What's new
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!

Official realignment thread - SEC formally invites OU and Texas to join the conference in 2025

The only way that gets better for CU from a ticket sales perspective is if CU and ****braska can organize an annual game.
Isn't this kind of the idea with scheduling?

Create games that bring eyeballs to the screen. CU VS NU, USC VS Ohio State, Clemson VD Mich,
 
I believe they're having simultaneous discussions with the ACC and the B1G to explore whether full membership in either is more advantageous than staying independent.

They could make more money by being in a conference but I don't think the difference is significant enough for them to join one at this point, so they can hang on to their independence. For now. But at some point the money difference will be too much to ignore and they won't be able to say no.
 
I don’t know how this will all affect the money to the Pac 12, but this is likely best case scenario for CU.

The problem with a scheduling alliance is every team getting out of the next decade of OOC contracts that have already been signed

Have to assume that the preliminary negotiations with TV partners (likely Fox Sports) have given the indication that the media deal would be well worth the cost of breaking those contracts.

or even greater the risk of having those contracts challenged in court
What those two posters wrote, and a not insignificant number of those contracts are between schools in the B1G, ACC & P12, so probably somewhere between 20-40% are easy and/or folded into the agreement between conferences.
 
CU’s schedule over the next 5-6 years is actually fairly conducive for this alliance and wouldn’t need to be changed much.

2023 - ****braska, TCU and CSU - they'd have replace TCU probably but that’s it. Maybe they’d actually replace CSU so they could play in Texas?

2024 - Neb, CSU, NDSU - replace NDSU w ACC team

2025 - GT, Hou, Wyoming - Probably replace Wyoming w B1G game so they can play in Texas

2026 - GT, Northwestern, Houston - Perfect schedule. No need to change

2027 - Colgate, NW, KSU - Replace KSU w ACC game
Wait a sec. we scheduled Colgate?
 
What would a 41 team (Pac 12/ACC/B1G/ND) super conference/league look like in terms of revenue? Could do 8/12 games against current conference teams and 4/12 cross conference, but basically create the NFL model with full revenue sharing. Of course, Notre Dame, Ohio State and Michigan and the rest of the B1G might not like the full revenue share, but if it creates a mega media deal with Fox, NBC and CBS (maybe even some streaming services) that puts them ahead of where they currently are, would the top programs be willing to accept that in order to box out the SEC from taking over college football?

In the end, the key question will be about money. Right now, the Big Ten makes a good bit more than either the ACC or Pac-12, and with a new TV deal looming in 2023, those differences could become even larger. Is the Big Ten willing to share some of that revenue to maintain a power structure to counter the SEC? There's some real doubt among ACC and Pac-12 administrators, which would ultimately mean the alliance offers incremental improvements for all concerned, but wouldn't likely provide dramatic changes.
But if this is the first step toward a super league, one in which all three work as a single entity with shared revenue, then all bets are off.

 
What would a 41 team (Pac 12/ACC/B1G/ND) super conference/league look like in terms of revenue? Could do 8/12 games against current conference teams and 4/12 cross conference, but basically create the NFL model with full revenue sharing. Of course, Notre Dame, Ohio State and Michigan and the rest of the B1G might not like the full revenue share, but if it creates a mega media deal with Fox, NBC and CBS (maybe even some streaming services) that puts them ahead of where they currently are, would the top programs be willing to accept that in order to box out the SEC from taking over college football?




Some skeptical national media out there. Details needed.
 
Some skeptical national media out there. Details needed.
I would think an league/conference that includes, USC, Oregon, UW, UCLA, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, Clemson, FSU, Miami and Notre Dame would be pretty desirable from a media standpoint. The key would be revenue sharing, though, and that’s probably the biggest hurdle for something like that to happen.
 
CU’s schedule over the next 5-6 years is actually fairly conducive for this alliance and wouldn’t need to be changed much.

2023 - ****braska, TCU and CSU - they'd have replace TCU probably but that’s it. Maybe they’d actually replace CSU so they could play in Texas?

2024 - Neb, CSU, NDSU - replace NDSU w ACC team

2025 - GT, Hou, Wyoming - Probably replace Wyoming w B1G game so they can play in Texas

2026 - GT, Northwestern, Houston - Perfect schedule. No need to change

2027 - Colgate, NW, KSU - Replace KSU w ACC game

The 2023 game with TCU is in Fort Worth. They're here next year.
 
While the proposed alliance is probably the best realistic outcome for CU it still bums me out that teams like Wyoming will get left out entirely from competing with the big boys. College football is especially unique because of things like Appalachian St - Michigan. Chaos is fun. It’s going to be more like the NFL in that regard and I don’t think it’ll be as exciting.
 
