Neutral bowl game venues

Submitted by crg on
This may be a more complicated discussion than warranted for a blog thread, but I'm curious why teams don't hold out for better bowl bids (as far as fairness, not prestige). Using UM as just one example: two years in a row where we go 1000+ miles on the road to an opponent with a virtual home game crowd. Of course the team deserves to go someplace warm, but why not insist on a truly neutral location? Want UM to play FSU? Ok - let's play that game in Texas or LA. The traditional tie-ins heavily favor one conference over the other in every case, so let's renegotiate those arrangements in some fashion.
MGoBoard
Football

xtramelanin

December 30th, 2016 at 11:11 PM ^

winter weather warnings in effect right now.   does anyone here think that if the game was being played in the snow that we wouldn't be having a signif benefit from that, not to mention our fans would be dominating attendance as well?   and even if not any particular game, over the course of decades it would make a huge difference.  

Joined: 12/09/2014

MGoPoints: 15439

SeattleWolverine

December 31st, 2016 at 12:21 AM ^

No you didn't say just Michigan. Since you want me to truly spell it out, it's not just Michigan, it's anywhere close to Michigan. People generally want to go to warm places with beaches for a December vacation. Or maybe a big city like NYC or SF but there not really any destinations close to Michigan that are attractive for bowls. Secondly, we will almost always play another Power 5 conference team which means either PAC 10, SEC, ACC or Big 12. A quick check of the map shows that those are schools mostly in warm weather areas that will be closer to bowl destinations. T

 

his has always been the way that bowls work (generally) and always will be the way that bowls work. It doesn't have to stay that way because that is how it has always been done; it will stay that way because it makes economic sense. The status quo exists for a reason and that's because having a large fanbase like Florida or FSU with the short travel distances is very appealing to bowls. Bowls will often gleefully except close local schools if they have large fanbases that will buy tickets, fill hotels rooms and restaurants which is the bowls' main agenda. No one is going to prioritize true neutrality in bowls over making money. If you don't know that already, you do not understand college sports. Sorry to be pissy but obviously I'm in a pissy mood and this thread is not helping. 

Joined: 11/07/2012

MGoPoints: 4047

crg

December 31st, 2016 at 12:31 AM ^

Except that there are already many bowls that have a reasonable degree of neutrality. The sun bowl today was UNC vs Stanford playing in Texas with a fair/good turnout. Many other examples can be given also. The conferences are the entities with leverage to influence these bowl agreements, and the member schools influence the conferences. Ultimately, it doesn't matter whoever plays in bowl XYZ - if the matchup is good people will go and money will be made. It does not necessitate giving an opponent virtual home field advantage.

Joined: 04/30/2015

MGoPoints: 75054

SeattleWolverine

December 31st, 2016 at 12:43 AM ^

Sure, there are going to be neutral site games because of the random ways that bowl selections play out. And especially for places like the Sun Bowl because the closest major college teams in Lubbock, Austin, Phoenix etc are ~500 miles away. But no one is every going to make that a prerequisite. Sometimes it will be neutral through happenstance. Other times not.

 

If you think the B1G has the leverage to say that large fanbases for schools near bowls must be excluded to preserve neutrality then I don't know what to tell you. The bowls, TV networks and other conference in the bowl agreement aren't going to limit themselves like that and the B1G doesn't have enough leverage to make that happen. The Citrus/Orange/Hall of Fame/WTF they are calling it these days are not writing off Miami/FSU/FL. The Rose is not excluding USC/UCLA. The Fiesta will not excluded AZ/ASU, not that that would matter. Cotton with Oklahoma or Texas. Same thing. Not happening.

Joined: 11/07/2012

MGoPoints: 4047

crg

December 31st, 2016 at 9:01 AM ^

But the conferences can pick & choose which bowls they want.  Simply because something has "always been done that way" does not mean it must be done that way.  Take the Rose Bowl for example:  Big Ten has been doing it since 1902 and, while very enjoyable, I do not believe anyone can credibly argue it does not provide a significant advantage to the PAC teams, especially those from southern California.  Why (aside from "Tradition!!") should the Big Ten continue to place itself at the disadvantage?  Since the majority of the Big Ten fans are travelling across the country, it doesn't matter if it is in Pasadena or Miami ultimately.  USC, UCLA, UW, Oregon, and other other PAC fan bases travel just as well.  The Rose Bowl can still be played and give the locals a good game to see, but whether it's Big Ten vs PAC or SEC vs Big Ten shouldn't matter.  

Also, you misunderstand how the leverage would be used.  The Big Ten would not dictate terms to these bowls, but simply pick and choose which bowl invites to accept.  And, if the Big Ten did this in coordination with at least one or moe power conferences, they could very easily shift the bowl tie-ins (and already have to some extent with the CFP).

