RealGM

Meh. Play it outside.

I really hope they rotate it on a yearly basis, would love to see it outdoors at Soldier Field, Lambeau, Heinz Field or Lincoln Field, etc... basically between all the states that have both a Big 10 school and a viable stadium, I would exclude the Metrodome because it is a dump.

Indiana doesn't deserve to host Big ten football, their program sucks. Dome or no dome.

chuckleslove wrote:I really hope they rotate it on a yearly basis, would love to see it outdoors at Soldier Field, Lambeau, Heinz Field or Lincoln Field, etc... basically between all the states that have both a Big 10 school and a viable stadium, I would exclude the Metrodome because it is a dump.

I agree that it should be rotated. There are enough desirable sites for the game to be rotated and thus let football fans of different areas experience the game.

El Duderino wrote:

chuckleslove wrote:I really hope they rotate it on a yearly basis, would love to see it outdoors at Soldier Field, Lambeau, Heinz Field or Lincoln Field, etc... basically between all the states that have both a Big 10 school and a viable stadium, I would exclude the Metrodome because it is a dump.

I agree that it should be rotated. There are enough desirable sites for the game to be rotated and thus let football fans of different areas experience the game.

Yep I would go to it at Lambeau or Soldier Field but not at any of the other Big 10 country venues.

Still don't know why a money-making entity like the Big 10 (this is all they care about) would play a title game outdoors in early December.

Most of the revenue would come from TV and imagine the ratings OSU/Mich in the snow at Lambeau would pull.

Mags FTW wrote:Most of the revenue would come from TV and imagine the ratings OSU/Mich in the snow at Lambeau would pull.

Yeah, I'm aware those are most of the revenues, HOWEVER.

We had this discussion before, Northwestern, Purdue, and to be honest, Michigan might as well not even show up to that game if they ever make it.

I know people will say "WELL BOTH TEAMS HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT" but a championship game, with a BCS bid and 10+ million on the line for a school. And you're telling me OSU (and hell, Wisconsin) wouldn't be at an advantage against an upstart Northwestern team that is having another one of their great spread years?

Actually, the game could turn out to be quite boring in the snow after a while. I've seen a few NFL games with wind/snow that made them 6-3. One of them involving that amazing Patriots offense that went 18-1. People might tune out after the first quarter, too.

Guarantee you'll get a passing team that loses their shot at the national title because of the snow and it'll be massive controversy.

Even the Super Bowl in NYC most likely won't be that bad of weather. I guarantee you that Goodell won't end up allowing it anywhere but Chicago, NYC, or Washington DC maybe for a colder/outdoor experience.

It would be fun, but it just goes against pretty much everything we've seen go on in college football. We've seen the Big 10 wants to suck up every last penny available to them, and if a Lambeau B10 title game occurred, the B10 would be leaving a lot of change on the table.

GrendonJennings wrote:

Mags FTW wrote:Most of the revenue would come from TV and imagine the ratings OSU/Mich in the snow at Lambeau would pull.

Yeah, I'm aware those are most of the revenues, HOWEVER.

We had this discussion before, Northwestern, Purdue, and to be honest, Michigan might as well not even show up to that game if they ever make it.

I know people will say "WELL BOTH TEAMS HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT" but a championship game, with a BCS bid and 10+ million on the line for a school. And you're telling me OSU (and hell, Wisconsin) wouldn't be at an advantage against an upstart Northwestern team that is having another one of their great spread years?

Actually, the game could turn out to be quite boring in the snow after a while. I've seen a few NFL games with wind/snow that made them 6-3. One of them involving that amazing Patriots offense that went 18-1. People might tune out after the first quarter, too.

Guarantee you'll get a passing team that loses their shot at the national title because of the snow and it'll be massive controversy.

Even the Super Bowl in NYC most likely won't be that bad of weather. I guarantee you that Goodell won't end up allowing it anywhere but Chicago, NYC, or Washington DC maybe for a colder/outdoor experience.

It would be fun, but it just goes against pretty much everything we've seen go on in college football. We've seen the Big 10 wants to suck up every last penny available to them, and if a Lambeau B10 title game occurred, the B10 would be leaving a lot of change on the table.

That same Patriots team beat the Titans what was it 52-0 or something in the snow? Tom Brady threw for 5 touchdowns in a half and 6 in the game and their offense was unstoppable. The effect snow has on a game is overrated, wind is far far worse than snow.

Michigan might as well not even show up to that game if they ever make it.

That makes no sense. Either your 10 years old or have a short memory.

mnstinks wrote:

Michigan might as well not even show up to that game if they ever make it.

That makes no sense. Either your 10 years old or have a short memory.

Thanks man. No, I can probably name more 90's Michigan players than 95% of this board and I was talking in current terms since Bo Schembechler isn't trotting a team out there next year. Dick Rod and his speed option/wide receiver screen offense would be in town.

Granted, with the way it looks like his team is going under him, a new coach could come in, though I doubt he's bringing power ball there either.

EDIT: That is why I said they might as well not show up. As if I was adding them to the list. "Oh, I guess them too." As in, you wouldn't expect it, but now they do fit.

chuckleslove wrote:

GrendonJennings wrote:

Mags FTW wrote:Most of the revenue would come from TV and imagine the ratings OSU/Mich in the snow at Lambeau would pull.

Yeah, I'm aware those are most of the revenues, HOWEVER.

We had this discussion before, Northwestern, Purdue, and to be honest, Michigan might as well not even show up to that game if they ever make it.

