FOOTBALL IS BACK!!!

All times are Eastern:

Prairie View at Rice is on ESPN+ at 7pm

Hawaii at Colorado State is on CBS Sports at 730pm

Wyoming at New Mexico State is on ESPN2 at 10pm

It's fun to have a few Week Zero appetizers before the main course begins next week.

But any team with even halfway-decent average attendance is going to lose a significant number of ticket sales by playing a home game in August.

There's a proposal going around to extend the CFB regular season by a week without adding any games to the regular season. The idea is to give each team two bye weeks per season. I don't see that proposal getting much traction unless ADs think they can sell a lot of tickets for late August games, because if the proposal is implemented, teams will effectively be moving a game from sometime around September 20 to sometime around August 25.

(08-24-2018 03:24 PM)Wedge Wrote:  It's fun to have a few Week Zero appetizers before the main course begins next week.

But any team with even halfway-decent average attendance is going to lose a significant number of ticket sales by playing a home game in August.

There's a proposal going around to extend the CFB regular season by a week without adding any games to the regular season. The idea is to give each team two bye weeks per season. I don't see that proposal getting much traction unless ADs think they can sell a lot of tickets for late August games, because if the proposal is implemented, teams will effectively be moving a game from sometime around September 20 to sometime around August 25.

Why not extend the end of the season 1 week - play conference championships during Army/Navy week (or move that game to week 0)?

(08-25-2018 10:57 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-24-2018 03:24 PM)Wedge Wrote:  It's fun to have a few Week Zero appetizers before the main course begins next week.

But any team with even halfway-decent average attendance is going to lose a significant number of ticket sales by playing a home game in August.

There's a proposal going around to extend the CFB regular season by a week without adding any games to the regular season. The idea is to give each team two bye weeks per season. I don't see that proposal getting much traction unless ADs think they can sell a lot of tickets for late August games, because if the proposal is implemented, teams will effectively be moving a game from sometime around September 20 to sometime around August 25.

Why not extend the end of the season 1 week - play conference championships during Army/Navy week (or move that game to week 0)?

Prolonging the season by a week won't help end of season attendance for teams having a bad year. In the midwest and northeast, playing a full week of games in December increases the risk of bad weather and makes it even harder to sell tickets to a low-stakes game.

The flip side is that playing a full week in August means another week of games in hot weather. The three Week Zero games are all starting in the evening, but for a full Week 1, TV wouldn't permit every game to start at 5 pm local time or later.

(08-24-2018 03:24 PM)Wedge Wrote:  It's fun to have a few Week Zero appetizers before the main course begins next week.

But any team with even halfway-decent average attendance is going to lose a significant number of ticket sales by playing a home game in August.

There's a proposal going around to extend the CFB regular season by a week without adding any games to the regular season. The idea is to give each team two bye weeks per season. I don't see that proposal getting much traction unless ADs think they can sell a lot of tickets for late August games, because if the proposal is implemented, teams will effectively be moving a game from sometime around September 20 to sometime around August 25.

I'm not sure how true that is. I agree that attendance would probably be lower if students aren't back on campus. But at most schools, those aren't "tickets sold". Some schools might consider it a worthwhile tradeoff if they get the exposure of a national telecast at a time where they have the airwaves to themselves with an audience starved for college football.

Frankly, I have wondered why the PAC doesn't take advantage of the opportunity to own Week Zero by monopolizing Hawaii's OOC schedule. They want better national exposure in time slots where they will be seen in the east. This would guarantee it.

(08-25-2018 04:23 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-24-2018 03:24 PM)Wedge Wrote:  It's fun to have a few Week Zero appetizers before the main course begins next week.

But any team with even halfway-decent average attendance is going to lose a significant number of ticket sales by playing a home game in August.

There's a proposal going around to extend the CFB regular season by a week without adding any games to the regular season. The idea is to give each team two bye weeks per season. I don't see that proposal getting much traction unless ADs think they can sell a lot of tickets for late August games, because if the proposal is implemented, teams will effectively be moving a game from sometime around September 20 to sometime around August 25.

