Word is Barstool is getting out of the bowl biz after this year. The bowl may still exist but Portnoy and Co. won’t be involved anymore.

(01-03-2024 09:56 PM)Max Power Wrote:  St. Louis is starving for football. They draw 35K for the XFL.

I don't know that the MAC would put butts in those seats the way we do Detroit, but I guess it's a bit closer than Montgomery, Alabama, for many of us.

(01-04-2024 06:28 AM)epasnoopy Wrote:  

(01-03-2024 12:06 PM)UofToledoFans Wrote:  

(01-03-2024 12:01 PM)astr083 Wrote:  

(01-03-2024 11:04 AM)Schadenfreude Wrote:  Our annual game in Tucson against the Mountain West is arguably the best combination of a destination and opponent the MAC has had since it was sending teams to Orlando each year for the Tangerine Bowl, where Miami managed to win three straight games against Georgia, Florida, and South Carolina.

(Our Detroit game sometimes gets better matchups, and it's a better stadium, but Detroit is not everyone's cup of tea in December. The Las Vegas Bowl is a decent destination, but it is not nearly as warm as Tucson is in December and Big West football was on its last legs back when we were sending teams to Vegas.)

Put another way: I'd hate to see the perfect become the enemy of the good. I'd be delighted if Bowling Green got a chance to play in Arizona next year.

I agree.... Can the MAC please get rid of their allegiance with the bowl games in Myrtle Beach and Montgomery in late December? It's not warm in either location and we are always stuck playing against a SBC team that becomes a virtual home game for them..... I'm partial to the bowl in Mobile so long as we are not playing USA on their home field, or Troy which is an hour away. Look at what happened with EMU at USA this year? That was ridiculous - no team should be able to play a bowl game on their home field. I'm ok with the Bahamas, and Boca Bowls... At least those destinations are appealing for fans traveling a lot further from the North and with the exception of FAU, the likelihood of it being a neutral-site game for both teams is good.

Mobile or Montgomery are fine If the SBC also had a northern bowl tie in with a MAC team to even the playing field. But let's be honest, how many MAC teams without outstanding seasons are bringing 10k to Ford Field? Our fanbases care far less about football than these new schools like Texas State and Coastal Carolina. Some of it is an "us" problem. But we are screwed geographically for the most part.

Being generous about Coastal. NIU played them in a bowl game and we way outnumbered them in attendance. Coastal just played another bowl game with 7k in attendance. The MAC just played a bowl game in their stadium and none of the locals came out to support it.

In all fairness, a bowl game in Hawaii on December 23rd against a team like San Jose State (7-5) is not going to get anybody there. Even if they could afford it, how many folks would take a trip to Hawaii XMas weekend on 3 weeks' notice to watch a 7-5 team play another 7-5 team nobody cares about?

Does attendance really matter during "Capital One Bowl Week"?

It's all about ESPN filling air time with programming.

The answer to all your questions is -

Money.

In case of the non-P5 bowl games especially it's TV money.

(01-05-2024 03:55 PM)MajorHoople Wrote:  Does attendance really matter during "Capital One Bowl Week"?

It's all about ESPN filling air time with programming.

The answer to all your questions is -

Money.

In case of the non-P5 bowl games especially it's TV money.

Sounds like the midweek games on ESPN aka MACtion.

Though as I mentioned, Barstool may be quitting as sponsor, the game’s ratings were quite good, all things considered.

https://awfulannouncing.com/college-foot...g-cfb.html

Those ratings were well-behind other MAC bowl games, certainly as a consequence of being on the CW.
If Barstool gives up sponsorship and it’s on ESPN or ESPN2 that would be a huge improvement broadcast-wise.

Call me old-fashioned, but the nice thing about the CW is that it is actually over the air, and thus probably in way more homes than ESPNU or CBS Sports Network.

My impression -- and I could be totally wrong about this -- is that the CW is trying to get into live sports programming more than it traditionally has been. While the numbers aren't great right now, they could improve as people begin to look for live sports on the CW just as they do on other over-the-air networks.

There is much talk about the MAC's next television contract. If the contract (or contracts) included some games on the CW, that might be pretty nice.

Well, we did almost land the 'ATS' crown...

(01-07-2024 12:59 PM)Schadenfreude Wrote:  Call me old-fashioned, but the nice thing about the CW is that it is actually over the air, and thus probably in way more homes than ESPNU or CBS Sports Network.

My impression -- and I could be totally wrong about this -- is that the CW is trying to get into live sports programming more than it traditionally has been. While the numbers aren't great right now, they could improve as people begin to look for live sports on the CW just as they do on other over-the-air networks.

There is much talk about the MAC's next television contract. If the contract (or contracts) included some games on the CW, that might be pretty nice.

I have been saying this for quite sometime. The MAC needs to get in on the CW now before it explodes. It is a national network that does not require a cable subscription.

(01-11-2024 02:03 PM)astr083 Wrote:  

(01-07-2024 12:59 PM)Schadenfreude Wrote:  Call me old-fashioned, but the nice thing about the CW is that it is actually over the air, and thus probably in way more homes than ESPNU or CBS Sports Network.

My impression -- and I could be totally wrong about this -- is that the CW is trying to get into live sports programming more than it traditionally has been. While the numbers aren't great right now, they could improve as people begin to look for live sports on the CW just as they do on other over-the-air networks.

There is much talk about the MAC's next television contract. If the contract (or contracts) included some games on the CW, that might be pretty nice.

I have been saying this for quite sometime. The MAC needs to get in on the CW now before it explodes. It is a national network that does not require a cable subscription.

At least the announcers would probably not spend half the game talking about a completely different game like the E$PN guys do.

The CW (formerly the WB and UPN) is probably never going to explode without any sort of regular popular programming but it’s a perfectly reasonable alternative to parking games on ESPNU or CBSSN which aren’t on everyone’s channel lineup.