bowl. Personally I think this has more to do with all of the people that are fans of teams in the Big Ten that have moved south that don't want to see it happen because they would lose there only chance to see there team play. I feel you moved to the south so to bad. Either move back or root for a team in the south you pansies.
Last edited:
Iowafarmgirl
Banned
Are people really so ignorant that we even have to have this discussion?
tm3308
Well-Known Member
The midwest can be the worst thing in the world in January. But it's EXTREMELY unpredictable. Big bowls will never be played here, because sponsors aren't going to risk tanking it due to the climate. That's why the big bowls are in the south and California: they're guaranteed money-makers because the games are in winter vacation destinations.
HawKCP
Well-Known Member
Imagine this conversation.
"Honey, what do you think about going to a bowl game this winter?"
"Well, how much would it cost?"
"I'm thinking around $2,000 once we figure in everything."
"What?! Where is it?"
"Indianapolis. I hear it's really nice there. You know it's the capital of Indiana."
hawkeye12345
Well-Known Member
I just traveled back to Iowa and my kids got the flu, it was freezing cold and everything was so damn bland and blah it wasn't even funny. There is a reason the US population density map looks the way it does. There is no chance that a major bowl game will be played in the Northern part of the US and for good reason.
ColoradoHAWKEYE
Well-Known Member
I don't know, it doesn't seem like such an out there thought to me. I think that it was only suggested that one game be included, and I think the idea of a major location has a lot of merit, ie Denver, Seattle, Chicago, New York/Jersey. (Detroit and Indianapolis have indoor facilities if that's a way for someone to play it up--not my choices). Why not? Our fan bases have to travel in mid week to support our teams; It's not like I don't vacation back to Denver midwinter, as do many from the South (well Texas anyways).
The argument was the weather and fan support. If it was a BCS game, there would be fans traveling and if not, then we can by more tickets ourselves. I might not be able to travel to New Orleans this year, but if the Hawks were playing in Chicago in a BCS game, I'd be there for sure. I can tell you first hand that the Orange Bowl has many empty seats every year (that Iowa is not in it). You put a BCS bowl in heartland "football" country, or New York, Seattle etc...they will have plenty of buts that go to the game that aren't fans of the respective schools participating.
I say put some wings on this pig BTN.
The argument was the weather and fan support. If it was a BCS game, there would be fans traveling and if not, then we can by more tickets ourselves. I might not be able to travel to New Orleans this year, but if the Hawks were playing in Chicago in a BCS game, I'd be there for sure. I can tell you first hand that the Orange Bowl has many empty seats every year (that Iowa is not in it). You put a BCS bowl in heartland "football" country, or New York, Seattle etc...they will have plenty of buts that go to the game that aren't fans of the respective schools participating.
I say put some wings on this pig BTN.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
The Orange Bowl gets the shaft because they are essentially locked into taking either an ACC or Big East team (or both) every year, and those conferences are notorious for poor traveling fans. There won't be another BCS game that gets stuck risking that kind of attendance.
ajbrand33
Well-Known Member
rose bowl in green bay? Fiesta at soldier field? this is never going to happen. some people need to realize that not everyone is a fan of a team from the north, these games will not sell and we all know this is what the bowl system is all about. Two vacations in a two month span, in this economy? you are out of your mind. the bcs bowl locations work, the bowl system, well thats another story. if your fans travel well it shouldnt matter the location
ColoradoHAWKEYE
Well-Known Member
They are lately, but I went to about 6 games over the 8 years I was down living in So Fla. We could walk up and buy mid field seats at the gate for every one of them; games like Mich v Alabama included.
melrosemania
Member
Miami players bundled up in 38 degree weather in El Paso was comical
