CSNbbs

Not surprising unfortunately.

http://sportsmediablog.dallasnews.com/ar...-just.html

I'm not surprised either. The media spent the entire time prior to the game dismissing it as irrelevant. Is it any wonder that the rest of the nation felt the same?

bitcruncher Wrote:The media spent the entire time prior to the game dismissing it as irrelevant.

Why do you suppose the media did that?

.........

One of the many advantages of a March-Madness-type of tournament is that every single game counts. Every single game means the end of the road for the loser, and another chance for the winner.

One of the many disadvantages of the current set-up in FBS-level football is that, among the 30-something bowl games out there, only 1 really matters to the general football-fan-public. The rest are of concern only to the fans of the particular schools playing, and perhaps some of the civic/business leaders in the host-cities.

Interestingly, it looks like most other bowls (both BCS and non-BCS) are up or relatively strong in terms of ratings this year. The Rose and Sugar Bowls had better ratings and even though the Capital One Bowl was down compared to the high-profile Michigan-Florida matchup last year (which beat every BCS bowl in the ratings except for the NCG and Rose), it was higher than the ratings for the Orange Bowl. The Cotton Bowl got a boost from not having to compete against other games in its time slot and the Meineke Car Care Bowl did well with WVU-UNC. I think it would be a pretty good bet that this year's Fiesta Bowl and NCG will handily beat their counterparts from last year in the ratings, too.

http://sportsmediawatch.blogspot.com/sea...20football

(01-05-2009 01:29 PM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]

bitcruncher Wrote:The media spent the entire time prior to the game dismissing it as irrelevant.

Why do you suppose the media did that?

.........

One of the many advantages of a March-Madness-type of tournament is that every single game counts. Every single game means the end of the road for the loser, and another chance for the winner.

One of the many disadvantages of the current set-up in FBS-level football is that, among the 30-something bowl games out there, only 1 really matters to the general football-fan-public. The rest are of concern only to the fans of the particular schools playing, and perhaps some of the civic/business leaders in the host-cities.

Quite simply it was a bad match-up that the Cartel knew was going to be a disaster because it had no story or interest. But the Cartel could not risk a Utah/Texas match-up in the second most important BCS game this year.

By the way, while I acknowledge that a championship style tourney with 8 teams or more would likely increase the ratings significantly, most other Bowl games this year are ahead of last year's ratings equivalent.

Cheers,
Neil

Well the OB got the BCS championship game so they also got the weakest BCS game in Cincy- VTech.
The problem the OB has is that it is ttached to the ACC champ and the last few years they have been one of the lowest ranked champions. Also you dont have FSU or UM in that game that would give the bowl a name that its recognize across the nation.
It would be similar if the Fiesta had a matchup of Kansas-Utah.
The Pac Ten has been dominated by USC, The BigTen by Ohio State, The Big12 by Oklahoma-Texas. All teams recognizable by fans so they bring an audience.
The SEC with Auburn-Georgia-Alabama-LSU and Florida have had different teams but they are the league with the highest number of teams with names and thus an audience

I expected the numbers to be down, but a prime time game on new years night. For some reason, i just expected people wouldn't have that much going on. Nothing on TV, either hit the sports bar or if your a fan on college football you might just have it on in the background. I mean, i wasn't expecting high numbers, but lower than i thought, but as was mentioned, they bashed the hell out of this game all month long.

Unfortunately, the final rating of 5.4 for the Orange Bowl is even worse than the initial overnight rating. That's lower than the Deal or No Deal and CSI re-runs that ran the same evening.

http://sportsmediawatch.blogspot.com/200...-bowl.html

That sucks. I hate how they do the ratings anyways. But it is what it is. To most it was a boring game but to me I found the game pretty exciting. I enjoy defensive games. I'm a Steelers fan so what do you expect from me.

(01-05-2009 06:39 PM)Cubanbull Wrote: [ -> ]Well the OB got the BCS championship game so they also got the weakest BCS game in Cincy- VTech.
The problem the OB has is that it is ttached to the ACC champ and the last few years they have been one of the lowest ranked champions.

A huge part of it is their selection of at-larges. The bowls that lose teams to the national title game is granted the first choice. Even in the years the Orange Bowl has the first pick afterwards, they have to choose one of the BE champ or 2 worst at-larges (one of them likely a non-BCS conference team). Not even FSU or Miami can save that match-up.

