MCB Created Major Decision Point for Tech

Re: what makes you think

But what GeeTee doesn't acknowledge are the facts I presented to him, including the fact that we outdrew both NCState and Clemson in the two Champs bowls preceeding ours. So I guess they don't travel well either?

The other point made, which is a fact but can't be quantified, is that fans don't always buy their tickets from the school. Tech may have only sold in the neighborhood of 10,000 tickets officially, but there were way more than 10,000 Tech fans at the game.

No one is claiming that we can put as many people in Charlotte as NC State or Clemson, but I have no doubts we would have put more in the MCB than UVA did.s

He's not striking a nerve. He's ignoring the argument.
 
Re: what makes you think

where to start.. The point of this thread was you saying we'd surely have taken alot of GT fans to the MSB. My point was to simply reference past history which is all we have to go on...and those numbers have been relatively low. You cite the travel distances which does impact fan travel, of course. Therefore, I made reference to the most recent and closest bowl for historical reference and again, it was a low GT attendance (heck, the total attendance for the entire game of sponsors, 'Cuse fans, and us was only 28,000). Of the last five years, all of the bowls had low GT turnout when compared to other schools in our conference and the SEC. Then, you decide to defend your argument of ticket sales at the Champs Bowl by comparing us to other schools who have gone there. So, what? IF GT fans travelled well, they would have been there in big numbers...we were not. Yet, you predicted we'd have a great turnout and someone else on the board predicted we would have had 25,000 in the MCB if we'd gotten that bid...to which I say WHY? What would be different this year..and from the Champs bowl? Orlando was close and in a much more desirable location than Nashville. Yet, suddenly our fans would turn out in droves for the MSB? Is Minnesota that big of a draw? I think not. Our numbers have averaged lower due to western baseball stadium and blue turf bowls. That is a fact. Unless we start winning and controlling our own destiny with bowls, these numbers, like it or not, will continually be used against us when selections are made for these low tiered bowls. After all, they are only about revenue and cash for the most part. My concern, and to get off this bowl talk, is to focus on why we continually get invited to these bottom feeder bowls. It is because of inconsistent play and our record...which under the Gailey regime looks to be a continued sure bet.
 
Re: what makes you think

just another thought here, but the lower tier bowls should be eliminated anyway and the fact that several teams didn't show up is evidence. We should have wiped the field with Utah, just like Miami, should have been more competitive against LSU and Michigan should have dominated Nebraska, but a bowl trip is not a reward for the players, just like a business trip is not a reward for workers.

These bowls are in place to make money for the conferences, schools, host cities, sponsors, and ESPN. period. The presidents don't like the idea of a playoff because it will reduce the payouts. honestly, how many of our guys do you think were really excited to be away from home on Christmas day? Not many and the play showed it.
 
Re: what makes you think

Nice to see you finally make a cogent argument. Neither of us knows how many Tech fans would have gone to Nashville. I think we would have drawn well, partly because I do believe we travel at least as well as any other ACC teams and partly because of all the postes on StingTalk and The Hive who were excited about a trip to the MCB to see Tech play during the week between Christmas and New Years. I still don't understand your comments about the Champs bowl though. I said we had at least as many fans as State and Clemson...two schools that supposedly travel well. But to you that doesn't mean anything. If they travel well and we had as many fans why doesn't that also mean we travel well? Your logic doesn't seem to hold together there.
 
ding ding ding!

EXACTLY. Well put my friend. /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/biggthumpup.gif
 
Re: what makes you think

[ QUOTE ]

And just a note to Ramblinwise1: Isn't it okay to post opinions on here? I thought that was part of what this is all about.

[/ QUOTE ]

ABSOLUTELY. I just emphasize you should clarify when you are stating opinion and when you are asserting fact. Don't masquerade one as the other.
 
Re: what makes you think

GeeTee, it was our lazy AD, not the average attendence in bowls, which hurt us. He thought of Music City as a sure backup while, more likely than not, Virginia Tech would have put us in the Peach Bowl. I've never heard of these average bowl attendence figures being used. Instead, Bowl committees just consider how many will come to their bowl. UVA's AD either paid off or fooled the MCB that UVA will draw more than Tech and UVA was actually the one that played out west last year. After all, UVA isn't exactly known the world over as a great travelling team.

Also I'm not sure if you understood that the total attendence, including Bowl Sponsors and their opponents, for NC State and Clemson was lower than 28000. We also had a very low drawing opponent in Syracuse, so don't say it was because of them. Those are two teams who, according to you, must travel better than us because we keep getting sent west every year while they play closer to home.
 
Re: what makes you think

sigh..yep, our ticket sales over the past 5 years to our bowls has been stellar...like the bowls we've gone to and the opponents we've faced. We should be proud.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top