PAC Football Championship Venue Poll
by Nars on Jun 17, 2010 2:31 PM PDT
Email
PrintWell, with Utah in the fray, the concept of a PAC football championship is pretty much a foregone conclusion. In reading about the experiences of other conferences in their respective championship games, it strikes me that venue/location have a major role to play in the success (or lack thereof) of the championship.
Since the PAC Championship in basketball was resurrected, I think it’s been an overwhelming success - for the fans. The Staples venue and set-up are great, and the LA location allows for every fan base to be represented. While many coaches downplay the role that the conference tournament play in prepping for March, as a fan, I have enjoyed it every year. I strongly believe that the venue and location chosen for the tournament play a big part in why the tournament has been such a fun event. My fan experience and opinion would be dramatically different if we were playing in the LB Pyramid or Forum.
So, how can the PAC institute a championship game in football while still catering to the fan experience and avoid some of the perceived pitfalls of what the ACC product has become? In my opinion, it comes down to location, location, location.
Without a NFL stadium in the greater LA area, it makes translating the basketball blueprint more difficult. I don't really see a slam dunk venue currently, so I thought I would create a poll to see where BN would like to see the championship game be played.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
76 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Bay Area
I think Bay Area makes most sense to me. In fact if the North-South division takes hold without keeping all 4 California schools in same division, then I think the 12-Pac should lock in hoops tourney in LA and the conference championship game in the Bay Area.
Also Bay Area
I voted Oakland, but with the caveat that the game be moved to Santa Clara if/when the 49ers get their new stadium built. Considering the condition of the ‘Stick, I can’t vote for any option that has it listed – I’m as big a 49ers fan as anyone, but that stadium is as run down as the LA Coliseum.
formerly bruinhoo
I actually like SD
I think that its the best “Vacation” option of the group – how hard is it to convince the wife and kids to go to SD and see Legoland and Shamu? Squeeze in a football game, and you’ve got quite a weekend.
Qualcomm isn’t the greatest, but at least it won’t rain!
lol...my two little ones (ages 3 and 5) love legoland
so it’s still not a ripoff for us. However, there doesn’t seem like much there for older kids, so we probably won’t be going there a few years now from.
Also, if you look, you can usually find great discount tickets.
by bornagainbruin on Jun 17, 2010 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions
I live in SD
And would love for it come here. The Holiday Bowl always puts on a solid showing.
I agree with Greg in Denver. I have been to Disney and Legoland with my 4 year old in the last 6 months. Legoland in kind of close in price, plus you have to pay for lots of activiities that would be free @ Disney. Not to mention downtown Disney has the Lego store. Sorry way off topic, gbruin I am with you brother LegoLand is a ripoff
Ditto on the Bay Area
It is kinda central to everybody, and selfishly, if I can’t see my Bruins play up here every year against Stanford/Cal depending on how they slice the divisions, hopefully I can at least root for the chance of seeing them in the 12-pac championship!
Go Bruins!
None of the above
…that is, not as one permanent site. I’d like to see it rotate between the Rose Bowl, U of Phx Stadium, Invesco, and Qwest, adding a new 49ers stadium into the mix if/when it is built.
In the immortal words of the pin I got while an undergrad: Roses are red, violets are blue...f*** $C.
Why
would anyone here not want it played at the Rose Bowl?
A bruin is good forever, a Trojan is only good... ahh eff it, just use tin foil
Only arguement I can think of
is that the championship game at the Rose Bowl would send the winner to….the Rose Bowl. I can’t decide if this cheapens it at all or not, thoughts?
playing
at the rose bowl is different than playing in the rose bowl.
A bruin is good forever, a Trojan is only good... ahh eff it, just use tin foil
Of course
I’d be ok with holding the championship game there, it was just the only possible negative (for me, living in LA) that I could think of.
It would only mean more revenue for Pasadena and the Rose Bowl.
I dont think anyone in LA would have a problem with it, maybe the surrounding neighborhood of the Rose Bowl but not many else. I could only see other cities having issue since we have the basketball tourney too.
