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!

Pac-10, 11, 12 or 14?

Pac size you want?

  • 10

  • 11

  • 12

  • 14

Results are only viewable after voting.
White_Rabbit said:
I’d also prefer unlv, but the problems there seem to be

They suck at football. Like really bad. Like they haven’t even gone .500 under a coach since the 70s or something.

Their support is pretty bad given the above, I think their attendance is roughly in the high teens range
Click to expand...
I'm actually impressed they are managing that much support given the history. That's... kind of impressive for a school in a town with a **** load of other entertainment options.

Now, it's pretty rare for long ****ty programs to become quite good, so they would probably be a perpetual bottom dweller - conferences need those too. And it's helpful if they are in a reasonably good place to visit for other teams: visit a fun city, watch your team win, what's not to love? Attendance would increase pretty quickly as a result of this, but it would be unlikely to translate to good football.

But, if carriage fees are still a thing (pretty sure they are a thing), isn't SDSU lumped in with the LA market? So you get those fees, and SMU adds a huge tv market, so there's some value there as well. Honestly, the addition of SMU would be a pretty compelling piece of evidence that carriage fees really are still a thing.
 
skibum said:
I'm actually impressed they are managing that much support given the history. That's... kind of impressive for a school in a town with a **** load of other entertainment options.

Now, it's pretty rare for long ****ty programs to become quite good, so they would probably be a perpetual bottom dweller - conferences need those too. And it's helpful if they are in a reasonably good place to visit for other teams: visit a fun city, watch your team win, what's not to love? Attendance would increase pretty quickly as a result of this, but it would be unlikely to translate to good football.

But, if carriage fees are still a thing (pretty sure they are a thing), isn't SDSU lumped in with the LA market? So you get those fees, and SMU adds a huge tv market, so there's some value there as well. Honestly, the addition of SMU would be a pretty compelling piece of evidence that carriage fees really are still a thing.
Click to expand...
San Diego is a separate market. #27 in the country.

List of television stations in North America by media market - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org
 
skibum said:
Then why the **** are we considering adding them?

I honestly thought the only point was that they would deliver the #2 market for carriage fees. Playing a game for SoCal alumns to attend can't be that important.
Click to expand...
whoa whoa whoa there, let's not be harsh on our CA Buffs.
 
InTheBuff said:

This must be your source. Lol
Click to expand...

new breaking inside info from oregon and washington people totally connected to their programs... they are demanding the right to sell their own branded weed and not rev share with anyone else. CU should be on board with the plan but there might be some powerful opposition internally.

now that we have a pot entrepreneur as a regent, i am hearing from totally credible amazing inside exclusive sources that she is working to overcome those internal challenges so we can join the legal weed coalition to boost our program revenue.

apple is trying to decide if they will run the ads for the product on the streaming service in the 3 states only.

stay tuned.
 
skibum said:
I'm actually impressed they are managing that much support given the history. That's... kind of impressive for a school in a town with a **** load of other entertainment options.

Now, it's pretty rare for long ****ty programs to become quite good, so they would probably be a perpetual bottom dweller - conferences need those too. And it's helpful if they are in a reasonably good place to visit for other teams: visit a fun city, watch your team win, what's not to love? Attendance would increase pretty quickly as a result of this, but it would be unlikely to translate to good football.

But, if carriage fees are still a thing (pretty sure they are a thing), isn't SDSU lumped in with the LA market? So you get those fees, and SMU adds a huge tv market, so there's some value there as well. Honestly, the addition of SMU would be a pretty compelling piece of evidence that carriage fees really are still a thing.
Click to expand...

Yeah idk if UNLV would be a better add over SMU due to those reasons, but I really like the regionality of college football. So I'd rather see them add stuff like SDSU, Boise, Fresno etc than other similar schools from further away, but I'd get it if they did
 
Which school would eventually become revenue additive to the P12?

Possibly none of them but SMU has the most upside to become a revenue generator or at least neutral.

SDSU I see more like an WSU/OSU. They’re no savior and are more like added inventory vs added revenue.

