Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

Do we need to rethink playing MAC Championship game at a neutral site? There is NO BODY in Ford Field! Embarassing for MAC and sure ESPN not happy. They can't even show a shot of the stands where there are nmore than a couple of fans sitting together.

Yes. They should move it whenever their agreement ends with Ford Field. Maybe play the championship at a the home stadium of the team with the best record. Wait....didn't they used to do something like that? Was the MAC better back then?

Either play on a campus site with a crowd, or go someplace else I say. Detroit......I don't know. Maybe the bowl game, but the title game? I jump on the "dump on Detroit" wagon now and then, but I just don't see any advantage anymore. The crowd.....well, there isn't one. It isn't even a "gathering." Plus the game is so bad it only underscores why nobody is there.

Indy, heck, and outdoor game would be better, anyplace but Detroit.

Regardless of the crowd ... What a game!! Nice job Huskies!

What a great game. Imagine if the winner got to go to a tournament game now. Would make it all the more amazing.

All credit to NIU for the big win...but what a choke job by Ohio.

NIU gave them every chance to win that game - Embarrassing if your an Ohio fan.

Globetrotter wrote:What a great game. Imagine if the winner got to go to a tournament game now. Would make it all the more amazing.

It would righteously suck because the winner has no business being up for a national title.

mc3022 wrote:e - Embarrassing if your an Ohio fan.

I think they interviewed THE Ohio fan that was there, you are right.

NWLB wrote:

mc3022 wrote:e - Embarrassing if your an Ohio fan.

I think they interviewed THE Ohio fan that was there, you are right.

hahahah...yeah attendance is usually lousy at Ford Field for this game

NWLB wrote:

Globetrotter wrote:What a great game. Imagine if the winner got to go to a tournament game now. Would make it all the more amazing.

It would righteously suck because the winner has no business being up for a national title.

Do you also think it would suck if the Mens basketball team won the MAC and went to that tournament?

Globetrotter wrote:

NWLB wrote:

Globetrotter wrote:What a great game. Imagine if the winner got to go to a tournament game now. Would make it all the more amazing.

It would righteously suck because the winner has no business being up for a national title.

Do you also think it would suck if the Mens basketball team won the MAC and went to that tournament?

The men's team can win the MAC but can't go the NCAA tourney unless they win the MAC tourney, which isn't a single game championship.

Plus, I don't buy the argument that the basketball tourney and a theoretical football counterpart can be compared.

NWLB wrote:

Globetrotter wrote:

NWLB wrote:

Globetrotter wrote:What a great game. Imagine if the winner got to go to a tournament game now. Would make it all the more amazing.

It would righteously suck because the winner has no business being up for a national title.

Do you also think it would suck if the Mens basketball team won the MAC and went to that tournament?

The men's team can win the MAC but can't go the NCAA tourney unless they win the MAC tourney, which isn't a single game championship.

Plus, I don't buy the argument that the basketball tourney and a theoretical football counterpart can be compared.

Why in the world could they not be compared? The MAC championship would mean even more. You don't think it would be cool for BG to go to a 16 team tournament at the end of the year for the championship? I would love that. There would be no reason to play any games if you just awarded the game to the likely winner.

So your rule is, "if its a one game tournament then that is not as good"? Makes no sense to me. I think it would be fun as hell.

Globetrotter wrote:

NWLB wrote:

Globetrotter wrote:

NWLB wrote:

Globetrotter wrote:What a great game. Imagine if the winner got to go to a tournament game now. Would make it all the more amazing.

It would righteously suck because the winner has no business being up for a national title.

Do you also think it would suck if the Mens basketball team won the MAC and went to that tournament?

The men's team can win the MAC but can't go the NCAA tourney unless they win the MAC tourney, which isn't a single game championship.

Plus, I don't buy the argument that the basketball tourney and a theoretical football counterpart can be compared.

Why in the world could they not be compared? The MAC championship would mean even more. You don't think it would be cool for BG to go to a 16 team tournament at the end of the year for the championship? I would love that. There would be no reason to play any games if you just awarded the game to the likely winner.

So your rule is, "if its a one game tournament then that is not as good"? Makes no sense to me. I think it would be fun as hell.

I do not think they can be compared, and have not felt that in the entire history of posting on this forum.

I do not think it would be cool to see a BGSU squad on par with the below average teams that just played in the MAC title game, in a 16 team tourney, which would begin with elites validly stating that BGSU has not credibility against any of the higher ranked teams it would play, and then prove it by being destroyed on the field.

Even if, and these days it is a massive, fat, ugly, IF, we somehow were one of the old-school giant killer MAC teams, I still would rather see a decent match in a bowl game where we walk away with something, rather than end the season on a loss, against teams we can't beat.

So no, I'm not in love with this fixation with football tourneys. No offense, no picking a fight, but I also do not back down from this point of view. You see it otherwise, go in peace, but I've heard the arguments endlessly here.

Maybe it should be a doubleheader in Indy with the Big Ten championship game...

Warthog wrote:Maybe it should be a doubleheader in Indy with the Big Ten championship game...

Maybe, but the Big Ten just got done denying they were paying for seat fillers once, why would they want to be accused of doing it again?