BCS Doubts A College Football Stadium Can Host A College Football Game

The NHL scheduled the 2013 Winter Classic at Michigan Stadium hoping to get the largest hockey crowd in history to attend, with potentially half the attendees being Toronto Maple Leafs fans coming from Ontario and needing hotel rooms and RV parking.

The best reason to not play games at home fields is because playing it at the bowl sites allows you to preserve the current system somewhat.  Part of the charm from the system comes from the fact that there are incremental benefits to it at the end.  There is value and meaning in games that don't affect the national championship (this year's Rose Bowl, for example).  And there is lasting value in a bowl victory.  Michigan, for example, has won numerous bowl games in our lifetime in years where they wouldn't have been selected for a final four. 

If you have a round of four at home stadiums, and then try to have the bowl system after that, it would be a disaster.  The bowl system would become the NIT, and it would collapse. 

Simple solution, make it a requirement that if a particular school's football field doesn't fit a size requirement (say 60,000 seats), they have to either 1) procure availability of a place that does fit the requirement within XXX number of miles of the campus or 2) be ineligible to host a game, thus the game is played at the home of the lower ranked team.  Problem solved. 

Do people still want a playoff even if it means that every game is played at a neutral (and probably warm weather) site?  What if there are 16 teams instead of 4, and those 16 teams include an auto-bid from the Sun Belt, C-USA, and the MAC?  Is anything better than what we have now? 

Its funny that the masses are all in favor (I think?) of a playoff system and there are a very few that oppose it, simply because of the money involved in and history of the bowl system. 

On a different note, I know the Rose Bowl has always been the Rolls Royce of the B1G and Michigan's yearly aspiration, but would we really be all that upset to see it fall away if it meant possibly hosting a playoff game in Ann Arbor?

Couple of points people are making.

1. There is no danger of these games not selling out ever regardless of weather.  If any team north of the Mason/Dixon line is hosting a playoff game they will sell out instantly for ridiculous amounts of money.   If a Florida Gator fan gives up his seat because he's afraid of the cold then go get a higher ranking.  Fuck Em.  He will make a lot of money off that seat.

2. If a small campus has to host the game then jack up the prices even higher and suck it up because with all the TV revenue you are making it will make a minimal difference.     If Northwestern is hosting a playoff game they will either go to Soldier Field or Memorial Stadium or they will jack up the prices of tickets at their stadium to a ridiculous level and they'll get it.

How is the Michigan Stadium and Ann Arbor Infrasturcture going to be able to handle all the Canadians coming across the border for the Winter Classic?  Didn't anyone know its going to be cold January 1!  And the throngs of media for that game.  How will the stadium handle it?

Ann Arbor is doomed!  

To be honest with you, I'm kind of surprised that they're not using a very basic argument to defend their case, which would be easier to BS for them. That they want no competitive advantage for either team and their fans and they can obtain this through playing at a neutral site. It would have been a better argument then the 3 they made.

About the only weather-related comment that I could see getting justified is that the B1G doesn't host night games after 1 November, and the BCS loves them some prime time.

Now I don't buy that complaint at all.  Otherwise the stadiums in Green Bay, Chicago, Buffalo, Boston, New York, Philiadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Cleveland would never host SNF/MNF games after November 1.  (And to a lesser extent you could include Washington DC, Baltimore, and Tennessee.)  This is a quarter (or more) of the league.

And don't throw the baseball argument out there.   Baseball doesn't adapt well to the elements, while Football (at least from the players perspective) DOES.  Maybe the fans will suffer a little hardship (but don't tell it to these guys)

Or these crazy guys

/crazy_people

Please don't have a playoff. Don't devalue the regular season.

Y'know, there's a reason why I've been saying that people who want a playoff are likely to be massively disappointed with the result.

The fat cats who run the NCAA and BCS are always saying these ridiculous things as if they really "care" about the student athletes. In reality anyone with a brain, who is not involved in their politicking, can clearly see that all of the fat cats chirping/lying is about $ pure and simple.  Its pretty sad, but that is the way it goes, particularly in college football.

why college football stadiums can't be relied on to host college football games.  There might be a schedule conflict with a high school game . . . .

All about the bcs trying to stay relevant. To much money not too. Its sad though really. They expect people to buy these shallow excuses.

Two words: booze sales

Final Word:

If South Africa can host a World Cup, then any Division 1 football school/college town can host a home playoff game. 

Sometimes you have to pick your battles and I think Delany wrongly picked keeping the Rose Bowl as prestigious as possible. Whatever. 

But the missing "infrastructure" isn't needed to serve the "crush of fans and media" but to take care of certain wealthy individuals who have come to expect rather expensive amenities that are much easier to provide when you know far in advance where the games will be played and when that place is Miami or New Orleans or Los Angeles and not a typical college town. Of course Eugene can handle a sellout crowd but where are the 5-star hotels? The Michelin-starred restaurants? The hookers and blow?