Fresno and UNLV would never get there revenue wise. I don’t even see them in the B12.

Rice and Tulane fit academically but would never generate significant revenue.

Gonzaga is a must-have in bball. I don’t care if they don’t generate revenue, they are entertaining.

So my answer would be 12 + Gonzaga in bball and then try to merge with the ACC or leave for the B1G or SEC after we dominate with Prime.
 
White_Rabbit said:
Yeah idk if UNLV would be a better add over SMU due to those reasons, but I really like the regionality of college football. So I'd rather see them add stuff like SDSU, Boise, Fresno etc than other similar schools from further away, but I'd get it if they did
Click to expand...
I think many of us feel this way, but that model is too far gone and won't generate the revenue. Purely as a fan, if the PAC were to expand I'd prefer it to be with western universities. Probably the best football program left west of Texas is Boise. But that won't bring in the money, so ugly mega-conferences here we come.
 
White_Rabbit said:
I’d also prefer unlv, but the problems there seem to be

They suck at football. Like really bad. Like they haven’t even gone .500 under a coach since the 70s or something.

Their support is pretty bad given the above, I think their attendance is roughly in the high teens range

So I like the idea of them more than I really like them

Tbh if we added like sdsu, Fresno, Boise, and one more decent football school that’d be pretty fun to watch, but idk if it does anything other than dilute the money as idk how much most of those add except maybe sdsu
Click to expand...
Have UC Davis make the jump
 
Not Sure said:
Characterizing OSU and WSU as dead weight is incorrect. WSU just won the conference women’s basketball championship. OSU has a baseball national championship in the last few years. Both schools have been better than CU in Football for a while. Corvallis is closer to Portland than Eugene is. These are legacy schools that don’t just get kicked to the curb.
Click to expand...
women's conference basketball championship generates no revenue

Baseball NC generates no revenue

30k capacity football stadiums generate little revenue

Yes, they've had more success in FB than CU in recent years, but it hasn't generated viewership or attendance (ie. Revenue for the PAC).

OSU and WSU would be good candidates for a conference more focused on Olympic sports than football. Oh, wait
 
hokiehead said:
women's conference basketball championship generates no revenue

Baseball NC generates no revenue

30k capacity football stadiums generate little revenue

Yes, they've had more success in FB than CU in recent years, but it hasn't generated viewership or attendance (ie. Revenue for the PAC).

OSU and WSU would be good candidates for a conference more focused on Olympic sports than football. Oh, wait
Click to expand...
Not every school is going to generate revenue. Even the SEC realizes this. For every Alabama, you need a Vanderbilt. Every Georgia needs a South Carolina. Every Ohio State needs a Rutgers. You don’t toss out legacy schools because they don’t bring eyeballs. Those schools make the conference stronger by elevating the top programs, and every once in a while, do something amazing. Those schools can contribute in other sports that help elevate the overall profile for the conference. Again, characterizing OSU and WSU as dead weight is simply incorrect.
 
Not Sure said:
Not every school is going to generate revenue. Even the SEC realizes this. For every Alabama, you need a Vanderbilt. Every Georgia needs a South Carolina. Every Ohio State needs a Rutgers. You don’t toss out legacy schools because they don’t bring eyeballs. Those schools make the conference stronger by elevating the top programs, and every once in a while, do something amazing. Those schools can contribute in other sports that help elevate the overall profile for the conference. Again, characterizing OSU and WSU as dead weight is simply incorrect.
Click to expand...
They are not dead weight and I really hate how the media footprint overtook tradition and rivalry. Fwiw, I think that will change as we move from cable driven with home markets ruling to streaming with fan base & compelling matchups mattering more. But in the current model, UNLV + Boise State would be worth more than OSU + WSU to the Pac since the conference has the OR & WA markets through UO & UW and those schools add ID & NV markets as home media footprints without giving up much of anything in national cache.
 
BerkeleyBuff said:
But not bigger followings (viewers), which is what matters (for Nebraska at least, not sure how WVU does in viewership).
Click to expand...
I think that's increasingly the driver.

