College GameDay at Wrigley Field 11/20

• ptown_trojans_1

  

  gorocks99;565464 wrote:UPDATE: Only one endzone will be used during the Illinois/Northwestern game: http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/ncf/news/story?id=5824661
  
  Ridiculous that that had to happen. And I can't imagine how pissed the people who have seats in the east endzone must be.

  
  That has fail written all over it.
  You would have figured someone would have, you know, measured to ensure that there is a buffer of something.
• derek bomar

  

  FAILBOAT
• karen lotz

  

  Wow that is unbelievable. Too bad they went through all that trouble to bolt a goal post into the brick wall.
• OneBuckeye

  

  gorocks99;565464 wrote:UPDATE: Only one endzone will be used during the Illinois/Northwestern game: http://sports.espn.go.com/chicago/ncf/news/story?id=5824661
  
  Ridiculous that that had to happen. And I can't imagine how pissed the people who have seats in the east endzone must be.

  
  That is dumb. I think people could figure out how to not get hurt using the other endzone. Dumb.
• Tiernan

  How did the Chicago Bears play there for almost 45 years without someone getting hurt?
• karen lotz

  

  It might be dumb but its not as dumb as the set up. There is less than a yard of room at the one corner and not much more than that along the rest of the end zone. Instead of having the goal post in the ground, there is a brick wall running the width of the field. It basically eliminates all corner routes and other WR routes along the back of the end zone which effectively cuts the end zone in half. This would be a pretty good advantage for defenses in the red zone.
• Non

  

  wow sounds like they should throw this idea back!
• karen lotz

  

  Tiernan;565618 wrote:How did the Chicago Bears play there for almost 45 years without someone getting hurt?

  They configured the field differently.
  
  
• Tiernan

  ^^^
  Well duhhh...thank you Eddie Engineer. My point was why wouldn't they configure it the same way it was when the Bears played there?
• gorocks99

  

  Tiernan;565649 wrote:^^^
  Well duhhh...thank you Eddie Engineer. My point was why wouldn't they configure it the same way it was when the Bears played there?

  
  The outfield seats are in a different configuration now, so they can't (at least, that's what I've read).
• krambman

  

  Apparently the NCAA rule book says that there should be 12 feet beyond the end line, and no less than 6 feet. Clearly this does not comply. How they just now figured this out and not months ago is beyond me.
  

  karen lotz;565586 wrote:Wow that is unbelievable. Too bad they went through all that trouble to bolt a goal post into the brick wall.

  
  Those goal post will still get used in warm ups (both teams can't warm up at the same end) and it's possible that they could get used in the game if someone returns a punt, interception, or fumble to that end zone I assume they would let them attempt the PAT there instead of making everyone march to the other end.
  

  Tiernan;565649 wrote:^^^
  Well duhhh...thank you Eddie Engineer. My point was why wouldn't they configure it the same way it was when the Bears played there?

  
  I believe that the outfield seating setup has changed since then so they can't set it up the same way as they did back then.
• rock_knutne

  karen lotz;565628 wrote:They configured the field differently.
  
  

  
  Plus those goal posts are on the goal line, as it was back in the day.
• karen lotz

  

  krambman;565691 wrote: Those goal post will still get used in warm ups (both teams can't warm up at the same end) and it's possible that they could get used in the game if someone returns a punt, interception, or fumble to that end zone I assume they would let them attempt the PAT there instead of making everyone march to the other end.

  
  
  They will kick extra points at the west end of the field only.
• FatHobbit

  

  Wow, that's terrible. How the hell did they just decide that today?
• Manhattan Buckeye

  karen lotz;565863 wrote:They will kick extra points at the west end of the field only.

  
  Makes sense, otherwise the same rationale for only going one direction applies if you choose to go for 2.
• karen lotz

  

  Apparently representatives from the teams walked on the field this week and that's when the concerns came up. They said on paper it seemed like it would be fine but once they actually got to see the layout after it was done, it was clear it wasn't safe. You'd think they would have sent people there earlier than a couple days prior to the game, especially with Northwestern being 10 minutes away. I know Notre Dame had a few people at Yankee Stadium while it was being configured early last week in case there were any such issues.
• fan_from_texas

  krambman;564364 wrote:As a Buckeye fan I'm bummed that he's out too. He was our best hope of Wisconsin losing sending us to Pasadena!

  
  Northwestern has done really well against Wisconsin over the past decade, so maybe there's still hope. The redshirt frosh QB is supposed to be a great talent--less of a runner and more of a pocket passer. I guess he'll get his trial by fire.
  
  All three games NU lost this season, it had a fourth quarter lead (including leads of 21 and 17 pts on Penn State and Michigan State, respectively). NU has been so close to breaking through, but just hasn't been able to close out. Still, this was supposed to be a rebuilding year, and almost everyone comes back next year. I guess there's plenty of hope for the future.
• Jughead

  

  Hell, I'd cancel the game at Wrigley entirely and put at Northwestern's field (or was it supposed to be at Illinois) rather than play with these bastardized set of rules.
• karen lotz

  

  Or take it to Soldier Field, I'd assume they have a lot of stuff going on in the city and a lot of people have already made the trip. Moving to Champaign would be a little bit of a stretch.
• Jughead

  

  Scratch that, it's the Big Ten officials that stepped in and changed these rules, while the two teams signed on to this 2 years ago.
  
  http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/stewart_mandel/11/19/wrigley/
  
  If I was on the athletic department at these schools, I'd be pissed. Hell, I'd play the game at night just in spite of the conference rules.
• Jughead

  

  After further reading, it says that all parties involved felt it was appropriate to adjust the rules.
  
  Why did that article contradict itself?
• darbypitcher22

  

  as crazy as it will be, the safety of players is pretty much paramount, and I wouldn't wanna lose a guy for a bowl game or possibly a career ending injury when he slames into or gets hit into the wall or I have a guy going to make a hit who misses and catches the wall.
  
  This move had to be made
• Non

  

  maybe they should put a tree in one endzone and have the players run around it, like in the backyard
• Manhattan Buckeye

  Non;566052 wrote:maybe they should put a tree in one endzone and have the players run around it, like in the backyard

  
  Why not, the Houston Astros more or less did the same thing with their stadium - in one of the most silly efforts to create "atmosphere."
  
  If the powers that be had a conscience, they would at least partially refund ticketholders in that part of the stadium.
• krambman

  

  Here's what I'm wondering:
  
  The fear is that these football players will end up hitting the wall at full speed. The wall has padding on it and the players are wearing pads and a helmet. However, when baseball games are played there there is also the risk of an outfielder running into the wall at full speed when it isn't padded and he isn't wearing any protection. Why isn't anyone concerned about them?