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!

Sir Larry Scott.. (P12 considering buying out Larry Scott)

Without Larry Scott and Mike Bohn we wouldnt have the Champions Center. And we'd still be stuck in the Big XII with less revenue share in an unequal pie. And our conference TV network would be the Longhorn Network representing us on cable.

It's not perfect. But we are far better off than we were.
 
How is Dixon still employed at the Pac-12?

The level of ego and entitlement it would take to make a phone call from your couch to overrule the officials on the field, the replay booth and the replay group at HQ on a targeting call is astounding. That it was done by someone who has never worked as an official and doesn't even have any involvement in the replay process almost makes my head explode. That all of that happened, Larry Scott was caught in several lies trying to brush things off before eventually acknowledging that a mistake was made and Dixon still has a job pretty much says it all about how the Pac-12 is the king (Larry Scott) and his court (5 lieutenants who are untouchable, including Dixon).
 
Buffnik said:
How is Dixon still employed at the Pac-12?

The level of ego and entitlement it would take to make a phone call from your couch to overrule the officials on the field, the replay booth and the replay group at HQ on a targeting call is astounding. That it was done by someone who has never worked as an official and doesn't even have any involvement in the replay process almost makes my head explode. That all of that happened, Larry Scott was caught in several lies trying to brush things off before eventually acknowledging that a mistake was made and Dixon still has a job pretty much says it all about how the Pac-12 is the king (Larry Scott) and his court (5 lieutenants who are untouchable, including Dixon).
Click to expand...
Leach had a point.

How can he NOT assume that the league is attempting to determine competitive outcomes from the league office?
 
I am more convinced than ever that the Pac-12 needs to clean house at the executive level. They all need to go and have leadership installed that will do what is right for the conference. I will volunteer, pay me $500k / year on a 10 year contract with incentives for increasing distribution payments to the schools. Just don't make me have to buy my own damn water bottles.
 
That article makes Leach a sympathetic character.

If forced to choose sides between Leach or Scott/Dixon, I say arrrrrrggh.
 
I was not in favor of the PAC 12 move but understood the dysfunction in the Big 12 caused by Texas and the financial improvement offered by the PAC 12. Now less than a decade later we see the PAC is not keeping pace financially and add to that the obvious dysfunction in the PAC 12 offices and the lack of control by the schools in running the conference. This series of articles are probably just the tip of the iceberg. There are many factions - ADs, coaches, frontline employees, and many fans who are very unhappy with the PAC 12 leadership. Unfortunately the University Presidents tend to be an insular group and are unlikely to take action.

As far as attendance - I worry that we are losing our donor base. I have sat in section 105 and 106 for years and their are a lot of empty seats in those sections - those are the some of the highly donation seats. The last few years I have sat in section 118 for some games because a friend of mine has a primo Franklin field tailgating spot and we can tailgate at halftime. Section 118 has a lot of empty seats except it gets invaded by students who make it look fuller than it is.

IMO, the PAC 12 network is hurting the conference much more than it is helping. It was an empire building move by Scott and now it has become an Albatross. Strong leadership is needed to fix things but I don't see where it would come from.
 
BlackNGold said:
I was not in favor of the PAC 12 move but understood the dysfunction in the Big 12 caused by Texas and the financial improvement offered by the PAC 12. Now less than a decade later we see the PAC is not keeping pace financially and add to that the obvious dysfunction in the PAC 12 offices and the lack of control by the schools in running the conference. This series of articles are probably just the tip of the iceberg. There are many factions - ADs, coaches, frontline employees, and many fans who are very unhappy with the PAC 12 leadership. Unfortunately the University Presidents tend to be an insular group and are unlikely to take action.

As far as attendance - I worry that we are losing our donor base. I have sat in section 105 and 106 for years and their are a lot of empty seats in those sections - those are the some of the highly donation seats. The last few years I have sat in section 118 for some games because a friend of mine has a primo Franklin field tailgating spot and we can tailgate at halftime. Section 118 has a lot of empty seats except it gets invaded by students who make it look fuller than it is.

IMO, the PAC 12 network is hurting the conference much more than it is helping. It was an empire building move by Scott and now it has become an Albatross. Strong leadership is needed to fix things but I don't see where it would come from.
Click to expand...

Couple things have impacted the ticket base.
1) The team has been mostly bad. That hurts.
2) The OOC home opponents have been bad. That is improving, but it hurts.
3) Ticket prices have increased despite 1 and 2.
4) Kickoff days and times have been all over the place.
5) The stadium seating has not been improved since they moved from wooden bleachers to metal. This needs help, especially in those primo spots.
6) The Pac-12 is not a very good conference in terms of fan travel. This hurts the appearance of Folsom on game days.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
Without Larry Scott and Mike Bohn we wouldnt have the Champions Center. And we'd still be stuck in the Big XII with less revenue share in an unequal pie. And our conference TV network would be the Longhorn Network representing us on cable.

It's not perfect. But we are far better off than we were.
Click to expand...

You're giving Bohn credit for the Champions Center?
 
BlackNGold said:
I was not in favor of the PAC 12 move but understood the dysfunction in the Big 12 caused by Texas and the financial improvement offered by the PAC 12. Now less than a decade later we see the PAC is not keeping pace financially and add to that the obvious dysfunction in the PAC 12 offices and the lack of control by the schools in running the conference. This series of articles are probably just the tip of the iceberg. There are many factions - ADs, coaches, frontline employees, and many fans who are very unhappy with the PAC 12 leadership. Unfortunately the University Presidents tend to be an insular group and are unlikely to take action.

As far as attendance - I worry that we are losing our donor base. I have sat in section 105 and 106 for years and their are a lot of empty seats in those sections - those are the some of the highly donation seats. The last few years I have sat in section 118 for some games because a friend of mine has a primo Franklin field tailgating spot and we can tailgate at halftime. Section 118 has a lot of empty seats except it gets invaded by students who make it look fuller than it is.

IMO, the PAC 12 network is hurting the conference much more than it is helping. It was an empire building move by Scott and now it has become an Albatross. Strong leadership is needed to fix things but I don't see where it would come from.
Click to expand...

The only part of this that i'll disagree with is bolded. You'll note in the article that the Pac 12 was constantly referred as being behind the SEC and Big 10. I guarantee CU is much better off, financially, in the Pac 12 than they would be if they were still in the Big 12.

Not excusing Scott's missteps, but staying in the Big 12 would have been a disaster for CU.
 
I think it was on 247 that I read this - sorry if I'm crediting the wrong person/place - but I saw the perfect description of Larry Scott's corporate culture.

"Kiss up, kick down"

And it is a toxic environment in which to work. The only time that is ever successful is if the megalomaniac at the top is crazy talented.
 
Buffarino said:
The only part of this that i'll disagree with is bolded. You'll note in the article that the Pac 12 was constantly referred as being behind the SEC and Big 10. I guarantee CU is much better off, financially, in the Pac 12 than they would be if they were still in the Big 12.

Not excusing Scott's missteps, but staying in the Big 12 would have been a disaster for CU.
Click to expand...

They did not show all the conferences distribution but the Big 12's distribution was ~$34 million and that does not include tier 3 distributions while the PAC 12 number does.

Link


Power 5 conference per-school distributions for FY17:
--SEC: $42.M to $39.9M
--Big Ten: $37.2M to $37M
--Big 12: Roughly $34.3M per school except Baylor
--Pac-12: $30.9M per school
--ACC: $30.7M to $25.3M except Notre Dame

My point is the PAC 12 has failed to deliver on one of the big drivers for moving to the conference. It is 4th out of 5 in the P5 group.
 
BlackNGold said:
They did not show all the conferences distribution but the Big 12's distribution was ~$34 million and that does not include tier 3 distributions while the PAC 12 number does.

Link


Power 5 conference per-school distributions for FY17:
--SEC: $42.M to $39.9M
--Big Ten: $37.2M to $37M
--Big 12: Roughly $34.3M per school except Baylor
--Pac-12: $30.9M per school
--ACC: $30.7M to $25.3M except Notre Dame

My point is the PAC 12 has failed to deliver on one of the big drivers for moving to the conference. It is 4th out of 5 in the P5 group.
Click to expand...
Wow, I stand corrected. Still glad we're out of the B12, though. Pac leadership needs to get this **** fixed pronto.
 
Duff Man said:
You're giving Bohn credit for the Champions Center?
Click to expand...

No. To you everything is black and white. But did Rick George get us into the Pac 12? Or did he inherit a good situation and made it better? How did we pay for that? Was there a level of renewed enthusiasm around the program that enabled fund raising? Would we have achieved this if we were left in the Big XII?



Darth Snow said:
Miami should probably stop commenting on Football, period. Checked out is one thing, but yeesh.
Click to expand...

Thanks! I'll comment on whatever I like. I enjoy your positive feedback. Put me on ignore if you cant stand it.
 
