I never implied otherwise and I don't think it's particularly great, but they seem happy with it.
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 never implied otherwise and I don't think it's particularly great, but they seem happy with it.
Sure,
And Nebraska football sold thousands of unsold seats to big boosters for $1 each to keep their sellout streak running, MLB teams regularly do promotions with little leagues "selling" them tickets at pennies on the dollar of face value. NFL Sunday ticket was given away to Direct TV customers, now it is tied to TMobile.
Plenty of viewership numbers are inflated in the sports world (and in other forms of entertainment.) As long as advertising is sold on a basis of the number of eyes viewing it there will be the interest in pumping up the numbers. They would rather sell the product at full price but they do what they need to maximize value.
1.7m per team would be around 20m, which is roughly a third of the number of subscribers Netflix has in the US (76m for US/Canada so I'll assume it's somewhere around 70m for the US alone). I think that'd be a very, very ambitious goal.
what????? that statement and the math doesn't work.... explain?
assuming that USC, UCLA, and Colorado were already gone, you are down to 9 teams... how does that make any sense? Wouldn't the "president" ask to take 7 teams?
There's very very ambitious and there is laughably unattainable and this falls somewhere beyond laughably unattainable. The SEC and B1G combined might be able to achieve that
Woof. You could probably count the number of teams in all of the NCAA that would have at least 1.7M paid monthly subscribers on two hands. There's not a single one in the old Pac12.
I'm guessing McMurphy added the 9 to the quote, and the wording ended up a bit awkward. He meant all nine, minus two, equals seven.
Has this guy been reasonably accurate about anything on conference realignment so far? Suggesting ESPN would pay more to the entire ACC +4 than they currently do is insane in and of itself, but suggesting that adding Stanford, Cal, OSU and WSU to the ACC in some kind of mythical merger is going to keep FSU and Clemson happy is also insane.
L Buff
Commissar of the Albuffs Collective Left
One thing I'm looking forward to is the shocked facial expressions of the USC and UCLA players and fans when they have to go to Columbus, Ann Arbor, State College etc. in late October or November and don't have that warm and cozy 70 degrees plus to play in. Should be fun.
Because they never had cold weather games in Oregon, Washington, Colorado or Utah.
Jim Williams is very useful actually. Whatever he tweets is absolutely not happening.
Has anyone else noticed that the thread that has everyone talking out of their a$$es is currently 665 pages? It is by far the longest thread in AllBuffs. Apparently more people talk out of their collective a$$es than we hate Nebraska.
Can you imagine what this thread would have looked like over at netbuffs?
Can you imagine what this thread would have looked like over at netbuffs?
BuffsAlways
Member
Nah. It will keep spinning until there isn’t any money left. By the 2030’s you might have athletics departments switching schools because they couldn’t agree with the administration about the new stadium
None of those places are actually cold in winter. Maryland where I grew up is colder than Seattle, Eugene, or Boulder (and I‘ve lived in all three cities).
TBF, those places he has listed is a different cold.
My point is that I believe the upper tier of CFB will become a closed shop at one point. If you aren't in by that point, you're out. Permanently.
L Buff
Commissar of the Albuffs Collective Left
By and large those venues aren't anything like football in the upper Midwest in the latter weeks of the season. And don't forget Minneapolis and Iowa City.
The real issue is the UCLA basketball team taking a bus to Newark or Philly to get on a 6-hour reverse redeye after losing in Piscataway.
They should be since their product is bad. A washed Messi is completely dominating play.
Big Jim
WTF?
Or in South Bend, Indiana.
Eugene and Seattle are usually pretty nice in October. Maybe some rain, but nothing nasty.
Pullman, on the other hand...
The networks are in charge of this. So if they say that a school has value and they want it as part of the inventory, the Big 12 will pursue. If the Big 12 doesn't get that word, it won't pursue.
Since that's the reality and none of us know the broadcaster business well enough to intelligently contradict anything they push, I'm not going to bother any more with that aspect of this. Whether a school is approved or not by ESPN & Fox proves the case one way or the other.
Also, I'm no longer going to worry about academic fit. That was a driver for Pac-12 which blackballed a lot of good candidates since we had enough votes to block expansion coming from schools which look down on even half of the AAU and most R1s. Not the case any more.
My focus is completely now on whether the school would be fun to play and whether they would be committed to putting out a competitive product. Basically - would they have a great home crowd, put forth all effort to win, and have the resources/ capability to to challenge for conference championships?
I'll take "Things that had merit a year ago when USC and UCLA bolted, but are now a day late and a dollar short for $1000, Alex"
I’ve lost the ability to talk out of my ass since that damned colonoscopy!
Equally shocking to at least the Bruins will be walking into stadiums full of 80, 90, 100,000 college football fans.
You are right about the networks driving this. They care about the bottom line.
At this point though we need to care about the bottom line as well. That is what motivated us to jump to the B12 when we were in a position of strength and got a full share instead of waiting for the rest of the conference.
If CU wants to compete at the highest level, if we want playing for championships to be a realistic possibility we have to worry about the money.
The SEC and the B1G are headed towards $100 million per school payouts, if you are trying to compete with the schools getting that kind of money then what a school does to the conference media distribution matters. If adding school X is likely to increase our value to the Networks by $5 million per school then come on in, I don't care if all they teach is truck driving and hair styling.
On the other side of that if adding Y school is likely to end up reducing our share by $3-4 million per year then no thanks, and I don't care how good their academics are or how great a place they are for a road trip.