AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Sir Larry Scott.. (P12 considering buying out Larry Scott)
- Thread starter Manti's woman
- Start date
You make some great points, but are missing how anemic the atmosphere is in Santa Clara. It is in the burbs without a central entertainment hub/hotel strip anywhere nearby. People going to the game are hurdling weird logistics and only showing up for the game exclusively.
Vegas becomes a destination event, where you can go to the game, and, and, and - pick your choice in entertainment, where 1000's of people can have lodging within walking distance and all the others are within a 10 dollar uber ride.
Plus all the casinos and trade show facilities would be selling or comping tickets to guests who are not there for the game. It is an EVENT city. These types of sporting events are the lifeblood that drives things.
ScottyBuff
Well-Known Member
Oh no question that if we do a neutral site that Vegas is far superior to any other city in the Pac-12 footprint, plus it doesn't give anyone a "home field" advantage like Atlanta favors those teams within driving distance in the SEC; or Charlotte does for the ACC schools nearby; and Indy for the B1G. It would truly be "neutral site". When the P12 first formed I thought that Phoenix was the best option for many of the same reasons (flight access, hotels, etc) rather than the Bay area. I could also see the new LA stadium being a better option than the Bay area; but logistically is not as strong as Vegas and still favors USC/UCLA when they play in CCG.
However, I still don't think the Pac-12 fanbases will travel en masse on short notice unless CFP spots are on the line for both teams (a very rare occurence) and would prefer the higher seed playing at home; even over Vegas.
We are all assuming that indifference towards the P12CCG would be different in Las Vegas than it would be in San Francisco. There are certainly a lot more hotel rooms and flight options that will probably drive costs down along with a more purely touristy destination to attract people. That being said these silly CCGs rarely offer up much in the way of notice and to plan your trip with under a 7 day advance means $$$. Only the most die hard are going to go. On some level you need a lot of the local population in town to support the game so LA is probably the best choice versus a neutral site.
Back in my WAC (and early MWC) days when I was following UNM BB closely, the conference tourney was in LV. I hated it because UNLV had home court advantage. From a conference standpoint, though, it made business sense. The tourney did have a good draw from almost all of the conference schools (certain schools traveled better than others, obviously), but it was a destination that was always on the radar of BB fans.
Would that translate to the PAC-12 FB championship -- I don't know. But I'd be shocked if it wasn't better attended than the current location. Plus logistics would be easier and cost would be substantially lower.
Would that translate to the PAC-12 FB championship -- I don't know. But I'd be shocked if it wasn't better attended than the current location. Plus logistics would be easier and cost would be substantially lower.
I think that "dude, it's a weekend in Vegas!" helps overcome some of the "indifference."
Before the conference just gives up and say that the P12CCG is, forever and always, going to have poor attendance*, they should try and improve it.
Every single one of these factors will drive, at the margins, more people to attend the game. None of them is a panacea, none of them will, all by itself, drive 30,000 more people to join. But if each of them drives 500 more, or 2,000 more - it all adds up:
1. Move the game to Saturday night. Take the late kick-off. This gives fans an extra day to get there - for those that work M-F jobs, they don't have to take a day off work. They can leave after work on Friday or even Saturday morning. Right now, literally anyone who wants to attend has to take time off work to do so - even most of the people who live in the bay area. (Note, this change also helps TV ratings, not just butts in seats: some years the game will have playoff implications - if it does, and it's the last game to go, you can damn well bet that every TV is tuned in.)
2. Move it somewhere that is cheaper and easier to get to for most of the conference, preferably somewhere that frequently has a lot of hotel rooms available on short notice.
3. Move it somewhere with better ****ing weather.
4. Move it somewhere where there are other things to do. (I mean, I like the bay area, but in early December?)
Put it this way: when CU made the game in 2016, I briefly considered going, but decided against it. If the game had been scheduled for Saturday night in Vegas, instead of Friday in Santa Clara, I would have attended. And so would have a lot of the other folks on this board.
