Here you are, with updated CCG averages by conference in parenthesis (excluding 2020).
SEC: 74,810 (75,093): Great numbers as always, though down over 3000 from last season. May have been hurt by LSU's loss to A&M taking them out of the playoff hunt.
Big 12: 69,335 (69,374): Good showing and consistent with previous years in Arlington, having nearby TCU helps as well.
Big Ten: 67,107 (63,350): These games usually sell out Indy, they could probably get SEC-like numbers if the Bears Dome is built with a larger capacity and they move there.
ACC: 64,115 (63,944): Clemson always brings a great crowd to Charlotte, having nearby UNC doesn't hurt either.
Pac 12: 61,195 (50,118): Second-best numbers for the Pac-12 ever (behind Arizona State on-campus). Vegas seems to be a much better draw than Santa Clara.
C-USA: 41,412 (27,989): UTSA with nearly identical numbers to last season, very impressive. Third-best numbers ever for C-USA (behind by UCF).
AAC: 30,118 (35,178): Behind other games hosted at larger venues, but Tulane still managed a sell-out.
MWC: 24,037 (23,516): Very consistent with the four other times Boise has hosted.
Sun Belt: 21,554 (21,470): Belt with only four CCG games so far, but just so happens that Troy's game last weekend is basically even with the new average.
MAC: 15,550 (20,637): Disappointing, especially since Toledo and Ohio U tend to be two of the better-drawing programs in the conference.
I was watching Toledo/Ohio and was surprised the sidelines looked more empty than full, considering Toledo and Ohio are 2 of the bigger fan bases.
Tbf, the only game I remember being packed was 2016 WMU.
MAC should have the game played on campus for the team with the best record. Not too many MAC fans are make going to drive to Detroit unless they live in the area.
(12-09-2022 10:01 AM)Love and Honor Wrote: [ -> ]Pac 12: 61,195 (50,118): Second-best numbers for the Pac-12 ever (behind Arizona State on-campus). Vegas seems to be a much better draw than Santa Clara.
The PAC 12's Scott-inflicted near-sightedness placed the CCG in Santa Clara. CCG should have been held in Las Vegas starting years ago. It's the perfect location. Easy to reach from everywhere and a more natural travel and vacation destination for just about every fan base.
It's almost comical that the conference had Washington + Utah and Oregon + Utah play neutral-site games in Santa Clara instead of Las Vegas.
(12-09-2022 10:37 AM)YNot Wrote: [ -> ]The PAC 12's Scott-inflicted near-sightedness placed the CCG in Santa Clara. CCG should have been held in Las Vegas starting years ago. It's the perfect location. Easy to reach from everywhere and a more natural travel and vacation destination for just about every fan base.
It's almost comical that the conference had Washington + Utah and Oregon + Utah play neutral-site games in Santa Clara instead of Las Vegas.
Tell us again why the Pac-12 as we know it could be on the verge of collapse
(12-09-2022 10:50 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 10:37 AM)YNot Wrote: [ -> ]The PAC 12's Scott-inflicted near-sightedness placed the CCG in Santa Clara. CCG should have been held in Las Vegas starting years ago. It's the perfect location. Easy to reach from everywhere and a more natural travel and vacation destination for just about every fan base.
It's almost comical that the conference had Washington + Utah and Oregon + Utah play neutral-site games in Santa Clara instead of Las Vegas.
Tell us again why the Pac-12 as we know it could be on the verge of collapse
Unrelated to my point about Las Vegas venue for the PAC CCG, but it's because the PAC 12's recent resurgence is materially tied to USC's resurgence....and USC is out the door in 18 months.
If it weren't for USC and UCLA leaving, SoFi Stadium would be ideal, at least from a city perspective. In the old divisional format, you statistically had a 1/3 chance of a home team playing. Why did the Pac never think of the Rose Bowl or the Coliseum?
Maybe even after they leave, the Pac 12 could still play there. They have no teams in Vegas so why not Los Angeles?
(12-09-2022 11:10 AM)YNot Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 10:50 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 10:37 AM)YNot Wrote: [ -> ]The PAC 12's Scott-inflicted near-sightedness placed the CCG in Santa Clara. CCG should have been held in Las Vegas starting years ago. It's the perfect location. Easy to reach from everywhere and a more natural travel and vacation destination for just about every fan base.
It's almost comical that the conference had Washington + Utah and Oregon + Utah play neutral-site games in Santa Clara instead of Las Vegas.
Tell us again why the Pac-12 as we know it could be on the verge of collapse
Unrelated to my point about Las Vegas venue for the PAC CCG, but it's because the PAC 12's recent resurgence is materially tied to USC's resurgence....and USC is out the door in 18 months.
I agree with your point about Las Vegas being the perfect location for the Pac-12 CCG. But the Pac-12 resurgence is tied to the play of the conference as a whole. Yes, it is great to have USC playing good football again and it shows the value of a good coaching hire to any conference.
But Washington went from 4-8 to 10-2 in one season. They went from 323 yards per game in offense in 2021 to 521 yards per game in 2022. From a ranking of #115 in the nation to #2 in the nation. That has nothing to do with USC. That has to do with hiring the right coach.
