Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

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

RiverBuff said:
Four more to B1G seems about right. I see Oregon, Wash, Stanford and ol' CU. Cal doesn't make sense. Colorado pluses for location, market and travel; and maybe CU-Neb history. And be cool to beat Mich St.
Click to expand...
I’m good with that outcome, but seriously, what part of Cal doesn’t make sense? One of the best public schools in the country? Geographic link to Stanford. Long time rival of Stanford. In so much debt that they would take just about any deal that is offered to them?
 
SpacemanSpiff said:
I’m good with that outcome, but seriously, what part of Cal doesn’t make sense? One of the best public schools in the country? Geographic link to Stanford. Long time rival of Stanford. In so much debt that they would take just about any deal that is offered to them?
Click to expand...
Those are nice value adds for Cal and Stanford, but what value do they bring to the B1G?
 
OR, WA, Stanford, and Cal bring a ton more academic pizazz to the B1G than the 4 corners schools do, obviously, if we’re going to toss that into the equation.
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
Neither program has much of a fan base and the Bay Area sucks for CFB ratings. I’m honestly surprised either of those programs are even being considered, regardless of market size. That being said, Stanford does have the rivalries with ND and USC that create more matchup options to fill one of those 3 time slots the B1G now has, and bringing Stanford could be used to entice ND to fold and join.

I’m just wondering what ESPN/SEC does in an attempt to secure evening inventory if the B1G does take Stanford, Cal, UW and OR. Do they try to bring in the 4 corner schools, or do they just stand pat?
Click to expand...

The case for Stanford has some valid points and even though I said Cal would be the better choice it's not like it's clear-cut either way. I didn't know what the Bay Area CFB ratings are but it doesn't surprise me that they're not good. But I would think the area would still bring alot of viewers due to the population even though the actual ratings are low. Kind of like NYC I would think.
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
I guess I don’t understand the, “but seriously, what about Cal doesn’t make sense…” post then. Aside from academic prestige and being a travel partner for Stanford, I honestly don’t know how Cal makes any sense.
Click to expand...
I think those two aspects (along with being ripe for a low ball offer) are why they make sense.
 
CarolinaBuff said:
The case for Stanford has some valid points and even though I said Cal would be the better choice it's not like it's clear-cut either way. I didn't know what the Bay Area CFB ratings are but it doesn't surprise me that they're not good. But I would think the area would still bring alot of viewers due to the population even though the actual ratings are low. Kind of like NYC I would think.
Click to expand...
I think you take one, but not both. I can't see why anybody wants anything to do with Cal in particular.
 
SpacemanSpiff said:
I think those two aspects (along with being ripe for a low ball offer) are why they make sense.
Click to expand...
What do you mean by "low ball offer"? If Cal becomes part of B1G, then they would get equal share ?!?! Maybe have to pay more in other costs, delayed payments, etc., but in long term would be same!?!?

Cal makes some sense, but I think Colorado brings more "brand" and national and regional appeal to the broadcast markets (yes, I'm biased). (it's too bad we haven't been relative in football for over twenty years and it's coming back to bite us) CU fills in the flyover location and travel. I don't think Cal necessarily wins much in the academic rating. For example, again bias, I compared Cal and CU's engineering programs and chose CU for my school(ing); upon graduation when I interviewed, CU was thought favorably by the engineering industry and added to my resume.
 
RiverBuff said:
What do you mean by "low ball offer"? If Cal becomes part of B1G, then they would get equal share ?!?! Maybe have to pay more in other costs, delayed payments, etc., but in long term would be same!?!?

Cal makes some sense, but I think Colorado brings more "brand" and national and regional appeal to the broadcast markets (yes, I'm biased). (it's too bad we haven't been relative in football for over twenty years and it's coming back to bite us) CU fills in the flyover location and travel. I don't think Cal necessarily wins much in the academic rating. For example, again bias, I compared Cal and CU's engineering programs and chose CU for my school(ing); upon graduation when I interviewed, CU was thought favorably by the engineering industry and added to my resume.
Click to expand...
Rutgers does not get an equal share. They’re getting a fractional piece until 2028 or 2029.
 
manhattanbuff said:
Rutgers does not get an equal share. They’re getting a fractional piece until 2028 or 2029.
Click to expand...
You're right: https://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/...n-revenue-share-before-rutgers-heres-why.html

"It is a departure from the precedent set by the league when it added Rutgers, Maryland and Nebraska under Warren’s predecessor Jim Delaney. Those three schools signed agreements that had them wait six years before earning a full share of the conference’s revenue."

But that's why I said "delayed payments" may be a part of joining the league, but eventually would be same.

A delay for us would be better than missing out on this round of negotiations. We will suck even more as new contracts come up in the future and we would have even less 'brand'.
 
RiverBuff said:
You're right: https://www.nj.com/rutgersfootball/...n-revenue-share-before-rutgers-heres-why.html

"It is a departure from the precedent set by the league when it added Rutgers, Maryland and Nebraska under Warren’s predecessor Jim Delaney. Those three schools signed agreements that had them wait six years before earning a full share of the conference’s revenue."

But that's why I said "delayed payments" may be a part of joining the league, but eventually would be same.

A delay for us would be better than missing out on this round of negotiations. We will suck even more as new contracts come up in the future and we would have even less 'brand'.
Click to expand...
Cal would also be a great candidate for a fractional piece, especially if it smoothes the way for UCLA.
 
RiverBuff said:
What do you mean by "low ball offer"? If Cal becomes part of B1G, then they would get equal share ?!?! Maybe have to pay more in other costs, delayed payments, etc., but in long term would be same!?!?

