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!

Congrats Buff Fans

Watching the recording. The long shots of the crowd look decent. And that is why they spread the season tix holders all over the place.
 
WTF was Miller thinking when he "sat" on the CSU guy? How dumb was that?
 
The inability to tackle the QB for a loss is maddening. Thomas must have avoided big losses four or five times.
 
My recollection of the contract is that ticket proceeds are allocated 55% to CU and 45% to CSU.

55,000 fans x $35 = $1,925,000 gate.
CU's 55% cut = $1,059,000 payday.

Est CU fans = 35,000. (64%)
CU payout / CU fan = $30.26.
Implied subsidy per CU fan payable to CSU: $4.74 each, or $165,900, payable to CSU.
The Rams get a pretty good deal for not showing up.
 
SnowBuff said:
I asked for facts first asshole :lol:. And we don't get to play at mile high for free. I remember back when we were first bitching about this game there was a fee discussed to whatever organization runs mile high.
Click to expand...


FACT: CU and CSU administration want to play every year

FACT: Playing at Invesco every yr is more profitable for the athletic dept than playing one game in Folsom and one in Hughes.

FACT: You bitch too much
 
The additional revenue is chump change. No reason to subsidize CSU now that we have superconference money.
 
JimmyBuff said:
FACT: CU and CSU administration want to play every year

FACT: Playing at Invesco every yr is more profitable for the athletic dept than playing one game in Folsom and one in Hughes.

FACT: You bitch too much
Click to expand...
Not neccessarily the truth. The CU administration and Bohn now don't neccessarily want to play CSU either in a rotating basis or in Denver.

This series started up again when it did and continues primarily because of a bunch of CSU supporters in the state legislature, call it the Baylor north syndrome.

This game is both the financial and emotional lifeblood of the CSU program. They make between $600,000 and $750,000 each year off this game, take it off their schedule and they would have to replace it with a payday game on the road which would likely net them between $300,000 and $500,000, most likely on the lower end of the scale since they don't travel well and aren't a name that is going to inspire ticket sales by opponent fans.

Bigger in the minds of those supporting the political pressure is that the CU game is their one chance each year to build credibility and generate enthusiasm among their "fanbase." Win or even show well and they can feel that they are a legitimate player on the Colorado sports scene. Take away the CU game and you might as well post a vacant sign at the CSU ticket booth.

Unfortunately for the CU the political pressure is going to continue as long as CSU supporters have some hope. The only way to end the series is for CU to put up a series of wins that are so one sided that CSU fans simply lose interest entirely.
 
JimmyBuff said:
FACT: CU and CSU administration want to play every year

FACT: Playing at Invesco every yr is more profitable for the athletic dept than playing one game in Folsom and one in Hughes.

FACT: You bitch too much
Click to expand...

Not sure about 1 and 2, but 3 is definitely true. And I would love for you to back up "FACT two"
 
JimmyBuff said:
FACT: CU and CSU administration want to play every year

FACT: Playing at Invesco every yr is more profitable for the athletic dept than playing one game in Folsom and one in Hughes.

FACT: You bitch too much
Click to expand...

FACT: This game sucks in Denver.
 
SnowBuff said:
Not sure about 1 and 2, but 3 is definitely true. And I would love for you to back up "FACT two"
Click to expand...

You seriously think we'd make over a million bucks at hughes? C'mon CSU couldn't pay us that.


If the two administrations didn't want to play this game wouldn't be happening.
 
MtnBuff said:
Not neccessarily the truth. The CU administration and Bohn now don't neccessarily want to play CSU either in a rotating basis or in Denver.

This series started up again when it did and continues primarily because of a bunch of CSU supporters in the state legislature, call it the Baylor north syndrome.

This game is both the financial and emotional lifeblood of the CSU program. They make between $600,000 and $750,000 each year off this game, take it off their schedule and they would have to replace it with a payday game on the road which would likely net them between $300,000 and $500,000, most likely on the lower end of the scale since they don't travel well and aren't a name that is going to inspire ticket sales by opponent fans.

Bigger in the minds of those supporting the political pressure is that the CU game is their one chance each year to build credibility and generate enthusiasm among their "fanbase." Win or even show well and they can feel that they are a legitimate player on the Colorado sports scene. Take away the CU game and you might as well post a vacant sign at the CSU ticket booth.

Unfortunately for the CU the political pressure is going to continue as long as CSU supporters have some hope. The only way to end the series is for CU to put up a series of wins that are so one sided that CSU fans simply lose interest entirely.
Click to expand...