A bruin is good forever, a Trojan is only good... ahh eff it, just use tin foil
I was thinking
that no mater where I lived I would rather have the game played in the Rose Bowl just to give us a competitve advantage. I understand that everyone wants to see the Bruins play in their backyard but, its just an on field / environmental opinion.
A bruin is good forever, a Trojan is only good... ahh eff it, just use tin foil
Other 10 teams will have problem with both basketball and football here.
The early Pac-10 basketball tournament games were moved because of the objections.
Revenue generated not just in Pasadena, but all over Southern California, especially for L.A.
Increased Odds
With SC having a post season ban, we are going to have a better shot (based on odds) of getting into the championship gameover the next two years. And if we get to play it in our own back yard, it only increases our shot at the Rose Bowl.
A bruin is good forever, a Trojan is only good... ahh eff it, just use tin foil
I voted Rose Bowl
because of the history and connection that the stadium has with the conference. However, like Nars said, San Diego would be a great place to go watch a football game too.
My problem with Jack Murphy
One, its an NFL stadium. The second issue being that you tail gate on a concrete parking lot that has very few portapotties. It also has no connection to the PAC X
A bruin is good forever, a Trojan is only good... ahh eff it, just use tin foil
I prefer the Rose Bowl
by a longshot. It is an amzing, historic, and beautiful stadium. It’s just San Diego is a decent option too and a great city. Qualcomm is aging though I guess.
You make a good point too about the tailgating
The Rose Bowl is way better with the golf course north of the bowl and the lawn at Lot H. And although the Rose Bowl is pretty old, the amazing history and tradition makes up for it.
That actually is true of all of the other conference championship games
The NFL Stadium + No connection to the conference (Can’t speak to the portapotty situation).
The SEC plays its championship game at the Georgia Dome – Atlanta Falcons, which does not have an SEC team, but shares its city with an ACC school (Ga Tech). The Big XII used to play its game at Arrowhead Stadium, but moved to Dallas upon the opening of Jerry Jones’ new place. KC was home of the the old Big 8 HQ, and Dallas houses the Big XII HQ, but neither city is connected to a university in the conference. The ACC has rotated its game through Jacksonville and Tampa, and is set to play next in Charlotte.
formerly bruinhoo
Hehe, I laughed on the inside when you called Atlanta
an “ACC town”.
Which of the potential sites has the highest population?
And within that highest population, which of the sites is better?
Quid erat demonstratum.
Now, the question is whether we can get out of this stupid arrangement.
If they could expand Sam Boyd Stadium to 50,000 or so
I’d love to see it in Vegas,
For everything UCLA baseball, visit my UCLA baseball twitter.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jun 17, 2010 1:47 PM PDT reply actions
I like the bay area but
how about SBC park where the SF giants play. I went to the game when UCLA played Florida St. there and had a great time (until the fourth quarter).
not sure if your joking or not but I will assume you are and add
who wants to freeze next to mccovey cove? if we are going to freeze i would rather do it in vegas instead of the castro. If we are talking small stadium.
A bruin is good forever, a Trojan is only good... ahh eff it, just use tin foil
Homophobia is cool
You’re still on thin ice MaltBaa. Tone down that kind of talk or you’re gone. Again.
my deepest apalogies
A bruin is good forever, a Trojan is only good... ahh eff it, just use tin foil
Accepted
Remember that Bruins come from all backgrounds and lifestyles.
Well, except cheating, lying dog fighting trOJan lifestyle. Feel free to direct your comments in that direction.
Small venue + not really the vibe the conference will want to put out there
as far as playing in a converted baseball stadium. Though I hear they fixed things so that now teams actually have their own sideline.
formerly bruinhoo
Isn't the endzone right up against a wall?
I seem to remember a player getting hurt in one of those bowl games going full steam into the wall.
by SuperBruinMan on Jun 17, 2010 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions
Just to let everyone know
I’m sure everyone here loves the Pac-10 Tourney, but the 8 other schools hate it. So I definitely wouldn’t call it an overwhelming sucess.
I Hate Your Ducks
look up our posts and comments
We don’t care much for a conference tourney. We rather get completely rid of it.
by Nestor on Jun 17, 2010 3:33 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Could someone point me to some of the writeups on this?
Tried searching but didn’t have much luck, maybe someone remembers the date range and can find it more easily.
