Don't love this, but as long as those evil rat****ers from Waco don't end up in a real conference, I'll might be able to live with it.
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
Don't love this, but as long as those evil rat****ers from Waco don't end up in a real conference, I'll might be able to live with it.
**** bailer I get, but TCU and TTU just left out?? I'd rather have those two in the Pac 12 than OSU and KSU
I think you are off a little bit here. No matter how ****ty the big 10 matchup they still rate high, that is why they make the most money in the country as of right now. The pac 12 and ACC have major ratings issues with their lower tier teams. Would a Ohio state usc game rate high? Of course but 2/3rds of those games are likely losing viewers by playing another conference.
With the religious affiliation I get the Pac12 not wanting TCU. Would much rather pair TTU with OSU personally.
Pointless without seeing the specific ratings. I guess I just don't believe that a Wisconsin/Rutgers game rates higher than a Wisconsin/ASU game would, or that Minnesota/Colorado is going to rate lower than Minnesota/Illinois?
****. THAT.
Yeah, Kansas State doesn't do anything for me at all. We'll take KU and OSU instead
There is definitely a distribution issue with the pac 12 network but games on the big 10 network rate wayyyyy better than our games. ACC has the same issue because a lot of those schools don’t care about football.
-BMP-
Well-Known Member
I’d like to play other teams in the B1G too though. Nebraska series every couple of years would work well.
Nebraska
@Nebraska
@Northwestern
Michigan State
Iowa
@Nebraska
Nebraska
Some type of schedule like that would be interesting to me. Rotate the other B1G teams during the three year gap we don’t play Nebraska.
Nebraska
@Nebraska
@Northwestern
Michigan State
Iowa
@Nebraska
Nebraska
Some type of schedule like that would be interesting to me. Rotate the other B1G teams during the three year gap we don’t play Nebraska.
Agreed. 2-4 years off would make sense to me.
I think CU v Nebraska will have to be a mainstay. It's a big time ratings game and that's the entire purpose of this, especially for a program like CU.
Outside of that, we already have Northwestern and Georgia Tech on the schedule over the next 4-5 years. I'm going to assume they will start looking to replace some games that don't rate with those in the B1G and ACC that would.
I think Houston, WY, Colgate, UMass, SMU, and UNT are all on the chopping block.
Forgot about SMU and UMass. I felt like Houston and TCU would both be kept for recruiting and exposure purposes, but maybe they try getting out of Houston.
If these 3 conferences are so concerned about the Big 12 then it seems pretty odd that the Big 12 wasn't included in the alliance.
The Big 12 is on a ventilator and the plug is about to be pulled.
It's not a 4 conference alliance, it's a 3 conference alliance where 8 teams without a home might eventually be absorbed
for me TTU and OSU if two go
nm
No signed contract could have two main reasons.
One is that there are still a lot of details to iron out before the schools and conferences make it official and sign it. SEC going rouge on them though forces them to do something to stay relevant, in the current situation the formal contract finalization and approval becomes a when, not an if.
Second is one last grasp at the status quo. They are smart enough to know that their product is worth more with the SEC as a part of things. Even though the SEC has officially already acted they want to give them one more shot at changing their minds and saying let's work together on this. Not likely to happen but may be worth a shot.
One is that there are still a lot of details to iron out before the schools and conferences make it official and sign it. SEC going rouge on them though forces them to do something to stay relevant, in the current situation the formal contract finalization and approval becomes a when, not an if.
Second is one last grasp at the status quo. They are smart enough to know that their product is worth more with the SEC as a part of things. Even though the SEC has officially already acted they want to give them one more shot at changing their minds and saying let's work together on this. Not likely to happen but may be worth a shot.
It seems pretty obvious to me that the 3 members have reached a handshake agreement and will formalize that relationship once negotiations on TV revenue begin. There is no need to do it now and they can play this altruistic "we trust each other and don't need a contract" game for another year or so.
CULifer
Well-Known Member
Indubitably, Watson
CULifer
Well-Known Member
No. We play Nebraska every, freaking, year, and MI State every other. None of that every couple of years bull crap. The rest of our non-conf games we play against Texas teams. Period.
UtahaluminTX
Well-Known Member
If the Wannstedt is not just making stuff up ... and the PAC is kind of forced to take on 2 of the leftover 8, isn't Tx Tech about 100 × better than K State? I am down with taking Oklahoma State. They are a good team. Cultural fit? No, but the PAC could benefit from a different viewpoint.
But wouldn't being the solid 3rd choice of Texas HS players being in the PAC be more valuable than anything the state of Kansas can ever add? Sure the top HS players are going to A & M and those who mysteriously choose playing for the over rated poseurs in Austin ... before Tech has any shot. But the Tech footprint could be big for the whole PAC competing for the Texas kids. 3rd choicers in TX > all but top handful of kids a year in Utah and Colorado.
But wouldn't being the solid 3rd choice of Texas HS players being in the PAC be more valuable than anything the state of Kansas can ever add? Sure the top HS players are going to A & M and those who mysteriously choose playing for the over rated poseurs in Austin ... before Tech has any shot. But the Tech footprint could be big for the whole PAC competing for the Texas kids. 3rd choicers in TX > all but top handful of kids a year in Utah and Colorado.
That would put Pac 12 at 16, B1G at 16 (KU and ISU) and ACC at 16 (including ND)