Lol. Sorry. Stanford >>> UCLA. Stanford is one of top universities in the world. Public or private.
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
SINKRATZ
PhD in Analogy
It’s too bad no one who went to Stanford realizes they have a football team.
No ****. Imagine their value if people cared when they were rolling off pac 12 titles a few years ago. I think they could have gotten almost any recruit they wanted in those years.
SINKRATZ
PhD in Analogy
All that also assumes this merged conference opts for equal revenue sharing. That’s not how the Big12 works today and was a major issue when we left for the Pac12 if I remember correctly. It helps that Texas and Oklahoma aren’t around to bully the conference, but CU will be in such a terrible bargaining position, would it surprise anyone if we end up with a lesser revenue share in this new conference?
Plus I think they’d rather have some programs be with rather than potentially against them.
That’s a very valid point not just in regards to CU but concerning the overall future of college football. I keep making the analogies with European football and that’s another one. The big and successful teams may well start pushing for a revenue sharing formula which sees their success and contribution reflected more. Which might seem fair but will only make the recent developments we’ve seen in college football worse and in addition with the playoff lead to economic imbalances within conferences which will be impossible to overcome long term.
I would actually be surprised at that in a conference like a newly reshaped Big 12. I don’t see any of those programs as being substantially more valuable or having significantly better ratings for most games to the point where an uneven rev share is prudent.
It takes a blue blood type of program to be able to make that kind of stipulation and there isn’t one with that kind of clout
Safety school. UBL?
That’s mostly because Ken posts photos of their cheerleaders.
Maybe not in a B/P12 merger but I am 95% certain we will see such a development in the SEC/B1G in the not too distant future.
The big programs will use their leverage to squeeze every last drop out of the current system and situation and try to shape the rules to their requirements and demands until the camel's back ultimately breaks, which is when they do their own thing. They are going to use that threat and the leverage that comes with it until the very last second.
UW fans have to freaking out just a little right?
Yeah I have to think Vanderbilt, Miss State, Rutgers, Maryland, etc are potentially taking less in the new deal
Well, if CU had invested in football and not stepped on its own dick over and over and had fielded a competitive football program and added sports instead of deleting to the bare minimum, we’d be a hot commodity. But now we are considered to be a bottom feeder program.
If we had have had Big 10 or SEC type of money, we would very likely not be in this mess. A competitive CU would be a hot commodity.
But our administration, from President to Regents, do not value athletics and have no vision for success. All it would’ve taken was a vision and an investment and CU would be a Top 25 program.
Now we are mere bottom feeders.
If we had have had Big 10 or SEC type of money, we would very likely not be in this mess. A competitive CU would be a hot commodity.
But our administration, from President to Regents, do not value athletics and have no vision for success. All it would’ve taken was a vision and an investment and CU would be a Top 25 program.
Now we are mere bottom feeders.
BerkeleyBuff
Well-Known Member
Little early to make that call
True, but I wouldn't put any money on those teams going to the B1G.
Same with Utah. I’m not convinced a competitive CU program is in a different position than they find themselves today w/r/t desirability for a conference. On the flip side, UCLA has been completely irrelevant in football for a long time.
I assume USC was driving the train and insisted on UCLA coming along.
I think SC couldnt have cared less. I think it was Fox driving UCLA, otherwise it would have been a no brainer for ESPN/SEC to come in and grab half the LA market
Maybe, but I doubt UCLA goes anywhere without USC.
For now. The point is that CU has put themselves in a weak position because of their apathetic approach.
I have to believe this is part of the ND-CU package deal I’ve been hearing so much about.
SINKRATZ
PhD in Analogy
Vanderbilt’s primary value is as the only private school in the SEC which I think allows the conference to conceal some of their financials. Not sure that warrants an equal share but it’s something Miss State and others don’t have. Northwestern was same for the BIG until USC joins. It also means if Stanford were to bolt for the BIG the Pac (if it tried to survive) would probably try to add a private school.
Why is that important?
We’ll see what happens to UW. I think that’s the best comparison. The only real difference is the last decade and a half or so where they made two good hires with Sarkisian and Peterson when we botched them with Hawkins and Embree and they showed more institutional support and also vastly upgraded their stadium.
If they get left behind we’d have been ****ed either way. If they don’t we killed CU football in the last 15 years or so.
stanford's investment in athletics are not driven by the same factors as any other power conference team. have you guys been to the stanford campus. every men's and women's sport has dedicated facilities. it is freaking gorgeous. empty and soulless and devoid of winners usually, but still impressive.
revenue generation is not a factor in the investments they made in their sports programs.
cal on the other hand is a public school and likes to trip over itself, much like CU.
i think i might dress up in one of those handmaiden's tale costumes for the first cal at baylor game.
revenue generation is not a factor in the investments they made in their sports programs.
cal on the other hand is a public school and likes to trip over itself, much like CU.
i think i might dress up in one of those handmaiden's tale costumes for the first cal at baylor game.