The conference under Kliavkoff has put an emphasis on football, which starts with spending more money on football. It also helps when schools hire the right coach for their program. Colorado and ASU put themselves in a hole when they hired the wrong coaches. Oregon State and Arizona hired the right coaches for their programs. It makes a huge difference.
(12-09-2022 11:14 AM)schmolik Wrote: [ -> ]If it weren't for USC and UCLA leaving, SoFi Stadium would be ideal, at least from a city perspective. In the old divisional format, you statistically had a 1/3 chance of a home team playing. Why did the Pac never think of the Rose Bowl or the Coliseum?
Maybe even after they leave, the Pac 12 could still play there. They have no teams in Vegas so why not Los Angeles?
Vegas is more centrally located, easier to get to, cheaper for fans to find lodging, and more things to do on a weekend that are accessible from the Strip area.
For a CCG Vegas>>>>>>>>>>>LA
(12-09-2022 10:18 AM)CliftonAve Wrote: [ -> ]MAC should have the game played on campus for the team with the best record. Not too many MAC fans are make going to drive to Detroit unless they live in the area.
The MAC will never go back on-campus when Rust Belt weather is so unpredictable. Last year NIU would've hosted Kent State in rainy 40-degree weather, we would've been lucky if Huskie Stadium had 10K butts in the seats and it would've looked awful. At least now there's climate certainty and the players get to experience playing in an NFL stadium, and there have been well-attended games at Ford Field (WMU had 45K during their NY6 season, CMU has always drawn over 20K for their games).
(12-09-2022 01:05 PM)dbackjon Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 11:14 AM)schmolik Wrote: [ -> ]If it weren't for USC and UCLA leaving, SoFi Stadium would be ideal, at least from a city perspective. In the old divisional format, you statistically had a 1/3 chance of a home team playing. Why did the Pac never think of the Rose Bowl or the Coliseum?
Maybe even after they leave, the Pac 12 could still play there. They have no teams in Vegas so why not Los Angeles?
Vegas is more centrally located, easier to get to, cheaper for fans to find lodging, and more things to do on a weekend that are accessible from the Strip area.
For a CCG Vegas>>>>>>>>>>>LA
Definitely, and I imagine that there are a lot fewer hurdles in dealing with cash-poor Mark Davis (i.e. eager to host as many events as possible) versus Stan Kroenke. Sofi would've been a good choice if the Raiders were still in Oakland and the new Vegas stadium didn't exist, but it's a moot point now.
(12-09-2022 01:05 PM)dbackjon Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 11:14 AM)schmolik Wrote: [ -> ]If it weren't for USC and UCLA leaving, SoFi Stadium would be ideal, at least from a city perspective. In the old divisional format, you statistically had a 1/3 chance of a home team playing. Why did the Pac never think of the Rose Bowl or the Coliseum?
Maybe even after they leave, the Pac 12 could still play there. They have no teams in Vegas so why not Los Angeles?
Vegas is more centrally located, easier to get to, cheaper for fans to find lodging, and more things to do on a weekend that are accessible from the Strip area.
For a CCG Vegas>>>>>>>>>>>LA
There are twenty hotels located with one mile or less of Allegiant Stadium. The street is closed off from traffic at Las Vegas Boulevard for football games and other events. Just a short walk over the Hacienda Bridge, a left on Dean Martin Drive and a right on Al Davis Way and you are there.
(12-09-2022 12:47 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 11:10 AM)YNot Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 10:50 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 10:37 AM)YNot Wrote: [ -> ]The PAC 12's Scott-inflicted near-sightedness placed the CCG in Santa Clara. CCG should have been held in Las Vegas starting years ago. It's the perfect location. Easy to reach from everywhere and a more natural travel and vacation destination for just about every fan base.
It's almost comical that the conference had Washington + Utah and Oregon + Utah play neutral-site games in Santa Clara instead of Las Vegas.
Tell us again why the Pac-12 as we know it could be on the verge of collapse
Unrelated to my point about Las Vegas venue for the PAC CCG, but it's because the PAC 12's recent resurgence is materially tied to USC's resurgence....and USC is out the door in 18 months.
I agree with your point about Las Vegas being the perfect location for the Pac-12 CCG. But the Pac-12 resurgence is tied to the play of the conference as a whole. Yes, it is great to have USC playing good football again and it shows the value of a good coaching hire to any conference.
But Washington went from 4-8 to 10-2 in one season. They went from 323 yards per game in offense in 2021 to 521 yards per game in 2022. From a ranking of #115 in the nation to #2 in the nation. That has nothing to do with USC. That has to do with hiring the right coach.
The conference under Kliavkoff has put an emphasis on football, which starts with spending more money on football. It also helps when schools hire the right coach for their program. Colorado and ASU put themselves in a hole when they hired the wrong coaches. Oregon State and Arizona hired the right coaches for their programs. It makes a huge difference.
I'm in between you guys. On one hand, I agree with you that the PAC as a whole rose up this football season.
On the other, USC and UCLA are leaving, and that makes the PAC much less attractive to everyone, IMO, including the remaining schools.
