CU has rejoined the Big 12 and broken college football - talking out asses continues

[ahoelsken]

So people who shill for the P12 are not to be trusted, but those who shill for the B12 are?

IMO yes. The one thing your posts tell me you don't understand is the concept of leverage. That's something the Pac 12 does not have right now.

 

[241Volcanos]

IMO yes. The one thing your posts tell me you don't understand is the concept of leverage. That's something the Pac 12 does not have right now.

B12 leverage is no one wants to poach any of them. That’s not a great hand either.

 

[MtnBuff]

Some of the Admins, and some Allbuffers, seem to think that because you're in the PAC you're automatically drinking Stags Leap and solving the world's (...er, the "planet's") weighty problems, and conversely if you're in the B12 you automatically have cow crap on your shoes and and you're chewing on a wooden matchstick. This is partly the result of CU not having much of an identity of its own. Newcomers to Colorado in the last 15 years or so don't understand how little the state itself, and many of the state's long term lifers, identifies with CU and how little it gives it a second thought.

We're just talking about sports leagues here folks. Sports leagues and nothing more. I'd suggest that the real semi-crisis/issue for CU football is NIL and not conference placement. Texas Tech NIL is going to pay 95 guys $25,000 each. That's a functional used car and a heck of a lot of pizza and beer......and Tech isn't pulling in a lot of Cherry Creek HS types for whom $25,000 is small potatoes. Without some meaningful NIL, CU's recruiting becomes a greater uphill battle IMO.

This in the long term is what kills top level major college football.

I don't know that all the talk about conference re-alignment and the rest isn't just ignoring the eventual reality that most of the teams that think they are competing at the major college level have no chance.

 

[pmoney52]

I think UT had a rule where any in-state kid who graduated top ten in his/her HS class (something like that) was automatically accepted. To your point, if I was the CU Prez I would pitch something like that to Polis (a Boulder guy & someone for whom education is on-brand) for increased state funding in return. Seems like something that could work.

I like this thought idea ... and just FYI, back in the 2000s, both CU and CSU had this and believe they still do. Although it was a matrix of GPA and SAT. From what I remember it was pretty easy to gain automatic acceptance to either in-state school, with CU requiring a little more than CSU. But ultimately I don't think this alone is going to move the needle that much so long as a CU relies so heavily on out-of-state students' tuition $$$$.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

IMO yes. The one thing your posts tell me you don't understand is the concept of leverage. That's something the Pac 12 does not have right now.

What clear leverage does the Big 12 have?

 

[Not Sure]

IMO yes. The one thing your posts tell me you don't understand is the concept of leverage. That's something the Pac 12 does not have right now.

What leverage does the B12 have? I’m really struggling with that.

 

[Denver_sc]

Not on revenue or prestige. Hard to be legit if you have no blue blood football programs. Same issue the Pac faces without USC. But things are definitely more pleasant without having to deal with a conference member that rightfully/infuriating acts like you're all riding its coattails.

Maybe more pleasant without UT, but also relegated to 2nd tier.

Honestly, I don't like any of the options right now. Kind of hoping the ACC gets poached and things get crazy. There's a chance good things could shake out of that.

100% this last part.

Staying in a poached Pac12, moving to a poached Big12, or forming some toothless alliance with the ACC seems like shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic.

I don't have faith that the leadership at CU right now cares enough to have a long-term plan to get CU to the B1G or SEC, which is the only viable move at the end of the day. Would CU be more likely to get in to one of those conferences right now, or if they limp along in a reduced second tier conference for 5-10 more years with no strategic vision?

At least if the giant shuffle happens now and CU ends up as a has-not, I'll know and can move on.

 

[241Volcanos]

100% this last part.

Staying in a poached Pac12, moving to a poached Big12, or forming some toothless alliance with the ACC seems like shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic.

I don't have faith that the leadership at CU right now cares enough to have a long-term plan to get CU to the B1G or SEC, which is the only viable move at the end of the day. Would CU be more likely to get in to one of those conferences right now, or if they limp along in a reduced second tier conference for 5-10 more years with no strategic vision?

At least if the giant shuffle happens now and CU ends up as a has-not, I'll know and can move on.

Is it a goal for anyone at CU outside the athletic dept to get into the Big10/SEC?

