Fighter of the Nightman
- Chicago, IL
I just want to be clear that as a relatively "pro-neutral site" fan, I mostly agree with you and I thus draw a HUGE distinction between these types of games. I'll use two examples from last year:For football, I think the default should be on campus games. A Mizzou game in St. Louis every so often is OK, but it’s just a different situation than basketball. I also don’t like the idea of giving up a home game.
Unless the money is just way too good to pass up, I don’t ever want to see us in one of those first week made for TV neutral site games. The idea of playing someone like Alabama in Atlanta just doesn’t hold a lot of appeal for me. I realize others will disagree.
(A) USC vs. LSU at Allegiant Stadium in Las Vegas on the Sunday of Labor Day Weekend. This was a straight-up TV cash grab, and (while I am sure the fans had a fun trip to Vegas) I think it would have been so much cooler on-campus. Watching USC come into Death Valley or LSU come into the Coliseum is what we need more of in college football. JMO, but these are the types of "neutral site games" that give the entire concept a bad name.
(B) Texas vs. Oklahoma in Dallas at the Texas State Fair with a 50/50 split crowd. This is just NOT the same, and to call both "neutral site games" is only technically true. This is an annual tradition that creates a special and unique environment/event that not only creates something BETTER than moving the game to a home/away format ... it's actually more traditional at this point! To oppose Texas/Oklahoma in Dallas (or Florida/Georgia in Jacksonville, Illinois/Missouri BASKETBALL in St. Louis, etc.) simply because it's at a neutral site is to cut off one's nose to spite his face. (I'm obviously not saying you are doing that, as you clearly drew a distinction! I'm just painting this picture for others.)
I would argue that on the football side, Illini/Mizzou falls somewhere in between those but closer to (B). For basketball, Braggin' Rights in St. Louis is incredibly special, and the bozo who ever authorizes moving it will leave an awful legacy. However, football is slightly different for two main reasons, IMO. First, the tradition is not as clear-cut. Sure, we played them there several times in the 2000s, but there were gaps between the games and there was an equally strong history of playing them on the campuses before that. Compare that to Braggin' Rights, which has now been an annual pre-Christmas event in St. Louis for over four decades, and it's just not the same. Also, the venue in St. Louis presents a problem. While I personally don't get too worked up about football games at baseball stadiums and think Busch would be awesome for this, I understand people's complaints. And as far as the dome, I just hate playing football indoors but ESPECIALLY when it is still so wonderful out in September. So, it would be a bit of a miss to go back to that setup, IMO.
TL;DR
Some neutral site matchups are incredibly natural, make sense and help to create an "annual event" that the on-campus games cannot match. However, these are rare ... we have it on the basketball side with Mizzou, but it's less clear if football in St. Louis would be a good idea.