What's new
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

Years ago, I read an article, titled, "Why Smart People Do Dumb Things." It listed some classic corporate blunders, such as the Edsel and New Coke. Since then, one can arguably add Kodak and Bud Light to that list.

The article stated that such catastrophes typically occur for several reasons. One is group think: Everyone involved thinks the same way, with no outside viewpoints that challenge the collective and reinforcing mindset by pointing out holes in the boat. That led to the Bay of Pigs.

A second is hubris: Those making the decisions think that they know more than the average Joe and consider themselves infallible (or that the rules don't apply to them).

I don't know which better describes the Pac's unraveling. Perhaps there's a third reason However, I suspect that MBA programs will have a field day dissecting what went wrong and why, which has startled me and was unthinkable, even two years ago.
 
Employee Of The Month Reaction GIF by Laff

 
Years ago, I read an article, titled, "Why Smart People Do Dumb Things." It listed some classic corporate blunders, such as the Edsel and New Coke. Since then, one can arguably add Kodak and Bud Light to that list.

The article stated that such catastrophes typically occur for several reasons. One is group think: Everyone involved thinks the same way, with no outside viewpoints that challenge the collective and reinforcing mindset by pointing out holes in the boat. That led to the Bay of Pigs.

A second is hubris: Those making the decisions think that they know more than the average Joe and consider themselves infallible (or that the rules don't apply to them).

I don't know which better describes the Pac's unraveling. Perhaps there's a third reason However, I suspect that MBA programs will have a field day dissecting what went wrong and why, which has startled me and was unthinkable, even two years ago.
Are you talking about the PAC or X?
 
Is it, though? If the PAC goes out and finds 6 jabronis to backfill the league, Oregon has a clear path to the CFP every year. Sure, it’s a too heavy league, but if they work it out to keep a larger share of their TV and Bowl money, it might work out fine for them along with Phil’s financial backing for the next 5-10 years.

UW, OTOH, has fewer options, IMO.
It's not about path to CFP, it's amount financial gaps that keep from investing back into the program.

This is the craziest argument ever. If all things were equal,maybe. But when you're annual revenue is 20-30 million $$$ short of Rutgers, Indiana, Northwestern how do you expect to be able to outbid on the coaches and upgrade facilities to attract recruits.

Thats a huge gap where the B1G nobodies can outspend a competive program like Oregon. Oregon cannot (and FSU) to that matter cannot afford to lose financial ground to programs like Purdue, Illinois, Minnesota, Maryland, or Northwestern. Especially in a world where big mega donors are expected to provide for NIL collectives and less to foot the bill for stadium upgrades, and top notch facilities.

There is no way Oregon can stay competitive at 17-20 million/Yr, when Rutgers is line for 70 million/yr. At what point does Rutgers get serious about football and dump the Brinks truck at Dan Lanning if he is successful? Maybe never, but can you take that risk.

Especially when SEC/B1G teams can also cancel or refuse to schedule non-conference games with you because they have a tough conference schedule.
 
That never happens involving UT bc UT was unwilling to give up the LHN. The LHN being probably one of the best examples of the misuse of TV money that explains these troubling times completely. And is THE reason NU, CU, A&M, and Missou left the conference.

The LHN was only “solved” by ESPN when they made a deal to move UT and OU to it‘s SEC.
That was the thing that Pac leadership wasn't willing to do - pay UT more than others to acquire LHN. The conference wanted a PACN-TX that contributed equally to every conference member.
 
Not really. Just acknowledging the different situations between those two programs. UO has a rich uncle who will subsidize the program as long as necessary. UW doesn’t.
that is not totally fair. uw has good support and from a larger network of folks than oregon and seattle is obviously a better market. the ONLY way oregon was going to try (and still not yet succeed) to be a national power was through a lottery win.

uw fans are arrogant pricks but they are not the "same" as uo. they actually have won stuff. they are more similar to us than pretty much any other of our ex conference mates.

i don't mind if uw gets totally screwed by all this, however.
 
that is not totally fair. uw has good support and from a larger network of folks than oregon and seattle is obviously a better market. the ONLY way oregon was going to try (and still not yet succeed) to be a national power was through a lottery win.

uw fans are arrogant pricks but they are not the "same" as uo. they actually have won stuff. they are more similar to us than pretty much any other of our ex conference mates.

i don't mind if uw gets totally screwed by all this, however.
My point was that in the world of conference affiliation musical chairs, UO can afford a more cavalier attitude.
 
My point was that in the world of conference affiliation musical chairs, UO can afford a more cavalier attitude.
i guess my counter point is that uw can weather lean financial times without too much issue.

i am pretty certain the reason the whole thing fell apart is because some schools-- uo, uw, stan, and cal in particular, were considering factors other than raw dollars and exposure.

what a **** show.

i do hope some others flee with us. even if it is just ua.
 
Will any of the UA lemmings survive or have they all run off the cliff yet because UA still isn't going to B12?

Off the cliff into all those cactus on a hot day...the world will be a better place.
 
Will any of the UA lemmings survive or have they all run off the cliff yet because UA still isn't going to B12?
What can U of A possibly be waiting for? That leadership isn't a rocket science bunch but the overall situation isn't going to get much clearer.
 
Yea if your trustees were a bunch of 18 y.o. with ZERO business acumen and had no attorney representing them in the contract negotiation.
thanks for answering.

to be clear -- you're saying that:
  • what's described could be considered fraud and if so, would be a way out of the GoR...
  • but there's near zero chance that FSU didn't have legal representation and sound advisement....
  • so this likely does NOT have any legs
am I following correctly?
 
so, the Pac 9 schools have three options as I see it:
  • get into the XII
  • merge w/ ACC
  • expand with the best G5 schools they can get
it sure seems the ACC merger could be the best option at this point
 


As the most positive possible take on the meeting, this is ominous for the P9.

If there was any type of agreement in principle pending BOR approvals someone would have said that. GK was positive and everyone was aligned prior to the P12 media day.
 
Not even a release from all 9 together giving GK & the PAC's future a vote of confidence with a commitment of solidarity.
 
I'm speechless.


Are they supposed to say they won't meet again soon? This is the ultimate defeatest summation. We got nothing, let's meet again. The real question is ..who will be left sitting around the table when that meeting happens.
 
Back
Top