Online Now 3353

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

On this Board 2068
Record: 7394 (2/14/2012)

Online now 3187
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

247Rumors

College football scuttlebutt and scoop- powered by Football Rumor Mill

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Big Ten Board (Beta)

Reply

Why should the Rose Bowl be preserved? Forreals. SEC free haven?

  • TalHawkins112 said...

    Is he serious in thinking we need the Big 10 more than they need us?

    Just because you have more people guy doesn't mean you have people watching. I think CFB is more popular in the South than the North/Midwest.

    Very big in the Midwest as well, but the problem would be by marginalizing your product, you marginalize the money. National TV is where the money is at.

    Plus, somed chick from the WSJ came up with the idea. I guess Delany has ruined the product and their ready to give women a chance to fix their football problems. Very B1G of them!

    BetterOff ●

  • bhiley77 said...

    The popularity of the NFL isn't relevant here. It's the fact that college football has always put a very large emphasis on going undefeated. In your absurd 16 team playoff scenario, there's no way you'd have to go undefeated to even be a top seed necessarily. That's putting aside the whole "total lack of parity between conferences that makes playoffs in CFB absurd" thing.

    The lack of parity argument wins out in every other sport.

    Didn't say it was perfect. Just what I would like.

    BetterOff ●

  • TalHawkins112 said...

    Thank you, you have proven yourself correct for 2011.

    Does that hold true for the past 10 years? Honestly asking, I'm curious if it has more to do with it being the Rose Bowl or the matchup for 2011.

    It does.

    Here you go, the television ratings for all BCS games, played through the 2011 New Years games.

    The Rose Bowl has never been beaten in television ratings by a non BCS Championship game bowl.

    Hey look, I actually put the link on it this time.

    This post was edited by AlwaysMore on 5/16/2012 at 9:26 AM

    TV ratings

    www.bcsfootball.org

    AlwaysMore

  • BetterOff said...

    Why don't you start awarding your players participation trophies and stop keeping score while you're at it.

    That's more of an Auburn thing.

    signature image

    Looks like another perfect day.

    Under Review

  • AlwaysMore said...

    It does.

    Here you go, the television ratings for all BCS games, played through the 2011 New Years games.

    The Rose Bowl has never been beaten in television ratings by a non BCS Championship game bowl.

    You said 'Here you go' like there was a link attached.

    ...But there wasn't.

    TalHawkins112 ●

  • Under Review said...

    This board is so southern centric in it's thinking. If it's over the Mason Dixon line or west of Dallas it doesn't count here.

    Wrong, if it's north of baton rouge, west of Lafayette, south of Mexico, or east of biloxi, then it doesn't matter

    LScootU

  • BetterOff said...

    NOLA was so much more fun. Much better stadium as well. Actual conveniences that most come to enjoy while attending a sporting event.

    New Orleans is the best placed for a major sporting event. You can walk everywhere. There is no need for a car the entire week you're there.

    I agree with this guy

    LScootU

  • Where does the tradition of only the Pac12/Big 10 come in? I know UGA won the RBG back in the 40's.

    signature image signature image signature image

    Face Stabber ●

  • BetterOff said...

    Just me being a Democrat I guess.

    That explains so much.

    meansonny

  • Under Review said...

    I had my youth when the Rose Bowl and the other bowls meant something and it wasn't about TV ratings or lining networks pockets.

    That statement is incorrect and naive. Bowl games (as well as ALL business investments) have always been about the money. Your wee perspective as a youth has you still daydreaming. The volume of money these bowls make today is much larger because the marketing and promotion has evolved. For these bowl games to continue as a good investment, they will have to evolve as well. Get your bowl in rotation as part of the Plus 1 playoff and NC mix, or remain as a "less than" matchup between PAC 10 & Big 10. Simple.

    Penman

  • Fogtown said...

    The only reason the Rose Bowl is a tradition between Pac/BIG is because western schools didn't like southern schools beating them, so they stopped inviting them back in the day.


    Why would you embarass yourself with false info like ^that^ on a national board,
    when all 1 has to do these days is spend 3 minutes on a web-site that lists all
    the Rose Bowl games ever played; and by minute 4 - everyone will know that
    you were eating retard sandwiches when you posted this.

    Let me help you with the FACTS:

    The WEST =
    7 Wins
    6 Losses
    1 Tie
    vs Schools from Southern Slave States
    in Rose Bowls - from the 1st RB until 1946.

    Perhaps, you meant the Western schools didn't like the southern schools beating them,
    LESS than half (46%) of the time.
    Which is strange logic but.... maybe you are bad at math.

    Or perhaps you were raised on the BCS Formula math:
    which would magically calculate the South's 46% win pct.
    vs the West, to be better than the West's 54% win pct.
    vs the South, therefore placing the South above the West
    in all BCS standings.

    NcaaAssassinG13

  • Penman said...

    That statement is incorrect and naive. Bowl games (as well as ALL business investments) have always been about the money. Your wee perspective as a youth has you still daydreaming. The volume of money these bowls make today is much larger because the marketing and promotion has evolved. For these bowl games to continue as a good investment, they will have to evolve as well. Get your bowl in rotation as part of the Plus 1 playoff and NC mix, or remain as a "less than" matchup between PAC 10 & Big 10. Simple.

    I think its an ego thing just as much as a money thing.

    The BCS games are the "money" games, but honestly there is usually only one that is really a great matchup with the current system. There are usually lower tier bowls that are more interesting games.

    This past year was actually against the norm with BCS games. OSU/Stanford, Wisky/Oregon, Clemson/WVU, and VaTech/Michigan were as good a BCS lineup as we have had in while.