 

[ahoelsken]

What leverage does the B12 have? I’m really struggling with that.

What clear leverage does the Big 12 have?

Stability for one. Likely getting a better TV deal than the Pac is secondly.

 

[Denver_sc]

Is it a goal for anyone at CU outside the athletic dept to get into the Big10/SEC?

I know that this is largely a rhetorical question, but I do not believe so.

I've said this before, but my belief is the Phil Distefano is largely content with status quo and has no long-term vision for excellence for CU in any area.

 

[Not Sure]

Stability for one. Likely getting a better TV deal than the Pac is secondly.

One, the B12 is far from stable. Two, the TV deal money is far from settled and the numbers are all over the place. So neither of those items you list provides any actual leverage for the B12.

 

[GawainBuff]

What CU should be focused on is making itself as attractive as possible to the B1G.

That's mostly about winning football and Folsom improvements.

But I'd put everything on the table in a strategic plan to achieve that goal.

Academic plan looking for strategic partnerships with B1G members while focusing on improving the metrics they care about.

Athletic plan that improves or adds non-football sports they care about. If hockey could put us over the top vs other similar schools, find a way to make it happen. Or whatever moves the needle that little bit.

Marketing to increase exposure in B1G country, attract more students from their footprint and build Buff Club chapters in their backyard.

The future of the university is in the balance on this.

This sounds a lot like my plan to get a date with the hot girl in high school.

Just translate:
- B1G to Molly Sparks
- “Non-football sports” to D&D club
- “strategic partnerships” to washing Molly’s friend’s cars
- “Buff club” to my bedroom (with a new lock on the door)
- “winning football” to dinner at Casa Bonita before prom

 

[Buffnik]

One, the B12 is far from stable. Two, the TV deal money is far from settled and the numbers are all over the place. So neither of those items you list provides any actual leverage for the B12.

On stability, if the ACC gets poached and tries to stay together then they would likely have some B12 targets.

 

[InTheBuff]

So Regents are meeting again this afternoon. Wish I could be a fly on the wall.

 

[Not Sure]

On stability, if the ACC gets poached and tries to stay together then they would likely have some B12 targets.

The stability argument has never made any sense to me at all. The B12 is the poster child for conference instability.
I still come back to the thought that a conference with the current PAC 10 makes a lot more sense than a weird conglomeration of 16-18 schools spread across four different time zones with no cohesive geographical or cultural identity. There seems to be a lot of speculation that a move would help us somehow be more competitive and take athletics more seriously. Where would anybody get that idea?

 

[hokiehead]

The near-future XII has a much stronger presence in the US top recruiting areas than the near-future Pac.

XII has a much stronger presence in states where football is currently popular, and the trends suggest that will only get larger .

The financials are certainly open to debate and questioning. Neither has a GoR that means anything past next year.

 

[ahoelsken]

One, the B12 is far from stable. Two, the TV deal money is far from settled and the numbers are all over the place. So neither of those items you list provides any actual leverage for the B12.

The Big 12 is far from stable? Explain that. I mean I can tell you this-If the Big 10 offers UO/UW a 60% revenue share for the first five years in the league, they're gone. That actually could happen.

This isn't about the long term-its about putting yourself in the best position to become as attractive as you can in 10 years when the ACC finally falls apart.

 

[leftybuff]

One, the B12 is far from stable. Two, the TV deal money is far from settled and the numbers are all over the place. So neither of those items you list provides any actual leverage for the B12.

Everybody but the B1G and the SEC are engaged in a race to be the tallest midget. The gap between B1G and SEC money will only get bigger. It is now all about getting a seat at one of those tables and nothing else.

The problem is, the plums have already been picked. There really is only one property that has the big three: 1. competitive prowess, 2. tv pull, 3. academic cache. That is ND.

The rest who populate the three little pigs (ACC, B12 and P12) there are some who have two. (e.g. UNC, UVA, Miami, Clemson, FSU, GT, Kansas, UW, Oregon, Cal, Stanford, ASU, UA and CU). None of these are "must haves" for the big boys.

Some are teetering on having two (Okie Lite, Bailer, VT, TT, TCU, Cincy) but are even less likely to get a seat at the big boy table.

