NCAA playoffs - no room at the inn.

If you can stop laughing at their premise for a moment, and use some logic, all it takes is one question to blow up the whole damn premise.
If these places -- TCU, New Mexico, Boise, to name a few -- can't handle the large crowds associated with hosting a playoff game, why have they been allowed to host bowl games all these years?

 

Because there isn't a whole lot of need to accommodate 75,000 people for the Humanitarian Bowl.

 

Why should their be home-field advantage? Neutral sites and put it up for bid.

 

Even more embarrassingly, it's called the Famous Idaho Potato Bowl now.

 

The theory (and there is some merit to this argument) is that neutral sites would basically be asking fans to make two bowl trips on short notice. In some cases, especially for teams on the west coast, it could be difficult for fans to pull the money together.
For examples of what it might look like, see any ACC title game outside the Carolinas.
The Pac-12 used the same logic last year when they decided to put their title game on campus.

 

That's a fair argument and the NCAA tournament analogy doesn't work. Most of those venues do not sell out the opening weekend and a school that brings 5,000 fans to an 18,000-seat arena is considered to have "traveled well".

 

A trip to West Lafayette at ANY time of the year is forgettable. ;D

 

I still like the idea of re-seeding AFTER the bowl games, so in years like when unbeaten Utah beat Alabama in the Sugar Bowl, the Utes would still get a crack at the "four-team event" to prove it was no fluke.

They were perfect but had no shot of finishing No. 1.

 

The Big Ten's Jim Delany pitched the home field idea. That's why I don't like it.

 

Actually, it's a misinterpretation of the statement. The source is saying the idea works well in Lincoln or Tuscaloosa or Ann Arbor but poorly in Boise or Eugene.

[/ducking]

 

???

What you got against Purdue. Seems an odd one to pick out.