Programs that draw eyeballs and rivalry games to feature. Programs that will drive app subscriptions or PPV.

And on that note - I think there's a damn good case to be made for the Pac going after BYU and AFA even though neither brings a new state or major metro for media market.
 
Buffnik said:
I think that's increasingly the driver.

Programs that draw eyeballs and rivalry games to feature. Programs that will drive app subscriptions or PPV.

And on that note - I think there's a damn good case to be made for the Pac going after BYU and AFA even though neither brings a new state or major metro for media market.
Click to expand...
I think BYU would have been a great add to the PAC. And they've wanted in for a long, long time. But that ship has sailed now.
 
Not Sure said:
I disagree. They haven’t joined the B12 yet.
Click to expand...
No, but they wouldn't take the PAC now unless it offered drastically more money. Many at BYU feel like they've been snubbed by the PAC for more than a decade (some fans, longer than that). They'd need a strong reason to turn away from a conference that seems (at the moment) to be offering as good or better money and likely better exposure, especially when added on top of the bitterness grown of those years of being denied by the PAC.
 
First time poster with half a century of BYU fandom. As I read the comments about BYU possibly joining the Pac, it's not going to happen. For forty years, every time BYU approached the Pac about joining, the response has been an emphatic "get lost!" The reasons given have varied with each inquiry but ultimately boil down to the fact that a religious-affiliated school is anathema to Pac presidents. It's never stated that bluntly, though the message has been clear to anyone who wanted to read between the lines.


When the Pac expanded in 2011, I read the analysis of various schools that could be considered. It stated that BYU and Colorado brought the most to the table, more than Utah. If something that obvious wasn't enough to persuade the Pac presidents to add BYU, it was never going to happen. As a result, BYU has found a better home in the Big-12, so that ship has indeed sailed, after 40 years at port, never to return.
 
SPCoug said:
The reasons given have varied with each inquiry but ultimately boil down to the fact that a religious-affiliated school is anathema to Pac presidents. It's never stated that bluntly, though the message has been clear to anyone who wanted to read between the lines.
Click to expand...
This narrative is going to take a big hit when SMU joins the conference.
 
I can't say I know a ton about this stuff, but what's the real difference between: BYU, SMU, and Notre Dame? Just academic rankings? Closeness of the church backing them? Political activity?
 
skibum said:
This narrative is going to take a big hit when SMU joins the conference.
Click to expand...
Yeah because the incompetence of the Pac 12 leadership forced them to take a school like SMU. Had the Pac 12 gobbled up OSU/TT when they had the chance, we're not here.
 
SPCoug said:
First time poster with half a century of BYU fandom. As I read the comments about BYU possibly joining the Pac, it's not going to happen. For forty years, every time BYU approached the Pac about joining, the response has been an emphatic "get lost!" The reasons given have varied with each inquiry butIt ultimately boil down to the fact that a religious-affiliated school is anathema to Pac presidents. It's never stated that bluntly, though the message has been clear to anyone who wanted to read between the lines.


When the Pac expanded in 2011, I read the analysis of various schools that could be considered. It stated that BYU and Colorado brought the most to the table, more than Utah. If something that obvious wasn't enough to persuade the Pac presidents to add BYU, it was never going to happen. As a result, BYU has found a better home in the Big-12, so that ship has indeed sailed, after 40 years at port, never to return.
Click to expand...
It has somewhat to do with Religion but not as much as you want to make it out to be. The no play Sunday is a problem from a religion perspective but the bigger issue is that academically, BYU is not a very good match with the Pac and never will be. There are religious schools that the Pac will be affiliated with but there will be a better overall match with the remaining institutions in the Pac from a much broader perspective.
 
skibum said:
This narrative is going to take a big hit when SMU joins the conference.
Click to expand...
SMU is not run by a church and, therefore, has no restrictions on academic freedom. It is also going to achieve R1 status for research intensity. Quite different and there's more to it than saying that religious affiliation is the problem for Pac Presidents.
 
BYU will play on Sunday if you pay them enough. Jesus himself will appear before the AD and let him know it’s OK.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top