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!

CU has rejoined the Big 12 and broken college football - talking out asses continues

MiamiBuffs said:
A @pac12 update: It seems the @Pac12Network will play a big role in the new media. The likely home for all the content from a production element. They will become a direct to consumer source for the events as well as on cable and satellite 📡📡📡
I must caution that is the framework of a deal and could change
That said the @Pac12Network has been used many times by both ESPN and FOX to produce P12 events. So it makes sense to keep costs down by making it home base. We will see IF it does come to be.


Was just coming to post this. I suggested they should do something like this several pages back. The P12N as an asset is a pretty valuable thing to me that struggled from distribution challenges under the dying cable pay set up. Its not hard to imagine a future where a lot of sports eventually become a stand alone streaming service as consumers habits continue to evolve. Owning our own network makes us less dependent than the other conferences will be on the major networks when that day comes

Cue ITB rant….
Click to expand...
This guy posts generally obvious ideas that anyone could guess at.

-Two linear networks and one streamer 😱
-P12N is a DTC option 😱

Here’s what’s coming next
-Believed the contract will include a night game 🤯

-Apple is involved, ESPN, too 🤯 (maybe a 3rd 🧐)

Translation, safe to say he knows nothing. Can’t retweet B12 groupie accounts all day and expect me to believe anyone serious would talk to him. It is entertaining I guess.
 
i think i am too hungover for this thread this am.

bed jumping GIF
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
Yeah, the conference affiliation has nothing to do with it, but the degree is definitely less prestigious now than it used to be
Click to expand...
Only value in conference affiliation would be like if Washington State moved to the Big 10. The university degree would still carry the same weight but it breaks the Regional recognition the institution may have.

WSU would be advertised locally in Illinois, Indiana and Ohio, therefore making it perceivably easier for an alumni resume to standout in a pile because the person hiring just had fun tailgating with WSU fans or attended a good basketball game that one time.

Not a problem for CU as the academic brand does call upon notable national attention. And not to call WSU or WVU academic slouches, they are just more regional brands.

My sister has run into this. She went to Duquesne University in Pittsburgh, outside of PA nobody knows the university. To everyone in Colorado it’s that funny name school picked as an upset in the March Madness bracket. And probably in Pittsburgh, DU is that school that is good at hockey and Penguin Jason Zucker went there.
 
Jens1893 said:
I think it's also utterly pointless to be arguing about the prestige of your degree unless you want to feel better about yourself.
Click to expand...
Preface with a trigger warning when in the company of Texas A&M graduates.

I think PhD matters sometimes. But that more during active studies and the necessary resources available at the institution. And Prestige = Resources.
 
Gramburglar said:
Preface with a trigger warning when in the company of Texas A&M graduates.

I think PhD matters sometimes. But that more during active studies and the necessary resources available at the institution. And Prestige = Resources.
Click to expand...

Had that discussion last week regarding a friend. He's currently doing a MBA/Comm double degree and sent me a link to a private school to do a PhD. I forwarded that stuff to a bunch of people I know and the consensus was "Why does he want a PhD if he doesn't want to stay in academia?"

Edit: That may not have been your point.
 
Jens1893 said:
Had that discussion last week regarding a friend. He's currently doing a MBA/Comm double degree and sent me a link to a private school to do a PhD. I forwarded that stuff to a bunch of people I know and the consensus was "Why does he want a PhD if he doesn't want to stay in academia?"

Edit: That may not have been your point.
Click to expand...
Industry dependent.

MBA/Comm I don’t see the value beyond personal goals, unless he wants to strike out on to his own and try to build a boutique company focused on a specific passion.

In my industry, major companies and entrepreneurial companies will absolutely demand their Subject Matter Experts have a PhD. But that’s extremely an niche role.
 
Gramburglar said:
Industry dependent.

MBA/Comm I don’t see the value beyond personal goals, unless he wants to strike out on to his own and try to build a boutique company focused on a specific passion.