BlackNGold said:
They did not show all the conferences distribution but the Big 12's distribution was ~$34 million and that does not include tier 3 distributions while the PAC 12 number does.

Link


Power 5 conference per-school distributions for FY17:
--SEC: $42.M to $39.9M
--Big Ten: $37.2M to $37M
--Big 12: Roughly $34.3M per school except Baylor
--Pac-12: $30.9M per school
--ACC: $30.7M to $25.3M except Notre Dame

My point is the PAC 12 has failed to deliver on one of the big drivers for moving to the conference. It is 4th out of 5 in the P5 group.
Click to expand...
Problem is, if the Big 12 was cutting the pie 12 ways instead of 10 then that distribution would be $28M and change.

Edit: And let's not pretend that CU would be making any money of consequence from putting its Tier 3 games that weren't picked up by the conference broadcast partners so that we could show them on local Altitude or AT&T Sports or whatever. We're not UT or OU on that stuff.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
No. To you everything is black and white. But did Rick George get us into the Pac 12? Or did he inherit a good situation? How did we pay for that? Was there a level of renewed enthusiasm around the program that enabled fund raising?





Thanks! I'll comment on whatever I like. I enjoy your positive feedback. Put me on ignore if you cant stand it.
Click to expand...
Stop babbling man. I can't believe you just dug yourself a deeper hole.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
No. To you everything is black and white. But did Rick George get us into the Pac 12? Or did he inherit a good situation and made it better? How did we pay for that? Was there a level of renewed enthusiasm around the program that enabled fund raising? Would we have achieved this if we were left in the Big XII?





Thanks! I'll comment on whatever I like. I enjoy your positive feedback. Put me on ignore if you cant stand it.
Click to expand...

Renewed enthusiasm?:ROFLMAO:

RG took over when fundraising was in the pits. It was the overriding reason he got hired.

Mike Bohn had fundraising stalled for the Champions Center when he was fired and now he gets credit? Huh?
 
Shldr2Shldr said:
Couple things have impacted the ticket base.
1) The team has been mostly bad. That hurts.
2) The OOC home opponents have been bad. That is improving, but it hurts.
3) Ticket prices have increased despite 1 and 2.
4) Kickoff days and times have been all over the place.
5) The stadium seating has not been improved since they moved from wooden bleachers to metal. This needs help, especially in those primo spots.
6) The Pac-12 is not a very good conference in terms of fan travel. This hurts the appearance of Folsom on game days.
Click to expand...

I am specifically talking about the high donor seats. In the 90s and early 2000s if you wanted to improve you seats you had to get on a list and after the renewals were done they would call with options for the few people that did not renew. The sections 105, 106, and 118 were sold out. Those are where people are making $500+ per seat donations. Many of the people that sat around me had their tickets for over 40 years, have are not renewing and no one is coming up to replace them. Many of your points are all reasons but it still is a problem. One thing you missed was Mike Bohn started doing a bunch of ticket give aways and some donors were upset that they were paying top dollar but a donation for those seats and people could get them below face value and no donation - basically devaluing your product. The problem is once people stop renewing their seats they do not come back.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
Im not sure what you mean. Is that some kind of a warning or threat? You raised the issue after all.
Click to expand...
Doubling down on giving Bohn credit for the Champions center is not a good look. Your word soup in support of it was the babble.
 
Hey! Bohn had a ****ng diorama and a concept drawing! It doesn't matter if that originated with Tharp and what got built is totally different and that Bohn couldn't secure any of the funding in 9 years -- the Champions Center credit goes to Bohn!
 
Bohn got us into the Pac-12, this is true.
The move to the Pac-12 did engage a previously under utilized donor base, this is true.
The move to the Pac-12 did give the CU fan base a brief shot of excitement, this is true.
Bohn was fired, mostly due to his inability to fund raise.
Bohn was unable to start construction on the Champions Center, because he couldn't fund raise and the "vision" he had was outdated, inefficient, and prohibitively expensive.

Rick George fully engaged the donor base in the Pac-12 to get the champions center built.
Rick George led the team that revised the design plan for the champions center and gets credit for the new design. A design that has been lauded by many college football analysts outside of Boulder, as one of the top facilities in the nation.

