anti-ND blather (was Re: [NU Sports] Sugar Bowl ...)

Sun Jan 7 21:26:05 CST 2007

This discussion seems to be boiling down to 'what we know' vs 'what we think we know', or 'what we have been told'.

The common wisdom - tossed around without attribution or reliance on facts, is that the South Bend school:

- has a major national fanbase, greater than any others (or maybe in the top 2 or 3)

- will automatically draw more tv viewers than ordinary teams

- will automatically draw more fans to their home games than ordinary teams

- will automatically pump more $$$ into a bowl city economy than an ordinary team

We know that alot of sources (NBC, the Fox bowl pre-game hosts) make these claims endlessly, but they just state them as fact - they don't offer solid proof.

Are there numbers out there that prove that the evil empire pumped more dollars into the New Orleans economy than any other recent Sugar Bowl team ?  That prove that more people watched this Sugar Bowl than woul've watched an LSU-Wisconsin Sugar Bowl ?  And that prove that the additional, South Bend-oriented viewers are in the more desirable advertising demographics ?

The Wall Street Journal article at least attempted to deal in statistics, not in imagined truths.  We need to see a few more carefully researched articles like that.

The bowl-game ratings I saw were (so far):

ROSE (USC-Michigan)    19.03 million viewers   6.6 rating   15 share
SUGAR (LSU-EE)           14.04 million viewers   4.9 rating   13 share
FIESTA (Boise-OU)        12.18 million viewers   4.2 rating   10 share
ORANGE (Louis-WF)        9.74 million viewers   3.4 rating     9 share

To my untrained eye, it looks like the Big Ten bowl beat out the EE bowl by almost 36%, while the EE bowl was only able to edge out Boise-Oklahoma by about 15%.  So they have a few more TV fans than those urban powerhouses of Boise, Idaho and Norman, Oklahoma...woohoo !

In short, are there any statistics that prove that the 'pro-evil empire' effect makes up for the 'anti-evil empire' effect ?  Or for the large number of viewers turned-off by endless 20+ point bowl game blowouts featuring the evil empire ?

Chuck Herron  Tech '85

-----Original Message-----
From: artmiller1 at hotmail.com
To: NEONRye at aol.com; sjtruog at yahoo.com; nwu-sports at tssi.com
Sent: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 12:33 AM
Subject: Re: anti-ND blather (was Re: [NU Sports] Sugar Bowl ...)

Let's first address the unfairness of big-fanbase teams being selected over small-fanbase teams with better records: On one hand, I agree that it's not fair, in the sense that (for example) Charlie Weis & the current players and staff at ND deserve preferential treatment. They personally haven't done anything to deserve such treatment, and are riding the legacy of prior players and staffs. 

Think about it a little deeper, however, and it seems perfectly fair that the ND or Nebraska as institutions *do* deserve preferential treatment. While Northwestern was declining to make the investments necessary to compete at the highest level, and while the Boise States of the world weren't even competing in I-A football, the Notre Dames and Nebraskas WERE doing these things. In doing so, they built the foundation of the awesome spectacle that college football is today. For better or worse, those programs have--dare we say it?--earned their large fanbases through decades of consistent success and unwavering commitment to excellence. 

I'm not saying everything these programs have done along the way has been good and honorable, but let's not kid ourselves that NU has always been above reproach, either. The NU administration of the late 70s and 80s seemed perfectly willing to allow the program to slide into a state of disrepair--but was happy to enjoy the financial benefits of being part of a conference where many other members were making sustained investments in their programs and building fanbases. THAT's hypocrisy, people. 

Let me also address the "compelling" nature of the Boise State situation as well: Like many of you, I enjoyed watching them beat OU on Monday night. But there's an element of this that sticks in my craw, and it's this: Boise State's gaudy record is entirely related to their being in a predominantly weaker conference. Put them in the Big Ten, where they may have to up against the likes of Michigan, Ohio State, Wisconsin, and Penn State on four consecutive weeks, and there's no way (pardon me, NO WAY IN HELL) they make a BCS bowl. They might do well, might even finish 8-4 or 9-3, but their "compelling story" goes right out the window, and Boise State goes to the Sun Bowl to play Oregon State. 

NU in 1995 was a compelling story, because it was a team that announced itself to the world with a stunning upset over a traditional power, and then slogged its way through a brutal conference schedule, eventually running the table. To compare that team with this year's Boise State team is, IMHO, missing the point completely. 

Did NU get "screwed" in 2000? Yes, perhaps. But theoretically we should have had an easier opponent than if we'd gone to the Outback, and in the end it's nobody's fault but our own that we lost 66-17. 

>From: NEONRye at aol.com 
>To: artmiller1 at hotmail.com, sjtruog at yahoo.com, nwu-sports at tssi.com 
>Subject: Re: anti-ND blather (was Re: [NU Sports] Sugar Bowl ...) 
>Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2007 00:43:45 EST 
> 
>Art, 
> 
>While you are correct that bowl games are "about money", that explanation 
>doesn't make it right. When NU was screwed out of the Outback Bowl in >2000, I 
>think it was, and sent instead to the Alamo Bowl to get eviscerated by 
>Nebraska, everyone lost--the Wildcats and their fans (us); fans of >well-balanced 
>college football post-season games; and the credibility that comes when one >gets 
> what one earns--on the field. We belonged in Tampa that year, not San 
>Antonio, but because we didn't have the hype and the rep and the "traveling 
>circus" of fans, we were sent indoors to get slaughtered by the Huskier >Huskers. 
> Notre Dame basically "buys" their way into the BCS as it stands now. If 
>you feel that such a system is just and in the interest of the game of >College 
>FB, then you can continue to support such an unlevel playing field. As >for 
>me (and apparently Stephen), I think the system stinks. The only >redeeming 
>moments are when the Boise States of the world upset the financial >"applecart" 
>for the Powers such as Oklahoma and their sycophantic supporters at the >BCS 
>and on the Bowl Committees. I cast my vote for parity and for a rising up >of 
>the "excluded". The most compelling story in last year's NCAA Hoops >Tourney 
>was George Mason (not Florida), and the most compelling stories this >College F 
>B season are Boise State, Wake Forest and Rutgers (3 schools that we 'Cat 
>fans should identify with, as we know what it is like to wear >"Cinderalla's 
>shoe"). Notre Dame's "shortcut" into BCS $$ and glory (although I am not >sure 
>how much glory there is in continual bowl defeats) should be eliminated >once 
>and for all. They need to make it the "old-fashioned way", as the Smith >& 
>Barney commercial put it--they need to "earn" their invitation, not >inherit it 
>every year. 
> 
>Paul Levinson 

_________________________________________________________________ 
Type your favorite song.  Get a customized station.  Try MSN Radio powered by Pandora. http://radio.msn.com/?icid=T002MSN03A07001 

_______________________________________________ 
nwu-sports site list 
nwu-sports at tssi.com 
http://romaine.tssi.com/mailman/listinfo/nwu-sports 
________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL.  Most comprehensive set of free safety and security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from across the web, free AOL Mail and more.