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
Including the inevitable Washington State-Wake Forest matchup?
My dad is an alum, and we have family down there. Would gladly take a trip down in September. Even if it's gross.
Yep, and the 3 conferences could agree that away team's TV partner has first dibs on the broadcast. Fans happy, AD's happy with more butts in stadiums, TV partners happy, more money. Sign me up.
WSU vs WF is infinitely more marketable and interesting than WSU vs Portland State or WF vs Norfolk State.
100% this.
In the end the whole thing is about money, how much money and who gets it. Keep that in mind when looking at this thing. It isn't about fair, or growing the game, or student athletes, or anything else.
Going to 11 P5 games per year gives them more quality inventory to sell to the broadcasters. I use broadcasters instead of networks because it may turn out that some or all of the content eventually ends up on pay per view or streaming services or some other media platform down the road, all depends on what generates the most revenue.
The problem with going to 11 P5 games per year is that it potentially reduces money going directly to the schools from donors and from ticket/seat license revenue.
How this works is simple. Fans and supporters like a winner and are more willing to support that winner. The games against G5 schools and even FCS schools aren't highly appealing from a competitive standpoint but they generate game revenue without as big a payout to the opponent and more importantly they allow schools to inflate their records.
Currently the standard for many of the mid-level P5 schools is making a bowl game, with that they can claim a successful year and requires 6 wins in a 12 game schedule. Look at the standings though and you find that about 2/3 of the schools meet the standard because of wins against these non-P5 opponents.
It's kind of reminiscent of the old joke about most of our teams being above average. In the PAC12 this means that with a 9 game conference schedule teams that are under .500 in conference with 4 or even 3 conference wins can still slip into a bowl and make their supporters happy by beating up on some lower level teams OOC.
The question is can the conference maintain their media value while still playing a bunch of those games that don't matter to anyone but the supporters of the individual schools.
It's also worth remembering that the G5 and FCS schools rely on the revenues gained in those games and as long as they are benefiting will continue to support the current system. Freeze them out and do they then sue on anti-trust grounds, a question that could potentially cost the P5 schools much more money. And the big programs haven't had a very successful run recently in the courts.
Going to 11 P5 games per year gives them more quality inventory to sell to the broadcasters. I use broadcasters instead of networks because it may turn out that some or all of the content eventually ends up on pay per view or streaming services or some other media platform down the road, all depends on what generates the most revenue.
The problem with going to 11 P5 games per year is that it potentially reduces money going directly to the schools from donors and from ticket/seat license revenue.
How this works is simple. Fans and supporters like a winner and are more willing to support that winner. The games against G5 schools and even FCS schools aren't highly appealing from a competitive standpoint but they generate game revenue without as big a payout to the opponent and more importantly they allow schools to inflate their records.
Currently the standard for many of the mid-level P5 schools is making a bowl game, with that they can claim a successful year and requires 6 wins in a 12 game schedule. Look at the standings though and you find that about 2/3 of the schools meet the standard because of wins against these non-P5 opponents.
It's kind of reminiscent of the old joke about most of our teams being above average. In the PAC12 this means that with a 9 game conference schedule teams that are under .500 in conference with 4 or even 3 conference wins can still slip into a bowl and make their supporters happy by beating up on some lower level teams OOC.
The question is can the conference maintain their media value while still playing a bunch of those games that don't matter to anyone but the supporters of the individual schools.
It's also worth remembering that the G5 and FCS schools rely on the revenues gained in those games and as long as they are benefiting will continue to support the current system. Freeze them out and do they then sue on anti-trust grounds, a question that could potentially cost the P5 schools much more money. And the big programs haven't had a very successful run recently in the courts.
You can watch the thing on the Pac-12 Network. Just to show what a crackerjack outfit they have over there, it started with a ”breaking news“ graphic followed by one minute of a computer screen saying “The Webinar Will Begin Soon.” I guess someone in a control room figured that a virtual waiting room for WebEx was not the best content, so they switched to some generic stuff, and now we have three conference chairmen staring at the cameras for an interminable time, apparently waiting for some kind of prompt. Such a professional network.
Thanks. Also on BTN
Listening to ACC Commissioner Phillips read from a prepared statement was riveting, absolutely riveting.
They are absolutely setting the groundwork to leave the NCAA.
At lest B1G commissioner Warren seams to be speaking extemporaneously.
When my son was deployed at Bagram, he would facetime me and I would tape my phone to the back of a chair so we could watch the CU games together. All the other guys in his group enjoyed that as well.
Here’s a great phrare: “socializing the playoff.”
I had no idea what Phillips was saying until he said it meant considering all the implications over a period of time. This is a use of the word “socialize“ that I had never heard before.
I had no idea what Phillips was saying until he said it meant considering all the implications over a period of time. This is a use of the word “socialize“ that I had never heard before.
These Commissioners are putting on a clinic on “commissioner-speak.” It’s even worse than coach-speak. More bureaucratic, and saying even less, with many more words.
Oh they are absolutely going to blow up contracts. The alliance just won't "dictate" it.
Pat Forde asked them to be a little more specific on their press release saying that scheduling alliance will be as soon as possible, and got an answer from the BiG commissioner that said exactly nothing other than they will not interfere with any existing contracts, “but also building relationships between these three like-minded conferences.”
Absolutely. He is great and speaking and saying nothing. But at least he seems to have a command of English.
Bulllllllll****
No . . . Signed . . . . Contract. A gentleman’s agreement. Just sort of shared aspirations.
Warren / Big10 obviously running this show.
A hidden "yet" in there. TV deals are going to change things very soon.
The Alliance going to absorb the Big12.
Given that the B1G has no GoR, i certainly wasn't expecting anything different.
They don't have a contract with each other, hard to imagine they sign a deal with other conferences.
I took away the opposite
If the Big12 looks like it is going to fail without Texas and OU, I think this alliance will come in to "save the day".
There’s an old saying that “an oral contract isn’t worth the paper it isn’t printed on.” And this isn’t even an oral contract.