So, really, CU should just look at which midget delivers the most coin. Maybe it is a four corner defection to the B12. Maybe keep the P12-2 and stand pat or add a couple of G5'ers. In the end, if you aren't B1G or SEC you won't matter in CFB.

CU admin has been struggling mightily to assure CU doesn't matter while pretending to matter, so I don't hold out much hope either way.

 

[Duff Man]

The Big 12's leverage is an anchor in Texas and desirable football markets.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

The stability argument has never made any sense to me at all. The B12 is the poster child for conference instability.
I still come back to the thought that a conference with the current PAC 10 makes a lot more sense than a weird conglomeration of 16-18 schools spread across four different time zones with no cohesive geographical or cultural identity. There seems to be a lot of speculation that a move would help us somehow be more competitive and take athletics more seriously. Where would anybody get that idea?

I think Mandel's merger idea was one that had serious potential to be a very entertaining league, solid TV revenue, scheduling structure that made travel very feasible, and a creative/innovative way to get more attractive inventory during the back end of the season when it really matters.

4 pods of 6 teams (Pacific, Mountain/Desert, TX/Midwest, and East)
Preserve current rivalries
8 conference games - 1 against the 5 pod mates and 1 against another team from each of the other pods
The 9th conference game over Thanksgiving weekend being a 1v1, 2v2, 3v3, etc matchup with another pod with the 1v1 matchups being a SemiFinal game with winners advancing to the Conference Championship Game

 

[ahoelsken]

The stability argument has never made any sense to me at all. The B12 is the poster child for conference instability.
I still come back to the thought that a conference with the current PAC 10 makes a lot more sense than a weird conglomeration of 16-18 schools spread across four different time zones with no cohesive geographical or cultural identity. There seems to be a lot of speculation that a move would help us somehow be more competitive and take athletics more seriously. Where would anybody get that idea?

I don't want anything to do with the same group of idiot university presidents that spent the better part of the last decade enabling Larry Scott and all of his stupid ideas. Emphasizing Olympic sports? Sure. One problem with that though-nobody ****ing cares about CU's skiing or USC's water polo programs outside of their fanbases. Late night TV windows? Sure! One problem with that though-the entire east coast is in bed by at the latest halftime of our games.

Do you think the Big 10 gives a **** about cultural identity?

 

[ahoelsken]

B12 leverage is no one wants to poach any of them. That’s not a great hand either.

Yeah I mean ask Oregon and Washington about not wanting to be poached either.

 

[hawg1]

One, the B12 is far from stable. Two, the TV deal money is far from settled and the numbers are all over the place. So neither of those items you list provides any actual leverage for the B12.

Survivability. Better concept than stability when speaking about realignment.

 

[White_Rabbit]

https://www.sportsmediawatch.com/college-football-tv-ratings/

I figure this thread needs more actual numbers and less insert random twitter guy posting random projections

Things that stood out to me:

-if the game is on FS1 the ratings are bad. ESPN, ABC, Fox, CBS all seem ok, even some ESPN2, but FS1 yikes. Granted it gets lesser games like ESPN2, but it stood out in a bad way. BTN makes some appearances, but P12N is nowhere to be seen.
-P12 after dark seems to have a ceiling of around 1-2M viewers, but drawing 1-2M doesn't seem too bad and that seems pretty consistent. Wazzu vs Oregon drew almost 2 million, that same day Miami vs FSU only drew 1.5 which is kinda nuts to me. The U vs FSU is, in my apparently dated mind, a pretty premium rivalry. I guess both schools being down for awhile now has killed the hype there. I miss me some top tier FSU vs U and FSU vs Florida games
-looking at this makes it clear why the B1G and SEC are rolling in the money. They just have top tier matchups almost every week and it'll only get more popular with USC/UCLA/UT/OU. The P12/B12/ACC only seems to get really big numbers if they play teams from the B1G/SEC. If I was P12 commish I think I'd be telling every P12 team to start scheduling at least a couple B1G/SEC OOC games per year just to pump those numbers up
-SDSU vs Boise week 13, almost 2M viewers. Granted it's day after Thanksgiving, but it drew more than FSU vs Florida, CU vs Utah, Georgia vs GT, UW vs Wazzu. Not sure we can extrapolate a ton from that, but somebody is a fan of one or both of those programs. I think they're the clear 2 adds the P12 needs to make at least for now if teams aren't bolting for the B12

 

[Not Sure]

Survivability. Better concept than stability when speaking about realignment.

