OT: Wow, Pac-12 bowl tie-ins are terrible
I was scanning the bowl match ups with the Pac-12 winner, Stanford, obviously going to the Rose this year for a New Year's Day game. That is a distinction that none of the other big names were able to claim. Here are some of the other "big" games with ranked teams and 8-4 Washington
#10 Oregon (10-2): Alamo Bowl Dec 30th
#14 ASU (10-3): Holiday Bowl Dec 30th
#17 UCLA (9-3): Sun Bowl Dec 31st
#25 USC (9-4): Las Vegas Bowl Dec 21st
Washington (8-4): Fight Hunger Bowl Dec 27th
We have 3 NYD games and the Orange Bowl in addition to the other games. Delany owns Larry Scott in this aspect for some reason.
December 9th, 2013 at 8:34 PM ^
The Pac-12 slate is not that bad. Really the only bowl the Big 10 has that is clearly more high profile is the Citrus. Holiday usually sees a better matchup than the Outback (this year even the Alamo is as good as the Outback), and this year the Pac-12 slate includes UCLA and Va. Tech in the Liberty.
Another question is whether Oregon deserved the second BCS spot. They were ranked ahead of OU and Clemson. To me, Oregon had the slight edge over Clemson. Although neither team had a signature win, the Pac-12 was overall a tougher league. (Maybe having players whine about the Rose Bowl hurt Oregon with the bowl selectors?)
December 9th, 2013 at 8:46 PM ^
Honestly, these bowl match-ups have little to do with how good each team is, and more to do with their national draw. West Coast teams have few fans outside of the West Coast and far less of a following nationwide. There just aren't many people who care about Oregon football who live more than 100 miles from the Pacific Ocean.
December 9th, 2013 at 9:21 PM ^
That's a good point--the assumption is that Clemson/OU send more folks to Miami/New Orleans. Would be interested to see whether historic BCS ticket sales bear that out. (Just on the basis of sheer proximity, I would tend to accept the premise.)
December 9th, 2013 at 10:37 PM ^
There aren't even that many Pac-12 fans in Pac-12 country... I'd be willing to bet there are more Michigan fans in California than Stanford fans. Aside from USC, Washington, Oregon, Utah and maybe Colorado, I don't think any team out there has the kind of fan following that schools east of the Rockies get... nobody who didn't attend Oregon State gives a shit about them
December 10th, 2013 at 1:47 AM ^
Doesn't have much of a following. They're stadium only holds about 63K and they rarely sell it out. The last few years that they've been done attendance has been awful.
December 10th, 2013 at 4:39 AM ^
Colorado is obviously very bad and never recovered from the Gary Barnett scandal fallout while the Broncos are very good, so this is perhaps a bad time to make the point... but when they were good, they were treated similarly to any medium state flagship: like another pro team. Stadium size is irrelevant, all that matters is fanbase.
Nobody in San Francisco who doesn't have some personal tie to Cal or Stanford cares about what the Golden Bears or Cardinal do or don't do. If they go 1-11, if they win the Pac-12, it doesn't matter. They're never going to compete with the Raiders and 49ers for hearts and minds. They get no media coverage either way. UCLA is in the same boat, even when good they're never headline material. Oregon State and Wazzou both have little brother syndrome.
to be honest, I'm not sure what the situation in Arizona is like.
December 10th, 2013 at 1:01 AM ^