Right, but it's not nearly the same as Texas owning Dallas, Georgia owning Atlanta, etc
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
Right, but it's not nearly the same as Texas owning Dallas, Georgia owning Atlanta, etc
In the days of TV households mattering for the media rights, it’s the exact same thing.
If far more people are watching CFB in one market compared to another market, wouldn't that first market be more valuable?
In many ways. But cable rates are still the biggest partner mechanism and they tie things to household subscribers in-market vs out-of-market subscribers. Especially important if a conference owned it's own network as the Pac-12 did.
The B1G didn’t take UCLA because people watch their games. Same with Maryland and Rutgers. At current it’s mostly about in market vs out of market subscriber fees.
Today is May Day and realignment in the lower levels could be heating up again. UTRV is joining the Southland and that was a school that really believed in the WAC's vision.
Maybe the WAC will finally die.
Maybe the WAC will finally die.
Yep the guy is delusional.
The WCC has their games on ESPN+ which isn't linear TV and that is where all their sports save for football will be housed for the next two athletic seasons. Some basketball games with Gonzaga will be on ESPN as usual. That probably won't be much different from what they got from the P12N which is only enough to cover the expense putting the games on media outlets.
I'd hate to know how much CW is paying both schools although both schools have acknowledged that they are sacrificing money for more exposure.
The MWC's media rights deal runs for this upcoming athletic season and the one after that. I just read a Wilner article related with the Pac-2 schools and the MWC and something is going to have to happen before June 30, 2025 if the Pac-2 will do that reverse merger with the MWC or the Pac-2 schools joining the MWC as full members.
That guy, and other OSU/WSU fans, tout their TV ratings all the time and it’s going to be fun to see them spin the bad ratings when they are playing CSU, SDSU and Boise State, instead of Oregon, Washington and USC.
66BUFF
FTW
ISU and K state are the shockers on that list
I can totally understand how you might confuse either of those schools with Wichita State.
Is there a reason why all your posts have a 24" x 36" picture of a hat attached to them? Granted the hat is pretty cool, but...
Last edited:
Arizona at 8.5?
I’m thinking of hammering the under on Arizona and the over on CU
I really don't get the Arizona love. They are a major unknown, IMO, with a wider range of possible season outcomes than CU.
Easier conference?
I got in a Twitter debate with a UA fan over how CU will dominate the Big 12 if they continue to recruit (transfer and high school) at the highest level in the conference. Just like the teams that recruit (transfer and high school) at the highest levels of the other conferences dominate. He was very confident that CU would suck no matter what and 4-8 is 4-8 and the on the field results matter more than recruiting.
I brought up how Tulane went 2-10 in '21 and 10-2 in '22. A remarkable turn around. I pointed out that over that offseason Tulane improved their ppg differential by 22.3 points. Cu last year improved their differential by 22.4 ppg.
It just seems no matter what metrics you use, Prime led CU will suck forever. This year could be lots of fun.
Colorado has been a doormat for so long and the vast majority of CFB "fans" (and media for that matter) don't have the in depth knowledge of what this team has done the past two offseasons, so the perception of CU to most people will always be a bottom feeder, until they prove otherwise.
That’s fair. I am a casual fan of most other teams, but I do try to respect obvious improvement when I see it. I was listening to late kick and even pate was going off about how he thinks cu is going to be bad. I wonder sometimes what I am missing.
The way that people become well known national college football personalities is by agreeing with the whims of the crowd (or being hot). The average net talent of the team is up YoY. The team addressed most of its glaring needs (aside from LB). The team’s most undisciplined personalities are gone.
The team will be better next year and plays in a worse conference. The two variables (aside from key player health) that will determine’s Colorado’s football season are: (1) quality of OL play; (2) defensive penalty margin
There are good reasons to believe that both of these will improve dramatically in 2024.
Just found out…I didn’t think it was THAT big. Took care of it…thanks.
Trogdor
Soy Boy
ahem
