Exactly.
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!
Wild, Unsubstantiated Rumor
- Thread starter BuffsRising
- Start date
Exactly.
the point is that we don't really belong with the Big 12. Does that mean we belong in the Pac 10? Not really. Just trying to show that we are a tweener (I think that is what he means).
P
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
to play devil's advocate, those are 1 time trips to areas with alums. not sure CU fans are going to travel to Tempe *every year* 10 years into Pac 10 membership. Corvallis, Pulllman?
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
yup, that's what i meant.
That's the beauty of it, though. CU alumni already live in those areas. Lots of them. The amount of "travel" would be nothing compared to what we have today.
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
sure, that's part of the argument. we have a lot of alums in Chicago and the east coast, too. i remember that the figure CU released last year had out of state students #1 New Jersey and #2 was Texas. so, hey? i don't remember the exact order but i think that was it. i still think once the novelty is over the "better road venues for fans" arguments is overstated. that's just my opinion.
Corvallis, Eugene & Pullman are all crappy places I would just assume miss, but the rest of the league has some pretty cool venues in places I like to visit (even LA).
Um, ok... but the original post had to do with losing a Nike deal if we were in the same division/conference with Oregon. So, I'm not sure what Oklahoma has to do with that discussion. I apologize for missing the point, however. OU/UO...
Yes, and he was pointing out that in the Big 12, Oklahoma also has a Nike contract and that it doesn't impact our relationship with Nike.
Glad we got that straightened out.
dply
Doble hoja
California is #1 and most years cali makes up half of all out off state students.
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
maybe the list i saw was *other than Cali*....it was an general administrative email i got on the adjunct faculty list, i never read those things very carefully. the point was the Texas had really moved up in the last year's version of the "biggest, best CU freshman class ever" email. soon, to be followed by the annual Daily Camera article about how there isn't enough freshman dorm space (again)....and some kids are sleeping 4 to a 2 bed room crib in the College Inn.
That was the point.
Ideally, the perfect scenario for me would be to drop Iowa State and Baylor from the conference (they do nothing for it in the revenue sports). Missouri then moves to the South and both Utah & BYU come into the North.
That makes Denver the center of the North, brings in an old-time rival in Utah, puts more focus on the CU-NU pairing (since the other 4 North schools would be in Utah-2 and Kansas-2), strengthens the conference in both football and men's basketball, and picks up the Utah media market for the conference by sacrificing some TVs in northern Iowa (where they really follow Nebraska and Iowa anyway).
Politically, it probably can't happen but it would be awesome.
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
Baylor was an NCAA tournament team two years ago in hoops and should have been last year too; as evidenced by their run to the conference finals and nearly winning the NIT after underachieving all year. they have a NC in women's hoops, good in baseball and golf and track (which is a bigger deal in the South)...i think the case that they bring "nothing" is overstated. they're, what?, 3-1 against us the last 4 in football?
Revenue sports are all that matter, so forget about WBB, baseball, golf, track or anything else besides football and MBB. No conference is going to try to poach CU because they want our skiing championships. I'll stand by what I said. Baylor was a politically-driven mistake in 1996 and they continue to be a program that is a net revenue loss to the conference (value versus available replacement programs such as TCU, Utah, BYU).
Why is it relevant to point out that Nike has contracts with more than one team per conference?
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
i agree politics drove the inclusion of Baylor, but...
if revenue sports are all that matter, how does Baylor (a program with no revenue, according to you) have a more complete, comprehensive AD than CU since revenue is what allows for things like golf teams and women's basketball? they are building a lot of new facilities, ours are on hold.
we aren't anybody's revenue champ. Men's BB is a money drain, the AD is in debt to the school. our hoops facilities are 15 years behind the rest of the conference and the new practice facility is on hold because of money. we have the minimum sports to remain D-1.
FWIW, CU's AD had revenues last year of $52.6 million to Baylor's $44.1 million.
But what I'm referring to is the revenue a program brings the conference as a whole. This comes from bowl appearances, regional and national tv appearances, MBB tourney appearances, and local media market (effects the tv contract the conference is able to negotiate). Baylor doesn't bring much of anything to that equation. In essence, they take their slice of the pie without making it significantly bigger.
w/o having read this thread word for word....there was a thread on a washington husky site within the last year that discussed Colorado joining the pac.
DD brought my attention to it. The jist of it was that they would actually welcome CU to the Pac because we mesh with their academic ideals. I dismissed it then because I figure it will never actually happen. However, based on what they were saying it does sound like we would be well received.
The current tv schedule would need to change though. The Huskies may have gone 0-12 last year, but every game was televised live. We do have Fox Sports NW to show for it, and I did fall asleep through most games because they went well after midnight. Obviously I would stay up for the Buffs (as DD stays up for the Huskies), but I would not be happy about it.