*also, why is it that you always take the "just give up and quit trying" approach to, well, pretty much everything? It's a pretty consistent pattern: CU head coach, CU assistant coaches, CU HS recruiting, CU football, Pac-12 football, everything in the politics forum, etc, etc...
Flights to Vegas are pretty inexpensive compared to the Bay Area and you can be at your hotel next to the stadium within an hour of landing. Not the case in the Bay Area. It’s also a 3 hour drive from LA, 5 hour drive from Tucson and Tempe, 6 hours from SLC and an easy 10 hour drive from Denver. Traveling to Vegas is easier, cheaper and provides a ton of options for almost everybody in the conference footprint
Wilner's newsletter today (you guys should subscribe - it's free):
Title game aftermath: By the numbers
The optics aren't good. They weren't good in real-time Friday night, and they are even worse with 20/10 hindsight provided by data collected over the past 48 hours.
The Hotline compared the Pac-12 championship game to its peer events in the ACC, Big 12, Big Ten and SEC in two key areas ... thekey areas: Attendance and TV ratings.
(Notes on the following: Times are Pacific. TV ratings and notes are from SportsMediaWatch. Listed capacity is does not include expanded seating options for the Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC venues.)
ACC
Clemson vs. Pittsburgh
Time: 5 p.m./ABC
BofA Stadium capacity: 75,412
Announced crowd: 67,784
Percentage filled: 89.8
TV rating: Not available.
Big Ten
Ohio State vs. Northwestern
Time: Saturday, 5 p.m./FOX
Lucas Oil Stadium capacity: 67,000
Announced crowd: 66,375
Percentage filled: 99
TV rating: 5.6
Note: Down 30 percent from last year (Ohio State-Wisconsin).
Big 12
Oklahoma vs. Texas
Time: Saturday 9 a.m./ABC
AT&T Stadium capacity: 80,000
Announced crowd: 83,114
Percentage filled: 104
TV rating: 6.8
Comment: Third-highest overnight of the season (any conference).
Pac-12
Washington vs. Utah
Time: 5 p.m./FOX (Friday)
Levi’s Stadium capacity: 67.500
Announced crowd: 35,134
Percentage filled: 52
TV rating: 3.1
Note: Up 15 percent from last year (Stanford vs. USC/ESPN) but down 21 percent from 2016 (UW vs. Colorado/FOX).
SEC
Alabama vs. Georgia
Time: Saturday 1 p.m./CBS
Mercedes-Benz Stadium capacity: 71,000
Announced crowd: 77,141
Percentage filled: 109
TV rating: 10.5
Note: Highest overnight ratings for a non-bowl since 2011 (any game, any conference).
It's didn't help the Pac-12's cause that neither participant was playing for a College Football Playoff berth, or that Washington didn't clinch the North until the previous weekend.
Utah traveled well; the Huskies did not; and the local support was lacking.
What can be done?
The day of the week is up to the discretion of FOX and ESPN, which prefer Friday to avoid the jammed windows of Championship Saturday.
The location is fixed for at least one more year: The conference's contract with Levi's Stadium runs through 2019, with an option for the 2020 season.
At that point, the Pac-12 could return to the on-campus approach we saw from 2011-13, which would lend rocket-fuel to the atmosphere without changing the TV ratings. But the home-host model would appear small-time compared to the other Power Five title games in NFL stadiums.
The Raiders' stadium in Las Vegas is the best option for 2020 and beyond, followed (far behind) by a return to the on-campus model. -- Jon Wilner.
Title game aftermath: By the numbers
The optics aren't good. They weren't good in real-time Friday night, and they are even worse with 20/10 hindsight provided by data collected over the past 48 hours.
The Hotline compared the Pac-12 championship game to its peer events in the ACC, Big 12, Big Ten and SEC in two key areas ... thekey areas: Attendance and TV ratings.
(Notes on the following: Times are Pacific. TV ratings and notes are from SportsMediaWatch. Listed capacity is does not include expanded seating options for the Big 12, Pac-12 and SEC venues.)
