Are you a fan of CU joining the Pac-10?

[buffs04]

I'd rather than not play in the same conference as USC, frankly, much less the same division. Playing either Texas or Oklahoma every year is bad enough. At least they are occasionally subject to years in which they are somewhat beatable.

USC, on the other hand, is absolutely, totally dominant year in, year out under Pete Carroll and will remain that way - every year - until he leaves, and possibly longer. Here are his records at USC:

6-6
11-2
12-1 split NC
13-0 NC
12-1 lost in the NC
11-2
11-2
11-1 with a probable rose bowl victory vs. Penn State

They have won or shared the Pac 10 every one of these years except for the first season, which I think can reasonably be dismissed as an anomaly. This is a team that is enormously disappointed with two losses in any given season. They consistently field the most talented team in CFB year in, year out.

I'd rather not be in the same conference as them. That would diminish CU's chances of conference championships, which will be extremely difficult to come by in the Big12, to nearly zero.

The Big12 is much stronger top to bottom than the Pac10, but USC owns that conference *thoroughly*.

 

[utebuff]

Yeah...that's what I think too. Why would CU want to be in a conference that is USU and the nine dwarfs? Better to be a BSU that dominates a weak conference, imo.

It could be that Az and ASU are also getting tired of the USC strangle-hold on titles, and might be induced to move to the WAC or MW.

Question: Could CU dominate the WAC?? Holtz and crew were ragging on the WAC needing to beef up it's competition in order for BSU to be take seriously on a national scale. If CU, BSU, BYU, AU, ASU, and Utah were in the same conference, be it WAC or Mountain West..there would be two good things come from that alignment.

1. CU would have a chance to dominate, and perhaps have 12-0 seasons and a shot at a big bowl.

2.That conference would be taken seriously, and a team that came through that schedule would be respected.

The kicker would be TV monies...but there are more sports channels added every year..and I think there are some good teams and rivalries in such a conference which would draw TV audiences. It might be doable.

 

[buffs04]

You don't want to be in a minor conference if you want to go to BCS bowls. Look at this year - BSU, despite their successes in the BCS two years ago, didn't get an invite despite going undefeated. Not only is there literally zero chance of going to the NC, regardless of how you play - unless you schedule 4 superpowers OOC or, at bare minimum, three, beat them, AND some other teams have down years - but you aren't even guaranteed a big bowl game even if you win *all* your games.

I feel like being in a minor conference also has to significantly hurt recruiting regardless of who your coaches are - some kids are only want to play in big conferences, period.

Moving to a minor conference is extremely unappealing unless there is a move to a playoff system, and even then, its questionable.

 

[utebuff]

I think the BCS bowl system is so flawed, that I can't imagine it lasting much longer. But, I understand your point that presently being in a perceived weak conference virtually excludes teams from BCS consideration.

Bottom line..I don't want the Buffs to go to the PAC-10....Beating UT and OU for the B12 title is daunting enough..USC is three deep in 5*'s at some positions, and HS kids with that kind of ability continue to sign with USC, even though they know they won't play early.

CU can compete in the B12 North...and, given the vagaries of a single football game, have an opportunity to win a B12 title. I think that is better that being in the P-10.

I will say this about BSU dominating their weak conference.......they get more mention, and higher national ratings, than most other teams by far. It sorta depends on what our goals are...it's easy to say..play for the MNC...but we have to be realistic.

 

[BlackNGold]

Yeah...that's what I think too. Why would CU want to be in a conference that is USU and the nine dwarfs? Better to be a BSU that dominates a weak conference, imo.

It could be that Az and ASU are also getting tired of the USC strangle-hold on titles, and might be induced to move to the WAC or MW.

Question: Could CU dominate the WAC?? Holtz and crew were ragging on the WAC needing to beef up it's competition in order for BSU to be take seriously on a national scale. If CU, BSU, BYU, AU, ASU, and Utah were in the same conference, be it WAC or Mountain West..there would be two good things come from that alignment.

1. CU would have a chance to dominate, and perhaps have 12-0 seasons and a shot at a big bowl.

2.That conference would be taken seriously, and a team that came through that schedule would be respected.

The kicker would be TV monies...but there are more sports channels added every year..and I think there are some good teams and rivalries in such a conference which would draw TV audiences. It might be doable.

If CU moves to minor conference then you can kiss CU athletics good bye. Why don't you look at the B12 conference payout to CU in FB and BB. How many people do you think are going to show up in Folsom to watch teams like Rice, Nevada, SD State. Attendance would drop to almost nothing. You think the WAC or MWAC has a television contract anything like the BCS conferences?

 

[BuffsRising]

Going to the Wac or the MWC would lose CU several million dollars in television and bowl revenue.

As for the PAC 10, their TV contracts aren't great, but we would sell out our visiting ticket allotments for everywhere but Pullman. And yeah, USC is pretty dominant, but after that its pretty fluid. I don't think we could move to the PAC 10, but I'd be for it if the tv contracts improved.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

I don't like the idea that much for an institution that lacks the funding of other schools. Going to the pac 10 would dramatically increase travel costs.

The only advantage I do see is that CU would make more appearance in California where we have a lot of alums and from where we draw most of our out of state students.

 

[Djugashvili]

as far as the strength of the pac-10 goes in evaluating the argument, i'm not quite sure how definitively we can judge the conference. now, alot of the previously prestigious and competitive programs there have fallen on really bad times, but the big 12 is only 3-0 against the pac-10 this year, with all the wins coming at the expense of the completely hopeless washington teams. USC certainly appears to be a dominant program, but the strength of the pac-10 in evaluating them also works both ways. if the pac-10 is really perceived to be a very weak conference and USC has not run the table there for a few years, then despite their talent they are clearly a beatable team; if the pac-10 is not supposed to be that weak of a conference then that means there will be competitive games against the other squads for CU each year.

while i didn't go to CU, from what i've seen and heard i would have to go with the attractiveness of california as a very strong reason FOR moving to the pac-10. with the current great relative prestige of the big 12 south programs, it seems that being able to get top-tier talent out of the texas hotbed is becoming an increasingly difficult task, while california probably has just as much to offer talent-wise and CU has already demonstrated an affinity for that area. i think colorado will still be able to recruit the surrounding states fairly well, but in the long term, having exposure in california and on the coast should do wonders for talent level.