The game's the thing...
Thinking of weather in December, I’d prefer LA, SD, or PHX.
Regardless of site, though, I’m much more likely to go to a 12 Pac Conference Championship game if UCLA is playing.
If the game were 18 miles away from me at Mile High and UCLA weren’t playing, I probably wouldn’t go.
greg in denver - UCLA guy for life
Qwest at Seattle
Would be nice if it weren’t for the weather I’d assume, though I’ve never been up to Seattle during December (there’s weather besides rain rain and more rain up there??)
Speaking from experience,
that late in the season runs a significant risk of brutal weather in Seattle. Serious risk of the same in Denver as well.
The NW schools wouldn’t mind, but the southern division would howl.
Glendale ensures a comfortable venue, and one that’s easy to get to. Considering that corporate dignitaries and fat cat boosters are going to be there in quantity, and it’s important to keep them happy in order to get/keep them financially involved, holding the conference showcase event in a showcase makes sense.
Andy Wooldridge, andy_wooldridge@yahoo.com
BuildingTheDam.Com
Go Beavs!
I don't understand the votes for the Rose Bowl
for the championship game. One, it devalues even further the allur of the actual “Rose Bowl”; ie, you’d be playing there for the championship game and then, if you win, a couple of weeks later, again?
Secondly, from a strictly economic point of view, the Rose Bowl is far too large (yes, you heard me – large) to hold a conference championship game. Even the SEC holds their championship game in a professional stadium which doesn’t hold more than 80K. Holding the championship game in a stadium than can hold close to 100K doesn’t make good economic sense.
Glendale would seem to be the logical choice. I’m not sure rotating it works. It’s too bad there’s not an effective stadium in Northern California. Candlestick and the Oakland Coliseum are dumps, but I could easily see holding the championship game in a newer NFL-caliber stadium in the Bay Area.
If there’s anything the ACC championship game experiment has taught the Pac-10, it’s not to bank on placing the conference championship game in a region where you think the participants are going to be, because that’s not going to work. The ACC put the championship game in Florida – outside of their traditional sphere – because they thought they’d be getting Miami and Florida State in the championship game every year.
Oops.
Glendale probably is the best choice in terms of weather/stadium, but it doesn’t have the location advantage
Agreed on the Rose Bowl part as well. Well they can move it back to LA once that new NFL stadium is built sometime around 2030
Glendale
Schools in California will be addressing political issues if they sign off on any championship game in Arizona.
Ahh, that's right
Do we go back to the Pac 10 by boycotting Arizona? What a horrible dilemma for those politically correct folks who favor expansion.
On Glendale...
…I don’t think the Community College stadium is available in December - plus playing the conference championship game at the North Verdugo Blvd stadium would just continue the age-old rivalry between the City of Roses and the Jewel City.
by C.T. in Boston on Jun 20, 2010 5:18 AM PDT up reply actions
As I stated above
playing at the Rose Bowl and playing in the Rose Bowl are to different things. Larry Scott is not going to make a decision based on the mental state of mind of a team playing in the same staudium two games in a row more than a month and a half apart. LA is the best fit for the championship game because of the LA market and not being geographically too long of a trip for any school involved. And in LA, the Rose Bowl has the nicer community stadium (A lot of SC fans hate going to the COliseum). So who cares if it seats 90,00? Puttuing 65,000 in a 90,000 seater would be better than putting 60 in a 60. Its a about revenue not perception. Rose Bowl = better than University of Pheonix which happens to be an NFL stadium, and not connected to the PAC 10 (who cares about the ACC?)
A bruin is good forever, a Trojan is only good... ahh eff it, just use tin foil
Bay Area
is the best location if the 49ers stadium plan works out. Its relatively central and would not require the championship game to be played in any team’s home stadium.
by FreewayBruin03 on Jun 17, 2010 11:02 PM PDT reply actions
I chose Candlestick.
it seems to be the one location that is as central to the overall conference as possible.
However, I think like the basketball championship, it should rotate between LA/SF area every year.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
I chose Candlestick.
it seems to be the one location that is as central to the overall conference as possible.
However, I think like the basketball championship, it should rotate between LA/SF area every year.
