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

MiamiBuffs said:
Probably not very long.


They’ll still pay the SEC cause ratings. But probably drop B12, ACC, etc.

[

☝️Fractured is the future. That means signing up for multiple services….


nymag.com

It’s About to Get Incredibly Expensive to Watch Sports

Cable TV was the worst way to follow your favorite team, except for every other way.
nymag.com nymag.com


The other side is watching what happened to the Pac12 happen again. Schools made budgets and hired coaches. They committed to things like construction projects bonds for 30 years because they expect the money to keep going up.

Someone WILL end up with less money.
Click to expand...

Don't watch any Yankees games, don't have to subscribe to any service
 
Buffnik said:
Remember the program boosters in Friday Night Lights? The "He's a big n, he won't break" scene when they wanted the HC to play the star RB on defense? These are the folks you are referring to - at least a significant portion of them are like that.
Click to expand...
I would venture to say those are aTm or Tech fans.

I think it’s important to separate “Texas” from UT. UT fans, in particular, or very CUish and get made of it constantly down here. So I think the racism thing with UT may not hit the same way as the overall state in general.
 
Three pages of discussion of Texas snobbery and its relation, or lack thereof, to racism. Did we slip into the off-season?
 
Not Sure said:
Three pages of discussion of Texas snobbery and its relation, or lack thereof, to racism. Did we slip into the off-season?
Click to expand...
0fe7c342-a974-42a3-830f-d344b7aeaaf8_text.gif
 
Going way back to the Stanford question (sans the race question), I had more than one conversation with people about Stanford and its politics. Almost all Big 12 fans had this feeling that Stanford was this uber-liberal hippie mecca that hated the Big 12 because of its location in the Midwest/Utah/Texas. That's not it at all. Does Stanford look down their noses at Big 12 schools academically? Sure, but they look down at almost everybody academically, because they can. I have no problem saying Stanford is a better academic institution than CU. They are. And the Pac-12 as a whole was academically superior to the Big 12 - especially with UT leaving. We're going back from middle of the pack academically to top tier in our conference.

But Stanford is anything but liberal. Like, not at all. Look at their alumni. Stanford ain't churning out hippies. They are probably the most conservative school in the Pac-12, with the possible exception of Utah. That doesn't put them in the same category as BYU or Baylor, but they are not Cal by a long shot.
 
Alfred91 said:
Going way back to the Stanford question (sans the race question), I had more than one conversation with people about Stanford and its politics. Almost all Big 12 fans had this feeling that Stanford was this uber-liberal hippie mecca that hated the Big 12 because of its location in the Midwest/Utah/Texas. That's not it at all. Does Stanford look down their noses at Big 12 schools academically? Sure, but they look down at almost everybody academically, because they can. I have no problem saying Stanford is a better academic institution than CU. They are. And the Pac-12 as a whole was academically superior to the Big 12 - especially with UT leaving. We're going back from middle of the pack academically to top tier in our conference.

But Stanford is anything but liberal. Like, not at all. Look at their alumni. Stanford ain't churning out hippies. They are probably the most conservative school in the Pac-12, with the possible exception of Utah. That doesn't put them in the same category as BYU or Baylor, but they are not Cal by a long shot.
Click to expand...

Was it the Hoover Institute that finally convinced you?
 
Alfred91 said:
Going way back to the Stanford question (sans the race question), I had more than one conversation with people about Stanford and its politics. Almost all Big 12 fans had this feeling that Stanford was this uber-liberal hippie mecca that hated the Big 12 because of its location in the Midwest/Utah/Texas. That's not it at all. Does Stanford look down their noses at Big 12 schools academically? Sure, but they look down at almost everybody academically, because they can. I have no problem saying Stanford is a better academic institution than CU. They are. And the Pac-12 as a whole was academically superior to the Big 12 - especially with UT leaving. We're going back from middle of the pack academically to top tier in our conference.