I'm not sure how true that is. I agree that attendance would probably be lower if students aren't back on campus. But at most schools, those aren't "tickets sold". Some schools might consider it a worthwhile tradeoff if they get the exposure of a national telecast at a time where they have the airwaves to themselves with an audience starved for college football.

Frankly, I have wondered why the PAC doesn't take advantage of the opportunity to own Week Zero by monopolizing Hawaii's OOC schedule. They want better national exposure in time slots where they will be seen in the east. This would guarantee it.

That's pretty unrealistic. But if you want to be stubborn about it, UCLA will be hosting Hawai'i in week zero in a few years. If you watch that game on TV and count all the empty seats in the Rose Bowl that day, that ought to explain it to anyone who isn't yet convinced.

(08-25-2018 05:38 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 04:23 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-24-2018 03:24 PM)Wedge Wrote:  It's fun to have a few Week Zero appetizers before the main course begins next week.

But any team with even halfway-decent average attendance is going to lose a significant number of ticket sales by playing a home game in August.

There's a proposal going around to extend the CFB regular season by a week without adding any games to the regular season. The idea is to give each team two bye weeks per season. I don't see that proposal getting much traction unless ADs think they can sell a lot of tickets for late August games, because if the proposal is implemented, teams will effectively be moving a game from sometime around September 20 to sometime around August 25.

I'm not sure how true that is. I agree that attendance would probably be lower if students aren't back on campus. But at most schools, those aren't "tickets sold". Some schools might consider it a worthwhile tradeoff if they get the exposure of a national telecast at a time where they have the airwaves to themselves with an audience starved for college football.

Frankly, I have wondered why the PAC doesn't take advantage of the opportunity to own Week Zero by monopolizing Hawaii's OOC schedule. They want better national exposure in time slots where they will be seen in the east. This would guarantee it.

That's pretty unrealistic. But if you want to be stubborn about it, UCLA will be hosting Hawai'i in week zero in a few years. If you watch that game on TV and count all the empty seats in the Rose Bowl that day, that ought to explain it to anyone who isn't yet convinced.

Why are they hosting Hawaii in Week Zero? It would be better to play Hawaii on the road later in the year so you can get a 13th game with which to play a P5 opponent in Week Zero.

(08-25-2018 07:16 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 05:38 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 04:23 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-24-2018 03:24 PM)Wedge Wrote:  It's fun to have a few Week Zero appetizers before the main course begins next week.

But any team with even halfway-decent average attendance is going to lose a significant number of ticket sales by playing a home game in August.

There's a proposal going around to extend the CFB regular season by a week without adding any games to the regular season. The idea is to give each team two bye weeks per season. I don't see that proposal getting much traction unless ADs think they can sell a lot of tickets for late August games, because if the proposal is implemented, teams will effectively be moving a game from sometime around September 20 to sometime around August 25.

I'm not sure how true that is. I agree that attendance would probably be lower if students aren't back on campus. But at most schools, those aren't "tickets sold". Some schools might consider it a worthwhile tradeoff if they get the exposure of a national telecast at a time where they have the airwaves to themselves with an audience starved for college football.

Frankly, I have wondered why the PAC doesn't take advantage of the opportunity to own Week Zero by monopolizing Hawaii's OOC schedule. They want better national exposure in time slots where they will be seen in the east. This would guarantee it.

That's pretty unrealistic. But if you want to be stubborn about it, UCLA will be hosting Hawai'i in week zero in a few years. If you watch that game on TV and count all the empty seats in the Rose Bowl that day, that ought to explain it to anyone who isn't yet convinced.

Why are they hosting Hawaii in Week Zero? It would be better to play Hawaii on the road later in the year so you can get a 13th game with which to play a P5 opponent in Week Zero.

To play a game in week zero, at least one of the teams in the game has to be playing a game in Hawai'i that same season.