In my industry, major companies and entrepreneurial companies will absolutely demand their Subject Matter Experts have a PhD. But that’s extremely an niche role.
Click to expand...

Negotiation is his thing right now.
 
A lot of broad stroke being taken in this thread. There are at least some departments/degrees in the University that rank quite well nationally and are well respected by their peers (Biochem and Aerospace Engineering are ones that I know of). I guess I'm not sure how good they were in the 90's, but AE is in the top 10 right now and its facilities are as good as any in the nation). I'm sure there are departments that have either declined or not kept up with the status quo through the years, but to generally say a degree from CU today isn't valued as much as it was in the 90's doesn't ring true to me. Regardless, athletic conference affiliation has nothing to do with quality of education.
 
married2abuff said:
A lot of broad stroke being taken in this thread. There are at least some departments/degrees in the University that rank quite well nationally and are well respected by their peers (Biochem and Aerospace Engineering are ones that I know of). I guess I'm not sure how good they were in the 90's, but AE is in the top 10 right now and its facilities are as good as any in the nation). I'm sure there are departments that have either declined or not kept up with the status quo through the years, but to generally say a degree from CU today isn't valued as much as it was in the 90's doesn't ring true to me. Regardless, athletic conference affiliation has nothing to do with quality of education.
Click to expand...
This is right. No (or very few) hiring managers give 2 ****s about an overall school ranking let alone athletic conference affiliation. Program ranking and reputation carry far more weight.
 
In the study in the July issue of the journal Sociology of Education, Stevens and two colleagues find that intercollegiate football leagues are composed of schools that tend to be similar in measures of academic reputation. What’s more, over time, scores assessing the academic reputation of schools admitted to any given league come closer and closer to the scores of those already in that league. “This reputation convergence seems to be independent of change in underlying academic quality,” said Stevens.
Click to expand...

https://ed.stanford.edu/news/ncaa-conference-affiliation-linked-academic-prestige-stanfordiowa-study
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
In theory yes, but that’s not how it works. CU was never elite enough academically for any employer to remember that it was any better 20 years ago. I also agree with Jens that unless it’s an Ivy or one of a handful of others, it doesn’t really matter.
Click to expand...
Also most of us didnt major in the programs where the degree matters the most at CU: Engineering, specifically Aerospace. Physics. Chemistry, specifically Physical Chemistry. Geology. Psychology.

A friend of mine used to do the hiring Network Appliance. They had a strong bias towards only two computer science programs in the state, CU and Mines, for interns and new grad hires.
 
Hank said:
https://ed.stanford.edu/news/ncaa-conference-affiliation-linked-academic-prestige-stanfordiowa-study
Click to expand...
Exactly. The conference is just a reflection of likeminded institutions deciding to be affiliated with one another.

The Big 12 has always benefitted from Texas and Colorado before it (also TAMU). BUT… both teams almost didn’t join at the start and almost went to the Pac-10, then both finally did leave because we fit in better elsewhere.

Usually you don’t see a fish out of water (Texas, for example) for too long. The Big 12 is now perfectly aligned academically.
 
Victory said:
Exactly. The conference is just a reflection of likeminded institutions deciding to be affiliated with one another.

The Big 12 has always benefitted from Texas and Colorado before it (also TAMU). BUT… both teams almost didn’t join at the start and almost went to the Pac-10, then both finally did leave because we fit in better elsewhere.

Usually you don’t see a fish out of water (Texas, for example) for too long. The Big 12 is now perfectly aligned academically.
Click to expand...
Well, geographic proximity as much as anything back in the day.
 
Victory said:
The Big 12 has always benefitted from Texas and Colorado before it (also TAMU). BUT… both teams almost didn’t join at the start and almost went to the Pac-10, then both finally did leave because we fit in better elsewhere.
Click to expand...
Texas left for money first, and rejoining football rivalries (Aggy and Arky, while keeping OU) second. If academics played any role in their move they'd be in the B1G. CU left for stability and to theoretically strengthen ties with west coast alumni. Neither moved for "fit" among the institutions of their new conference.
 
