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!

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

Jens1893 said:
How is Colorado a prime geographical location in the context of college football? Colorado is largely irrelevant for recruiting plus us and Utah are the 2 most isolated P5 schools with no school within 500 miles of Boulder.

Between 2014 and 2019 we were 50th in the country in average attendance with us using 86% of Folsom's capacity. That doesn't scream rabid fanbase to me and I think the state's apathy towards CFB in general has been discussed on this forum at length.
Click to expand...
Everyone's talked about how important the TV market is and based on convos on this board and CU is in THE prime TV market in the mountain time zone.

Pretty sure I didn't say we had a rabid fan base, but it's certainly better than UCLA, Stanford, Cal, and some of the other Cali schools. The apathy comes from a lack of investment and direction in the program, not the fan base. When we were good that one year, the fan base was pretty fired up. It can be again with additional money one would home would come out of move to the B1G.

I don't see how local recruiting has an impact on the attractiveness of CU to the B1G. It makes CU's recruiting effort more difficult (but we aren't effective recruiting what we have in the state, anyway), but that's CU's problem and not a negative impact on it's attractiveness.
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
We’ve talked about whether Cal admin even wants a football program before and while they’ve put together a solid football program, Stanford’s fanbase is garbage. When CU is good, there is a decent following and they will sell tickets.
Click to expand...

Stanford's average attendance between 2014 and 2019, which is during their best decade *ever*, was 45.4k or 91%. Whereas we got 43.3k and 86% during some mediocre years with the exception of 2017.

With the exception of the Broncos, who draw a capacity crowd if they open the gates, the general thing in Colorado is that the people will support you if you give them a reason to do so.
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
What does being the VC capital of the world have to do with College Football?
Click to expand...
I think there is still some merit to university presidents wanting to be associated with success off the field and partnering with a university like Stanford raises the profile for the rest of the conference and may help tap markets for investment that were not previously available to them. Yes, football rules, but there are a few considerations beyond recent football success that still matter at least a little (I think).
 
Jens1893 said:
Stanford's average attendance between 2014 and 2019, which is during their best decade *ever*, was 45.4k or 91%. Whereas we got 43.3k and 86% during some mediocre years with the exception of 2017.

With the exception of the Broncos, who draw a capacity crowd if they open the gates, the general thing in Colorado is that the people will support you if you give them a reason to do so.
Click to expand...
Colorado is also a destination state for Midwesterners. TONS of BIG alum reside in this state and that trend isn't going to slow. Having Wisconsin, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio State, Iowa, Nebraska*, etc rolling through Folsom in a given year will sell that place out faster than almost all Pac 12 programs.

*Could another reason why CU is viewed as a desirable option for the BIG be the Nebraska rivalry?
 
onealcd said:
You know we are talking about college football and not if students can get hired out of college right? The big 10 doesn’t give a **** if traveling to the Bay Area is nice or not. They really don’t care about the local companies.
Click to expand...

i wouldn't completely dismiss the Silicon Valley factor just because there really is a ****load of money there, but I largely agree.
 
onealcd said:
You know we are talking about college football and not if students can get hired out of college right? The big 10 doesn’t give a **** if traveling to the Bay Area is nice or not. They really don’t care about the local companies.
Click to expand...
We’re not talking about Stanford versus Clemson here. If we were, it’s not a discussion. But if it’s Stanford versus Colorado, Kansas, Iowa St then I think those marginal qualities become more important.
 
married2abuff said:
Everyone's talked about how important the TV market is and based on convos on this board and CU is in THE prime TV market in the mountain time zone.

Pretty sure I didn't say we had a rabid fan base, but it's certainly better than UCLA, Stanford, Cal, and some of the other Cali schools. The apathy comes from a lack of investment and direction in the program, not the fan base. When we were good that one year, the fan base was pretty fired up. It can be again with additional money one would home would come out of move to the B1G.