(08-25-2018 07:58 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 07:16 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 05:38 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 04:23 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-24-2018 03:24 PM)Wedge Wrote:  It's fun to have a few Week Zero appetizers before the main course begins next week.

But any team with even halfway-decent average attendance is going to lose a significant number of ticket sales by playing a home game in August.

There's a proposal going around to extend the CFB regular season by a week without adding any games to the regular season. The idea is to give each team two bye weeks per season. I don't see that proposal getting much traction unless ADs think they can sell a lot of tickets for late August games, because if the proposal is implemented, teams will effectively be moving a game from sometime around September 20 to sometime around August 25.

I'm not sure how true that is. I agree that attendance would probably be lower if students aren't back on campus. But at most schools, those aren't "tickets sold". Some schools might consider it a worthwhile tradeoff if they get the exposure of a national telecast at a time where they have the airwaves to themselves with an audience starved for college football.

Frankly, I have wondered why the PAC doesn't take advantage of the opportunity to own Week Zero by monopolizing Hawaii's OOC schedule. They want better national exposure in time slots where they will be seen in the east. This would guarantee it.

That's pretty unrealistic. But if you want to be stubborn about it, UCLA will be hosting Hawai'i in week zero in a few years. If you watch that game on TV and count all the empty seats in the Rose Bowl that day, that ought to explain it to anyone who isn't yet convinced.

Why are they hosting Hawaii in Week Zero? It would be better to play Hawaii on the road later in the year so you can get a 13th game with which to play a P5 opponent in Week Zero.

To play a game in week zero, at least one of the teams in the game has to be playing a game in Hawai'i that same season.

Assuming that the team playing in Hawaii that season is Hawaii, and not UCLA, how does that benefit UCLA? They neither get a 13th game (since they didn't travel to Hawaii) nor get good attendance for their week zero home game. Seems like all UCLA gets out of it is an extra bye week later in the season.

If, instead, UCLA played at Hawaii in week 3, they would be able to play a 13th game against an attractive P5 opponent in week zero.

(08-25-2018 08:27 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 07:58 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 07:16 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 05:38 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-25-2018 04:23 PM)ken d Wrote:  I'm not sure how true that is. I agree that attendance would probably be lower if students aren't back on campus. But at most schools, those aren't "tickets sold". Some schools might consider it a worthwhile tradeoff if they get the exposure of a national telecast at a time where they have the airwaves to themselves with an audience starved for college football.

Frankly, I have wondered why the PAC doesn't take advantage of the opportunity to own Week Zero by monopolizing Hawaii's OOC schedule. They want better national exposure in time slots where they will be seen in the east. This would guarantee it.

That's pretty unrealistic. But if you want to be stubborn about it, UCLA will be hosting Hawai'i in week zero in a few years. If you watch that game on TV and count all the empty seats in the Rose Bowl that day, that ought to explain it to anyone who isn't yet convinced.

Why are they hosting Hawaii in Week Zero? It would be better to play Hawaii on the road later in the year so you can get a 13th game with which to play a P5 opponent in Week Zero.

To play a game in week zero, at least one of the teams in the game has to be playing a game in Hawai'i that same season.

Assuming that the team playing in Hawaii that season is Hawaii, and not UCLA, how does that benefit UCLA? They neither get a 13th game (since they didn't travel to Hawaii) nor get good attendance for their week zero home game. Seems like all UCLA gets out of it is an extra bye week later in the season.

If, instead, UCLA played at Hawaii in week 3, they would be able to play a 13th game against an attractive P5 opponent in week zero.

And this is how a thread devolves from a celebration of the return of actual football into another "how many hairs are there on a gnats fanny" kind of discussion.

But it's slow so carry on!

Pac picks up Hous & Hawaii, along with week 0
i like idea, moving CCG back a week, gives Pac week 0, labour day wkend, 1st & 2nd week in Dec
4 weeks only game in town

(08-25-2018 10:57 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-24-2018 03:24 PM)Wedge Wrote:  It's fun to have a few Week Zero appetizers before the main course begins next week.