DD brought my attention to it. The jist of it was that they would actually welcome CU to the Pac because we mesh with their academic ideals. I dismissed it then because I figure it will never actually happen. However, based on what they were saying it does sound like we would be well received.
The current tv schedule would need to change though. The Huskies may have gone 0-12 last year, but every game was televised live. We do have Fox Sports NW to show for it, and I did fall asleep through most games because they went well after midnight. Obviously I would stay up for the Buffs (as DD stays up for the Huskies), but I would not be happy about it.
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
sure. i just think the only 2 sports matter approach is pretty lame. it's just my opinion, but where is TCU gonna be now that they are in the Big XII after Patterson takes another job? and they are terrible in basketball...i just don't think conference membership is so easily reduced. there are a lot of other factors to consider. CSU was being mentioned for bigtime conference membership at times in the late 90's but they're a .500 team in the MWC that draws 20,000 today.
working on that premise, men's rev sports, you just create flavors of the month. and, really, seems like what's being talked about it is which schools have good football teams right now today. it seems kinda kneejerk.
working on that premise, men's rev sports, you just create flavors of the month. and, really, seems like what's being talked about it is which schools have good football teams right now today. it seems kinda kneejerk.
somebody
Well-Known Member
Eureka! You've hit it! We go independent, get our own TV contract, and beat the Irish at their own game. That's the ticket to automatic 5 star lineups, 13 games a year televised (with our new BCS deal), and higher rankings than we deserve.
I think the point to be made along with CU being a better fit academically with the pac 10 is what we would bring. A major tv market, a earlier time slot for many games to be televised, hence more exposure for the conference. Also there would be a major cash infusion with the institution of a conference championship game and a new tv network/espn deal. I could see a north and south split ASU, AU, CU, Utah, UCLA, and USC in the south, CAL, Stanford, Oregon, OSU, UW and WSU in the north. We would technically have two border states with arizona and utah along with the possibility that a major portion of our fan base would now be able to see the games. I also pesonally feel the Denver area would be more interested in the more cosmopolitan matchups with the pac 10, maybe support would improve.
I agree that in a perfect world things other than money and power matter... but this isn't a perfect world. And all I really care about is what's going to be best for keeping CU in the best position possible to have a 1st class AD and compete for championships. Having a history with Iowa State doesn't mean much to me... especially when I can point to one with Utah that goes back 100 years. If the Big 12 was to get Utah, they also have to take BYU for political reasons. That either means Kansas State or a team from the south goes. KSU could actually make more sense given the problems they are facing.
As an aside, after going back over the numbers Tech is actually more likely to get dropped from the South than Baylor due to less political influence and a slightly smaller revenue base.
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
the deal with Tech is why i included them in my fictional Mountain States type conference that would have a legit BCS bid in my first post in this thread (that would include the two Arizona schools, Utah and BYU...and CU and the whatever else is the cream of the MWC). i don't see the Big XII expanding west. i think more likely would be a run at Arkansas or something of that nature....though, part of the reason the hogs bailed the SWC was the same reason we're all nostalgic for the Big 8. too much Texas.
and on the by and by, Missouri boards are full of "should we move to the Big 10" threads every year. it's a better academic fit. we're more midwestern and civilized than those hillbilly okies and texas yahoos...etc.
and on the by and by, Missouri boards are full of "should we move to the Big 10" threads every year. it's a better academic fit. we're more midwestern and civilized than those hillbilly okies and texas yahoos...etc.
The Guest
Guest
I do agree that they're more midwestern...
Let me say that when I lived in Chicago I went to the buffs local bar to watch the game and it wasn't quite like the scene at the san francisco buffs bar where it was so crowded that we drank the bar out of beer - twice.
If CU played Stanford and Cal every year you could be damned sure that I'd be at those games, and so would thousands of others.
BehindEnemyLines
beware the habu
It seems that ISU is more of a natural fit for the big-ten-eleven-whatever. Geographic location and an in-state rival are two of the better reasons I can think of for a clown defection.
Junction
Club Member
Make a map of any possible conference except a fictional one CU could form with CSU, AFA, Wyo, Utah, BYU and Utah State and CU is going to be a on a distant edge... :huh:
FIFY :smile2:
ISU would bolt in a heartbeat if they could. I think the same goes for Mizzou as well. However, there is absolutely no way the Big10 takes them. Iowa doesn't want them in, their academics aren't up to Big10 standards and they don't bring a mass market with them (Iowa is small and Iowa already has their "flagship" university in the Big 10). Mizzou is a much better fit for the Big10 since they'd get 2 major TV markets or I bet they'd go further east (Syracuse anyone?)
fcjack1
Member
I don't see this ever happening, I think it's pure rumor and speculation. It wouldn't benefit our progrom at all to join the Pac 10, Cu has a hard enough time packing in the fans right now, take away my deep seeded hatred of nebraska and it's all downhill from there.