(01-06-2009 01:01 AM)rferry Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-05-2009 06:39 PM)Cubanbull Wrote: [ -> ]Well the OB got the BCS championship game so they also got the weakest BCS game in Cincy- VTech.
The problem the OB has is that it is ttached to the ACC champ and the last few years they have been one of the lowest ranked champions.

A huge part of it is their selection of at-larges. The bowls that lose teams to the national title game is granted the first choice. Even in the years the Orange Bowl has the first pick afterwards, they have to choose one of the BE champ or 2 worst at-larges (one of them likely a non-BCS conference team). Not even FSU or Miami can save that match-up.

Could it has something to do with ACC always bringing the worst BCS team to this bowl on a yearly basis? ACC teams aren't exactly blowing up any kind of ratings lately.

(01-05-2009 01:29 PM)Native Georgian Wrote: [ -> ]

bitcruncher Wrote:The media spent the entire time prior to the game dismissing it as irrelevant.

Why do you suppose the media did that?

ESPN did it because the game was on Fox Sports. And others did it because they think it will further the cause for BCS reform.

That's why.

The BCS shouldn't be reformed. It should be scrapped in favor of a playoff...

(01-06-2009 01:01 AM)rferry Wrote: [ -> ]

(01-05-2009 06:39 PM)Cubanbull Wrote: [ -> ]Well the OB got the BCS championship game so they also got the weakest BCS game in Cincy- VTech.
The problem the OB has is that it is ttached to the ACC champ and the last few years they have been one of the lowest ranked champions.

A huge part of it is their selection of at-larges. The bowls that lose teams to the national title game is granted the first choice. Even in the years the Orange Bowl has the first pick afterwards, they have to choose one of the BE champ or 2 worst at-larges (one of them likely a non-BCS conference team). Not even FSU or Miami can save that match-up.

Spoken like a true ACC fan. This has nothing to do with performance of the ACC, which has sucked gas since expansion. It's everything else. It's the Big East, it's the selection process, hell its global warming. The ACC needs to get its act together.

Right. The ACC Championship game sure was a huge draw...

Last I checked, Virginia Tech wasn't that bad. And most of our teams have supported the Orange Bowl well. But the fact remains, as long as the ACC remains outside of the championship game, the best they can get is one of the worst at-large teams. That's not going to be a good match-up. ACC bowl support has been strong, but I agree that the ACC needs to place a team into national title contention again. The league had one of its strongest years and it was barely noticed because it lacked a top team.

Quote:Last I checked, Virginia Tech wasn't that bad.

Neither was Cincy

Quote:But the fact remains, as long as the ACC remains outside of the championship game, the best they can get is one of the worst at-large teams. That's not going to be a good match-up

.

That is the same problem that the BE has. Thats why we had to be matched up with the Acc champ this season, and in 2006, because it's champion was one of the worst at large teams.

Quote:ACC bowl support has been strong, but I agree that the ACC needs to place a team into national title contention again. The league had one of its strongest years and it was barely noticed because it lacked a top team.

Its interesting that the acc still had a losing record to the BE head to head, in one of its strongest seasons.

This was a game that nobody outside of the two fanbases cared about. There is no agenda; the stats Frank posted showing the higher numbers for the other bowl games illustrate this.

(01-06-2009 12:25 PM)cuseroc Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:But the fact remains, as long as the ACC remains outside of the championship game, the best they can get is one of the worst at-large teams. That's not going to be a good match-up

.

That is the same problem that the BE has. Thats why we had to be matched up with the Acc champ this season, and in 2006, because it's champion was one of the worst at large teams.

Not the same problem.
The ACC's problem is one of BCS rankings, something that can be corrected in any given season and on the field.
Because the BE does not have a BCS bowl tie-in, they're chosen on a basis of their on-field strength, attendance, TV, and match-ups. The BE champ could be #3 in the BCS rankings and still be chosen last among the at-larges. That will take years to correct.

(01-06-2009 01:24 AM)SF Husky Wrote: [ -> ]Could it has something to do with ACC always bringing the worst BCS team to this bowl on a yearly basis? ACC teams aren't exactly blowing up any kind of ratings lately.

Well...the 2 lowest TV Rated Orange Bowl Games in history were both Big East vs ACC match-ups.

That probably can't be good news for both conferences trying to secure more $$$$ in future TV contracts.