But any team with even halfway-decent average attendance is going to lose a significant number of ticket sales by playing a home game in August.

There's a proposal going around to extend the CFB regular season by a week without adding any games to the regular season. The idea is to give each team two bye weeks per season. I don't see that proposal getting much traction unless ADs think they can sell a lot of tickets for late August games, because if the proposal is implemented, teams will effectively be moving a game from sometime around September 20 to sometime around August 25.

Why not extend the end of the season 1 week - play conference championships during Army/Navy week (or move that game to week 0)?

Messes up the first weekend of bowls and Army-Navy wouldn't be pleased starting the year instead of ending it.

Navy-Army on week zero would be like your Hokies playing the Cavaliers aka UVa to kickoff the season. Still, I do agree with the general premise of your argument that more teams need to take advantage of week zero.

(08-24-2018 03:24 PM)Wedge Wrote:  It's fun to have a few Week Zero appetizers before the main course begins next week.

But any team with even halfway-decent average attendance is going to lose a significant number of ticket sales by playing a home game in August.

There's a proposal going around to extend the CFB regular season by a week without adding any games to the regular season. The idea is to give each team two bye weeks per season. I don't see that proposal getting much traction unless ADs think they can sell a lot of tickets for late August games, because if the proposal is implemented, teams will effectively be moving a game from sometime around September 20 to sometime around August 25.

Being a fellow Pac12 fan Wedge, in addition to the SEC, I think both you and I can agree that the PAC12 has some real stinkers of conference games at times that don’t draw well regardless of when they are played. I can think of one right now: Washington vs Cal or USC vs Utah. The game doesn’t draw. What could be done is that both teams could agree to play it on week zero. It can be played at night on Pacific Time with few if any loss of viewers, IMO, but it could be played on week zero so that the Pac12 could make an early impression on CFB committee.

(08-28-2018 09:05 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  Navy-Army on week zero would be like your Hokies playing the Cavaliers aka UVa to kickoff the season. Still, I do agree with the general premise of your argument that more teams need to take advantage of week zero.

In recent years the VT/UVA game has been played on Black Friday - probably the only way to get it on television, given the level of competition for Rivalry Saturday. Moving a rivalry game to Week Zero virtually guarantees TV exposure...

(08-28-2018 09:27 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  

(08-24-2018 03:24 PM)Wedge Wrote:  It's fun to have a few Week Zero appetizers before the main course begins next week.

But any team with even halfway-decent average attendance is going to lose a significant number of ticket sales by playing a home game in August.

There's a proposal going around to extend the CFB regular season by a week without adding any games to the regular season. The idea is to give each team two bye weeks per season. I don't see that proposal getting much traction unless ADs think they can sell a lot of tickets for late August games, because if the proposal is implemented, teams will effectively be moving a game from sometime around September 20 to sometime around August 25.

Being a fellow Pac12 fan Wedge, in addition to the SEC, I think both you and I can agree that the PAC12 has some real stinkers of conference games at times that don’t draw well regardless of when they are played. I can think of one right now: Washington vs Cal or USC vs Utah. The game doesn’t draw. What could be done is that both teams could agree to play it on week zero. It can be played at night on Pacific Time with few if any loss of viewers, IMO, but it could be played on week zero so that the Pac12 could make an early impression on CFB committee.

Just a nitpick comment. The truth is the USC-Utah game is usually competitive and a great draw. Last year, the game was broadcast on ABC with over 3 million viewers. More viewers than USC-Notre Dame.

The 2015 game was on FOX, again with over 3 million viewers. The 2016 USC-Utah matchup still had over 1 million viewers, even though broadcast on FS1 on a Friday night.

There are often only 3 or 4 PAC 12 conference games per year that draw more than 3 million viewers, and USC-Utah has proven that it can be one of those.

EDIT: Now, after defending the Ewetes, I need to go take a shower.

