B1G Champ Seatfiller WAS a Hoax

Submitted by JeepinBen on December 1st, 2011 at 10:27 AM

Orson from EDSBS had quite the conversation with the master troll...

http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com/2011/12/1/2602611/a-conversation-with-the-b1g-seatfiller-hoaxster

It was someone who was pissed off by how much they spent for B1G Champ Game tickets, while people are now getting them for like $11. An admitted B1G alum, not from MSU, Wisconsin, OSU or PSU (According to themselves of course)

Comments

winterblue75

December 1st, 2011 at 10:38 AM ^

Well if said "hoaxster" would have done a little research, he would have seen that these football conference championship games have the bottom drop out of the ticket prices as the game approaches. He's an idiot.

Needs

December 1st, 2011 at 11:39 AM ^

SEC championship tix have stayed stable if not increased. Right now, cheapest tix are $134 on stubhub. And that's been the history for that game. Not unreasonable to think the same of the inaugural Big 10 championship.

Real problem was that Michigan, Nebraska, and Ohio State were eliminated on the same weekend a week after the Penn State scandal broke, removing the four largest fan bases from the market and flooding the secondary market with tickets. Doesn't help that Wisconsin fans have been depressed since the back-to-back hail mary losses (if they lose only one of those,  Wisconsin's making their case for a national championship slot this weekend, and there's a lot more interest) and that Sparty doesn't travel well.

Section 1

December 1st, 2011 at 2:41 PM ^

I do sort of wonder what the SEC game prices might be, if the game were in Birmingham, or Mobile, or Lexington.  Or, uh, Indianapolis.  Maybe the same, I don't know.  I also wonder if Georgia playing the Number 1 team in America matters.  Would the B1G game prices be different if Nebraska was playing a Number 1 OSU?  Or if Purdue was playing a Number 1 Michigan?

WhoopinStick

December 1st, 2011 at 11:07 AM ^

You know it was a hoax as the Lions and Pistons in down years could fill the stadium by giving away tickets.  Not paying people to go, but just giving away tickets for free. 

JeepinBen

December 1st, 2011 at 11:43 AM ^

But Indy's problem as well. Indy wants as perfect an event as they can have, remember that they're bidding against Chicago here. Indy doesn't want images like the ACC Champ Game photo flying around. The B1G is set money wise. The game sold out. All of the tickets have been sold by the B1G/Venue/Whatever. The issue is perception and actually having butts in the seats. I'm sure plenty of Nebraska fans bought tickets and are no longer going. The B1G/Indy people want to make sure that the seats attributed to those tickets are filled. Thus this hoax.

MI Expat NY

December 1st, 2011 at 12:07 PM ^

Indy already has it for 5 years.  They're well on their way to establishing themselves as the permanent host just as Atlanta has done with the SEC (after the first two were held in Birmingham).  One bad year while the conference works out the kinks won't be a problem for Indy.  Two or three years of "bad" match-ups and no-shows could start to cause some problems, though.

Lionsfan

December 1st, 2011 at 12:04 PM ^

What does it say about the state of the BTCG if that many people were willing to belive it? I don't think you could have picked a worse slate of teams to represent the Big Ten in it's inaugural Championship Game

Needs

December 1st, 2011 at 12:26 PM ^

You could have had Penn State. That definitely would have been worse. Maybe not for attendance (though, if you're a PSU fan, are you really physched for football right now?) but certainly for the story surrounding the game, especially with the first Sandusky lawsuit filed this week.

And certainly for the quality of football played. Watching PSU play offense is not exactly going to draw any casual viewers away from Oklahoma-Okie State. At least this matchup has the Monte Ball trying to break Barry Sanders' record going for it.

Yeoman

December 1st, 2011 at 12:36 PM ^

...that's bored by these 63-60 games? I guess they're ok as a novelty, but a steady dose of wondering who'll drop the ball because they'll sure as hell never be tackled isn't really the kind of foortball I like.

Child of the '70s, I suppose. 24-12, 10-7, 12-10, 10-10. That was good football.

Needs

December 1st, 2011 at 12:41 PM ^

I am generally with you. Football shouldn't be like grass court tennis where there's one break of serve/defensive stop in an otherwise overwhelming offensive display. 

That said, there are defensive struggles where great defenses overwhelm competent offenses (think OSU-UM 1997). Then there is incompetent, boring offense. That's Penn State this year.

Yeoman

December 1st, 2011 at 12:45 PM ^

Good football's better than bad, for sure. But I feel like I might be the only neutral observer that got more pleasure out of LSU/Alabama than I expect to get out of Bedlam.

Of course, I like watching Wisconsin-style basketball, too. Ignore me.