    Yes, you could argue that VaTech/Michigan shouldn't have been there, but it was still a good matchup and no one would have thought that WVU would have pantsed Clemson they way they did. Add Arky/Kansas St and UGA/MSU and we really had some good matchups.

    Money and perception is what the battle is over though. You are correct. I wish they would leave the bowl games alone and set the 4 team playoff as a bid only tournament and let the cities bid on the games just like they do in March Madness.

    BetterOff ●

  • NcaaAssassinG13 said...

    Why would you embarass yourself with false info like ^that^ on a national board,
    when all 1 has to do these days is spend 3 minutes on a web-site that lists all
    the Rose Bowl games ever played; and by minute 4 - everyone will know that
    you were eating retard sandwiches when you posted this.

    Let me help you with the FACTS:

    The WEST =
    7 Wins
    6 Losses
    1 Tie
    vs Schools from Southern Slave States
    in Rose Bowls - from the 1st RB until 1946.

    Perhaps, you meant the Western schools didn't like the southern schools beating them,
    LESS than half (46%) of the time.
    Which is strange logic but.... maybe you are bad at math.

    Or perhaps you were raised on the BCS Formula math:
    which would magically calculate the South's 46% win pct.
    vs the West, to be better than the West's 54% win pct.
    vs the South, therefore placing the South above the West
    in all BCS standings.

    They just didn't like Alabama beating them.

    biggrin

    Alabama= #5 on the list of Rose Bowl victories. 4-1-1 in the game.

    The last game before the conference agreement was a 20 point win by Alabama over USC. Coincidence?

    And no, I don't really believe this. Just throwing in some facts.

    BetterOff ●

  • TalHawkins112 said...

    I would absolutely hate anything more than a 4 team playoff.

    And honestly, the Rose Bowl has a lot of history but recently it hasn't really meant anything. Put it like this: the Rose Bowl is the Notre Dame of bowls.

    Also find it pretty interesting that Bama was 4-1-1 in the Rose Bowl before they decided they didn't want to pair the West Coast team with anyone but Big 10 teams any more.


    Ya, I give Alabama props for going 4-1-1 in the Rose Bowl.
    Including a blowout win vs USC.
    To note, the Tide was only 3 pts away from going 3-3 in RB games,
    beating UW 20-19 and tying Stanford 7-7.

    But they won and that's all that matters, so they deserve credit.

    However, If I wanted to throw out the same type of SPIN job as you did in your last 2 sentences,
    I could easily claim that because of USC's 4-1 record vs the South in Rose Bowl games, they
    decided the South just wasn't providing good enough competition for USC.
    So they paired them against Big 10 teams from 1946 on.

    .....Still Spinning?

    Let's just call it what it was- a very competitive match-up between the
    West (7 wins) and the South (6 wins). With 2 of college football's
    all-time great programs (USC & Alabama) dominating the Rose Bowl
    when they played in it, just like they do on any other stage.

    NcaaAssassinG13

  • BetterOff said...

    They just didn't like Alabama beating them.

    Alabama= #5 on the list of Rose Bowl victories. 4-1-1 in the game.

    The last game before the conference agreement was a 20 point win by Alabama over USC. Coincidence?

    And no, I don't really believe this. Just throwing in some facts.


    If you want to know the real reason why the Rose Bowl became an exclusive Pac/Big Ten match-up, read Keith Dunnavant's book "The 50 Year Seduction" and you'll understand that the South & the West didn't have much to do with it.

    USC had to wait so long to pay Bama back for that 1940's Rose Bowl,
    that they paid them back twice in the 70's.

    NcaaAssassinG13

  • NcaaAssassinG13 said...

    If you want to know the real reason why the Rose Bowl became an exclusive Pac/Big Ten match-up, read Keith Dunnavant's book "The 50 Year Seduction" and you'll understand that the South & the West didn't have much to do with it.

    USC had to wait so long to pay Bama back for that 1940's Rose Bowl,
    that they paid them back twice in the 70's.

    I guess you still owe us 3 since the series is at 5-2.

    Actually a big SC fan. Dad went there and I've been to many a game at the Coliseum. Post a good bit on the FightOn board

    V

    BetterOff ●

  • BetterOff said...

    I think its an ego thing just as much as a money thing.

    The BCS games are the "money" games, but honestly there is usually only one that is really a great matchup with the current system. There are usually lower tier bowls that are more interesting games.

    This past year was actually against the norm with BCS games. OSU/Stanford, Wisky/Oregon, Clemson/WVU, and VaTech/Michigan were as good a BCS lineup as we have had in while.

    Yes, you could argue that VaTech/Michigan shouldn't have been there, but it was still a good matchup and no one would have thought that WVU would have pantsed Clemson they way they did. Add Arky/Kansas St and UGA/MSU and we really had some good matchups.

    Money and perception is what the battle is over though. You are correct. I wish they would leave the bowl games alone and set the 4 team playoff as a bid only tournament and let the cities bid on the games just like they do in March Madness.

    You are correct, ego is clouding common sense for Rose Bowlers. I like your idea of bidding for a playoff venue. That would allow potential parity for the smaller bowls and increase revenue all around. LOL on your WVA/Clemson remark, as I lost my tail on that one.

    Penman

  • BetterOff -

    Can you post on the USC site
    at least once a day?
    That lovely young blonde lady you display
    should be mandatory morning viewing.
    cyclops

    NcaaAssassinG13

  • Heres the television ratings for the BCS games through 2011. Sorry I was too dense to be able to actually post the link last time.

    TV ratings

    www.bcsfootball.org

    AlwaysMore

Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports