allbuffs mods on moderating: whatever we do, we're going to do it together.
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!
OU regents authorize Boren to act on realignment (was: link to OU's BOR meeting)
- Thread starter NashBuff
- Start date
allbuffs mods on moderating: whatever we do, we're going to do it together.
MrFrumpylane
Well-Known Member
I was actually baiting you guys to do edit my post. Not that I would have cared in this case. :thumbsup:
Yeah. We're tight like that. When we go out together, if one of us needs to pee we all go to the powder room together.
Are we girls?
whatever ou and okie state want, i wonder if it will map to what the pac 12 university presidents will want. larry scott better sell the megaconference vision hard to get past the humor of okie state and stanford in the same conference.
i know, money talks.
we'll see. until scott got to the p12, it was a very, very inward looking conference. the university presidents have historically cared far more about the reputation of the schools rather than the programs. and, they have often resisted change. hell, the p10 didn't even have a conf. bb tourney for years and years. and, think about how the p10 regards the importance of the rose bowl and their traditional rivalries.
the cal schools will want to stick together. the conference members who are already in the conference want to play the cal schools. everyone wants equal rev sharing. the university presidents want academics to matter. and, they don't like the long travel times that would be associated with an extended conference.
expansion feels inevitable to many of us, including me, but we could all be wrong. we'll see who is in the driver's seat-- the athletic types or the academic types. they have a record-setting tv deal already. scott is going to have to make a hell of a case to get the votes.
we'll see.
i post this more as a hope of what will happen, as opposed to feeling certain it will break this way.
i know, money talks.
we'll see. until scott got to the p12, it was a very, very inward looking conference. the university presidents have historically cared far more about the reputation of the schools rather than the programs. and, they have often resisted change. hell, the p10 didn't even have a conf. bb tourney for years and years. and, think about how the p10 regards the importance of the rose bowl and their traditional rivalries.
the cal schools will want to stick together. the conference members who are already in the conference want to play the cal schools. everyone wants equal rev sharing. the university presidents want academics to matter. and, they don't like the long travel times that would be associated with an extended conference.
expansion feels inevitable to many of us, including me, but we could all be wrong. we'll see who is in the driver's seat-- the athletic types or the academic types. they have a record-setting tv deal already. scott is going to have to make a hell of a case to get the votes.
we'll see.
i post this more as a hope of what will happen, as opposed to feeling certain it will break this way.
I like to hear that from UCLA as well as the others (CU) that have spoken up.
In other words, OU, UT et al need to convince them it's the right thing instead of the other way around.
NashBuff
CSU Knob-Slobberer
From what I have seen on the net today, there seems to be a growing amount of unease about Pac-12 expansion by the other Pac-12 schools who are not the mountain schools.
First, the Arizona AD voices his concern, Bruce Benson protests to the Denver Post, and the UCLA AD posts a statement that doesn't sound like UCLA is ready to move on expansion and UCLA could be speaking for Cal so there could be at least six NO votes to scuttle expansion.
First, the Arizona AD voices his concern, Bruce Benson protests to the Denver Post, and the UCLA AD posts a statement that doesn't sound like UCLA is ready to move on expansion and UCLA could be speaking for Cal so there could be at least six NO votes to scuttle expansion.
MrFrumpylane
Well-Known Member
Possible that OU is only saying this as a foreword so that when (potentially) OU gets the invite to the Pac12 and OSU doesn't, the Sooners would be able to say "..at least we tried.." to save face with state legislature, etc.
cal speaks for cal. ucla doesn't speak for cal. cal and stanford care about academic reputations. cal might be more flexible (i'm guessing) because they have had some real challenges on their funding of athletics, but i think that cal will be unlikely to support a scheduling system that separates them from usc/ucla.
Good point, why does UCLA think it has to go public with such a statement? The 4 California schools are the one with the least to lose here, especially USC and UCLA. They´ll be in a huge market and great recruiting ground no matter how this pans out.
I think we are seeing the Pac 12 schools starting to publicly acknowledge what the alumni and fans have been very vocal about, which is that Texas is a huge potential cancer and just may not be worth the potential upside.
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
i'll try harder on the renamed threads. cowboy up, as it were.
Except they add 4 more conference mates going after those same recruits.
I would be okay with adding the Oklahoma schools, but I do not think 16 team super-conferences are the way of the future. Big Ten looks content, Pac-12 seems to at least be resisting expansion. SEC isn't going to 16 anytime soon.
Honestly, if I had my druthers, we'd go back to the Big 8, Big East, SEC, SWC, Pac-10, Big 10, ACC set-up and stay there. Realignment is really kind of sad, IMO.
Honestly, if I had my druthers, we'd go back to the Big 8, Big East, SEC, SWC, Pac-10, Big 10, ACC set-up and stay there. Realignment is really kind of sad, IMO.
ScottyBuff
Well-Known Member
At some point there will be a "College sports" bubble bursting at the networks/advertisers. This will greatly diminish the need for superconferences and actually work against traditional economics of regional rivalries/gameday attendance.
When things unwind we could have 8 8-9 team conferences essentially making up the "divisions" of the super-conferences with adding the best of the rest of the country when possible.
It might not happen for 10 or 20 years but it can certainly happen.
My kids might be in the same position we are now talking about College Conference Contraction as we do realignment.
Cal84
Member
Conspiracy theories aside, methinks the more likely explanation is that they inbreed and simply want to stick together.
Best post of your short career imho.
CUFan
Welcome back
If Boren truly regretted losing Colorado and Nebraska then why didn't he speak up in the last go around? Because he thought he was getting a sweet deal like Texas and that the rest of the teams had no other options (yes I did answer my own question). It seems to me they are lobbying Texas hard to start playing ball. The PAC12 presidents need to continue to speak up and say they are not interested. There is no need to expand. The PAC has the entire western US already locked up.
BehindEnemyLines
beware the habu
Don't count me as one of Tramel's fans. He tends to shoot from the hip with or without research.
But I will give it up (a bit) to Boren for calling out bailer. He's right that the litigation, etc., is only going to widen the chasm between the existing benign conference members.
Bailer reminds me of the bratty little bro/sis who finds out the older siblings are going somewhere fun. Lil one jumps and kicks and screams and cries hoping mommy will make the others take him/her along.
But I will give it up (a bit) to Boren for calling out bailer. He's right that the litigation, etc., is only going to widen the chasm between the existing benign conference members.
Bailer reminds me of the bratty little bro/sis who finds out the older siblings are going somewhere fun. Lil one jumps and kicks and screams and cries hoping mommy will make the others take him/her along.
If it is a true statement that OU has two options - the Pac-12 or the Big 12, then that means that the schools that have bandied about as potential Pac-16 members will still be around in a year or two or five, because OU staying in the Big 12 means UT, OSU, KU, TTU, and associated hangers-on will be sticking around too.
I say hold off and make the targeted schools even more desperate in the next few years.
I say hold off and make the targeted schools even more desperate in the next few years.
unless another conference swoops in first... like the sec or b10...