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
I could see something similar to what the ACC just implemented where there are opportunities for higher distribution for better postseason performance. But there’s no chance the base static revenue distribution will be unequal. Oregon and Washington don’t have options and therefore they don’t have leverage to demand thatwilner prattling on about uneven rev sharing in the pac.
this whole process has been a goat rodeo from start to now and it isn't done.
Want to kill a college athletic conference? Uneven revenue sharing. It’s a horrible idea that only places like UT really push for.
I’m honestly hoping that the reason for the delay is because the ACC and P10 are exploring options for a merger. That’s not something that just happens. It takes a lot of time and energy and effort. There are a lot of moving parts which means there’s a lot of parties that have a place at the table.
I’m honestly hoping that the reason for the delay is because the ACC and P10 are exploring options for a merger. That’s not something that just happens. It takes a lot of time and energy and effort. There are a lot of moving parts which means there’s a lot of parties that have a place at the table.
Honestly, calling it a goat rodeo is generous.wilner prattling on about uneven rev sharing in the pac.
this whole process has been a goat rodeo from start to now and it isn't done.
A merger makes far too much sense for the Pac 10 and ACC as it would push the Big 12 to the least relevant conference and solidify it as a close #3.
Obviously, the entire thing basically hinges on ESPN's willingness to renegotiate the ACC contract, which they just don't have any incentive to do.
SIAP but the ACC has already agreed to unequal revenue sharing for postseason games in football and MBB starting in 2024. Of course this will only end up being a temporary solution.
ACC endorses plan for increased payouts based on schools’ performance in postseason play
Details of how the incentives will be determined were not released but 'will be solidified in the coming months,' the ACC said.
theathletic.com
Last edited:
Unequal revenue sharing with limited exposure. What could go wrong?
They would have that incentive if the “ACC” no longer exists and they have any intention of televising games with UNC, Clemson, and Florida Stare.
Doesn't really fit the narrative but still pretty funny
Play that out, though. The Pac 10 would have to convince at least 8 ACC members to vote to dissolve, but only under the condition that at least those 8 would merge with the Pac 10 and the Pac 10 only. If the ACC just votes to dissolve without that stipulation, Clemson, FSU, UNC and Miami are all gone to SEC and B1G. They would also be voting to dissolve and merge with a conference that doesn't have a media right deal.
I just don't see any movement in conference realignment without the networks orchestrating it
Again, it's unequal rev share for teams who do well in the post season. You have no idea what the exposure is going to be like
Right, which is why this *could* be taking so long. There’s a lot of moving parts and lots of different agendas at work here.
Or they’re not doing anything at all and just hoping for the best. Based on historical evidence, that’s the more likely scenario.
Ok- assuming my understanding of the B1G situation is accurate (feel free to correct the below), they have 2 major issues:
- One revolves around the 2026 championship game being given to NBC over Fox without permission to do so (can't help here)
- Also, traditionally, the B1G has had it in their contract that their schools in certain areas (read: the upper midwest) do not have to play night games after the first week in November because of health concerns (read: it's really ****ing cold). The new massive contract was done without this allowance, and now the presidents are pissed, NBC is pissed, etc.
SINKRATZ
PhD in Analogy
Long term, one issue for the P2 (if not a problem), is that both conferences very clearly have members that are far less valuable than some outside programs. Up to now conferences haven’t booted legacy members, but if money and the networks are driving factors here doesn’t that have to change eventually?
There’s no way Rutgers, Indiana, Iowa, Vanderbilt, Miss St or a few others are worth $90M to their conference and they’re certainly not worth more than Washington, Oregon, maybe CU, and half the ACC. When do networks make that push to trade out conference memberships so the pie gets bigger, but they’re not cutting more slices?
There’s no way Rutgers, Indiana, Iowa, Vanderbilt, Miss St or a few others are worth $90M to their conference and they’re certainly not worth more than Washington, Oregon, maybe CU, and half the ACC. When do networks make that push to trade out conference memberships so the pie gets bigger, but they’re not cutting more slices?
Tatonka Thunder
Well-Known Member
My new favorite saying - “Goat Rodeo”!wilner prattling on about uneven rev sharing in the pac.
this whole process has been a goat rodeo from start to now and it isn't done.
hawg1
Well-Known Member
I like ACC model. .
I could see the SEC doing that kind of thing, although, who would they kick out? Vandy for sure, but the Egg Bowl means something and I don't know if they would break up two state institutions like that. The B1G doesn't really have that problem since none of Rutgers, Indiana, Iowa or Minnesota have state rivalries that are also in the B1G, but Iowa and Minnesota do have long standing rivalries with Wisconsin and Nebraska.
I don't know, any kind of "relegation" action feels like it would have to be part of a sport-wide upheaval where the B1G and SEC merge to form a brand new entity under one umbrella like the NFL. At that point, you might see invitations sent out to programs all around the country that account for historical blue bloods and collects all major markets and time zones.
SINKRATZ
PhD in Analogy
I would have thought all that too, but Oklahoma ended the Bedlam Game with their move didn’t they? And I’m pretty sure Texas and A&M haven’t played since A&M left the Big 12. Just seems money means more than those historic rivalry games in some cases which is a shame.
Pretty sure the PAC-12 is the cowpoke in this scenario.wilner prattling on about uneven rev sharing in the pac.
this whole process has been a goat rodeo from start to now and it isn't done.
Victory
Well-Known Member
RG mentioned realignment in this interview (last min of interview). Doesn’t really say anything other than don’t believe everything, we want to be in P12 but we’ll do what’s best for us. So, there’s some kind of door open with the “but”. At no point did Howell or RG say B12.
RG has always been vague in these responses and very clearly leaving the door open. There's probably more truth to the click bait speculation that ITB posts than most here want to admit.
He was very careful with that answer
30% might be true
No firm commitment to the PAC
Great to see how Saliman has made Colorado focus on being relevant, profitable, and doing the right things instead of self-destruction
Victory
Well-Known Member
Pretty stoic answer. We are all in the dark on what’s happening here. But something is happening here. There are only two things I do know about it:
1) CU has the hot hand
2) Prime wants nothing other than the biggest stage possible and that ain’t the B12 - it’s the B1G and SEC. Either way I’m sure he’s made his wishes known to RG
The thing I don’t know is Saliman. I 100% agree with your take - he’s about excellence and sets the bar high. But I don’t have any idea what he thinks about this topic other than possibly what Phil said last month which is he’s confident in a P12 deal.
Big Jim
WTF?
33% per Rick George
This is miserable. The big 12 isn’t close to the conference it was when we left. Full of schools with no football history and subpar academics. Sec and BIG will create their own league someday, just want to be a part of it. There’s dumbass people on the CUBoulder reddit that think athletics essentially should be killed. But if our athletics were at our potential over the last 20 years, we’d be in much better shape overall in this realignment, which includes academics. I do not want any part of an irrelevant Big 12 conference
I hope there’s a special place in hell for the likes of Larry Scott
Saying "We're gonna do what's best for CU" is a big change from saying they're 100% committed to the Pac12. The writing is on the wall here.
Victory
Well-Known Member
Absolutely. It gives the allusion there is no deal as of today. In fact it sounded like we’re back at square one in July 2022. I can only hope Saliman will do what’s best for the university and not be too influenced by RG if he does want the B12. We really don’t know but it’s a presidential decision. The Toddfather needs to have a strategic view not a temp view based on an AD that is closer to retirement than most care to admit. RG must have made 5 references to his time at CU in the interview. He’s not going to be here much longer.
It isn’t like our time in the Pac-12 has seen CU gain in academic stature.
I don’t think an athletic conference has any bearing on academics.