ACC
Clemson vs. Pittsburgh
Time: 5 p.m./ABC
BofA Stadium capacity: 75,412
Announced crowd: 67,784
Percentage filled: 89.8
TV rating: Not available.
Big Ten
Ohio State vs. Northwestern
Time: Saturday, 5 p.m./FOX
Lucas Oil Stadium capacity: 67,000
Announced crowd: 66,375
Percentage filled: 99
TV rating: 5.6
Note: Down 30 percent from last year (Ohio State-Wisconsin).
Big 12
Oklahoma vs. Texas
Time: Saturday 9 a.m./ABC
AT&T Stadium capacity: 80,000
Announced crowd: 83,114
Percentage filled: 104
TV rating: 6.8
Comment: Third-highest overnight of the season (any conference).
Pac-12
Washington vs. Utah
Time: 5 p.m./FOX (Friday)
Levi’s Stadium capacity: 67.500
Announced crowd: 35,134
Percentage filled: 52
TV rating: 3.1
Note: Up 15 percent from last year (Stanford vs. USC/ESPN) but down 21 percent from 2016 (UW vs. Colorado/FOX).
SEC
Alabama vs. Georgia
Time: Saturday 1 p.m./CBS
Mercedes-Benz Stadium capacity: 71,000
Announced crowd: 77,141
Percentage filled: 109
TV rating: 10.5
Note: Highest overnight ratings for a non-bowl since 2011 (any game, any conference).
It's didn't help the Pac-12's cause that neither participant was playing for a College Football Playoff berth, or that Washington didn't clinch the North until the previous weekend.
Utah traveled well; the Huskies did not; and the local support was lacking.
What can be done?
The day of the week is up to the discretion of FOX and ESPN, which prefer Friday to avoid the jammed windows of Championship Saturday.
The location is fixed for at least one more year: The conference's contract with Levi's Stadium runs through 2019, with an option for the 2020 season.
At that point, the Pac-12 could return to the on-campus approach we saw from 2011-13, which would lend rocket-fuel to the atmosphere without changing the TV ratings. But the home-host model would appear small-time compared to the other Power Five title games in NFL stadiums.
The Raiders' stadium in Las Vegas is the best option for 2020 and beyond, followed (far behind) by a return to the on-campus model. -- Jon Wilner.
ScottyBuff
Well-Known Member
No question on the logistics being easier. I just question if the Pac-12 fanbases will do that enough to have 70,000 in attendance regardless of the matchup/implications.
I don't think anyone is arguing with that point... unless we expand with an OU or UT in the future. But the baseline level for the P12C is simply going to be higher in Vegas than in Santa Clara.
I think 70k is attainable in Vegas, but it has to be a game vs two really good teams with actual national implications on the line. A matchup between #1 ranked USC and #4 ranked Oregon/Washington for example (using this year's SEC Championship Game) would definitely be a big time draw, IMO.
I think another thing to consider is the growth in football fans attending in Vegas, not just Pac-12 fans. I am sure there are quite a few people that like to go to Vegas for championship weekend that would be open to going to a game at some point during their stay. Also, there could be people scheduling a vacation to Vegas at some point during the fall and they decide on championship weekend because there is a major football game going on. It might not be anything huge but it sure can't hurt. So you get...
1) more fans of the two teams playing
2) more Pac-12 fans who decide to buy tickets to the game before the season becuase Vegas is a much more appealing place to travel to for a weekend
3) more football fans from across the country that will go see a game in person while visiting Vegas for championship weekend
4) more people looking for something to do while there for the weekend.
It is a very easy choice.
Not sure if we can get to 70,000, but there is a place somewhere between 35,000 and 70,000.
I just don't understand the "we can't get 70,000 people in the stadium, therefore we should accept 35,000" stance that some people seem to be taking.
