(12-05-2011 03:58 PM)wvucrazed Wrote:  

(12-05-2011 03:50 PM)CollegeCard Wrote:  I think to a certain extent this is true. Most BCS schools at least have a rep and it is very difficult to change or shake. Have a good rep and a bad year travelling? You can always find an excuse. Have a good year despite a bad rep, it can largely be ignored or singled out for why it won't happen again.

I don't Louisville has the above problem, but I think that exists.

I don't think bowl execs are making these decisions based on a school's "rep". Big $$$ is riding on their pick. By and large these folks know what they are getting.

It's more like a mix since those schools don't get the rep without a long history of backing it up. There's also a sliding scale with the national name brand power of the school. Virginia Tech took about 10 years of great traveling to build its rep. Once it got that rep, the bowls are now willing to overlook a couple of years of poor traveling since it still has its rep along with a good brand name. A better example is Oklahoma - its bowl traveling value certainly didn't disappear with poor turnout at last year's Fiesta Bowl. It would take a LOT of bad traveling seasons to puncture OU's rep - they'll get the benefit of the doubt for a long time. In contrast, a school like Cincinnati traveled great to the Orange and Sugar Bowls, but they still haven't built up enough of a traveling rep to get the benefit of the doubt and the brand name isn't there to compensate.

From a ticket sale perspective, bowls look for long histories of fans buying them up. From a TV perspective, bowls want a pairing that Average Joe Sports Fan says, "Those are two big-time schools playing each other." In the case of Michigan, they definitely deliver on both fronts, while Virginia Tech is right on that next tier. In contrast, Kansas State is good for ticket sales but bad for TV, while Boise State might be good for TV but bad for ticket sales.

(12-05-2011 04:23 PM)chrisRU Wrote:  The only game that means ANYTHING is that BCS Championship game. Everything else is just an exhibition. The bowl games are only about putting butts in the seats and eyes on the tv. Not sure why people continue to be confounded by this simple concept every year.

Stop watching and attending the bowl games if you want it to change.

That's the key point. Not only is this not happening, but more people are watching college football games than ever before. People say one thing ("We want to see Boise State/Butler/Tampa Rays!") and do the exact opposite (way higher TV ratings for Notre Dame/Duke/Yankees). The people on this message board are not a representative sample of the general sports viewing public at all. The large ratings come from people that only casually watch college football and they want to see the Notre Dame/Ohio State/Alabama/USC/Texas-types even if they're ranked lower than a Boise State/Kansas State-type. It's just like how more people will have watched a critically-based Transformers 3 movie compared to whoever will win the Best Picture Oscar this year - in a world with limited time and almost unlimited access to media via the Internet and cable, it makes top brand names even more valuable than ever.

(12-05-2011 04:16 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  Either way, it was much cheaper for VT fans to get to FLA vs. UCONN fans going to Glendale.

This is not entirely true either. If they drove, it may be cheaper. But it is much cheaper to fly to Phoenix from just about anywhere in the country than it is to fly to Miami. And don't even get me started on how much cheaper it is to stay in the Phoenix area than it is in Miami, on New Year's eve no less. I could get a flight to Phoenix, pay for my hotel and my ticket, for less than I could fly to Miami. And Miami is half the distance.

Now it is true that fans did have a cheaper option, but I believe most people fly to Miami.

I am more curious as to the reason Va had a chance to make the Sugar, TCU being left out of the BCS top 16. I know that the had a tough OT loss to SMU but I would put them in there somewhere.

I'm thinking they had staked a pretty good claim as far as taking a non-AQ slot.

Just shows that people will argue over anything. Even if it's to claim how Boise St, Kansas St or Baylor are better draws for a bowl.

(12-05-2011 03:34 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-05-2011 03:15 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  Cause they are bunch of crooks that have no integrity?

To be fair, I could see how the VT fans have had Orange Bowl fatigue as they had been sent there 3 out of the last 4 years. Otherwise, VT has a top-notch traveling reputation (whether deserved or not). In particular, the Sugar Bowl had a great ticket-selling experience with VT in the 2004 season, so that's a direct reason why the Sugar would've found them attractive. Couple that with Michigan (who will definitely sell a ton of tickets) and the Sugar is pretty happy. Note that LSU going to the championship game a week later is NOT a good thing for bowl organizers as a ton of locals and day-trippers are going to be snapping up tickets while not staying in hotels and eating in as many restaurants. (It's a great thing for ticket scalpers, though.) A lot of Alabama fans might be day-trippers, too.

LSU will day-trip but Bama fans will stay a week.

Quote:Remember that it's not about Michigan or Virginia Tech in respective isolation. Michigan fans are simply going to be more motivated to travel with VT as a name opponent compared to Boise State

I'd say Boise is about as big a 'named' opponent as VT.

(12-05-2011 07:01 PM)LaRue777 Wrote:  I'm thinking they had staked a pretty good claim as far as taking a non-AQ slot.

Because they finished 18th, they were not even elgible. Only Boise St was eligible as far as non-ACQ, and they were eligible as an at large team, and passed over for Michigan and Va. Tech.

(12-05-2011 10:32 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2011 03:34 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-05-2011 03:15 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  Cause they are bunch of crooks that have no integrity?

To be fair, I could see how the VT fans have had Orange Bowl fatigue as they had been sent there 3 out of the last 4 years. Otherwise, VT has a top-notch traveling reputation (whether deserved or not). In particular, the Sugar Bowl had a great ticket-selling experience with VT in the 2004 season, so that's a direct reason why the Sugar would've found them attractive. Couple that with Michigan (who will definitely sell a ton of tickets) and the Sugar is pretty happy. Note that LSU going to the championship game a week later is NOT a good thing for bowl organizers as a ton of locals and day-trippers are going to be snapping up tickets while not staying in hotels and eating in as many restaurants. (It's a great thing for ticket scalpers, though.) A lot of Alabama fans might be day-trippers, too.

