from what I remember the tickets to the Big 12 championship were no more than $60, so I can't see these tickets being $150
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!
Where should the Pac-12 Championship game be held?
- Thread starter Duff Man
- Start date
from what I remember the tickets to the Big 12 championship were no more than $60, so I can't see these tickets being $150
GoBruinz
Member
I already said I'm in favor of the conference championship being held at the site of the #1 team's home stadium, but if it was to be held at a "neutral" site, I'm not sure why so many of you are against it being held in L.A. I thought this whole Division split debate was being driven by "exposure" in L.A. If your team got to the championship game, wouldn't you want that L.A. exposure, not just because of the large stadiums, but also the recruiting impact?
Because the rose bowl is only 3/4 full when UCLA is playing there. How do you expect it to fill up without UCLA playing - assuming they will not be in the champ game very often?
I still think Vegas, or the winningest team (as long as they tiebreaker is not the BCS ranking of the team - that was a ****ing mess/joke in the Big 12 when Tech, OU, and UT were all tied)
Freemont? Really? That's on the other side of the Bay. Closer to San Jose than San Francisco. Hell, it's closer to Oakland. That would be really weird. If I were the 49ers, I'd arrange to play at Stanford for 2 years and tear down/rebuild Candlestick.
yes that is where they are looking at building, near an amusement park and the Santa Clara convention center, so that they can all share parking.
No Rose Bowl- that venue IMHO should only be UCLA's & for THE ROSE BOWL-
I say rotate between Phoenix & San Diego-
and if this place is ever built then play it here .....
http://www.losangelesfootballstadium.com/
I say rotate between Phoenix & San Diego-
and if this place is ever built then play it here .....
http://www.losangelesfootballstadium.com/
Either of the LA stadiums, San Diego, or the Phoenix stadium. I don't see why it would be played anywhere else. Vegas isn't a real option at this time.
IF they built a new stadium, vegas would be the best. The best lodging. Easiest to travel to and from. It's geographic location is right in the middle for all of the schools. It would make going to the PAC championship amazing for all of the fans. If it's in the middle of LA or Phoenix, that's cool for the game - but dont expect fans to be hanging around for several days.
DeNiro
My Dixie Wrecked
It worked for the Bears when the renovated Solider Field
Even with a new stadium, Vegas would suck balls for a championship site. You realize most people won't stay in Vegas for a whole week either? Glad Vegas is not a viable option.
GoBruinz
Member
As an FYI, the San Jose Mercury News updated their blog/article on the division realignment issue with the following:
espn.com reporting that Glendale, Ariz., Los Angeles, Seattle and Las Vegas are being considered as sites for a Pac-12 football championship game.
(if it's at a neutral site).
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/colleg...on-the-latest-on-the-division-split-and-more/
espn.com reporting that Glendale, Ariz., Los Angeles, Seattle and Las Vegas are being considered as sites for a Pac-12 football championship game.
(if it's at a neutral site).
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/colleg...on-the-latest-on-the-division-split-and-more/
If Vegas, a city outside the conference and with a stadium capacity of about 40K, beats out those other sites, the Pac-10 has royally ****ed up.
EDIT: I realize some really like Vegas with improved facilities, but I just do not understand how it is a real, viable option right now.
I don't think it's a viable option now, but with improved facilities (near the Strip - very important) it could be. Is it really outside the conference? I don't think so. In fact, I think it's right smack dab in the middle of the conference. 8 of the 12 schools would be within a one-day drive.
Short of that, I actually like the idea of having it at the Rose Bowl. That's a pretty cool place. So what if the winner just gets to go back? Wouldn't that be a bit of an incentive? The Rose Bowl is what we're all gunning for now, remember?
(I just got shivers typing that - we're gunning for the Rose Bowl - I just got them again. kewl.)
Short of that, I actually like the idea of having it at the Rose Bowl. That's a pretty cool place. So what if the winner just gets to go back? Wouldn't that be a bit of an incentive? The Rose Bowl is what we're all gunning for now, remember?
