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

BlackNGold said:
I never liked going to the PAC12 mostly because I felt the West Coast Schools were not as passionate about football as the Big 12 fans were. But the Big 12 we return to is not the Big 12 that we left. Of course, after next year the PAC12 will not be the conference that we went to play. I took no pleasure in the failure of the PAC12 nor in the struggles of CU football.

I believe the biggest problem the PAC had was the creation of the Pac12 network. This basically thumbed their nose at the traditional media partners, relegated the PAC to limited exposure, and continues to be an albatross in the present media negotiations.

I do not believe there will be another round of conference realignment in decade, at least not as people presently view it. I believe that is going to fracture into about 40 teams vying for the top TV dollars and then about 50 teams fighting the next tier. Conferences are no longer going to be relevant in Football. Too much money and too much dead weight. How long does Ohio State and Michigan want to carry Rutgers and Maryland. That is why I don't understand the fixation on adding G5 teams, they are no longer value additive. SDSU or Fresno State or Boise are not going to move the needle much in role of adding subscribers.

I think that carriage fee programing(some want to call it linear) is going to level off at ~50-60 million subscribers. People "cut the cord" by dropping cable but they then go to something like YoutubeTV or Sling which still pays a carriage fee. Which is the case of ESPN is going to be ~$600 Million per month without advertising. Now the media companies need to figure out the direct to consumer piece. I think eventually ESPN+ type service is going to fall into the $25 per month range with add-on to watch specialized programming like MLB. After they figure the financial part out they can figure out the rights fees, but the fees are going to be associated more fan engagement - Okie State may be more valuable than Cal because they draw more fan engagement (subscribers).
Click to expand...
Yep. Even with the Big 12 now watered down, there is a lot of excitement and energy in the conference and fan bases which will create value.
 
Free shoes U is not going to the big. Utah is not leaving the pac. The last dominoes in this round of moves are ua and asu and possibly another unknown pac team to the big 12.

Oh and the backfilling from the g5 but who cares about them?
 
SuperD said:
I think its pretty clear the folks running these institutions are academics and not business people. The debacle that was their attempt to start a media company is evidence of that, as is the rampant out of control costs for higher ed since they've have an unlimited flow of student loan money.
Click to expand...
Likewise the economic prosperity of many college towns. Not difficult to do well when 5,000 to 12,000 new bodies show up every year with credit cards from Mumzy & Pop…..
 
JayHawk said:
In the PAC did CU develop any rivals or hate any teams in particula?
Click to expand...
Allbuffs has had more Big 12 fans visit this message board in the past several weeks than PAC 12 rivals visited in the past twelve years. That should tell you something.

The rivalry with Utah was forced and never materialized.

Most people loathed SC and Oregon, but hard to call it a rivalry when it’s not competitive.

Pac fans have very little passion for the game in my opinion.

CU struggled with a recruiting identity. It made zero recruiting inroads into the wider Pac 12 footprint beyond what had already been established in SoCal. I actually think CU went backward in California recruiting since joining. CU used to do well with Polynesian players, but that never returned either. Pacific Northwest and Utah produced almost nothing for CU.

If Arizona joins the Big 12, and several pac 12 teams get relegated to the MWC PAC hybrid, I think CU can maintain SoCal recruiting, establish itself in Arizona better, while picking up more in Texas, and potentially Florida.
 
BlackNGold said:
I never liked going to the PAC12 mostly because I felt the West Coast Schools were not as passionate about football as the Big 12 fans were. But the Big 12 we return to is not the Big 12 that we left. Of course, after next year the PAC12 will not be the conference that we went to play. I took no pleasure in the failure of the PAC12 nor in the struggles of CU football.

I believe the biggest problem the PAC had was the creation of the Pac12 network. This basically thumbed their nose at the traditional media partners, relegated the PAC to limited exposure, and continues to be an albatross in the present media negotiations.

I do not believe there will be another round of conference realignment in decade, at least not as people presently view it. I believe that is going to fracture into about 40 teams vying for the top TV dollars and then about 50 teams fighting the next tier. Conferences are no longer going to be relevant in Football. Too much money and too much dead weight. How long does Ohio State and Michigan want to carry Rutgers and Maryland. That is why I don't understand the fixation on adding G5 teams, they are no longer value additive. SDSU or Fresno State or Boise are not going to move the needle much in role of adding subscribers.

I think that carriage fee programing(some want to call it linear) is going to level off at ~50-60 million subscribers. People "cut the cord" by dropping cable but they then go to something like YoutubeTV or Sling which still pays a carriage fee. Which is the case of ESPN is going to be ~$600 Million per month without advertising. Now the media companies need to figure out the direct to consumer piece. I think eventually ESPN+ type service is going to fall into the $25 per month range with add-on to watch specialized programming like MLB. After they figure the financial part out they can figure out the rights fees, but the fees are going to be associated more fan engagement - Okie State may be more valuable than Cal because they draw more fan engagement (subscribers).
Click to expand...


Im not as convinced that those companies are going to step in spend the way ESPN and Fox have. They seem to be proceeding cautiously other than YouTube & NFLST deal. Apple is sitting there with all that money but they want 'global rights' not just North America. Yet they dont seem to be offering the kind of money some think they should. If anything, they all could sit and wait for a market correction and then start buying content when its cheaper.

