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!

I hope CSU joins the big XII

darth-horax

Well-Known Member
In all honesty, that would help the buffs.
Our scheduling would look better with another yearly P5 conference opponent every season.

Wouldn't get any tougher, but the appearance of scheduling would definitely look that way.

It would be cool to see CSU do well in the BIG XII, but that wouldn't happen for quite some time.
 
I think it would be cool for them. Not going to happen, but a nice thought. They fit in the B12 culture a lot more than we ever did.
 
TimmyDUBs said:
I think it would be cool for them. Not going to happen, but a nice thought. They fit in the B12 culture a lot more than we ever did.
Click to expand...

Yeah. There are a lot of Agg schools in the Big 12. They'll fit very well when KU, OU and UT all leave and the remaining programs (Agg or religious) need to expand in hopes of keeping power conference status.
 
Pass, there are many better options for the Big XII. The only reason they are in the conversation is it is convenient for the media to look back and see the geographic similarity to when CU and Nebraska were once in the conference. The Big XII has shifted south and midwest. UH, Cincy, Memphis, and other more regional Universities make more sense in relation to the conferences core.
 
From everything I have heard, if the Big 12 only adds two CSU has no shot. If the Big 12 adds four and one of them is BYU, it could get very interesting. Jake Trotter of ESPN thinks CSU is in the second tier of expansion candidates right now which he broke down in his Big 12 blog last week:

Tier 1: BYU, Cincinnati, Houston
Tier 2: Connecticut, Central Florida, Colorado State
Tier 3: Memphis, South Florida, Boise State
Tier 4: Everyone else

http://www.espn.com/blog/big12/post...g-placing-the-expansion-candidates-into-tiers
 
Since this thread is already about fantasy, there's more angles to consider. if CSU doesn't get an invite to the B12, and subsequently has to shut down its football program due to financial feasibility issues, that would be good for CU, too.

All those two dozen CSU college football fans would need to find another school to support.

The local media may be able to focus more on CU vs P12 teams instead of RMS and MWC games.

CSU football bankruptcy also frees CU up to add more variety to the OOC schedule.

There's no downside when CSU football goes tits up.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
darth-horax said:
In all honesty, that would help the buffs.
Our scheduling would look better with another yearly P5 conference opponent every season.

Wouldn't get any tougher, but the appearance of scheduling would definitely look that way.

It would be cool to see CSU do well in the BIG XII, but that wouldn't happen for quite some time.
Click to expand...


I agree with everything you said, except the first three paragraphs. ...
 
agree with the above post ^ It would help us at the end of the year having P5 conference scheduled non conference, the bad is, they would probably recruit Texas better
 
I just do not care what happens to them. We will play them once in a while after this contract is up so it will not matter. We will not see another long term deal and will be able to adjust our schedule.
 
Buffalo Brad said:
I just do not care what happens to them. We will play them once in a while after this contract is up so it will not matter. We will not see another long term deal and will be able to adjust our schedule.
Click to expand...

What I find interesting is the radio silence in the past couple months. Back in June, the FoCo paper was reporting 2023 & 2024 as if a home/home was a done deal that would be officially announced this summer. Frankly, I don't want to play CSU either of those years. 2023 already has TCU & Nebraska. 2024 already has Nebraska & North Dakota State. 2025 & 2026 work better for CU (Georgia Tech only scheduled opponent each year), but apparently CSU doesn't want to do those years because they're afraid of overscheduling with 2 P5s on each schedule already. Which takes us to 2027 & 2028. Buffs have KSU each year and CSU has nothing on that schedule. I suspect that if 2023/24 doesn't happen we'll be looking at a 6-year hiatus. And if I'm RG, the only way I do 2023/24 is if CSU gives up 2020 being a home game instead of Mile High. Why again did Bohn agree to a 10-year extension of the RMS with CSU having the option of playing the 10th year game in Ft. Collins? I'm getting pissed off all over again about that deal.
 
