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!

typical tu spin

leftybuff said:
In a sense, yes, but they have taken a gigantic PR hit from this, and are rightly seen as money grubbing, self interested a-holes who are a cancer to any conference they are in. And while they aren't "on the hook" as far as risk goes, they don't really see the big pay day until ESPiN recoups it's costs. So uterus dioes need the LHN to be successful to see any real $$ out of the deal. In other words, UT is not getting first dollar revenue out of this contract.
Click to expand...

Ok, so maybe this is the part that I'm missing... what happens if/when ESPN recovers the initial investment?
 
It would not be completely shocking if the mighty UT publicity machine forget to mention clauses in the contract that give ESPN an out or reduce the payout in the event that the whole thing doesn't work. They wouldn't bother since of course they are Texas, eveyone loves them and it can't not work.
 
Denver_sc said:
Ok, so maybe this is the part that I'm missing... what happens if/when ESPN recovers the initial investment?
Click to expand...
Then UT is hip deep in gravy....the revenues get split on a much more favorable level, I don't remember the specifics, but UT could get something on the order of 15-20 MM per year from the LHN...that's why they won't budge. The problem isn't with the concept, it's the execution. IMO ESPiN is trying to wrench too much from the distributors for the programming.
 
leftybuff said:
Then UT is hip deep in gravy....the revenues get split on a much more favorable level, I don't remember the specifics, but UT could get something on the order of 15-20 MM per year from the LHN...that's why they won't budge. The problem isn't with the concept, it's the amount of content. IMO ESPiN is trying to wrench too much from the distributors for 2 football games.
Click to expand...
fify
 
Bienemy4life said:
I wanted to see what the Austin Statesman says, the headline is:

"No move to Pac-12 for Horns; conference is staying put."

Um, you had the door slammed in your face, nice spin.
Click to expand...

This is how the article opens, I thought it said pretty much what you said.

"Pac-12 Commissioner Larry Scott pulled the plug on possibly adding Texas, Oklahoma or other schools, notifying his conference presidents late Tuesday night that the league was staying put at 12 teams, temporarily giving renewed life to the Big 12 but severely limiting those two schools’ options. "
 
The Texass fans by nature will always see any event that happens as benefiting them and because they willed it to be so. As long as they are winning. Once they are losing, then the attitude flips to - everything needs to be changed and right away.

Not surprisingly since they are currently 3-0, they view this event (not getting into P16), as them standing up for their fundamental right to be superior to everyone else. Just as 48 hours ago when it looked like they would enter the P16, it was viewed as a great opportunity to lead a new conference to CFB dominance.

You gotta hand it to them, at least they are confident. Until they lose....
 
Cal84 said:
The Texass fans by nature will always see any event that happens as benefiting them and because they willed it to be so. As long as they are winning. Once they are losing, then the attitude flips to - everything needs to be changed and right away.



Not surprisingly since they are currently 3-0, they view this event (not getting into P16), as them standing up for their fundamental right to be superior to everyone else. Just as 48 hours ago when it looked like they would enter the P16, it was viewed as a great opportunity to lead a new conference to CFB dominance.

You gotta hand it to them, at least they are confident. Until they lose....
Click to expand...

Welcome to our (former) world.
 
Now as fun as it is to blast UT lets just be happy their arrogance still lives. Was anyone here really looking forward to the PAC 16? I understand that it would have some advantages, but we just left those jerks because they do not play well with others. I am glad the Presidents and Scott refused to compromise on the revenue sharing. The PAC 12 will expand and likely be 16 in the relatively near future but right now they do not need to go hat in hand to Austin and beg them to come. Lets see if UT can maintain some semblence of a competitive conference. If OK finds another place to land and UT is selling games against SMU and Rice they might not be so attractive.
 
Again with the assertion that we're going to need to expand at some point. What a bunch of nonsense.
 
True. However, I wanted a headline like "Pac 12 says no way to Whorns!" or "Whorns left at the alter". Damn you Austin Statesman!

Whereas, Thorburn's piece in todays Camera reads more how I would write it. :) "League's nonexpansion good news for Buffs"

zbuff said:
This is how the article opens, I thought it said pretty much what you said.

"Pac-12 Commissioner Larry Scott pulled the plug on possibly adding Texas, Oklahoma or other schools, notifying his conference presidents late Tuesday night that the league was staying put at 12 teams, temporarily giving renewed life to the Big 12 but severely limiting those two schools’ options. "
Click to expand...
 
sackman said:
Again with the assertion that we're going to need to expand at some point. What a bunch of nonsense.
Click to expand...

we don't what the scale of competition for media contracts/coverage/and ESPN-style boosterism passing as punditry.....will be. SEC, ACC (minor player) and Big 10 will compose the population heavy parts of TV land in the East and Midwest. so, now, no need to expand but a competitive West may need an OU or UT type bloc at some point.
 
sackman said:
Again with the assertion that we're going to need to expand at some point. What a bunch of nonsense.
Click to expand...

Totally agree. I didn't see the Big 10 looking to expand while everybody else was jumping around because they have a great product already. Given the population demographics, the Pac 12 is only going to get stronger.
 
sackman said:
Again with the assertion that we're going to need to expand at some point. What a bunch of nonsense.
Click to expand...
<br><br>we don't what the scale of competition for media contracts/coverage/and ESPN-style boosterism passing as punditry.....will be. &nbsp;SEC, ACC (minor player) and Big 10 will compose the population heavy parts of TV land in the East and Midwest. &nbsp;so, now, no need to expand but a competitive West may need an OU or UT type bloc at some point.
 
buffedup said:
Totally agree. I didn't see the Big 10 looking to expand while everybody else was jumping around because they have a great product already. Given the population demographics, the Pac 12 is only going to get stronger.
Click to expand...

The Big 10+1+1's interest in expanding at any given point in time is exactly the same as Notre Lame's interest in joining a conference....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top