I don’t know how this will all affect the money to the Pac 12, but this is likely best case scenario for CU.

The problem with a scheduling alliance is every team getting out of the next decade of OOC contracts that have already been signed
I was told you could schedule your entire season in the offseason without any problem because some pro hockey and soccer teams did it. Apparently you are as ret*ded as I am for thinking this.
 
I was told you could schedule your entire season in the offseason without any problem because some pro hockey and soccer teams did it. Apparently you are as ret*ded as I am for thinking this.
No I think you absolutely can and I’ve never understood why colleges schedule so far out.
 
What would a 41 team (Pac 12/ACC/B1G/ND) super conference/league look like in terms of revenue? Could do 8/12 games against current conference teams and 4/12 cross conference, but basically create the NFL model with full revenue sharing. Of course, Notre Dame, Ohio State and Michigan and the rest of the B1G might not like the full revenue share, but if it creates a mega media deal with Fox, NBC and CBS (maybe even some streaming services) that puts them ahead of where they currently are, would the top programs be willing to accept that in order to box out the SEC from taking over college football?





I don't see where strength in numbers is what will necessarily increase revenue per school. Strength in brands is what really matters.

I'm surprised the B1G is interested in forming this alliance, or any type of revenue sharing model with the ACC and Pac12 for that matter. They're currently pulling in ~$20 million more per school than those other 2 conferences and I'd only expect that gap to widen during the next round of TV deals if the 3 conferences were to remain as is.
 
I don't see where strength in numbers is what will necessarily increase revenue per school. Strength in brands is what really matters.

I'm surprised the B1G is interested in forming this alliance, or any type of revenue sharing model with the ACC and Pac12 for that matter. They're currently pulling in ~$20 million more per school than those other 2 conferences and I'd only expect that gap to widen during the next round of TV deals if the 3 conferences were to remain as is.
Right. That’s the concern. It has to be about more than money for the B1G. They have to want to box the SEC out of taking over CFB completely. They have to have the desire to align and get the votes to keep the SEC and CFP in check.

I think the sell to the non-ESPN/ABC networks is that you have just as many blue blood brands as the SEC, you own all major media markets, and with profit sharing, there will be an uptick in investment in football at some of the smaller programs that should help the conference generate more parity. It’s a sell of an NFL system with a ton of popular college brands from every time zone.
 
Last edited:
Right. That’s the concern. It has to be about more than money for the B1G. They have to want to box the SEC out of taking over CFB completely. They have to have the desire to align and get the votes to keep the SEC and CFP in check.

I think the sell to the non-ESPN/ABC networks is that you have just as many blue blood brands as the SEC, but with profit sharing, their will be an uptick in investment in football at some of the smaller programs that should help the conference generate more parity. It’s a sell of an NFL system with a ton of popular college brands from every time zone.

One of the interesting things about this alliance is the anti-ESPN angle, but who owns the ACC Network again? ESPN.

As for CFP expansion, all the schools need the money after last year and they need it sooner rather than later. So it wouldn't make sense for them to try to delay the expansion just for spite. And nobody among the P5 conferences needs expansion of the playoff more than the Pac12. Which is why this will likely all simmer down in the coming months and the CFP will expand as originally planned.
 
Right. That’s the concern. It has to be about more than money for the B1G. They have to want to box the SEC out of taking over CFB completely. They have to have the desire to align and get the votes to keep the SEC and CFP in check.

I think the sell to the non-ESPN/ABC networks is that you have just as many blue blood brands as the SEC, but with profit sharing, their will be an uptick in investment in football at some of the smaller programs that should help the conference generate more parity. It’s a sell of an NFL system with a ton of popular college brands from every time zone.
I don’t have faith in them selling it this way…because the PAC is involved, but I agree that this is the way it should be sold.
 
While the proposed alliance is probably the best realistic outcome for CU it still bums me out that teams like Wyoming will get left out entirely from competing with the big boys. College football is especially unique because of things like Appalachian St - Michigan. Chaos is fun. It’s going to be more like the NFL in that regard and I don’t think it’ll be as exciting.
+1
 
While the proposed alliance is probably the best realistic outcome for CU it still bums me out that teams like Wyoming will get left out entirely from competing with the big boys. College football is especially unique because of things like Appalachian St - Michigan. Chaos is fun. It’s going to be more like the NFL in that regard and I don’t think it’ll be as exciting.
I agree, but am struggling to drum up sympathy for Drake.
 
Back
Top