Last edited:
CsquaredCC said:
From everything I have heard, if the Big 12 only adds two CSU has no shot. If the Big 12 adds four and one of them is BYU, it could get very interesting. Jake Trotter of ESPN thinks CSU is in the second tier of expansion candidates right now which he broke down in his Big 12 blog last week:

Tier 1: BYU, Cincinnati, Houston
Tier 2: Connecticut, Central Florida, Colorado State
Tier 3: Memphis, South Florida, Boise State
Tier 4: Everyone else

http://www.espn.com/blog/big12/post...g-placing-the-expansion-candidates-into-tiers
Click to expand...

I think this is a reasonable take. CSU is certainly not the most attractive candidate, but I don't think they're too far off. The product on the field hasn't been compelling in recent years, no argument there, but certain criteria cast CSU in a favorable light. The inclusion of CSU would be due to overall institutional fit (land grant institution, sizable enrollment, solid academics, large contingent of B12 alumni in the area) and potential (denver tv market, new stadium, demonstrated commitment to growth/excellence). Not sure how much those things will matter to the B12 or how detrimental the lack of recent success will be. However, I think it's shortsighted to think CSU has zero shot. It's almost as crazy as suggesting CU will return to the B12.
 
CSU has very, very little chance of a B12 invite unless they can somehow convince the big hats in Texas that they really are CU. once the invite for "The University of Colorado" is delivered, they'll just cross it out, put "Colorado State University" in its place and hope nobody notices.
 
What interest existed in the series with them has mostly died out. We have no real reason to play them more than once a decade or so now.

We should not be playing them in Denver and there is no advantage to us in playing in Ft. Collins. Even if the new stadium if full we can make more money elsewhere and gain other benefits as well such as recruiting and connecting with out of state aums.

They have made a lot of noise that they are willling to do 2 for 1s and that would be the only way we should consider a contract with them (other than a simple one off in our stadium) and if they won't do that then on to the next potential opponent.
 
ramfan said:
I think this is a reasonable take. CSU is certainly not the most attractive candidate, but I don't think they're too far off. The product on the field hasn't been compelling in recent years, no argument there, but certain criteria cast CSU in a favorable light. The inclusion of CSU would be due to overall institutional fit (land grant institution, sizable enrollment, solid academics, large contingent of B12 alumni in the area) and potential (denver tv market, new stadium, demonstrated commitment to growth/excellence). Not sure how much those things will matter to the B12 or how detrimental the lack of recent success will be. However, I think it's shortsighted to think CSU has zero shot. It's almost as crazy as suggesting CU will return to the B12.
Click to expand...

At the end of the day, what I think kills CSU's chances is that it doesn't open up new recruiting grounds while adding one more competitor for the same recruits. It's the last thing that KU, KSU, ISU and WVU want to see as they try to find players in Texas.

This is why I think Cincinnati has the best chance. Tapping into Ohio recruiting is a big deal for the conference. I think they like Memphis for much the same reason as well as UCF. Houston is up there due to in-state politics and because they've lost E. Texas to the SEC. Heck, even Tulane makes an interesting case since it's New Orleans and also significantly enhances the academic rep of the conference. Last, UConn would probably make the networks happy with pieces of the Boston and New York tv sets.

Honestly, I don't think that the conference looks west. BYU has the Sunday problem for all the other sports. Then, none of the other candidates do anything to move the needle on broadcast revenue or recruiting... unless they go after SDSU.

The best argument CSU has is geographic proximity (for KSU, at least, as well as land bridging BYU if they got picked) and that is the one criteria the Big 12 said didn't matter to it.
 
The best thing CSU has going for it is that the Big 12 doesn't seem to care who they add. They are simply adding for a money grab. If CSU takes a smaller piece of the pie, they may have a shot.
 
Buffnik said:
At the end of the day, what I think kills CSU's chances is that it doesn't open up new recruiting grounds while adding one more competitor for the same recruits. It's the last thing that KU, KSU, ISU and WVU want to see as they try to find players in Texas.

This is why I think Cincinnati has the best chance. Tapping into Ohio recruiting is a big deal for the conference. I think they like Memphis for much the same reason as well as UCF. Houston is up there due to in-state politics and because they've lost E. Texas to the SEC. Heck, even Tulane makes an interesting case since it's New Orleans and also significantly enhances the academic rep of the conference. Last, UConn would probably make the networks happy with pieces of the Boston and New York tv sets.

