Andy Staples ‏@Andy_Staples

More Slive: “We’re going to take a hard look at how we do our bowl relationships and see if there might be a better way.”
Details
25m Andy Staples Andy Staples ‏@Andy_Staples

Slive on bowls: “In our league, we’re going to have a serious conversation about ticketing

what's the implication here?

(01-08-2013 09:17 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  what's the implication here?

SEC not selling out allotments for non-national championshp bowls. Costing them money having to pay for unsold tickets is my guess.

I read about the problem from the Florida perspective yesterday. if they arent in National title, they dont care.

To them, the Sugar Bowl meant nothing. was on a Wednesday night, hard to take off work after you just had off work and off school for so many days with New Years. And they were playing a "BS Big East team." Where's the glory in winning?

I kind of get the point. Obviously disagree. But it is obviously a problem because no bowls sell out. and very few schools sell their entire allotments.

Why did bowl games seem bigger prior to the BCS?

BCS makes anything other than the title game insignificant?
Too many bowl games?
Loss of traditional league rivalries that bowl games used to have (maybe that is what the bigger conferences are going after - restoring that by eliminating other conferences from upper tier bowls?)
The pursuit of money, while still there, was not a factor as it is now the # 1 factor. (I think I just answered my own question).

(01-09-2013 10:47 AM)bearcatfan Wrote:  Why did bowl games seem bigger prior to the BCS?

BCS makes anything other than the title game insignificant?
Too many bowl games?
Loss of traditional league rivalries that bowl games used to have (maybe that is what the bigger conferences are going after - restoring that by eliminating other conferences from upper tier bowls?)
The pursuit of money, while still there, was not a factor as it is now the # 1 factor. (I think I just answered my own question).

Yes, Yes, Yes and Yes.

The BCS makes other bowls insignificant. I think tie-ins hurt as well. Think about it... Florida got invited to the Sugar Bowl for crying out loud and their fans were bored and did not go to the game. It is a pretty sad state of affairs when fans cannot get themselves up for an opportunity to play in the Sugar Bowl, one of the most historic bowls out there.

At least for me, the big problem is having these bowls played during the week which makes it almost impossible to attend. I know that TV rules and fans attending the games are secondary because of the almighty dollar, but if they want the games well attended they need to do them all weekends or on the holidays themselves.

Yes, the bowl dates this year for the BCS Bowls did make it difficult for anyone to attend. It will be much worse when the play-off starts...Can you imagine being asked to travel your fan base for a conference championship game then about 3 weeks later travel again for a semi final game and then the next week for a Championship game? I don't think the masses in this horrid economy will be able to do that in the numbers required.

My assumption is that Slive and SEC schools are tired of the practice of Bowls giving schools the worse
tickets to sell.

Playing the BCS games in the middle of the week after the New Year Holiday's is absolutely moronic. Unless it is in the middle of the holiday week between Christmas and New Year's people dont want to watch college football games in the middle of the work week or even attend them. They should never have allowed ESPN to gain so much control that they were able to change the dates only for their own ratings purposes. They should all be played on New Years Day like they used to be. That is when bowl games were exciting and it was much easier for people to travel to games having the days before and a day after off work.

(01-09-2013 11:28 AM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  My assumption is that Slive and SEC schools are tired of the practice of Bowls giving schools the worse
tickets to sell.

That is a legit complaint and the reason many (including some who would prefer to buy from their university to hep with covering the ticket allotment) purchase on a secondary market. They know where their seats are going to be when they buy and in the case of Florida since the national championship game was also in Miami they likely were able to buy much better seats at a huge discount.

Buying from a secondary market, they also don't get pushed into crappy seats by monied alums buying 16 good seats from the schools' allotment. Mind you I don't mind monied alums getting good seats but if you have 4 season tickets at Nippert you should get only 4 of the best seats from the school's allotment. quid pro quo.

We buy from UC as we see it as a donation but I totally get why many choose to buy from a secondary market.

(01-09-2013 10:47 AM)bearcatfan Wrote:  Why did bowl games seem bigger prior to the BCS?

BCS makes anything other than the title game insignificant?
Too many bowl games?
Loss of traditional league rivalries that bowl games used to have (maybe that is what the bigger conferences are going after - restoring that by eliminating other conferences from upper tier bowls?)
The pursuit of money, while still there, was not a factor as it is now the # 1 factor. (I think I just answered my own question).

Agree with all of it.

Odd how "everybody" pined for a championship structure for years, but it's now becoming clear that the old system of bowl chaos was better for the sport, and the fans.

(01-09-2013 11:17 AM)Bearcat T Wrote:  It will be much worse when the play-off starts...Can you imagine being asked to travel your fan base for a conference championship game then about 3 weeks later travel again for a semi final game and then the next week for a Championship game? I don't think the masses in this horrid economy will be able to do that in the numbers required.

I think there will be enough interest in these games that the semi-finals will sell out even if the fans of the teams involved don't travel. You will get enough locals at the games to sell the tickets.

