-
Wasn't a better neutral field available than Wrigley Field?
When ISU and KSU wanted a game on a neutral field, we chose Arrowhead Stadium. Worked out very well. Wasn't a better stadium available for the Illinois-Northwestern game than Wrigley Field? The game will be forced to use only one end zone for both teams on offense. For Northwestern Wildcats-Illinois Illini game at Wrigley, offense will use one end zone - ESPN Chicago -
Re: Wasn't a better neutral field available than Wrigley Field?
I wonder why it wasn't held at Soldier Field.
When Prepared, Fear No One. -
Re: Wasn't a better neutral field available than Wrigley Field?
I want to see a college game on a high school field.
"Winning isn't everything, it's the only thing." † -
Re: Wasn't a better neutral field available than Wrigley Field?
Anyone know why I can't find this game anywhere on my tv guide? I thought for sure it would be on tv.
-
Re: Wasn't a better neutral field available than Wrigley Field?
 Originally Posted by mustangcy Anyone know why I can't find this game anywhere on my tv guide? I thought for sure it would be on tv. It's on ESPNU.
-
Re: Wasn't a better neutral field available than Wrigley Field?
They wanted to play at Wrigley. Wrigley hasn't had a college fb game since 1930 something. They could have played at NW or Ill or Soldier Field or basically anywhere, but they wanted to play at Wrigley. Both schools agreed to it, and agreed to the endzone set up. The Big 11 even signed off on it, right up until Friday when they made the decision to only go in one direction.
I don't blame them for wanting to play at Wrigley, people in Chicago are more excited for this game than they would otherwise be. It is being called "Chicago's first bowl game". I think the Big 11 handled the whole situation poorly.
-
Re: Wasn't a better neutral field available than Wrigley Field?
Clearly there are "better" stadiums available for this game, but those stadiums don't have the same novelty as playing a football game in Wrigley Field. Playing the game in Wrigley has created a national buzz for a game involving two mediocre football teams. Was College Gameday there for our neutral site game against KSU? Nope. And they wouldn't be at this game either if it was being played at Soldier Field.
For those reasons, I understand why they wanted to play this game at Wrigley. Having said that, there is no question that the realities of the dimensions of the stadium should have trumped the desire to play a college football game there. They knew long ago that the brick wall would be immediately behind the end zone, but somehow thought that everything would be okay once they painted the lines on the field. Now the game is baically a joke, with using only one of the endzones. The plug should have been pulled on this site for this game long ago. So, while I understand why they wanted to play the game at Wrigley, they clearly should not have done so.
-
Re: Wasn't a better neutral field available than Wrigley Field?
 Originally Posted by Cyclone42
It's a gimmick. It wasn't about playing on a neutral field. It was about playing at Wrigley Field. Far more attention for the game than otherwise. The adjustment they've made is a quirk, but it's really not a big deal. The players and coaches in the game won't care.
-
Re: Wasn't a better neutral field available than Wrigley Field?
 Originally Posted by GoCubsGo Clearly there are "better" stadiums available for this game, but those stadiums don't have the same novelty as playing a football game in Wrigley Field. Playing the game in Wrigley has created a national buzz for a game involving two mediocre football teams. Was College Gameday there for our neutral site game against KSU? Nope. And they wouldn't be at this game either if it was being played at Soldier Field.
For those reasons, I understand why they wanted to play this game at Wrigley. Having said that, there is no question that the realities of the dimensions of the stadium should have trumped the desire to play a college football game there. They knew long ago that the brick wall would be immediately behind the end zone, but somehow thought that everything would be okay once they painted the lines on the field. Now the game is baically a joke, with using only one of the endzones. The plug should have been pulled on this site for this game long ago. So, while I understand why they wanted to play the game at Wrigley, they clearly should not have done so. I agree with everything here except for Northwestern as mediocre. They only have 3 losses, and have a victory over a ranked team. They're better than mediocre.
-
Re: Wasn't a better neutral field available than Wrigley Field?
It was not done to be a neutral field. It was done as a PR ploy. The national media would not care if it was at soldier field. How much media attention has the Penn State-Indiana game had that is being played at Fed Ex field?
-
Re: Wasn't a better neutral field available than Wrigley Field?
 Originally Posted by Senolcyc It's a gimmick. It wasn't about playing on a neutral field. It was about playing at Wrigley Field. Far more attention for the game than otherwise. The adjustment they've made is a quirk, but it's really not a big deal. The players and coaches in the game won't care. Agree. For crying out loud, Game Day is there. Would they come if the game was at Soldier Field? Would there be as much build up? No on both counts.
I would love it if ISU could play NW at Wrigley Field, no matter if it's on half the field or not.
-
Re: Wasn't a better neutral field available than Wrigley Field?
Maybe sometime ISU should schedule a game to be played on a concrete Wal-Mart parking lot sometime. It would be a stupid idea, but we would get a hell of a lot of media attention.
When Prepared, Fear No One. -
Re: Wasn't a better neutral field available than Wrigley Field?
 Originally Posted by cyclonedave25 Maybe sometime ISU should schedule a game to be played on a concrete Wal-Mart parking lot sometime. It would be a stupid idea, but we would get a hell of a lot of media attention. pffffft may as well just paint our field blue......... oh someone seriously did that -
Re: Wasn't a better neutral field available than Wrigley Field?
 Originally Posted by CycloneErik I agree with everything here except for Northwestern as mediocre. They only have 3 losses, and have a victory over a ranked team. They're better than mediocre. One may argue they are mediocre without their starting QB that is now out for the season.
Wouldn't you be ****** if you had tix toward the end zone that they are not using
-
Re: Wasn't a better neutral field available than Wrigley Field?
 Originally Posted by Cypwr One may argue they are mediocre without their starting QB that is now out for the season.
Wouldn't you be ****** if you had tix toward the end zone that they are not using I know a lot of people who are sitting in the RF bleachers are trying to get refunds.
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules | | |
Bookmarks