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
Cal, Stanford, and SMU are definitely going to pacify FSU and convince them to stop their insurrection / jailbreak...
All FSU cares about is whether the ACC will provide them the resources to compete without financial disadvantage against Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Ohio State and USC.
I’ve always hated those ****ers. Not in a sports rivalry sort of way. Just in a disdain sort of way.
Fred 2
steaming service
Sure this will appease FSU & Clemson. They add so much revenue to the table.
Pipe down Florida Man.
Ooh, sweet. And alliance with the ACC. Those are awesome.
Yep. They like many of the universities in the ACC and even if travel costs make it a worse financial deal than the Big 12, it's worth it for them because the other options they had were conferencing with schools they look down on while getting a $10-15M media deal.
What I can't figure out is why any ACC school would want it. Because it sounds like the slight increase in media revenue would be eaten up by the travel and then you would need to factor in the fan engagement issues. Core ACC fans complain already that all the conference locations are no longer within driving distance. I'm sure they love the idea of coast-to-coast flights and a 3-hour time zone difference. (My biggest concern about the Big 12, actually.)
Well not zero. But $7mill in the aac.
ESPN gets
4corners at say 31m each
Cal and furd for say what, 25m
Wsu\osu for 7m in the aac
Fox is picking up 4
But ESPN is only laying out $188mil/year vs say, paying 10 teams at 30m for 300m/year
Seems like ESPN gets what they want from programming at a much cheaper price. Sure, they had to split some with fox, who are paying a lot more.
Just matters if all the teams in the acc and aac will be onboard. They may not be, especially in the ACC. Teams looking to jump ship to the sec may vote no, just like USC and UCLA did to the PAC.
It also cuts the contract term down to 2031 for ACC members, I think. That's very appealing to all parties. And while the SEC, FSU and Clemson probably don't want to wait, it's ESPN paying the SEC bills.
If the contract terms drops, yes. That would be very appealing. Still a hike for the teams in terms of travel, but what are their other options? Independence or even less money. ESPN probably doesn't care if they keep osu\wsu, but they would take them at 7mil or not. And the existing acc teams won't like the travel, they will like the lowering of the contract terms, well at least their ADs would.
Fred 2
steaming service
What’s your concern about travel! It’s just 3 teams and how often are we really going to play! Utah, byu, az, asu, ksu, ks OSU ttu, TCU, OSU, and Baylor! These are all teams we have played before in the same conference with one exception. So who you have left is cinn, wv, ucf and I would argue Houston isn’t that much further than Seattle if any. I would argue we are closer than we were in the pac with more than 2/3 of them.
California state-funded travel ban - Wikipedia
There are 23 states on that list. Including some in the old pac 10/12. It's not gonna stop travel for football teams, even in state schools.
- Alabama
- Arizona
- Arkansas
- Florida
- Georgia
- Idaho
- Indiana
- Iowa
- Kansas
- Kentucky
- Louisiana
- Mississippi
- Montana
- North Carolina
- North Dakota
- Ohio
- Oklahoma
- South Carolina
- South Dakota
- Tennessee
- Texas
- Utah
- West Virginia[1]
I'm a big advocate for regional conferences. National conferences have never worked because fan engagement sucks when your conference rival to win the title is thousands of miles away. Those games are fun when they're non-conference rarities to check out a new stadium / city / fanbase. Loses its luster and only the negatives remain when it's every year. Especially since this isn't only about football. It's not going to be fun when our WBB has to play Friday at UCF and Sunday at West Virginia.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
Utah fans are as stupid as nub fans with like a 10th of the history
And a better football team
HighlandsBuff
Well-Known Member
I've seen some damn empty UCLA games, but that didn't stop 'em.
Then again, I've always thought the Big 10 took UCLA along with USC to totally dislodge the Pac from LA, which was a massive deal.
Ending up with various Pac-12 couplets in the Big 10, Big 12 and ACC would be such a stupid result. But here we are.