(FWIW - if someone's lurking and hasn't set up an account, Ricky Bobby would make a great screen name & avatar)
BlackNGold
Club Member
The attendance at the CCG and the TV ratings are only symptoms of the problem. The real problem, if we are to believe Wilner and OregonLive, is the corrupt and incompetent leadership of the PAC12. The picture being painted is one of self-serving leadership, cronyism, and corruption that is not focusing on success. When you see this in any organization it usually means massive failure.
In a few short years we have seen the other conferences pass the PAC12 in both revenue and in prestige. The inept Big 12 seems to be doing better. The PAC 12 brand has taken a big hit - it is pretty much considered the weakest of P5 right now in both football and basketball. If the erosion of the PAC12 Brand continues it does not bode well for the future.
A good portion of the blame lies with the conference presidents whom seem content to standby claiming they are happy with the Olympic sports being their point of emphasis while ignoring the fact that football and basketball pay the way. The PAC 12 network is a joke. The reason that AT&T has no trouble dropping is because it has no ratings.
In the future they better start worrying about the AAC starting to muscle in for Power 5 status. Their contract expires after next year and they have teams in huge population centers plus play in the eastern and central time zones. With the success of some of the programs (UCF, USF, Houston, ) they are going to be push for a piece of the pie.
In a few short years we have seen the other conferences pass the PAC12 in both revenue and in prestige. The inept Big 12 seems to be doing better. The PAC 12 brand has taken a big hit - it is pretty much considered the weakest of P5 right now in both football and basketball. If the erosion of the PAC12 Brand continues it does not bode well for the future.
A good portion of the blame lies with the conference presidents whom seem content to standby claiming they are happy with the Olympic sports being their point of emphasis while ignoring the fact that football and basketball pay the way. The PAC 12 network is a joke. The reason that AT&T has no trouble dropping is because it has no ratings.
In the future they better start worrying about the AAC starting to muscle in for Power 5 status. Their contract expires after next year and they have teams in huge population centers plus play in the eastern and central time zones. With the success of some of the programs (UCF, USF, Houston, ) they are going to be push for a piece of the pie.
Your last paragraph makes an interesting point I hadn't thought about.
Yeah. I’d go with “His Highness, Lord of
All” Larry Scott.
Deleted member 807
Guest
RalphieRunr
Well-Known Member
I have AT&T (In Texas) and just tried to go to PAC-12 Channel to watch the game tonight and I get "This Channel Is no Longer Available". Cancelling now. Guess Ill have to get Sling or something else. Super frustrating
Hell, I might go watch ASU vs OSU in a PAC12 Championship game in Las Vegas. Any excuse to go to Vegas is a good excuse. Make it happen.
The Pac12 sucks. I thought it would be awesome but I was wrong.
I was thinking about it. Would be almost like being in Vegas for some of the other big sports weekends. Go to the Pac-12 game on Friday night with a little action on it to keep things interesting, go out on the town after, and then spend Saturday in the sports book watching the other conference championship games. I could definitely make that an annual trip.
Last edited:
Pointy knees...oh wait.
Agreed that it makes more sense for the Pac12 to have their CCG on campus given the combination of distances and general apathy of Pac12 fanbases. I realize that creates a bit of a logistical issue but they need to treat it as a normal home game for the host school instead of as a neutral site game like they did the first few years.
To the bolded part above, the ACC has the benefit of having more than half their schools within a 4-hour drive of Charlotte, in particular Clemson and VT. Plus ACC has also fortunate to have VT, Clemson, or FSU in this game every year it's been in Charlotte but there's no doubt that this is the ideal location for the ACCCG.
pcbuff
Well-Known Member
Whose going to buy Larry Scott’s drinks and lunch everyday if the conference championship vendors aren’t in San Francisco?
Make it a home game for the higher ranked team and sell half the stadium to visitors for 20.00 per seat. That is recipe for success as long as Stanford isn’t in the mix. If they’re involved you have to promise a televised half time from their band.
Always 5.00 beers in first half.
Attendance problem solved. Your welcome!
Nah man. Pheonix --> Vegas when the stadium is ready.