BerkeleyBuff said:
Texas left for money first, and rejoining football rivalries (Aggy and Arky, while keeping OU) second. If academics played any role in their move they'd be in the B1G. CU left for stability and to theoretically strengthen ties with west coast alumni. Neither moved for "fit" among the institutions of their new conference.
Click to expand...
Conferences are a reflection of the likemindedness of the institutions. So yeah, fit is a major reason why schools align. We almost always cite our large CA alumni contingent in major metros (LA, SF) that are very affluent areas as a reason why the Pac made sense in 2011 and almost back in the 90’s. Wealthy families in CA send their kids to CU more than any other state because it’s a great school, they can afford it and the kids get good grades in HS. That’s called fit. And when we joined the top 4 major schools in CA were in the Pac. It was a better fit.

The SEC has Vandy, Florida, TAMU and Tenn and Georgia are better than any B12 school. Texas is not a fish out of water in the SEC plus they get to stay in the south.

It’s not just academics but in every realignment scenario in the modern era EXCEPT NEBRASKA the school aligned academically and athletically with the new conference.
 
PAHIBuff said:
In a recent example, IMO USC andUCLA bolted for the B1G money, not because they feel a likemindedness with Purdue, Nebraska, Indiana, or Minnesota..
Click to expand...
USC and UCLA have more in common academically with Minnesota and Purdue than most Pac-12 schools but otherwise good point and bonus points for leaving out Michigan and Northwestern. 😂
 
Victory said:
Conferences are a reflection of the likemindedness of the institutions. So yeah, fit is a major reason why schools align. We almost always cite our large CA alumni contingent in major metros (LA, SF) that are very affluent areas as a reason why the Pac made sense in 2011 and almost back in the 90’s. Wealthy families in CA send their kids to CU more than any other state because it’s a great school, they can afford it and the kids get good grades in HS. That’s called fit. And when we joined the top 4 major schools in CA were in the Pac. It was a better fit.

The SEC has Vandy, Florida, TAMU and Tenn and Georgia are better than any B12 school. Texas is not a fish out of water in the SEC plus they get to stay in the south.

It’s not just academics but in every realignment scenario in the modern era EXCEPT NEBRASKA the school aligned academically and athletically with the new conference.
Click to expand...
Conferences are a reflection of geographic proximity (mostly past, as you say) and willingness to spend on athletics (largely an alumni # thing, but also related to historical success that bred non-alumni fanbases that bring in the money). If you're saying fit is "connecting with alumni" - well, ok, but I agreed with that, and that has nothing to do with the other institutions of the conference.

Wealthy Californians sending their kids to CU says nothing about fit; wealthy Californians send their kids to every state because there aren't enough spots in the CA system schools. In fact, if you look at the enrollments of MOST large universities west of the Mississippi, guess which state is nearly always #2 on their enrollment charts. Can you guess what non-Texan demographic tops Baylor's enrollment chart? That's right, wealthy Californians. Does Baylor "fit" in the PAC?

I'm just saying this "academic alignment" is not a reason any school is moving to another conference. As mentioned, Texas moved for money and for rivalries. If they considered "academic fit", well their options (by definition) were SEC, B1G, PAC, and ACC, and they chose the LEAST academically prestigious (yet you'd likely argue they moved for academic fit no matter which they chose). CU moved because alumni (we agree), Big XII instability (at the time), and money (at the time looked good; may have still benefitted us on the donation front).
 
BerkeleyBuff said:
Conferences are a reflection of geographic proximity (mostly past, as you say) and willingness to spend on athletics (largely an alumni # thing, but also related to historical success that bred non-alumni fanbases that bring in the money). If you're saying fit is "connecting with alumni" - well, ok, but I agreed with that, and that has nothing to do with the other institutions of the conference.