(08-28-2018 10:43 AM)Hokie Mark Wrote:  

(08-28-2018 09:05 AM)DawgNBama Wrote:  Navy-Army on week zero would be like your Hokies playing the Cavaliers aka UVa to kickoff the season. Still, I do agree with the general premise of your argument that more teams need to take advantage of week zero.

In recent years the VT/UVA game has been played on Black Friday - probably the only way to get it on television, given the level of competition for Rivalry Saturday. Moving a rivalry game to Week Zero virtually guarantees TV exposure...

Just as an example - Utah State and Colorado State already alternate playing their conference games @Hawaii. If Utah and Colorado would do the same OOC, then Utah could play Utah State and Colorado could play Colorado State every year in Week Zero. The exposure would be great for all of them, and the rivalry aspect would mitigate the effects of low attendance for the home team in Week Zero.

(08-24-2018 03:24 PM)Wedge Wrote:  It's fun to have a few Week Zero appetizers before the main course begins next week.

But any team with even halfway-decent average attendance is going to lose a significant number of ticket sales by playing a home game in August.

There's a proposal going around to extend the CFB regular season by a week without adding any games to the regular season. The idea is to give each team two bye weeks per season. I don't see that proposal getting much traction unless ADs think they can sell a lot of tickets for late August games, because if the proposal is implemented, teams will effectively be moving a game from sometime around September 20 to sometime around August 25.

I think it's a solid proposal for several reasons.

1. In the age of greater focus on player safety, it's better to have an extra off week. We'll probably get a 2nd off week one way or the other and it's better to add a week of competition at the beginning than at the end. The end of the semester is more stressful for athletes due to exams and other such responsibilities.

2. We're really not altering the balance as far as weather goes. Teams that would have hosted their first game on Labor Day weekend would simply do it a week earlier. The weather's not going to be any different from Labor Day to the previous week regardless of what part of the country we're talking about. At that, a lot of the neutral site games will end up on this week which means more comfortable air conditioned stadiums for a lot of match-ups. In fact, we might see more of those games as those stadiums would love to fill their dates before the NFL season starts and that would just give them another week to do so. In other words, you'd probably still see a lot of neutral site games on Labor Day weekend as well.

Now, if the rule was implemented sooner than later then it might affect some games that have already been scheduled a few years out by requiring some of them to be shifted in order to fill time slots, but that's a temporary problem and shouldn't affect very many games anyway. Even then, it's not a necessity because schools could simply use Week Zero as their off week and not worry about utilizing it until they start focusing on future schedules.

3. It's great for TV. Networks would love the idea because college football is super popular and this way they get to spread out the inventory they're already paying for and take advantage of advertising opportunities. Their bottom line increases because more games get a higher perch in the pecking order. Some programs will love it for the same reason.

4. Personally, I believe this sort of setup would lend itself to adding a playoff round later. If we had three rounds in December/January then it's a lot more palatable thing to offer if we've given the athletes a 2nd off week during the regular season as well as a couple of weeks between the end of the season and the CFP.

Agree with all of those.

It's the prospect of mediocre week zero ticket sales that is going to cause hesitation among many ADs. The ADs who would be hesitant are not the ADs at Ohio State or Alabama where they're going to be swimming in cash no matter what. It's the ADs at places like Minnesota or Missouri who are going to be asking whether such a move would cost them a few hundred thousand dollars in lost ticket sales every time they play at home in week zero. G5 programs might also resist, because even if the lost ticket sales in dollars would be a lower amount at a G5 school starting from a lower average attendance, it would impact them because the lost revenue is a larger percentage of their budget.

You'd have to convince ADs that such a move would either have no effect on ticket sales or a small-enough effect that the trade off would be worth it to them.

I remember when the third Saturday in September was when college football started.

That said, I'd be fine with Week 0 becoming week 1 but only if we require player safety changes. Mandatory 10 minute quarter breaks and 20 half break if the heat index is 95 or above. That'll gut the TV audience and it will go away in the south. :)