The B1G could have taken Stanford instead of UCLA but by taking both LA schools, its intent on destroying the PAC was clear.
The PAC's snobbery towards expansion is why we are at this point.
Fred: I would like to understand what you are saying here. So what is it that you are saying?
The list of teams ARE the teams we play.... so we will play them OFTEN.... in fact, we play THEM almost every week.
Houston is about 300 miles closer than Seattle and Pullman.
Closer to the PAC 2/3? We are MUCH closer to KU, KSU and OSU than any other Pac-12 school other than Utah. where does the 2/3 number come from? or is that opinon?
Production costs are very high. It costs $75-$100K to broadcast a poker tournament with non union crews in the PokerGo studio. Travel for dozens, fuel, sets, power, etc. get very pricy.
Who doesn't? Longest bowl-less streak in the P5 belongs to the Nubs, iirc. Their "Best at Sucking" football museum is quite impressive. Highlights include the "Best 3-9 Team Ever" memorial wing, numerous "Moral Victory" trophies which commemorate great Husker moments like when they went into Columbus in 2018 and only lost 31-36, and of course there's the "Everyone Else is a Dirty, Classless Cheater" pavilion with (my personal favorite) the 3-hour interactive multimedia presentation on Jacob Callier.
I'm with you on regional conferences. Maybe this move to national conferences will finally divorce football from the rest of the sports and there would be another realignment back to regional conferences sans football.
HighlandsBuff
Well-Known Member
For sure.
Not to defend it too hard, but the geography of the west (which a few years ago seemed to kinda matter) is tricky, with fewer obvious candidates. We debated endlessly UNLV, Boise, SDSU (and we apparently aren't done) and it always seemed like they weren't additive. On the other hand, a complementary public flagship like UT, KU, OU and so on seemed too distant.
Now we're talking about Stanford and Cal, single-digit miles from the Pacific, joining the Atlantic Coast Conference.
I think the Pac-12 higher ups (who are likely snobs) wanted a fitting, "peer" university.
It turned out that no one cares.
HighlandsBuff
Well-Known Member
I've always thought this snippet from the Pac-12 Wikipedia page was interesting:
"Following "pay-for-play" scandals at California, USC, UCLA, and Washington, the PCC disbanded in June 1959. Ten months earlier in August 1958, these four schools agreed to form a new conference that would take effect the following summer.[83][84] When the four schools and Stanford began discussions for a new conference in 1959, retired Admiral Thomas J. Hamilton interceded and suggested the schools consider creating a national "power conference" (Hamilton had been a key player, head coach, and athletic director at Navy, and was the current athletic director at Pittsburgh). Nicknamed the "Airplane Conference,"[85][86][87] the five former PCC schools would have played with other major academically-oriented schools, including Army, Navy, Air Force, Notre Dame, Pitt, Penn State, and Syracuse.[85][88] The effort fell through when a Pentagon official vetoed the idea and the service academies backed out.[89]"
Obviously the service academies aren't what they were back then any more, but that would've been an interesting alternate universe.
"Following "pay-for-play" scandals at California, USC, UCLA, and Washington, the PCC disbanded in June 1959. Ten months earlier in August 1958, these four schools agreed to form a new conference that would take effect the following summer.[83][84] When the four schools and Stanford began discussions for a new conference in 1959, retired Admiral Thomas J. Hamilton interceded and suggested the schools consider creating a national "power conference" (Hamilton had been a key player, head coach, and athletic director at Navy, and was the current athletic director at Pittsburgh). Nicknamed the "Airplane Conference,"[85][86][87] the five former PCC schools would have played with other major academically-oriented schools, including Army, Navy, Air Force, Notre Dame, Pitt, Penn State, and Syracuse.[85][88] The effort fell through when a Pentagon official vetoed the idea and the service academies backed out.[89]"
Obviously the service academies aren't what they were back then any more, but that would've been an interesting alternate universe.