Joined: 04/30/2015

MGoPoints: 75054

SeattleWolverine

December 31st, 2016 at 10:06 AM ^

I understand what you are saying perfectly well. You want to shift a lot of things around to ensure neutrality. Which I get, but other people, and by other people I mean the B1G, the bowls, and the other 4 Power conferences don't care enough about a vague concept like bowl neutrality to shift bowl agreements that involve millions of dollars of money around simply for that purpose. There are better and worse bowls and bowl arrangements. If the B1G tries to get what you are asking for, you might have more Alamo/Sun bowls and fewer Citrus bowls. Which may provide neutrality but is probably a net loss for the traveling Michigan fan base.

Joined: 11/07/2012

MGoPoints: 4047

crg

January 2nd, 2017 at 8:09 AM ^

The big ten officials are the ones placing their conference at the greatest disadvantage by sticking to the "traditional" arrangements. Using the Rose bowl as an example again, it is obvious why the PAC should fight to keep it as is, but not so for the big ten. It may have more pageantry, but the Big Ten winner (or other rep if winner in CFP) would get as many views in a similar major bowl (Sugar, Cotton, etc) if the alignments were rearranged. There are already millions of dollars tied into the current bowl system, but a revamped system would still generate similar revenue for all - I'm not certain that argument is dominant.

Joined: 04/30/2015

MGoPoints: 75054

GoBlueBill

December 30th, 2016 at 11:35 PM ^

To the OP.  No. There is a pecking order. It is based on how  teams finish in each Conference . The top bowls rotate who chooses and gets the best bowl teams  . The smaller get the scraps . 

Thats how Bowl games are choosen . 

If there wasnt than the Rose Bowl would probably have first pick every year and the other Bowls would slowly suffer and die .

Joined: 12/30/2014

MGoPoints: 11999

mgoblue0970

December 31st, 2016 at 12:20 AM ^

So the fact this game was in Florida caused Speight to fucking suck tonight?  The venue caused Smith to be ineffective?  The venue caused the offensive coaching to make zero adjustments?

This type of shit is what sucks about the Michigan fanbase... it's always the refs, or the venue, or some other bullshit -- Michigan never loses, it's always something else's fault!

Joined: 11/22/2008

MGoPoints: 18648

Mgodiscgolfer

December 31st, 2016 at 1:39 AM ^

I just want to forget this season. I know they played their hearts out tonight and I do feel terrible for the Srs, I really thought they were going to have a special season.

Joined: 01/13/2011

MGoPoints: 5322

doggdetroit

December 31st, 2016 at 12:38 PM ^

I agree that the bowl system is inherently unfair to B1G teams. However, if you agree to having a bowl system then I would not change anything about the current setup. The Rose Bowl is the most prestigious/storied game. The stadium is by far the most iconic venue. Southern California is by far the best location. It's unfortunate that it's a virtual home game for USC, but that's the way it is.

Bowl season is basically a vacation centered around a game for the players/alumni/fans of the schools involved. The only location worth taking a vacation to in the Midwest/Northeast during the winter is Chicago, New York and DC. We have the Pinstripe Bowl in NYC now. If someone wanted to create a B1G bowl game in either DC and/or Chicago, that would be cool, but if you ask B1G players and coaches where they would rather be for a week in late December/early January, the preferred destinations would be California and Florida despite playing in virtual road games for the most part.
 

Joined: 09/05/2015

MGoPoints: 2337

MadMike92

December 31st, 2016 at 11:37 AM ^

If we're in the Quicky Lube bowl @ Ford Field next year you're happy? Yes, being sarcastic. But I do think college football is in a state right now where many traditions are being thrown out for the sake of TV money, media markets, corporate sponsorships, etc. The game is changing, I wish it was still Ufer calling the game and toe meeting leather at 1:05 but those days are loooong gone. So, nothing wrong with questioning all this shit at this point, I guess.

Joined: 03/06/2016

MGoPoints: 515

ilah17

January 1st, 2017 at 2:42 AM ^

I don't know what the answer is, but the atmosphere at the game was rough. Obviously the result was different last year under similar circumstances though.



Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad

Joined: 12/15/2011

MGoPoints: 4185

MINajee et Trois

January 1st, 2017 at 3:21 AM ^

Too much preparation goes into the venues well before the teams are even picked to change venues 

Most big bowl games are played in warmer areas which just so happen to be where our opponents will come from like Florida,Texas,bama,LSU etc

Nothing can or will be done about it

Joined: 12/25/2016

MGoPoints: -344