Atlanta seems like a obvious choice, but Nashville would also be great

thoughts?

Uhhhh.....Atlanta?....duh?

(j/k, obviously I'm biased, but at out presser it seemed that our AD and Benson had already talked about this and the BBall Tournament moving to Atlanta.)

Honestly, I prefer the team with the better record to host; I think that would typically result in a higher attended game.

(05-03-2012 02:54 PM)Panthersville Wrote:  Uhhhh.....Atlanta?....duh?

(j/k, obviously I'm biased, but at out presser it seemed that our AD and Benson had already talked about this and the BBall Tournament moving to Atlanta.)

right on, location location location- I remember watching like the MAC CCG last fall, there was basically nobody there, just the middle section of each side had people in it, would expect better for the SBC!

(05-03-2012 02:55 PM)tyler90wm Wrote:  Honestly, I prefer the team with the better record to host; I think that would typically result in a higher attended game.

I've always thought that this would be the best option

NASHVILLE!!!

(05-03-2012 02:57 PM)GaSouthern Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 02:55 PM)tyler90wm Wrote:  Honestly, I prefer the team with the better record to host; I think that would typically result in a higher attended game.

I've always thought that this would be the best option

Yep. I'd love to see the basketball tournament in Atlanta though.

Right on, I can go along with team with best record, sort of like our playoffs, play for home field advantage

tournament in ATL would be awesome

(05-03-2012 02:55 PM)tyler90wm Wrote:  Honestly, I prefer the team with the better record to host; I think that would typically result in a higher attended game.

Agreed.

The cow pasture next to my house. I wouldn't have far to travel and I could make a killing in charging for parking in my yard.

New Orleans is nice...

(05-03-2012 02:57 PM)GaSouthern Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 02:55 PM)tyler90wm Wrote:  Honestly, I prefer the team with the better record to host; I think that would typically result in a higher attended game.

I've always thought that this would be the best option

Agree. Placing the game at a neutral site just about guarantees a low turnout (unless, by chance, a participating team is nearby). Playing the championship game at the home field of the team with the best conference record would produce a decent to great crowd.

(05-03-2012 03:05 PM)97App Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 02:57 PM)GaSouthern Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 02:55 PM)tyler90wm Wrote:  Honestly, I prefer the team with the better record to host; I think that would typically result in a higher attended game.

I've always thought that this would be the best option

Agree. Placing the game at a neutral site just about guarantees a low turnout (unless, by chance, a participating team is nearby). Playing the championship game at the home field of the team with the best conference record would produce a decent to great crowd.

also have to factor in that these games are likely played after that semesters finals (??) students gone home maybe

(05-03-2012 02:55 PM)tyler90wm Wrote:  Honestly, I prefer the team with the better record to host; I think that would typically result in a higher attended game.

Absolutely agree. Full stadiums makes more compelling tv and better ratings (which means more $$$). I'd split the gate between the schools participating and the tv revenue would go in the general conference coffers. The schools attending are the one buying the tickets anyway.

Somewhere OUTSIDE!!! Atlanta is centralized and obviously perfect, but the Dome is sterile and cavernous. How 'bout Bobby Dodd Stadium? Tech would probably lease it a crapload cheaper then the WCC/Dome folks and if any of you have ever seen a Thursday night ESPN game at Grant Field on TV... it is magical with the skyline in the background and a 58K capacity (vs. 85K at the Dome).

(05-03-2012 03:34 PM)gasoutherneagle Wrote:  Somewhere OUTSIDE!!! Atlanta is centralized and obviously perfect, but the Dome is sterile and cavernous. How 'bout Bobby Dodd Stadium? Tech would probably lease it a crapload cheaper then the WCC/Dome folks and if any of you have ever seen a Thursday night ESPN game at Grant Field on TV... it is magical with the skyline in the background and a 58K capacity (vs. 85K at the Dome).

Yeah, I was thinking that too! F- the dome for CFB, I barely tolerate it for Falcons

(05-03-2012 03:40 PM)ATLGSUEAGLE Wrote:  

(05-03-2012 03:34 PM)gasoutherneagle Wrote:  Somewhere OUTSIDE!!! Atlanta is centralized and obviously perfect, but the Dome is sterile and cavernous. How 'bout Bobby Dodd Stadium? Tech would probably lease it a crapload cheaper then the WCC/Dome folks and if any of you have ever seen a Thursday night ESPN game at Grant Field on TV... it is magical with the skyline in the background and a 58K capacity (vs. 85K at the Dome).

Yeah, I was thinking that too! F- the dome for CFB, I barely tolerate it for Falcons

HEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEY.... I'm a giver. :ugaexams:

(05-03-2012 02:55 PM)tyler90wm Wrote:  Honestly, I prefer the team with the better record to host; I think that would typically result in a higher attended game.

THIS
ALL OF THIS
NOTHING BUT THIS

If you guys don't like it after 4+ years then you can pick Atlanta.

(05-03-2012 03:02 PM)Usajags Wrote:  The cow pasture next to my house. I wouldn't have far to travel and I could make a killing in charging for parking in my yard.

Naa man they'll never put the championship game on Georgia Southerns campus.

Kapow!

Got to be the home of the highest ranked participating team.

Playing it in a neutral site is a recipe for disaster. Imagine FAU vs TxSt in Nashville on a weeks notice - you're looking at 1,500 fans, tops.

Play the same game in Boca or San Marcos and you're at 25k min.