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
- Thread starter InTheBuff
- Start date
We hard in the H-Town burbs, brah!
Aric Goodman broke Rugged
Laughing at all the 'yeah but it's different' from the Big Ten bros once they were reminded that it actually snows in Boulder, SLC, and Pullman.
He's absolutely right. I spent 12 years in the family office world. "Give your kids enough to do something but not enough to do nothing" is a common refrain.
Why would the B10 want Stanford or Cal? This is about football and television revenue, not academics. They likely don't want us, either.
Academics, yes. But you really think they bring TV sets in the Bay Area?
I could see the B1G taking Stanford on a conditional with ND but I don't see any scenario they would want Cal
1989 Orange Bowl, 1990 Orange Bowl, 1995 Fiesta Bowl. The Irish can't get over the fact that we took 2 out of 3. And that they lost the last meeting 41-24 in a laugher.
I see zero percent chance Stanford goes B1G. They might well go independent. Though.
Still always fun to poke at those sunshine boys.
To be fair, after graduating from CU, I moved to Chicago. The winter in the Midwest is ****tier in almost every way. Yuck.
I went to CU, I live in SoCal. UCLA >>>>>>>>>>>>>CU. Just a few more >>>>>>>> to make my point.
Why would the SEC increase the amount of schools in their conference now? Their tv contract is good through 2033/2034. Any new school better be worth the 'end game ' as adding new schools ends up reducing each current member's share of the pie till a new contract is up for renewal. What schools would be worth that right now? Notre Dame ? Probably but anyone else? Not Clemson, N Carolina, Miami, FSU and not Oregon.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
When I was in college, we played at Utah Valley State. We stayed in Provo. I can tell you having been to Provo it is not an upgrade.
If this really goes to two conferences, I could see the B1G trying to set up a "Smarties vs Dummies" scenario, and the SEC happily, almost intentionally, accepting the dummy role. I think that would be a mistake by the SEC - but I kind of think that's where we are.
I’m sure ESPN is telling them here is what “X program” is worth per year and the SEC can then decide if it makes sense for other reasons to dilute the revenue
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
There's one line of thinking in which they do-Title 9 is still a thing. So's academics. The fewer non-revenue events between USC/UCLA and Maryland/Rutgers the better. Not only that, but there are a fair amount of somewhat hard to get to campuses in the Big 10. By hard to get to, I'm talking like Penn State. How do you do it? Flying to Pittsburgh or Philly and then driving 3 hours? Its going to be bad for the athletes. The Big 10 fancies itself a conference that actually gives a **** about academics. They're creating a western pod. They probably want to include Oregon/Washington in that, but only if they don't have to take the little brothers. I've seen some twitter talk about the politicians in both states getting involved to stop that. To me, that's got something to do with why the Big 10 has said they're standing pat. If that drama drags out and I'm Kevin Warren, I'm taking Utah and probably us.
I think the bigger thing is this-we outta work with Utah to sell ourselves as a package to both the superconferences. If that isn't working, sure-the Big 12 is fine.
I’m not arguing cu is equal to ucla as an institution. What the have in common is largely irrelevant football programs. As far institutional prestige goes Stanford >>>>>>>>>>>> ucla. But that’s not why the B1G added ucla. It’s because of the LA revenue they expect.
Compare the basketball programs. Has CU ever won 88 in a row? Has anyone done it? I don't even know what the next longest streak is.
The football program is a sleeping giant. People that wanted jobs used to say that about CU, but it isn't the same.
This is 90% about football. But if you are building a brand, UCLA adds tons of value.
Last edited:
I know it feels odd to stay at certain places in Utah (stayed in a room overlooking the Mormon temple in Ogden) but they got mountains while the Big 12 have more windmills & cows than trees.
BYU is one of those schools I have not seen CU play regularly and I’m intrigued by playing that mixture of intermountain schools and Big 8 schools in the Big 12. I have talked openly about CU being in a MWC-like setting and this would be the closest to that vision. Only thing missing would be CSU but I’d ask Nebraska if they want to come back before sending the invite to Ft. Collins. I don’t think the Nubs would bite but I’m sure they would at least consider it.
Agree UCLA is a sleeping giant but I’d love to beat them this year and next year. A win over U$C would be an added bonus before they depart for the B1G.
Never will forget the deep chill I felt when getting off the plane at Midway…that ain’t CO weather!
Dude. UCLA is the top public school in the country. I think you have a few too may ">" in your post above.
Fox Sports insisted on both USC and UCLA because they wanted to capture the L.A. market and forestall the PAC 12 from competing there. Leave UCLA in the PAC 11, Fox leaves the door cracked for some other media company to retrench in that market. It’s a great business move. Crippled the conference, but Fox takes care of Fox.
Ucla is a very prestigious university with a storied athletic program that exceeds cu historically. No doubt. I just am not sure that really matters. I think what fox/B1G care about is how much revenue can x university bring in to us through athletics (mainly football). Ucla can bring in more because of the LA market. That is now part of the B1G footprint. When capitalism demands growth and expansion, I think denver and thus cu is in the next tier. Could be wrong, but that’s how I see the situation. *edit: actually notre dame is the next tier, or the same tier as ucla. Then cu is in the tier after that. The question is where the diminishing returns line is. I think cu is above that, but cu needs to sell itself which is a scary thought lol.
Okay. So to recap, we both agree that UCLA is much more attractive to the Big Ten than is CU.
Yes. They are less attractive than usc and more attractive then cu. That does not mean cu won’t get into the B1G.