(I just got shivers typing that - we're gunning for the Rose Bowl - I just got them again. kewl.)
And you now have something to like about LA.
You know what? You're absolutely right. Well played, sir.
top dog
I vote for best overall record with the tie breaker (after conference record) being out of conference SOS. You think Oregon schedules New Mexico State and Portland State to start the season knowing that Oregon State plays 2 of the top 10 teams in the country in their OOC with that incentive? Pac 12's new motto: anyone,any time, any where.
Although I have to admit that saying "our ccg is in Vegas, the entertainment capital of the world, every year" does have a certain cachet to it.
I vote for best overall record with the tie breaker (after conference record) being out of conference SOS. You think Oregon schedules New Mexico State and Portland State to start the season knowing that Oregon State plays 2 of the top 10 teams in the country in their OOC with that incentive? Pac 12's new motto: anyone,any time, any where.
Although I have to admit that saying "our ccg is in Vegas, the entertainment capital of the world, every year" does have a certain cachet to it.
GoBruinz
Member
Actually, the Pac 10 generally schedules better OOC games than virtually any other conference. Yeah, you have Oregon (New Mexico and Portland State) and Arizona State (2 1-AA teams), but schools like USC, UCLA, Washington, Stanford and others generally schedule very good OOC games, and often have the highest SOS in the country. To its credit, Colorado seems to also schedule a very good OOC, and Utah looks like it does as well.
Overall your point about SOS is spot on though -- the BCS ranking does take into account SOS I think (within the computer polls), so maybe just use that as the tie-break?
I don't want to look at a map, so I assume the 4 not schools are the Oregon and Wash ones?
BuffaloWing
New Member
I also vote #1 seed's home field. I can't believe this hasn't been mentioned yet, but having the game at the #1's location would help reduce the zipper's apparent #1 downfall. If your rivals week features the top two teams in the conference, there still will be something to play for. Oregon vs. Oregon State will be crap if they're both guaranteed to play again in Arizona next week, but if the winner gets homefield advantage for the big game, you'd have a lot more to play for. It would make both games more competitive. Besides, we're talking college ball! Play it at college campuses!!! You'd think all us CU fans who hate Invesco would know this by now. It's a different atmosphere on campus that is unparalleled.
If not, I don't mind Vegas if we do put in some of those incentives to improve their stadium (increase seating capacity) prior to us committing to it.
If not, I don't mind Vegas if we do put in some of those incentives to improve their stadium (increase seating capacity) prior to us committing to it.
As for Candlestick, did Cal ever consider Candlestick or was AT&T Park their first choice for their "replacement" home? If so, I think it speaks volumes they rather want to play their home games at a MLB park than at a NFL stadium.
As for LA, what are the chances of LA getting a new football stadium in the next 5 years? I know LA and the NFL is turning into an eternal story, but is a stadium contingent on getting a team or is there a chance this Roskie (?) guy is going to go go ahead on a new stadium without having a NFL team lined up?
As for LA, what are the chances of LA getting a new football stadium in the next 5 years? I know LA and the NFL is turning into an eternal story, but is a stadium contingent on getting a team or is there a chance this Roskie (?) guy is going to go go ahead on a new stadium without having a NFL team lined up?
SF_BUFF
Member
I don't believe CAL really considered Candlestick. The Stick has terrible facilities and should have been renovated 15 years ago. I swear to God, walking in that place is terribly depressing (even though I grew up watching Giants games there).
AT&T Park is a great venue for football even though it's a gem of a baseball destination. It's also a lot easier to fill than Candlestick. I believe Candlestick is right around 63,000 for baseball but it's over 70K for football (which would be almost impossible for CAL to sell out).
Added a poll. Enjoy.
ESPN is reporting that Las Vegas is definitely in the running due to its central conference location.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5604452
ESPN is reporting that Las Vegas is definitely in the running due to its central conference location.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5604452