The best thing you can do for your children is to love their mother. John Wooden
This game can be initially played in AT&T Park
That’s where the Emerald Bowl is played and where Cal is playing as they are renovating their stadium.
That said, I would prefer the Rose Bowl.
"I never watched baseball on TV. It's slow and boring. I'm not a fan. Never was." - Jeff Kent
Rotating or So Cal
I have a hard time seeing the Pac place the game permanently anywhere other than Southern California. Remember that this game is going to be played in December. SoCal’s warmth and lack of inclement weather will be very strong factors in its favor. Also, all of the Pac schools (including Colorado and Utah) have decent, if not large, alumni bases down here. The only alternative to placing it down here that I would see them strongly consider would be rotating the game with the top seed getting the home game.
Even Oregon St?
Seems like they never bring more than about 20 people.
I can’t see the rest of the conference agreeing to having the conference championship in LA for BOTH basketball and football.
by SuperBruinMan on Jun 19, 2010 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions
simple fix
eliminate the basketball tournament
According to OSU fan
9 out of 10 schools hate it. I’d say that’s reason enough to get rid of the damn thing.
Question
If UNLV were to expand Sam Boyd Stadium to a minimum of 50,000 or maybe more, would anyone have an issue playing the title game there yearly?
For everything UCLA baseball, visit my UCLA baseball twitter.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jun 18, 2010 7:37 PM PDT reply actions
Would be a pretty good idea to get more people to go
It’s central to all the member schools, and what kind of fan would turn down a trip to see their team in the title game AND a trip to vegas?
They signed on for a bowl game in the city
For everything UCLA baseball, visit my UCLA baseball twitter.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jun 19, 2010 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions
one thought
which is that a lot of the ancillary dollars then go in to the hands of Harrahs, MGM Grand etc rather than into local economies of a Pac-10 school.
An interesting question is whether it would be easier to sell out 50,000 tickets in Vegas than in LA or the Bay Area. My prior would be you’d have a better chance of getting an ASU-WSU sellout in Vegas than in the other places, but that the alumni base of Cal/Stanford in LA and us in the Bay would make a California location easiest to sell out if any California school made it.
by britishbruin on Jun 19, 2010 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions
well... like they say
If you ever want to get your club/organization/company to have a great turnout… hold your meeting in Vegas
Still too small
for the times when you get a great draw.
If you get USC vs. UW or UofO and both are in the top 8, 50,000 won’t be nearly enough. And there is no good reason to be turning away gate at the conference showcase event.
Andy Wooldridge, andy_wooldridge@yahoo.com
BuildingTheDam.Com
Go Beavs!
Every once in a while, sure
but I would bet that over the course of five years, the added attendance just by having it in Vegas and that luring people is greater than the extra 15,000 you would get in a NFL stadium for that one year every five or so.
For everything UCLA baseball, visit my UCLA baseball twitter.
by Ryan Rosenblatt on Jun 23, 2010 9:16 PM PDT up reply actions
San Diego
I voted for SD because thought it was more fair to play in a netural stadium even if we’re not there, great place to visit and not too cold in December BUT Vegas is always on my list of places to go but the bowl game we went to a few years ago was very cold!
ha
you should have been at the game in DC…
by britishbruin on Jun 19, 2010 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Biased for the bay area, but:
Since this would start in 2012 I think, ATT park is nice for football. It isn’t next to the Castro district. Weather should be OK.
After the new 49’ers stadium is complete, that should be a great venue although Santa Clara isn’t exactly a cultural mecca. Weather should be better than SF most of the time.
San Diego might be superior for weather but the bay area is more centeral for the people who want to drive.
I hope that all of the stuff that is planned will happen in the south bay. The high-speed rail will lead to easy LA trips and a 20 minute commute in to SF. The BART extension will tie in to that also. The 49’ers stadium and possibly a baseball stadium for the A’s will bring more people through and really utilize that new public transportation. Maybe then it won’t seem like everything closes at 9:00 pm and more cultural events will happen here instead of making me drive to SF when my favorite bands come through the area.
Have we totally ruled out Raymond James Stadium in Tampa?
I’m not being selfish or anything, just wondering.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