Wealthy Californians sending their kids to CU says nothing about fit; wealthy Californians send their kids to every state because there aren't enough spots in the CA system schools. In fact, if you look at the enrollments of MOST large universities west of the Mississippi, guess which state is nearly always #2 on their enrollment charts. Does Baylor fit in the PAC? Can you guess what non-Texan demographic tops Baylor's enrollment chart? That's right, wealthy Californians.

I'm just saying this "academic alignment" is not a reason any school is moving to another conference. As mentioned, Texas moved for money and for rivalries. If they considered "academic fit", well their options (by definition) were SEC, B1G, PAC, and ACC, and they chose the LEAST academically prestigious (yet you'd likely argue they moved for academic fit no matter which they chose). CU moved because alumni (we agree) Big XII instability (at the time), and money (at the time looked good; may have still benefitted us on the donation front).
Click to expand...
No I’ve always said it’s a combo, everything should be there. The academics, athletics, the money (obviously) and geography (except for USC).

To Jim’s point, would the Big 12 hurt our reputation. It’s hard to say. We’ve never been in a conference, in the modern era, where there were no likeminded institutions there with us.

Obviously, there’s some extenuating financial circumstances but it would be a legit concern although history has shown fish don’t swim out of water for too long.
 
Victory said:
No I’ve always said it’s a combo, everything should be there. The academics, athletics, the money (obviously) and geography (except for USC).

To Jim’s point, would the Big 12 hurt our reputation. It’s hard to say. We’ve never been in a conference, in the modern era, where there were no likeminded institutions there with us.

Obviously, there’s some extenuating financial circumstances but it would be a legit concern although history has shown fish don’t swim out of water for too long.
Click to expand...
Depends on what you mean by "like-minded." We are closer to Kansas and Iowa state than we are to Stanford or Berkeley. Academically, the back end of both conferences is bad. The high end of the PAC much more prestigious obviously. Depending on which ranking system you use, CU fits into the upper third of the Big XII.

Anyways, I'm simply saying that academic "fit", however you define it, is not something that will go into CU's decision making about this move-or-stay scenario.
 
BerkeleyBuff said:
Depends on what you mean by "like-minded." We are closer to Kansas and Iowa state than we are to Stanford or Berkeley. Academically, the back end of both conferences is bad. The high end of the PAC much more prestigious obviously. Depending on which ranking system you use, CU fits into the upper third of the Big XII.

Anyways, I'm simply saying that academic "fit", however you define it, is not something that will go into CU's decision making about this move-or-stay scenario.
Click to expand...
No, CU is significantly out in front of the B12. This shouldn’t be a point of debate. We fit perfectly with the Pac-12 and are a better fit with the B1G than B12 academically.
 
Victory said:
No, CU is significantly out in front of the B12. This shouldn’t be a point of debate. We fit perfectly with the Pac-12 and are a better fit with the B1G than B12 academically.
Click to expand...
Let me repeat this line from my last post: "Depending on which ranking system you use, CU fits into the upper third of the Big XII." That is a factually correct statement. That doesn't mean I don't think we'd be the best academic institution of the new Big XII, but it's still a factually correct statement and will appear as such to most high schoolers evaluating us. The gulf between us and Stanford is much greater than the gulf between us and Kansas.
 
CU is right in the middle of the PAC - ranked around 100 by USNWR.

The middle of the Big 12 is UCF and Cincinnati, ranked at about 150.

But the top academic schools in the Big 12 are Bailor, TCU, and BYU. We're just not a fit.

Hope the PAC works out. It's better for the university's reputation.
 
Hank said:
CU is right in the middle of the PAC - ranked around 100 by USNWR.

The middle of the Big 12 is UCF and Cincinnati, ranked at about 150.

But the top academic schools in the Big 12 are Bailor, TCU, and BYU. We're just not a fit.

Hope the PAC works out. It's better for the university's reputation.
Click to expand...
Why on earth did USNWR enter the discussion? University presidents don't use that. Elites like Harvard Medical refused to continue reporting to that ranking because it's not good at what it tries to do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top