LSU will day-trip but Bama fans will stay a week.

Quote:Remember that it's not about Michigan or Virginia Tech in respective isolation. Michigan fans are simply going to be more motivated to travel with VT as a name opponent compared to Boise State

I'd say Boise is about as big a 'named' opponent as VT.

Hate to say it but.........wrong

(12-06-2011 02:25 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(12-05-2011 10:32 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2011 03:34 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-05-2011 03:15 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  Cause they are bunch of crooks that have no integrity?

To be fair, I could see how the VT fans have had Orange Bowl fatigue as they had been sent there 3 out of the last 4 years. Otherwise, VT has a top-notch traveling reputation (whether deserved or not). In particular, the Sugar Bowl had a great ticket-selling experience with VT in the 2004 season, so that's a direct reason why the Sugar would've found them attractive. Couple that with Michigan (who will definitely sell a ton of tickets) and the Sugar is pretty happy. Note that LSU going to the championship game a week later is NOT a good thing for bowl organizers as a ton of locals and day-trippers are going to be snapping up tickets while not staying in hotels and eating in as many restaurants. (It's a great thing for ticket scalpers, though.) A lot of Alabama fans might be day-trippers, too.

LSU will day-trip but Bama fans will stay a week.

Quote:Remember that it's not about Michigan or Virginia Tech in respective isolation. Michigan fans are simply going to be more motivated to travel with VT as a name opponent compared to Boise State

I'd say Boise is about as big a 'named' opponent as VT.

Hate to say it but.........wrong

VT and Boise are both second-tier names. Not much to choose between them.

(12-06-2011 02:00 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(12-05-2011 07:01 PM)LaRue777 Wrote:  I'm thinking they had staked a pretty good claim as far as taking a non-AQ slot.

Because they finished 18th, they were not even elgible. Only Boise St was eligible as far as non-ACQ, and they were eligible as an at large team, and passed over for Michigan and Va. Tech.

My full post criticized the fact that they did not receive the votes to be included in the top 16. I understand that they are not eligible for an automatic bid. I am not pounding Tech here but wondering why TCU wasn't in the position to take them out of consideration.

(12-06-2011 02:25 PM)Tigeer Wrote:  

(12-05-2011 10:32 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(12-05-2011 03:34 PM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(12-05-2011 03:15 PM)SF Husky Wrote:  Cause they are bunch of crooks that have no integrity?

To be fair, I could see how the VT fans have had Orange Bowl fatigue as they had been sent there 3 out of the last 4 years. Otherwise, VT has a top-notch traveling reputation (whether deserved or not). In particular, the Sugar Bowl had a great ticket-selling experience with VT in the 2004 season, so that's a direct reason why the Sugar would've found them attractive. Couple that with Michigan (who will definitely sell a ton of tickets) and the Sugar is pretty happy. Note that LSU going to the championship game a week later is NOT a good thing for bowl organizers as a ton of locals and day-trippers are going to be snapping up tickets while not staying in hotels and eating in as many restaurants. (It's a great thing for ticket scalpers, though.) A lot of Alabama fans might be day-trippers, too.

LSU will day-trip but Bama fans will stay a week.

Quote:Remember that it's not about Michigan or Virginia Tech in respective isolation. Michigan fans are simply going to be more motivated to travel with VT as a name opponent compared to Boise State

I'd say Boise is about as big a 'named' opponent as VT.

Hate to say it but.........wrong

Would you agree that this is something that needs to change? Boise State has a great recent history and perhaps should be getting more respect? They will travel and fill a major bowl.

I believe it is only a matter of the media (ESPN) not giving them the attention they have earned which would help bringing about TV interest.

(12-06-2011 04:29 PM)LaRue777 Wrote:  Would you agree that this is something that needs to change? Boise State has a great recent history and perhaps should be getting more respect? They will travel and fill a major bowl.

I believe it is only a matter of the media (ESPN) not giving them the attention they have earned which would help bringing about TV interest.

Boise State has been media darlings for years. ESPN has milked them for programming over and over again during their successful WAC years.

The bowls are not swayed by a media bias or anything like that - it's all about the bottom line. If Boise State was the best pick for the Sugar Bowl to maximize their revenue, interest in the game nationally, attendance, etc... then Boise State would have been selected.

(12-06-2011 04:35 PM)wvucrazed Wrote:  

(12-06-2011 04:29 PM)LaRue777 Wrote:  Would you agree that this is something that needs to change? Boise State has a great recent history and perhaps should be getting more respect? They will travel and fill a major bowl.

I believe it is only a matter of the media (ESPN) not giving them the attention they have earned which would help bringing about TV interest.

Boise State has been media darlings for years. ESPN has milked them for programming over and over again during their successful WAC years.

The bowls are not swayed by a media bias or anything like that - it's all about the bottom line. If Boise State was the best pick for the Sugar Bowl to maximize their revenue, interest in the game nationally, attendance, etc... then Boise State would have been selected.

Media bias drives the bottom line. Boise State has been viewed not as darlings but as outsiders who earned their way in despite all their obstacles. ESPN enjoys them when they can cause debate but drops them like a hot rock as soon as they lose a game.

Boise State has proven they are worthy (with their recent bowl success) and the media needs to start thinking about giving them more respect. This will give any bowl choosing them more TV interest and revenue.