But Stanford is anything but liberal. Like, not at all. Look at their alumni. Stanford ain't churning out hippies. They are probably the most conservative school in the Pac-12, with the possible exception of Utah. That doesn't put them in the same category as BYU or Baylor, but they are not Cal by a long shot.
Click to expand...
Stanford is much more of a “use shadowy capital and influence to topple govts and amass personal power” type of conservative than “lightskin guy kneels during song so I cry” type imo
 
Oregon State and Washington State took legal action against the Pac-12 and commissioner George Kliavkoff “to confirm the governance structure of the conference, gain access to business information and protect the conference’s assets,” Oregon State said in a statement Friday.
Click to expand...

...

According to the Pac-12 constitution and bylaws, if a member school gives notice of withdrawal, it immediately ceases to be a member of the Pac-12 Board of Directors, meaning Oregon State and Washington State should now make up the entire Board of Directors membership.
Click to expand...

Link
 
hokiehead said:
...



Link
Click to expand...

I mean, it makes sense. Oregon State and Washington State should have the rights to everything, and to be honest, it's not much, but it should be something they could leverage with the MWC with.

With there really only being 4 power conferences left, you could argue that the Pac-13(? - I wonder if they would allow Hawaii to continue as a football only member) would be the 5th strongest conference in the country. I could definitely see Oregon State cruising to the playoffs next year.
 
Alfred91 said:
I mean, it makes sense. Oregon State and Washington State should have the rights to everything, and to be honest, it's not much, but it should be something they could leverage with the MWC with.

With there really only being 4 power conferences left, you could argue that the Pac-13(? - I wonder if they would allow Hawaii to continue as a football only member) would be the 5th strongest conference in the country. I could definitely see Oregon State cruising to the playoffs next year.
Click to expand...
I'm curious if they could do anything really impactful to the other 10 schools, e.g. vote that only OSU and WSU get shares of media revenue, or move the CCGs to their home campuses
 
Alfred91 said:
I mean, it makes sense. Oregon State and Washington State should have the rights to everything, and to be honest, it's not much, but it should be something they could leverage with the MWC with.

With there really only being 4 power conferences left, you could argue that the Pac-13(? - I wonder if they would allow Hawaii to continue as a football only member) would be the 5th strongest conference in the country. I could definitely see Oregon State cruising to the playoffs next year.
Click to expand...
The other 10 invested millions in creating those assets. I doubt they give them away if they have rights to them.
 
Buffnik said:
The other 10 invested millions in creating those assets. I doubt they give them away if they have rights to them.
Click to expand...

Yes, but... they have a good argument that those institutions have that up when they walked away.

What I imagine OSU and WSU want is a settlement in which the rest of the schools agree to pay their share of the money dip**** Larry Scott screwed them out of, and let OSU and WSU have the rights to the conference name, history, etc.
 
Alfred91 said:
Yes, but... they have a good argument that those institutions have that up when they walked away.

What I imagine OSU and WSU want is a settlement in which the rest of the schools agree to pay their share of the money dip**** Larry Scott screwed them out of, and let OSU and WSU have the rights to the conference name, history, etc.
Click to expand...
So they just want all of the assets and none of the liabilities. Is that all?
 
Buffnik said:
So they just want all of the assets and none of the liabilities. Is that all?
Click to expand...
If the other 10 participated in crafting by-laws giving the last two remaining schools all the power, I couldn't hold it against them for using it to benefit themselves to the fullest extent possible
 
Buffnik said:
So they just want all of the assets and none of the liabilities. Is that all?
Click to expand...

I guess I'm not following. The 10 schools left. They obviously don't value the name and history, so OSU and WSU are moving to secure them, as well as ensuring they don't get stuck with the TV bill. It would be stupid of those schools not to do it.

Do you actually think that those terms won't be agreed to?

ETA - it would be the height of pettiness and I would lose respect for all of the schools involved, even CU, if they didn't resolve this amicably.
 
Alfred91 said:
I guess I'm not following. The 10 schools left. They obviously don't value the name and history, so OSU and WSU are moving to secure them, as well as ensuring they don't get stuck with the TV bill. It would be stupid of those schools not to do it.