[/font]I applaud him on this. Obligating schools to sell crappy tickets to bowls mid week 2 weeks after announcing they're in the bowl has got to go. It's aggravating sitting in the end zone 40 rows up paying more than a guy on the 50. Not to mention it took 3 vacation days bc it's a Wednesday game instead of holiday or weekend bc they're beholden to fat asses watching on tv. I'm just tired of it.

(01-09-2013 10:52 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  The BCS makes other bowls insignificant. I think tie-ins hurt as well. Think about it... Florida got invited to the Sugar Bowl for crying out loud and their fans were bored and did not go to the game. It is a pretty sad state of affairs when fans cannot get themselves up for an opportunity to play in the Sugar Bowl, one of the most historic bowls out there.

They've played in the Sugar Bowl 9 times (3 times since 2000). It's simply not as "big" of a deal to play in the Sugar Bowl for their fans. It isn't sad, it's just the reality of a team has won national titles recently and plays in a league where EVERY week is a game they get themselves up for in conference play.

Even if that wasn't the case, can you blame Florida fans for not caring? It's a game that lacks any of the drama or excitement associated with the SEC season. Frankly, I can't blame any fan for not wanting to pay hard-earned dollars for tickets, travel and lodging to go watch an exhibition game.

(01-09-2013 02:07 PM)#41 Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 10:52 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  The BCS makes other bowls insignificant. I think tie-ins hurt as well. Think about it... Florida got invited to the Sugar Bowl for crying out loud and their fans were bored and did not go to the game. It is a pretty sad state of affairs when fans cannot get themselves up for an opportunity to play in the Sugar Bowl, one of the most historic bowls out there.

Have you ever heard an Ohio state fan ho-hum the Rose Bowl? Those Bucknuts are many things, but the only thing I give them credit for is they will travel. Other B10 teams think likewise To most midwesterns, going to the Rose Bowl is an event to be celebrated, regardless of who they are playing. When Wisconsin played TCU a few years ago, there was a capacity crowd of Cheeseheads in the stands. Certainly one would think playing TCU instead of USC, UCLA or Stanford would have caused a lot of Badger fans to stay home. Why shouldn't this be the same for a Florida Gator fan?

(01-09-2013 10:47 AM)bearcatfan Wrote:  Why did bowl games seem bigger prior to the BCS?

BCS makes anything other than the title game insignificant?
Too many bowl games?
Loss of traditional league rivalries that bowl games used to have (maybe that is what the bigger conferences are going after - restoring that by eliminating other conferences from upper tier bowls?)
The pursuit of money, while still there, was not a factor as it is now the # 1 factor. (I think I just answered my own question).

ESPN is as much to blame as anyone. They suppress turnout by beating their drum about how bad a conference is or how such and such doesn't belong on the same field. UF fans and the like buy in and stay home instead of ESPN hyping the match-up. Its very strange but by driving the conference alignment bus with their damaging rhetoric they are also damaging an extremely valuable property they own.

(01-09-2013 02:07 PM)#41 Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 10:52 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  The BCS makes other bowls insignificant. I think tie-ins hurt as well. Think about it... Florida got invited to the Sugar Bowl for crying out loud and their fans were bored and did not go to the game. It is a pretty sad state of affairs when fans cannot get themselves up for an opportunity to play in the Sugar Bowl, one of the most historic bowls out there.

They've played in the Sugar Bowl 9 times (3 times since 2000). It's simply not as "big" of a deal to play in the Sugar Bowl for their fans. It isn't sad, it's just the reality of a team has won national titles recently and plays in a league where EVERY week is a game they get themselves up for in conference play.

Even if that wasn't the case, can you blame Florida fans for not caring? It's a game that lacks any of the drama or excitement associated with the SEC season. Frankly, I can't blame any fan for not wanting to pay hard-earned dollars for tickets, travel and lodging to go watch an exhibition game.

Pretty dumb take really. This game was supposed to be their springboard to a national title run next season. Ooops.

(01-09-2013 02:07 PM)#41 Wrote:  

(01-09-2013 10:52 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  The BCS makes other bowls insignificant. I think tie-ins hurt as well. Think about it... Florida got invited to the Sugar Bowl for crying out loud and their fans were bored and did not go to the game. It is a pretty sad state of affairs when fans cannot get themselves up for an opportunity to play in the Sugar Bowl, one of the most historic bowls out there.

They've played in the Sugar Bowl 9 times (3 times since 2000). It's simply not as "big" of a deal to play in the Sugar Bowl for their fans. It isn't sad, it's just the reality of a team has won national titles recently and plays in a league where EVERY week is a game they get themselves up for in conference play.

Even if that wasn't the case, can you blame Florida fans for not caring? It's a game that lacks any of the drama or excitement associated with the SEC season. Frankly, I can't blame any fan for not wanting to pay hard-earned dollars for tickets, travel and lodging to go watch an exhibition game.

They were beat like a drum. I guess they knew the beating was coming and decided to stay home.

If Florida fans feel that high and mighty that it's just beneath them to go to a plain old BCS bowl, screw'em. No one held a gun to their head to accept the invitation. Why don't they just decline and pout quietly at home?