It likely isn't in the cards for CU to part of one of those two conferences at this point in time, but there is likely another decade of moves to be made before the sport settles on what will likely be the lasting structure that resembles something close to the NFL. We'll see how the CU football program manages between now and then to determine whether CU football is included in that structure or not.Colorado passed Minnesota to become #21 in population and is growing 2x-6x as fast as the states in front of it for those within 1M of CO (WI, MO, MD, IN, TN, MA). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_population
Az & WA are the next states on the list, both with double digit growth from 2010-2021.
Denver, likewise, is a growing Top 20 metro.
State flagship in that metro with an attractive research institution profile and P5 level facilities is attractive.
CU's problem isn't that the package isn't attractive. It is. CU is more valuable than many current B1G and SEC members. Our problem is that we're on the outside looking in and we're not attractive enough to take a revenue share while increasing the value of the revenue shares for the 16 teams already inside. Very few schools (maybe only Notre Dame) have enough juice to overcome that math.
I like them all better that bolting with UA, ASU and Utah to make a Big 16. I think I lean toward Option 1 even though that's probably the most politically challenging due each conference leaving long-time members and rivals behind.
Which set-up would you prefer?
I like the third one.
So many of these “what if” scenarios ultimately have teams outside the P5 being added to make up these news conferences. That can’t be financially viable. Adding SMU and Memphis to a merged Big12 and Pac12? What??A couple thoughts...
1. Option 3 is cool and all but splitting a $500m(??) TV deal 24 ways (or maybe some programs would get more than others) is probably not sustainable, as that's $21m/school. That conference would need a $1B/year deal to be legitimate, and to even be remotely competitive with the other two, it'd have to be closer to $2B, which isn't happening.
2. Option 1 would be the best. 16 teams, Oregon and Washington included
3. One consistent thing I'm noticing on Twitter from fans other programs, writers and other media types is that CU is neither being mentioned as a great addition to a conference OR as a candidate to be left out completely. Basically, most people believe CU has a place among the second tier programs, which is encouraging. There's also a WSJ article out there that claimed 10 teams have reached out to Kevin Warren about B1G admission and a few media types have speculated that CU is one of them.
Yeah, everyone is so fixated on making an even number of teams for Pods for some reason. Every conference is getting rid of divisions, so I don't know why it all keeps getting presented as such with teams being added specifically to fill out a specific pod.So many of these “what if” scenarios ultimately have teams outside the P5 being added to make up these news conferences. That can’t be financially viable. Adding SMU and Memphis to a merged Big12 and Pac12? What??
The only way all this consolidation makes conferences more money is at some point several schools have to be left without a seat, otherwise it’s just rearranging deck chairs.
Side note: Rutgers is the luckiest f**king school in all this as it stands.
It makes you wonder how much more valuable CU would be right now if we were a perennial top 25 program the last decade + instead of a P5 doormat. All the other metrics seem to be there, it’s pretty infuriating that terrible management and allowing the program to languish because winning hasn’t been a priority is why we’re in this situation.Colorado passed Minnesota to become #21 in population and is growing 2x-6x as fast as the states in front of it for those within 1M of CO (WI, MO, MD, IN, TN, MA). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_population
Az & WA are the next states on the list, both with double digit growth from 2010-2021.
Denver, likewise, is a growing Top 20 metro.
State flagship in that metro with an attractive research institution profile and P5 level facilities is attractive.
CU's problem isn't that the package isn't attractive. It is. CU is more valuable than many current B1G and SEC members. Our problem is that we're on the outside looking in and we're not attractive enough to take a revenue share while increasing the value of the revenue shares for the 16 teams already inside. Very few schools (maybe only Notre Dame) have enough juice to overcome that math.
Look at the support the program got in 2016. Folsom was packed, multiple games were in prime time slots, local and national media were talking about us. Colorado is a fairweather sports state, outside of the Broncos, for sure, but that extends to CU the same way. People are dying for a good football program in Boulder and the ratings would absolutely come. Hopefully that would be part of the pitch to the B1G, but definitely feels like the answer would be, "let's see how you invest in the program over the next 3-5 years and we'll revisit the ratings and discussion then"It makes you wonder how much more valuable CU would be right now if we were a perennial top 25 program the last decade + instead of a P5 doormat. All the other metrics seem to be there, it’s pretty infuriating that terrible management and allowing the program to languish because winning hasn’t been a priority is why we’re in this situation.
CU probably becomes more valuable than 10-12 current BIG and SEC members if we’re an 8-9 win program the last 10 years or so.