I don't see how local recruiting has an impact on the attractiveness of CU to the B1G. It makes CU's recruiting effort more difficult (but we aren't effective recruiting what we have in the state, anyway), but that's CU's problem and not a negative impact on it's attractiveness.
Click to expand...

a) I don't think TV markets matter anymore. Linear television will not nearly have the importance it used to have in the future.
b) I also don't think the "build it and they will come" argument matters here, there are schools who fill stadiums way bigger than ours as long as they unlock the gates.
c) We bring nothing to the recruiting table with Colorado so you can't play the "we give you a presence in a state with a lot of talent" card like you can in say California or Texas.
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
Colorado is also a destination state for Midwesterners. TONS of BIG alum reside in this state and that trend isn't going to slow. Having Wisconsin, Minnesota, Northwestern, Ohio State, Iowa, ****braska*, etc rolling through Folsom in a given year will sell that place out faster than almost all Pac 12 programs.

*Could another reason why CU is viewed as a desirable option for the BIG be the ****braska rivalry?
Click to expand...

People are forgetting how good the TV ratings were for the recent two games for the Buffs-Huskers. Even during CU's 1990 NC year, I saw a good number of ISU fans at Folsom Field and that team was bad at that time. Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois, and Northwestern aren't really that far away from Ames. Those fans WILL travel to Folsom Field no questions asked.
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
Silicon Valley didn't just emerge in the last couple years. Where have all those companies been when the Pac 12 was leading the way across the country on the field in the mid 2000s? Why would these companies all of the sudden get involved in CFB now?
Click to expand...

i think you want to keep the door open if possible.

How you weigh it is your decision, but I think it's a factor that I'd at least keep under consideration
 
Jens1893 said:
i think you want to keep the door open if possible.

How you weigh it is your decision, but I think it's a factor that I'd at least keep under consideration
Click to expand...
That's fair, but I guess I don't know why Stanford or Cal would have any bearing on whether those companies would be willing to get involved, just because they are in the same geographical location.
 
Jens1893 said:
a) I don't think TV markets matter anymore. Linear television will not nearly have the importance it used to have in the future.
b) I also don't think the "build it and they will come" argument matters here, there are schools who fill stadiums way bigger than ours as long as they unlock the gates.
c) We bring nothing to the recruiting table with Colorado so you can't play the "we give you a presence in a state with a lot of talent" card like you can in say California or Texas.
Click to expand...
a) It mattered when we played the nubs both times. I think there's value there.
b) Disagree. Our fan base has proven to show up even with an average product. Move the needle a little bit and CU does just fine. Again, comparing against many of the Cali schools, CU stacks up fine from a fan base standpoint.
c) Ok, I don't disagree. But I still have a hard time translating that to saying something like Cal has more value because it has a better recruiting footprint.

My point is, I think CU is an attractive addition to the B1G. Better than KSU, Okie Light, KU, AU, ASU, WSU, OSU, Cal, and TT.
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
Silicon Valley didn't just emerge in the last couple years. Where have all those companies been when the Pac 12 was leading the way across the country on the field in the mid 2000s? Why would these companies all of the sudden get involved in CFB now?
Click to expand...

IMO, it's pure speculation on the part of the tech companies. With the reach of ESPN through their traditional channels and ESPN+, it's going to be a question of whether they are with ESPN or not and those Silicon Valley tech companies will just provide us with a way to watch the games. Fox is the last one that hasn't released its own paid streaming service as far as I know and that will happen sooner than later.

The Alabaster Yak said:
Why is KU constantly being discussed as an attractive option? Football accounts for 85 cents on the dollar. Basketball is irrelevant in this conversation
Click to expand...

KU is an easy win and to help with CFB playoff positioning and there's the Kansas City TV market. They do have a sizable fanbase for basketball but I have talked to quite a few of them and sometimes they are all about KU while they follow Mizzou in football and KU in basketball.
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
We’ve talked about whether Cal admin even wants a football program before and while they’ve put together a solid football program, Stanford’s fanbase is garbage. When CU is good, there is a decent following and they will sell tickets.
Click to expand...
This to me is the potential sticking point. Would Stanford or Cal even care to leave the Pac 12 for the sake of being in a better football conference and more media money? They don't exactly need the exposure that comes with being in a better athletic conference since both names sell themselves and they might even be worried about watering down their brand / shake-up for the sake of athletics... I could see both being content staying the course and maybe trying to pick up some academically inclined schools to fill the void of any teams that jump. Plus I could see the appeal of adding Boulder to the coast to coast branding if you are already picking up some of the California schools and yes, Stanford + Cal fanbases are garbage and very anti Big 10 even though we aren't that great either of late.