Cal makes some sense, but I think Colorado brings more "brand" and national and regional appeal to the broadcast markets (yes, I'm biased). (it's too bad we haven't been relative in football for over twenty years and it's coming back to bite us) CU fills in the flyover location and travel. I don't think Cal necessarily wins much in the academic rating. For example, again bias, I compared Cal and CU's engineering programs and chose CU for my school(ing); upon graduation when I interviewed, CU was thought favorably by the engineering industry and added to my resume.
Click to expand...
Let me ask you this, do you think that Cal would accept a reduced offer to join?

Ps - what Manhattan said.
 
SpacemanSpiff said:
Let me ask you this, do you think that Cal would accept a reduced offer to join?

Ps - what Manhattan said.
Click to expand...
Of course, Cal and its (also UCLA) regents would agree to reduced offer. (UCLA and USC are getting full shares)

My statement is that CU should and would be offered before Cal. And CU should take an offered delayed payment plan to get in while the Pac-10 and Big 12(?) are in such disarray and are losing bargaining opportunities.
 
RiverBuff said:
Of course, Cal and its (also UCLA) regents would agree to reduced offer. (UCLA and USC are getting full shares)

My statement is that CU should and would be offered before Cal. And CU should take an offered delayed payment plan to get in while the Pac-10 and Big 12(?) are in such disarray and are losing bargaining opportunities.
Click to expand...
Neither are legit prospects. Cal being tied with UCLA puts them far ahead of Colorado.
 
RiverBuff said:
I don't think Cal necessarily wins much in the academic rating.
Click to expand...
Mark Wahlberg Reaction GIF by 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment


Forbes:
#1 Cal
#126 Colorado

Times:
#8 Cal
#158 Colorado

Shanghai:
#4 Cal
#51 Colorado

USNWR:
#5 Cal
#62 Colorado
 
Last edited:
I think it's a mistake to believe that it's only about money and that the networks are driving this without the conference members having the ultimate control over expansion.

Because of that, the more I consider it the more I think that if the B1G chooses to go to 20 without Notre Dame that it's likely to take Cal.

Cal perfectly fits the basic B1G model of public land grant research universities with AAU membership. Throw in the huge SF Bay home market. Throw in the global prestige of the university. Throw in the tradition of Pac-8/ Big 10 alliance.

This leaves me believing that Cal-Stanford-Oregon-Washington would be the play to join with USC-UCLA. They'll leave behind the non-AAU 2 from the original Pac-8 (OSU, WSU). They might consider Colorado, Arizona, Utah and Kansas as other western properties which remain and fit their profile, but we may all be waiting.

I'm not confident at all that CU is on the list if the B1G goes to 20. I believe we're more on the list for 24 and likely the best remaining western take at that point with ND and the ACC being our biggest competitors.
 
I actually think the case for Cal is very similar to the case for CU, ASU and Utah. Big markets and big schools where you hope to increase engagement and ratings over time.

as @Duff Man would say, well funded Cal and Colorado football programs would be dangerous.
 
we all know we are likely to get screwed in all this. the question is when and how and by what degree...

cal as a geographic partner for stanford ahead of us would be a ****ing brutal **** sandwich of despair.
 
Buffnik said:
This leaves me believing that Cal-Stanford-Oregon-Washington would be the play to join with USC-UCLA. They'll leave behind the non-AAU 2 from the original Pac-8 (OSU, WSU).
Click to expand...
Agree - I think there is value to keeping those 6 together.
 
Liver said:
we all know we are likely to get screwed in all this. the question is when and how and by what degree...

cal as a geographic partner for stanford ahead of us would be a ****ing brutal **** sandwich of despair.
Click to expand...
Dirty city hippies!
 
You peeps that are picking Cal above CU are probably right. But, can't a homer hope?!?! This is "AllBUFFS" isn't it!?!
 
I have been trying to keep up with his whole ordeal and i wonder this. While it is unlikely (at least i think it is unlikely) what if CU put up a really good season? Think 2016 or close to it, do you think that is enough progress or improvement along with other positives to convince a conference like B1G or SEC to come knocking? Would it be enough boost our value for another conference?

I am a season ticket holder from *ebraska and have been since 2002. I have been a fan since 85. It is hard to care about something as much as we do when their own administration doesn't seem to care nearly as much as we do.
 
buffs6236 said:
I have been trying to keep up with his whole ordeal and i wonder this. While it is unlikely (at least i think it is unlikely) what if CU put up a really good season? Think 2016 or close to it, do you think that is enough progress or improvement along with other positives to convince a conference like B1G or SEC to come knocking? Would it be enough boost our value for another conference?

I am a season ticket holder from *ebraska and have been since 2002. I have been a fan since 85. It is hard to care about something as much as we do when their own administration doesn't seem to care nearly as much as we do.
Click to expand...
I personally think it probably wouldn't change whatever dynamics are in motion very much. I look at Washington. They went 4-8 last year, but since that had a good run with Peterson and have been in the top half of the conference for quite a while they are viewed as a different tier of program than CU despite many similarities between the two.
 
HudsonBuff said:
I personally think it probably wouldn't change whatever dynamics are in motion very much. I look at Washington. They went 4-8 last year, but since that had a good run with Peterson and have been in the top half of the conference for quite a while they are viewed as a different tier of program than CU despite many similarities between the two.
Click to expand...
But UW also brings a bigger market than Denver, a bigger local fan base that supports the University (Denver metro is just a transplant city where CU isn't the primary alma mater), a lot more money and an administration that invests and cares about having a good football program. Plus, yes, they've been more successful in modern CFB than CU
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top