Im having negative flashbacks just thinking about it.About 30 miles from Westwood to Pasadena across LA traffic.
Exactly.So many of these “what if” scenarios ultimately have teams outside the P5 being added to make up these news conferences. That can’t be financially viable. Adding SMU and Memphis to a merged Big12 and Pac12? What??
The only way all this consolidation makes conferences more money is at some point several schools have to be left without a seat, otherwise it’s just rearranging deck chairs.
Side note: Rutgers is the luckiest f**king school in all this as it stands.
IM loling at the idea of the “Pacific pod” of the B1G where all the teams are familiar with each other and still cant recruit.Colorado passed Minnesota to become #21 in population and is growing 2x-6x as fast as the states in front of it for those within 1M of CO (WI, MO, MD, IN, TN, MA). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_population
Az & WA are the next states on the list, both with double digit growth from 2010-2021.
Denver, likewise, is a growing Top 20 metro.
State flagship in that metro with an attractive research institution profile and P5 level facilities is attractive.
CU's problem isn't that the package isn't attractive. It is. CU is more valuable than many current B1G and SEC members. Our problem is that we're on the outside looking in and we're not attractive enough to take a revenue share while increasing the value of the revenue shares for the 16 teams already inside. Very few schools (maybe only Notre Dame) have enough juice to overcome that math.
Sometimes you have to take the life preserver that is available when you jump ship.I'm pretty much done caring, but I'd prefer that religiously affiliated schools with questionable histories (BYU, Baylor) aren't given a preferred spot
Yeah, everyone is so fixated on making an even number of teams for Pods for some reason. Every conference is getting rid of divisions, so I don't know why it all keeps getting presented as such with teams being added specifically to fill out a specific pod.
IMO, the only scenario in that piece that makes any sense is Option 1
Yep. Pods is for scheduling. Championship game selections will be divisionless - just the 2 highest-ranked teams to give the conference its best shot at a playoff invite. I think that's where we were all headed even if the SEC & B1G hadn't shaken things up so much with UT/OU/USC/UCLA expansion.I think you will see the divisions or pods stick around in some manner simply for scheduling purposes even though they no longer matter for the title game.
It is the only way to make travel make sense (and cents) and to build any kind of traditions and rivalries which is/was the foundation of CFB.Yep. Pods is for scheduling. Championship game selections will be divisionless - just the 2 highest-ranked teams to give the conference its best shot at a playoff invite. I think that's where we were all headed even if the SEC & B1G hadn't shaken things up so much with UT/OU/USC/UCLA expansion.
That's BS, if Harvard wanted to join the B1G they would be welcome with open arms, regardless of their athletics.Stanford brings approximately zero eyes to tv sets. No one gives a rip about Stanford athletics. B1G has zero reason to invite them or Cal.
You really believe that?That's BS, if Harvard wanted to join the B1G they would be welcome with open arms, regardless of their athletics.
ESPN actually has a pretty massive incentive for the Big 12 to be the conference that loses the Big 12 / PAC Whatever death match.I’m starting to think that the B12 and PAC 12 dissolve and select members of each form their own 14-16 team conference. That sucks for schools like UCF and WVA, but they’re probably better off in the ACC anyway, and the ACC has room for them.
We negotiate our butts into the B1G by taking a reduction in conference share for an extended amount of time, just to get in so that in 2028-30 (somewhere in there) we gain our full share. It's B1G or bust for me. Nubs and MI State regularly played in conference is too good to pass up and gets eyeballs and tickets and $$$.Colorado passed Minnesota to become #21 in population and is growing 2x-6x as fast as the states in front of it for those within 1M of CO (WI, MO, MD, IN, TN, MA). https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_and_territories_by_population
Az & WA are the next states on the list, both with double digit growth from 2010-2021.
Denver, likewise, is a growing Top 20 metro.
State flagship in that metro with an attractive research institution profile and P5 level facilities is attractive.
CU's problem isn't that the package isn't attractive. It is. CU is more valuable than many current B1G and SEC members. Our problem is that we're on the outside looking in and we're not attractive enough to take a revenue share while increasing the value of the revenue shares for the 16 teams already inside. Very few schools (maybe only Notre Dame) have enough juice to overcome that math.
We negotiate our butts into the B1G by taking a reduction in conference share for an extended amount of time, just to get in so that in 2028-30 (somewhere in there) we gain our full share. It's B1G or bust for me. Nubs and MI State regularly played in conference is too good to pass up and gets eyeballs and tickets and $$$.
We need to put on some makeup, get a full makeover actually, and make ourselves as attractive as we possibly can by negotiating futures at reduced initial price.