NashBuff
CSU Knob-Slobberer
So it is a sweet deal. The way I understand it, the deal is for both football and basketball?
Way more than that. EVERY single sport that the Pac-12 has.
So it is a sweet deal. The way I understand it, the deal is for both football and basketball?
You know, in an equal revenue sharing scenario, along an infinite timeline each of the Pac 12 schools will end up with (assuming similar levels of spending) equal-valued facilities, coaching salaries, stadium amenities, etc. - in other words, will be equal in the things that cost money.
That being said, along that infinite timeline, what will separate schools from one another will be the intangibles, which Boulder/Colorado is rife with. Advantage Buffs. Just sayin'.
Anyone else get the feeling that we'll be on FX alot?
Oh, no problem with it, great HD channel in lots of homes. It's just probably later on in the pecking order, where I see some/most of our games landing.And the problem with that is? Do you know how many households across the country carry FX?
Anyone else get the feeling that we'll be on FX alot?
Oh, no problem with it, great HD channel in lots of homes. It's just probably later on in the pecking order, where I see some/most of our games landing.
Love the idea but you got LA to deal with in addition to Seattle and the Bay Area. We don't have the advantage that we had over the Big 12 schools in the department anymore.
But then if you talked UT or CSU, I guess I would have to take UT. CSU would not have any drawing power. Not that they would ever be a choice for the PAC.
You know, in an equal revenue sharing scenario, along an infinite timeline each of the Pac 12 schools will end up with (assuming similar levels of spending) equal-valued facilities, coaching salaries, stadium amenities, etc. - in other words, will be equal in the things that cost money.
That being said, along that infinite timeline, what will separate schools from one another will be the intangibles, which Boulder/Colorado is rife with. Advantage Buffs. Just sayin'.
Not really. Conference payout won't even cover half the CU AD's expenses. Ticket sales and donations make up most of the rest. Several Pac 12 schools have the potential to sell many more tix than the Buffs--for both football and basketball. USC and Oregon are always going to spend more than CU on athletics.
You know, in an equal revenue sharing scenario, along an infinite timeline each of the Pac 12 schools will end up with (assuming similar levels of spending) equal-valued facilities, coaching salaries, stadium amenities, etc. - in other words, will be equal in the things that cost money.
That being said, along that infinite timeline, what will separate schools from one another will be the intangibles, which Boulder/Colorado is rife with. Advantage Buffs. Just sayin'.
My God Man, shut your pie-hole. CSU would be about a gazillion times more preferable than UT. UT is the conference killer. We have a great thing going. Don't mess it up by letting those assholes anywhere near the Pac 12.
My God Man, shut your pie-hole. CSU would be about a gazillion times more preferable than UT. UT is the conference killer. We have a great thing going. Don't mess it up by letting those assholes anywhere near the Pac 12.
Too bad UNLV is so worthless.
My God Man, shut your pie-hole. CSU would be about a gazillion times more preferable than UT. UT is the conference killer. We have a great thing going. Don't mess it up by letting those assholes anywhere near the Pac 12.
Well I said infinite timeline, so I'm assuming that CU will upgrade/expand Folsom eventully to greatly diminish the gulf between CU and, say, USC (97K capacity). Also assuming that all of the potential CU donors who have literally been standing on the sidelines with cash will start to come out of the woodwork and lessen the gulf between CU and, say, Oregon (Phil Knight). I'm also assuming the Aztecs are wrong about 2012. All theory.Not really. Conference payout won't even cover half the CU AD's expenses. Ticket sales and donations make up most of the rest. Several Pac 12 schools have the potential to sell many more tix than the Buffs--for both football and basketball. USC and Oregon are always going to spend more than CU on athletics.
I think those fears would be unfounded honestly. They killed the SWC/Big 12 because they did not have a counter balance to Texas.
The Pac-12 has one, it is called California.
Dude, no offense, but you haven't dealt with these guys the same way we have. They suck the lifeblood out of every conference they're in. Every time, the conference *thinks* it has a counterbalance. You must trust us on this - you don't want Texas anywhere near your conference.
Scott isn't likely to stand pat over the life of the 12-year deal either. He boldly tried to add Texas, Oklahoma and a few other Big 12 schools to form the first superconference just a summer ago and he insisted on putting provisions into the new deal to ensure a revenue bump if he's able to pull off the maneuver over the next few years.
"Both ESPN and Fox know my views," Scott said. "They both know that if we were to expand, there would be appropriate adjustments to our fees and we certainly have the ability to expand under these contracts. I don't foresee it happening in the near future but it's my view that there will be further expansion down the road."
And honestly, USC > Nebraska in terms of power and 'counter-balance'.
We've seen Texas ruin 2 conferences. Would you like the Pac-12/16 be the third?
They wouldn't ruin the pac-16
We might not know about the Big 12 and Texas, but you guys might not know about the power of California and USC
I see so the SWC and the Big 12 were just flukes. The Big 8 was a strong conference before Texas joined.
Just like the Pac-10 being strong right now.
I can't see the Pac-12 accepting Texas unless Texas restructures their Longhorn Network to show sports that are not part of the Pac-12.