I know people will say "WELL BOTH TEAMS HAVE TO DEAL WITH IT" but a championship game, with a BCS bid and 10+ million on the line for a school. And you're telling me OSU (and hell, Wisconsin) wouldn't be at an advantage against an upstart Northwestern team that is having another one of their great spread years?

Actually, the game could turn out to be quite boring in the snow after a while. I've seen a few NFL games with wind/snow that made them 6-3. One of them involving that amazing Patriots offense that went 18-1. People might tune out after the first quarter, too.

Guarantee you'll get a passing team that loses their shot at the national title because of the snow and it'll be massive controversy.

Even the Super Bowl in NYC most likely won't be that bad of weather. I guarantee you that Goodell won't end up allowing it anywhere but Chicago, NYC, or Washington DC maybe for a colder/outdoor experience.

It would be fun, but it just goes against pretty much everything we've seen go on in college football. We've seen the Big 10 wants to suck up every last penny available to them, and if a Lambeau B10 title game occurred, the B10 would be leaving a lot of change on the table.

That same Patriots team beat the Titans what was it 52-0 or something in the snow? Tom Brady threw for 5 touchdowns in a half and 6 in the game and their offense was unstoppable. The effect snow has on a game is overrated, wind is far far worse than snow.

Good, you've strengthened my point.

1. I would assume game-changing wind (especially that cold wind) would occur more in Lambeau or Soldier Field than Lucas Oil Field or in the case of any other bowl, Tampa or one of those cities.

2. You're right, snow is a bit less of a factor. However, when it is actually snowing, it affects a number of things. It again, makes it pretty damn hard to pass most of the time and visibility on TV can be terrible. Also, receivers can't come in and out of their routes very easily in certain types of snow. Most of the time, the grounds crew does a fine job of keeping the field playable, but there have been some pretty bad ones. I've seen a few NFL games in previous years where play on the field WAS affected by a driving snow, and on top of it, the fan could barely see the game. I'm sure AllState, AT&T, and all the other sponsors would love the fan television turnout for their commercial and sponsorship ratings on that.

3. I was at a game (Texans/Packers) in '08 right around when a Big 10 Title game would be. It got really cold but for the most part, play on the field wasn't affected. I enjoyed it, did fine, but I'll admit at times I was kinda like, "I wouldn't mind if I was forced to go inside right now." But I was fine. My girlfriend at the time on the other hand essentially ruined the game, wanted to leave mostly, etc. but was a tough cookie and rode it out. As fun as some things would be for us who grew up in that, I'm not sure all the promotional games, events, and crews would want to come set up there. Granted, you may have a decent amount of things inside, but again domes normally have better setups for that and if it is a warmer city, it is more pleasant outside.



The one concession I'll make is that in terms of footing, rain and snow can both have effects and we do see rain in bowl games. I believe this year it happened kinda twice, but most years it doesn't happen at all or happens just once. I would say once a year on average in EVERY bowl game played outdoors (20 or so) we see rain/footing/ball-handling issues. We would probably say that we'd see it once every 3-5 years in an outdoor, cold weather game.

Sure rain, wind, snow they all effect the game play.

So what? It is equal to both teams.

I don't understand why it is even an issue. Weather and adverse conditions is part of the game of football, it is part of what separates football from the other sports, you play through everything short of lightning/tornado/monsoon/hurricane/earthquake, you know the real bad stuff

I love football games in bad weather.

I won't argue with you that playing the game outdoor in November/December has the potential to cause some nasty weather but I don't see why that is a big deal, I've never understood why people think you need to play big games in nice weather. Both teams are effected equally, so a team that plays a style like Wisconsin would have an advantage in the snow/bad weather? Who cares, a team like Purdue that runs a spread offense has an advantage in a dome, why should they get the advantage every single year? Why should the fans in Wisconsin miss the chance to see a championship game in their home state? Why should the state of Wisconsin miss out on the revenue opportunities that come with hosting a championship game? I can think of far more reasons to rotate the game and keep competitive balance than to keep it in a nice weather location.

chuckleslove wrote:Sure rain, wind, snow they all effect the game play.

So what? It is equal to both teams.

I don't understand why it is even an issue. Weather and adverse conditions is part of the game of football, it is part of what separates football from the other sports, you play through everything short of lightning/tornado/monsoon/hurricane/earthquake, you know the real bad stuff

I love football games in bad weather.

I won't argue with you that playing the game outdoor in November/December has the potential to cause some nasty weather but I don't see why that is a big deal, I've never understood why people think you need to play big games in nice weather. Both teams are effected equally, so a team that plays a style like Wisconsin would have an advantage in the snow/bad weather? Who cares, a team like Purdue that runs a spread offense has an advantage in a dome, why should they get the advantage every single year? Why should the fans in Wisconsin miss the chance to see a championship game in their home state? Why should the state of Wisconsin miss out on the revenue opportunities that come with hosting a championship game? I can think of far more reasons to rotate the game and keep competitive balance than to keep it in a nice weather location.

Considering 98% of football games are played in decent weather, I'd say neither a Wisconsin nor Purdue has an advantage weather-wise most of those games. We aren't playing on artificial flat turf that allows a spread/speed team to have an advantage anymore, so I'd say it is even.

When it gets to snow the scales massively tip to Wisconsin.



Another point: As for ticket revenue, it's the big wigs and guys that probably don't want to sit in 10 degree weather and/or wind and/or snow that will be buying up all the tickets.


EDIT: I'm not massively opposed to this, I just would dislike seeing some team absolutely jobbed by it one time that deserved to go to a National Title or Rose Bowl or whatever but most of my opinion stems from the Big 10 not wanting to do it for these reasons and more.