Bohn did some good things, but there is no question that George is a better AD.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
No. To you everything is black and white. But did Rick George get us into the Pac 12? Or did he inherit a good situation and made it better? How did we pay for that? Was there a level of renewed enthusiasm around the program that enabled fund raising? Would we have achieved this if we were left in the Big XII?.
Click to expand...
Serious question: Is it really the Athletic Director's decision to move conferences? I assume that would be no, so therefore I would say it was Benson who got us into the Pac 12.

Regardless, you believe Rick George inherited a good situation and made it better? What planet have you been living on? Did the renewed interest in the program come before or after the 4-21 record the football program achieved in the first two years in the Pac 12?
 
Duff Man said:
Renewed enthusiasm?:ROFLMAO:

RG took over when fundraising was in the pits. It was the overriding reason he got hired.

Mike Bohn had fundraising stalled for the Champions Center when he was fired and now he gets credit? Huh?
Click to expand...

Im not disputing why he was fired captain obvious. But fund raising did not pay for the champions center. CU borrowed the money...

[Dec 15, 2014] CU sold $38.7 million in short-term bonds with a fixed interest rate of 2.43 percent. Those bonds are scheduled to be paid off in 12 years with an annual payment of $3.6 million. If the payments are made on schedule, CU will have paid $43.7 million of principal and interest.

CU also sold $112.2 million in long-term bonds with a fixed interest rate of 3.99 percent. It will pay $6.3 million per year for 30 years on those bonds, ultimately paying $189.8 million of principal and interest.

If CU makes its minimum payments over the life of the bonds, the project will ultimately cost the department $233.5 million. Kelly Fox, CU's senior vice chancellor and chief financial officer, said it's likely the department will stick to the payment schedule and not try to pay down the debt earlier.

Athletic director Rick George said CU decided to sell bonds for the project in August because of favorable conditions in the bond market. George said he is comfortable the athletic department will be able to handle the debt at a time when it is also adding more expenses still being discussed among the power five conferences.​

My point was and remains that Larry Scott and Mike Bohn got us into the Pac 12. That change was financially the most significant event for the CUAD since at least the BigXII. The move also re-energized and better aligned us with our out of state alumni base. Which made whatever fund raising easier to go along with over all larger revenue stream that allows us to afford borrowing $233 million dollars.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
Im not disputing why he was fired captain obvious. But fund raising did not pay for the champions center. CU borrowed the money...

[Dec 15, 2014] CU sold $38.7 million in short-term bonds with a fixed interest rate of 2.43 percent. Those bonds are scheduled to be paid off in 12 years with an annual payment of $3.6 million. If the payments are made on schedule, CU will have paid $43.7 million of principal and interest.

CU also sold $112.2 million in long-term bonds with a fixed interest rate of 3.99 percent. It will pay $6.3 million per year for 30 years on those bonds, ultimately paying $189.8 million of principal and interest.

If CU makes its minimum payments over the life of the bonds, the project will ultimately cost the department $233.5 million. Kelly Fox, CU's senior vice chancellor and chief financial officer, said it's likely the department will stick to the payment schedule and not try to pay down the debt earlier.

Athletic director Rick George said CU decided to sell bonds for the project in August because of favorable conditions in the bond market. George said he is comfortable the athletic department will be able to handle the debt at a time when it is also adding more expenses still being discussed among the power five conferences.​

My point was and remains that Larry Scott and Mike Bohn got us into the Pac 12. That change was financially the most significant event for the CUAD since at least the BigXII. The move also re-energized and better aligned us with our out of state alumni base. Which made whatever fund raising easier to go along with over all larger revenue stream that allows us to afford borrowing $233 million dollars.
Click to expand...
Rick George not only organized and fully funded the largest single fund raising effort in the history of Colorado Athletics, he has also secured the largest single donation in our history.

Deciding to take on bonds was a direct result of:
a) favorable bond market
b) the need for quick funding so they could start construction before the penalties kicked in from MacIntyre's contract
c) the AD had the new revenue stream from the Pac-12, AND the new revenue stream to be created by the new endowment fund. The endowment fund created by Rick George's "Drive for 105".
 
RG had raised about 1/3 of the construction costs when the regents approved the project. He walked into a bad fundraising spot because football was awful.

Mike Bohn deserves very little credit for the Champions Center and not much credit either for the Pac-12 move.
 
Duff Man said:
RG had raised about 1/3 of the construction costs when the regents approved the project. He walked into a bad fundraising spot because football was awful.

Mike Bohn deserves very little credit for the Champions Center and not much credit either for the Pac-12 move.
Click to expand...

Thank you for another dry, banal, black and white response once again Mr. arm chair QB.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top