Do you actually think that those terms won't be agreed to?

ETA - it would be the height of pettiness and I would lose respect for all of the schools involved, even CU, if they didn't resolve this amicably.
Click to expand...
Personally, I think WSU and OSU should get all the assets and stick USC and Oregon with all the liabilities. Seems fair to me.
 
hokiehead said:
If the other 10 participated in crafting by-laws giving the last two remaining schools all the power, I couldn't hold it against them for using it to benefit themselves to the fullest extent possible
Click to expand...
That's all I'm saying. CU should enforce its contractual rights, whatever they are, and not give a thing away.

I feel for OSU & WSU fans, but from a business sense they should be on their knees thankful they received an equal revenue share all those years. The market just spoke and clearly told them that they are worth less than many G5s.
 
Alfred91 said:
I guess I'm not following. The 10 schools left. They obviously don't value the name and history, so OSU and WSU are moving to secure them, as well as ensuring they don't get stuck with the TV bill. It would be stupid of those schools not to do it.

Do you actually think that those terms won't be agreed to?

ETA - it would be the height of pettiness and I would lose respect for all of the schools involved, even CU, if they didn't resolve this amicably.
Click to expand...
I've never been part of a negotiation where you didn't have to give something to get something.
 
Buffnik said:
I've never been part of a negotiation where you didn't have to give something to get something.
Click to expand...

WSU and OSU are alleging that right now they are the sole members of the Pac board of directors, so it seems to me that they could vote themselves the entire share of the revenues for the Pac-12 basketball tournament, they could vote themselves the entire share of the revenue from the Pac-12 conference championship game, etc.
 
Alfred91 said:
I mean, it makes sense. Oregon State and Washington State should have the rights to everything, and to be honest, it's not much, but it should be something they could leverage with the MWC with.

With there really only being 4 power conferences left, you could argue that the Pac-13(? - I wonder if they would allow Hawaii to continue as a football only member) would be the 5th strongest conference in the country. I could definitely see Oregon State cruising to the playoffs next year.
Click to expand...
Lol. There are 2 power conferences and thats it.
 
Alfred91 said:
I mean, it makes sense. Oregon State and Washington State should have the rights to everything, and to be honest, it's not much, but it should be something they could leverage with the MWC with.

With there really only being 4 power conferences left, you could argue that the Pac-13(? - I wonder if they would allow Hawaii to continue as a football only member) would be the 5th strongest conference in the country. I could definitely see Oregon State cruising to the playoffs next year.
Click to expand...
I disagree.

No one is leaving the conference during the existing gor and there is still a year left of operations where 12 teams are full members. If those 12 members want to come together before August 1st 2024 and dissolve the conference, they can.
 
No matter what the contracts say there is enough money involved, both in terms of assets and in terms of liabilities that it is going to end up in the hands of the lawyers.

If they don't figure out a way to resolve it that everyone can agree to that is going to mean ongoing legal action that will be both expensive and take years to finally resolve. I doubt any of the schools want that ending because in that case the only ones who will come out ahead are the lawyers.

WSU and OSU have the most to lose but reality is that they have already lost. The B12 and the ACC don't want them and going to the MWC (even if this means a "merger" retaining some PAC identity) will mean a lot less money in the future. For decades they rode the coattails of UO and UW, that is gone and not coming back.
 
Alfred91 said:
WSU and OSU are alleging that right now they are the sole members of the Pac board of directors, so it seems to me that they could vote themselves the entire share of the revenues for the Pac-12 basketball tournament, they could vote themselves the entire share of the revenue from the Pac-12 conference championship game, etc.
Click to expand...
BOD cannot change the by-laws for the remainder of the current agreement. They are sitting alone in those seats because it would be inappropriate for the other 10 to be deciding what deals on expansion, media, bowls, sponsors, etc to negotiate for post this year. That would be a conflict of interest since they will be representing other conferences after this year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top