Honestly, I don't think that the conference looks west. BYU has the Sunday problem for all the other sports. Then, none of the other candidates do anything to move the needle on broadcast revenue or recruiting... unless they go after SDSU.

The best argument CSU has is geographic proximity (for KSU, at least, as well as land bridging BYU if they got picked) and that is the one criteria the Big 12 said didn't matter to it.
Click to expand...

I actually think the block of KSU, KU, ISU and OSU are the ones hitting hard against adding Houston to the mix for recruiting reasons. From what I have heard those schools are actually supportive of CSU.

Cincinnati looks like a shoe-in at this point. I disagree with other CSU fans on this, but I think CSU getting in depends heavily on BYU getting in. I honestly don't see how the Big 12 passes on BYU given the overall strength of their programs and fan base. At the end of the day, it looks like it is shaping up to be six (maybe seven) programs vying for two or four spots. CSU is in that mix, but will need a couple of breaks for it to happen.
 
Last edited:
Cincy, Memphis and two out of the UCF, USF Houston trio would be the best for recruiting purposes. Orlando and Memphis are unsaturated markets where is could be argued college football is the biggest sport (not necessarily saying the teams themselves but their interest would obviously pick up over time). UConn adds a bunch from the perspective of a big-12 network but it doesn't sound like the Longhorn Network is going away so they would be off the table unless the current schools want to add a bottom feeder for the conference and a blue blood bball program. I wonder if they add four teams from the american if the exit fee would be significantly reduced.
 
Bufffan68 said:
Is that a possibility? I've heard some programs like Hawaii and SJSU are struggling but not heard that re CSEwe.
Click to expand...

Short answer - the likelihood of a CSU bankruptcy in the near term is about as likely as a CSU invite to the Pac12. Chances are very slim.

But, according to the Coloradoan, CSU athletics are no where near to being self-sufficient. Over half of CSU's $38M annual revenue commitment comes from the University. CSU is spending $20M of university funds to prop up CSU athletics.

In Boulder, the message is loud and clear that CU athletics must be self-sufficient. Our media deal, ticket sales, licensing, and fund-raising proceeds are supposed to cover CUAD expenses. There's no political will for Benson or DiStefano to cut Rick Geoege a fat $20M check every year to prop up CU athletics. The students at CU aren't going to approve student fee increases to cover some $20M in revenue shortfall.

The politics at CSU are different than at CU. But it's a fair opinion to assume that CSU president Tony Frank is looking for CSU athletics to become a break-even proposition. It's hard to explain to facility, students, and the Board of Governors that CSU tuition has to go up when there is a $20M discretionary subsidy being spent to keep the CSU athletic department afloat.

The CSU gamble is that a new $200M+ stadium and P5 bid will equal a higher profile that allows CSU to attract more out of state students who are willing to pay a premium out of state tuition. But if the P5 bid falls on its face, CSU will have tremendous pressure to recognize their gamble is a loser. Then CSU administrators will stop throwing good money at a bad college athletic budget shortfall. At some point, CSU may have to throw in the towel on the pipe dream of being able to run with the big dogs in an arms race they can't win with a meager MWC media deal.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Skidmark said:
In Boulder, the message is loud and clear that CU athletics must be self-sufficient. Our media deal, ticket sales, licensing, and fund-raising proceeds are supposed to cover CUAD expenses. There's no political will for Benson or DiStefano to cut Rick Geoege a fat $20M check every year to prop up CU athletics. The students at CU aren't going to approve student fee increases to cover some $20M in revenue shortfall.
Click to expand...

Every semester they charged me $35 in the 90s to subsidize the AD. Is that really self sufficient? Will that fee be eliminated to achieve self sufficient?

Until these mega TV deals came along 90% of the schools in the big conferences were subsidized by the school and losing money.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
Every semester they charged me $35 in the 90s to subsidize the AD. Is that really self sufficient? Will that fee be eliminated to achieve self sufficient?

Until these mega TV deals came along 90% of the schools in the big conferences were subsidized by the school and losing money.
Click to expand...


CU's student fees run $404 semester according to 9News
This funds access to the Rec center and student programs. No mention of what, if any, is directed towards the CUAD.

The Coloradoan article I linked above says $114 at CSU goes to CSU's AD.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top