Obviously this all just pure speculation and trying to convince myself we are actually wanted or a better add relative to those two in a package with USC/UCLA, Oregon, UW.
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
Silicon Valley didn't just emerge in the last couple years. Where have all those companies been when the Pac 12 was leading the way across the country on the field in the mid 2000s? Why would these companies all of the sudden get involved in CFB now?
Click to expand...
If you want to generate more revenue, having an extremely deep pocketed alumni base in your conference isn’t a bad thing. At some point you want some carrot for faculty and administrators who see some benefit in partnering with an institution like Stanford.

If geography isn’t a determining factor, and media market isn’t a determining factor, and academics aren’t a factor, alumni network isn’t a factor, and this is a 100% football decision then I’m not sure why CU is even in the discussion here? What’s the argument for CU over ASU even?
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
That's fair, but I guess I don't know why Stanford or Cal would have any bearing on whether those companies would be willing to get involved, just because they are in the same geographical location.
Click to expand...
Because after Harvard, Stanford produces more venture capitalists than any University in America (Cal is 7th FWIW). That network would be pretty attractive to a conference that (at least outwardly) purports to value academics I would think.
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
Why is KU constantly being discussed as an attractive option? Football accounts for 85 cents on the dollar. Basketball is irrelevant in this conversation
Click to expand...
Branding - adding blue blood basketball program raises the overall profile of Big Ten hoops.

They fit the geographic footprint and could be slotted in fairly naturally.

They are decent AAU school (not great by any means but clear the hurdle).
 
SINKRATZ said:
If you want to generate more revenue, having an extremely deep pocketed alumni base in your conference isn’t a bad thing. At some point you want some carrot for faculty and administrators who see some benefit in partnering with an institution like Stanford.

If geography isn’t a determining factor, and media market isn’t a determining factor, and academics aren’t a factor, alumni network isn’t a factor, and this is a 100% football decision then I’m not sure why CU is even in the discussion here? What’s the argument for CU over ASU even?
Click to expand...
But where have those deep silicon valley pockets been the last 20+ years? Why would that all of the sudden become relevant? Also, have you considered the Stanford and Cal alums who have deep pockets because they go work for Google likely aren't the type who are chomping at the bit to donate bigly to football? Those fanbases are far more apathetic than CUs.

Re ASU... I've been told there are standards for the BIG.
 
This is starting to feel like the Euro super league talk from a few months ago imo. Alot of this ignores what people actually like about college football, which is tradition, rivalries, the chance for upset. This also leaves all other college sports just dangling in the wind.

When I combine those factors together, I struggle to see how this actually increases the popularity of CFB. These mergers would leave out about half of the existing P5 teams, there’s also going to be significant opposition within some of the schools that will be included, not to mention the state political fights that will arise from it. Sure there will be a short-term revenue windfall for the included schools and that’s obviously why we’re seeing the jockeying right now. In the face of declining attendance, tv ratings, the popularity of football as a whole, and college football fandom, especially in younger generations, does that hold in the long run?
 
cowe6453 said:
Branding - adding blue blood basketball program raises the overall profile of Big Ten hoops.

They fit the geographic footprint and could be slotted in fairly naturally.

They are decent AAU school (not great by any means but clear the hurdle).
Click to expand...
It's all football-driven, though, and KU is arguably the worst football brand in the country. Maybe a basketball only invite is possible, but taking KU football solely because it's basketball brand is elite is a net negative.
 
SINKRATZ said:
If you want to generate more revenue, having an extremely deep pocketed alumni base in your conference isn’t a bad thing. At some point you want some carrot for faculty and administrators who see some benefit in partnering with an institution like Stanford.

If geography isn’t a determining factor, and media market isn’t a determining factor, and academics aren’t a factor, alumni network isn’t a factor, and this is a 100% football decision then I’m not sure why CU is even in the discussion here? What’s the argument for CU over ASU even?
Click to expand...
I mean that's an easy one... Come on now. Other than Pheonix market, ASU doesn't really have much to offer IMO. Big one being poor academic reputation (possibly overblown) and not AAU which has been a deal breaker in the past (Nebraska lost AAU status after being admitted). If you are a Big 10 bureaucrat Boulder >>>
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top