Ultimately, It will all come down to gaining subscribers. If they dont theyre not going to pay.

I can see a scenario where ESPN possibly work as a stand alone add on service to an Amazon Prime, to a Disney+, to an Apple TV+, or to a YouTubeTV.

We'll see I guess.
 
Last edited:
Buffnik said:
Paraphrasing Wilner's best spin: "It's a sh!t deal on both distribution and revenue, but maybe, potentially, hopefully it positions the Pac for the next round by being the first mover and a legacy partner for Apple's streaming service." That's all he's got.
Click to expand...

He just moved ahead of Canzano for the title of most likely to be the Pacs Baghdad Bob.
 
Pac-12 trying to hold everything together:

seinfeld-george.gif
 
B1G talking to Oregon, Washington, Cal, and Stanford

Whelp....sounds preliminary, but f this happens the 2030 consolidation is coming 7 years early and we may be looking at being in the conference of misfit toys forever since I assume any additional expansion for the B1G would be East with ND and ACC schools if the B1G goes beyond 20, unless for some reason the SEC wants to get bigger.

If I'm WSU or OSU its time to lawyer up and start talking anti-trust and crying to their State legislatures.
 
AZ to the B12, UO UW to the B1G, with maybe Cal and Stanford? I guess everybody else in the P12-x can kick rocks....
 
Cal is a great school who could give two ****s about their athletics. Sure would be lucky. Guess they would be the doormat along with Rutgers.
 
Wetzel is doing an interview at 12:25 MT

www.joxfm.com

Listen Live

Stay connected to Jox 94.5 wherever you go! Find out the best way to take America's best sports station with you around the world through your computer, phone, tablet or smart speaker! RADIO If you are in the central Alabama area, you can tune in to Jox on your radio: FM 94.5 DESKTOP &
www.joxfm.com www.joxfm.com
 
SuperD said:
B1G talking to Oregon, Washington, Cal, and Stanford

Whelp....sounds preliminary, but f this happens the 2030 consolidation is coming 7 years early and we may be looking at being in the conference of misfit toys forever since I assume any additional expansion for the B1G would be East with ND and ACC schools if the B1G goes beyond 20, unless for some reason the SEC wants to get bigger.

If I'm WSU or OSU its time to lawyer up and start talking anti-trust and crying to their State legislatures.
Click to expand...
The consolidation of CFB will either be (1) 64 team league or (2) 32 team conferences. Either way, at that point the Big12, Pac12, and ACC won't matter and the worthy teams will be absorbed by the B1G and SEC. CU needs to do everything it can to leave 0 doubt by the time that happens.
 
It is still unclear though if Fox would actually give the B1G more money at this point. If the answer is no, then they are just doing preliminary planning 7 years before anything happens
 
I agree with Charles Barkley.
I think we'll have pro teams, a pro feeder league and regular colleges.

“In the next three to five years, we are going to have 25 schools that’s gonna dominate the sports because they can afford players,” Barkley said. “The schools who can’t afford or won’t pay players are gonna be irrelevant.”
 
Shldr2Shldr said:
It is still unclear though if Fox would actually give the B1G more money at this point. If the answer is no, then they are just doing preliminary planning 7 years before anything happens
Click to expand...
That is part of due diligence. I imagine UW and Oregon would be offered a partial share which would be covered especially with many Big 10 schools pushing back on night games late in the season. Two more pacific time zone schools make night games easier without playing in Ann Arbor at night in November.
 
Hallett Hell said:
B1G doesn't want to be predatory, lol. Yeah, taking UCLA/USC was just what friends do.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree that accepting them was NOT in the spirit of the "alliance", but in fairness, the reports were that the LA schools, independently, initiated contact with the B1G. Predatory would be the B1G reaching out to them.
 
the big saying it doesn't want to be "predatory" is important. they know they are at some risk already.

by waiting until CU walked out and the pac numbers became known, they try to distance themselves from the damage they have already done.

i guess it is possible that they add uw and uo now but going to 20 with stan and cal seems risky to me. there is some unknown number of schools together that will trigger additional antitrust and other issues.

also, uw and uo can take the partial share thing and suck it up. stan obviously could do so as well. cal would be possibly ****ed on a partial big share unless that deal is somehow better than the pac deal.

i think everything slows down again after the last departures, whomever they may be, from the pac to the b12.

the thing to remember with the big is that they do not NEED to add uo and uw now. or anyone else. presidents do care about perception and they care about litigation and they care about congressional review.
 
BlackNGold said:
That is part of due diligence. I imagine UW and Oregon would be offered a partial share which would be covered especially with many Big 10 schools pushing back on night games late in the season. Two more pacific time zone schools make night games easier without playing in Ann Arbor at night in November.
Click to expand...
They might get a full share via involvement of 4th network.
 
hawg1 said:
They might get a full share via involvement of 4th network.
Click to expand...
I have no idea of what you are talking about. Any network added to the Media rights deal would have to reach an agreement with Fox, CBS and NBC and I doubt that will happen since the Big 10 network is guaranteed 50 games of inventory.
 
BlackNGold said:
That is part of due diligence. I imagine UW and Oregon would be offered a partial share which would be covered especially with many Big 10 schools pushing back on night games late in the season. Two more pacific time zone schools make night games easier without playing in Ann Arbor at night in November.
Click to expand...

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top