How is the B12 more “survivable”? I don’t see it. The league has basically turned the entire membership over in 12 years. How is that “survivable”?

Having an anchor in Texas is something. I suppose. I don’t see the value in being second fiddle in Texas when we can be the only game in town on the entire West Coast. Being in a conference where football means something is great, but it really doesn’t mean anything to the people that are there now. It’s a conference of misfits and castoffs tha gets at best lukewarm support in its own markets. I suppose that’s what we are now anyway, but I think we have better options.

 

[leftybuff]

How is the B12 more “survivable”? I don’t see it. The league has basically turned the entire membership over in 12 years. How is that “survivable”?

Having an anchor in Texas is something. I suppose. I don’t see the value in being second fiddle in Texas when we can be the only game in town on the entire West Coast. Being in a conference where football means something is great, but it really doesn’t mean anything to the people that are there now. It’s a conference of misfits and castoffs tha gets at best lukewarm support in its own markets. I suppose that’s what we are now anyway, but I think we have better options.

The tagline: "The Conference of Misfits and Castoffs" has a strange attraction.

 

[SoDak]

I know that this is largely a rhetorical question, but I do not believe so.

I've said this before, but my belief is the Phil Distefano is largely content with status quo and has no long-term vision for excellence for CU in any area.

Bruce Benson would beg to differ.
“I’ve got to pay for good people,” Benson said in 2012. “I want quality. You’re not going to have quality if you don’t have quality people working for you.”

Benson offered that a chancellor’s salary at a campus comparable to Boulder, for example, was $457,000, which is $68,000 more than what CU bumped him up to at that time.
"When I hired him, I talked him into taking a low wage. I think it’s time we get him somewhere near where the average is. Phil is a hell of chancellor.”

Benson also pointed out that when making salary decisions, he considers how long employees will be working.

“They have to build up for their retirement,” he said.

Phil was 65 at the time the article was published.

CU tuition hike funded raises for Phil DiStefano, other top administrators

The University of Colorado used money generated from last year’s 9.3 percent tuition hike to reward many of its top administrators with raises, increasing Chancellor Phil DiStefano’s sa…

www.dailycamera.com

 

[hawg1]

How is the B12 more “survivable”? I don’t see it. The league has basically turned the entire membership over in 12 years. How is that “survivable”?

Having an anchor in Texas is something. I suppose. I don’t see the value in being second fiddle in Texas when we can be the only game in town on the entire West Coast. Being in a conference where football means something is great, but it really doesn’t mean anything to the people that are there now. It’s a conference of misfits and castoffs tha gets at best lukewarm support in its own markets. I suppose that’s what we are now anyway, but I think we have better options.

They aren’t necessarily stable, but they have survived two exit periods. As conferences get whittled down, I think they have greater odds to survive rather than P12 where O/U and UDub are ready to go. And Four Corners likely to lead the way, especially AZ and CU.

 

[leftybuff]

Bruce Benson would beg to differ.
“I’ve got to pay for good people,” Benson said in 2012. “I want quality. You’re not going to have quality if you don’t have quality people working for you.”

Benson offered that a chancellor’s salary at a campus comparable to Boulder, for example, was $457,000, which is $68,000 more than what CU bumped him up to at that time.
"When I hired him, I talked him into taking a low wage. I think it’s time we get him somewhere near where the average is. Phil is a hell of chancellor.”

Benson also pointed out that when making salary decisions, he considers how long employees will be working.

“They have to build up for their retirement,” he said.

Phil was 65 at the time the article was published.

CU tuition hike funded raises for Phil DiStefano, other top administrators

The University of Colorado used money generated from last year’s 9.3 percent tuition hike to reward many of its top administrators with raises, increasing Chancellor Phil DiStefano’s sa…

www.dailycamera.com

I didn't realize Bruce Benson was infallible.

If Dr. Phil has some grand plan for greatness, I think it has been a miserable failure where FB is concerned.

 

[GawainBuff]

I figure this thread needs more actual numbers and less insert random twitter guy posting random projections

That’s funny. I was having the exact opposite reaction: finding all the numbers meaningless and the commenting on rampant speculation by random Twitter guy the only reason to scroll through page after page.