Too bad, because last week's PAC title game, which not only had good viewership but almost SEC-level energy in the building, is something that could have continued into the future, but IMO will not.
(12-09-2022 05:31 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 12:47 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 11:10 AM)YNot Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 10:50 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 10:37 AM)YNot Wrote: [ -> ]The PAC 12's Scott-inflicted near-sightedness placed the CCG in Santa Clara. CCG should have been held in Las Vegas starting years ago. It's the perfect location. Easy to reach from everywhere and a more natural travel and vacation destination for just about every fan base.
It's almost comical that the conference had Washington + Utah and Oregon + Utah play neutral-site games in Santa Clara instead of Las Vegas.
Tell us again why the Pac-12 as we know it could be on the verge of collapse
Unrelated to my point about Las Vegas venue for the PAC CCG, but it's because the PAC 12's recent resurgence is materially tied to USC's resurgence....and USC is out the door in 18 months.
I agree with your point about Las Vegas being the perfect location for the Pac-12 CCG. But the Pac-12 resurgence is tied to the play of the conference as a whole. Yes, it is great to have USC playing good football again and it shows the value of a good coaching hire to any conference.
But Washington went from 4-8 to 10-2 in one season. They went from 323 yards per game in offense in 2021 to 521 yards per game in 2022. From a ranking of #115 in the nation to #2 in the nation. That has nothing to do with USC. That has to do with hiring the right coach.
The conference under Kliavkoff has put an emphasis on football, which starts with spending more money on football. It also helps when schools hire the right coach for their program. Colorado and ASU put themselves in a hole when they hired the wrong coaches. Oregon State and Arizona hired the right coaches for their programs. It makes a huge difference.
I'm in between you guys. On one hand, I agree with you that the PAC as a whole rose up this football season.
On the other, USC and UCLA are leaving, and that makes the PAC much less attractive to everyone, IMO, including the remaining schools.
Too bad, because last week's PAC title game, which not only had good viewership but almost SEC-level energy in the building, is something that could have continued into the future, but IMO will not.
I would watch the recruiting, both the high school recruits and the transfers. If that is going well, then the conference will be just fine. If Deion Sanders can get top recruits and transfers to Colorado, that will be huge for the Pac-12. Can Stanford find the right coach and also find a way to bring in transfers? Can Kenny Dillingham keep Arizona recruits from leaving the state?
(12-09-2022 10:37 AM)YNot Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 10:01 AM)Love and Honor Wrote: [ -> ]Pac 12: 61,195 (50,118): Second-best numbers for the Pac-12 ever (behind Arizona State on-campus). Vegas seems to be a much better draw than Santa Clara.
The PAC 12's Scott-inflicted near-sightedness placed the CCG in Santa Clara. CCG should have been held in Las Vegas starting years ago. It's the perfect location. Easy to reach from everywhere and a more natural travel and vacation destination for just about every fan base.
It's almost comical that the conference had Washington + Utah and Oregon + Utah play neutral-site games in Santa Clara instead of Las Vegas.
Where would they have played? Sam Boyd was not an acceptable venue.
(12-09-2022 10:09 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 05:31 PM)quo vadis Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 12:47 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 11:10 AM)YNot Wrote: [ -> ] (12-09-2022 10:50 AM)PeteTheChop Wrote: [ -> ]Tell us again why the Pac-12 as we know it could be on the verge of collapse
Unrelated to my point about Las Vegas venue for the PAC CCG, but it's because the PAC 12's recent resurgence is materially tied to USC's resurgence....and USC is out the door in 18 months.
I agree with your point about Las Vegas being the perfect location for the Pac-12 CCG. But the Pac-12 resurgence is tied to the play of the conference as a whole. Yes, it is great to have USC playing good football again and it shows the value of a good coaching hire to any conference.
But Washington went from 4-8 to 10-2 in one season. They went from 323 yards per game in offense in 2021 to 521 yards per game in 2022. From a ranking of #115 in the nation to #2 in the nation. That has nothing to do with USC. That has to do with hiring the right coach.
The conference under Kliavkoff has put an emphasis on football, which starts with spending more money on football. It also helps when schools hire the right coach for their program. Colorado and ASU put themselves in a hole when they hired the wrong coaches. Oregon State and Arizona hired the right coaches for their programs. It makes a huge difference.
I'm in between you guys. On one hand, I agree with you that the PAC as a whole rose up this football season.
On the other, USC and UCLA are leaving, and that makes the PAC much less attractive to everyone, IMO, including the remaining schools.
Too bad, because last week's PAC title game, which not only had good viewership but almost SEC-level energy in the building, is something that could have continued into the future, but IMO will not.
I would watch the recruiting, both the high school recruits and the transfers. If that is going well, then the conference will be just fine. If Deion Sanders can get top recruits and transfers to Colorado, that will be huge for the Pac-12. Can Stanford find the right coach and also find a way to bring in transfers? Can Kenny Dillingham keep Arizona recruits from leaving the state?
TBH, I don't think there is anything Colorado could do short of contending for a national championship that would have much effect on the PAC's standing in the national perception.