Complete Bull****. If CU didn't want to play this game they wouldn't play. Fact is both the schools administration want this game to be played. Has nothing to do with the state legislature.
 
JimmyBuff said:
You seriously think we'd make over a million bucks at hughes? C'mon CSU couldn't pay us that.


If the two administrations didn't want to play this game wouldn't be happening.
Click to expand...

No. Which means we shouldn't ever play the game at hughes. You still haven't explained the benefit of playing games at mile v folsom.
 
JimmyBuff said:
Complete Bull****. If CU didn't want to play this game they wouldn't play. Fact is both the schools administration want this game to be played. Has nothing to do with the state legislature.
Click to expand...

The legislature did step in to renew the series, if not there would be no way we'd have picked it up again.
 
JimmyBuff said:
Complete Bull****. If CU didn't want to play this game they wouldn't play. Fact is both the schools administration want this game to be played. Has nothing to do with the state legislature.
Click to expand...

Calling BS on your part, go back and check what was happening at the time the series was restarted. There was a significant amount of backroom pressure applied to CU to restart the series. There is still political pressure subtly being applied to insure it continues. If you think politics isn't a huge part of college football then you and the easter bunny can have a great party.

CU didn't resist strongly because it didn't have a negative impact on the AD but CU has reasons they would prefer it to end, they are just not willing to spend the politcal value needed to do so.
 
SnowBuff said:
No. Which means we shouldn't ever play the game at hughes. You still haven't explained the benefit of playing games at mile v folsom.
Click to expand...

you think CSU is going to play every game at Folsom? Not going to happen. Nothing to do with Folsom vs Mile High. its about CU and CSU and together making the most money they can by playing each other.
 
MtnBuff said:
Calling BS on your part, go back and check what was happening at the time the series was restarted. There was a significant amount of backroom pressure applied to CU to restart the series. There is still political pressure subtly being applied to insure it continues. If you think politics isn't a huge part of college football then you and the easter bunny can have a great party.

CU didn't resist strongly because it didn't have a negative impact on the AD but CU has reasons they would prefer it to end, they are just not willing to spend the politcal value needed to do so.
Click to expand...


go ahead and google this political pressure you talk about with a link.
 
JimmyBuff said:
you think CSU is going to play every game at Folsom? Not going to happen. Nothing to do with Folsom vs Mile High. its about CU and CSU and together making the most money they can by playing each other.
Click to expand...
Ahh, you are almost there. So what is the advantage for CU to play their home games at mile high v folsom?
 
JimmyBuff said:
go ahead and google this political pressure you talk about with a link.
Click to expand...

You do the work, go back into the Denver Post archives and you will find articles that talk about it, better still go talk to people who were working in the legislature at the time.

You are sounding as delusional as the sheep fans are about this subject. Remeber some of us were around when all this happened.
 
MtnBuff said:
You do the work, go back into the Denver Post archives and you will find articles that talk about it, better still go talk to people who were working in the legislature at the time.

You are sounding as delusional as the sheep fans are about this subject. Remeber some of us were around when all this happened.
Click to expand...

I'm delusional yet you are the one disputing that CU doesn't really want to play CSU anymore even though they signed a 10 year agreement for Denver with a new athletic director after we've played each other 9 out of the last 10 years. Okay
 
JimmyBuff said:
I'm delusional yet you are the one disputing that CU doesn't really want to play CSU anymore even though they signed a 10 year agreement for Denver with a new athletic director after we've played each other 9 out of the last 10 years. Okay
Click to expand...

I'm just telling you that there are things happening in the backrooms that impact what happens on the surface. It's called politics and it is reality.
 
With the impending conference alignment changes and historic rivalries being ripped apart, I kinda like the idea of the CU/CSU game ongoing and the attitude of the contest. Remember Lawrence Vickers going into the end zone? Today was a little chippy too. More importantly, I enjoy football games where there are people a lot more drunk than me. For a non-conference game, why not an in state rivalry that CU should (should) beat every year? It sure beats 'don't care' games. My opinion.
 
SnowBuff said:
jimmy, you are just being obstinate and deliberately obtuse at this point.
Click to expand...

Jimmy? Never! :lol:

I still think that I remember bohn being willing to let csu play at Hughes when cu was insisting on taking their home games in the series back to folding. It was the lammies who demanded to go back to invesco. I think its incorrect to say bohn was the roadblock to an on campus series.
 
JimmyBuff said:
you think CSU is going to play every game at Folsom? Not going to happen. Nothing to do with Folsom vs Mile High. its about CU and CSU and together making the most money they can by playing each other.
Click to expand...

Right no pressure from state legislators at all :rolling_eyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top