Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by HotRack, Jun 7, 2010.
Even if we are selected, it sucks to finish behind sh-theads like TTech and OSU.
Although I'd have to think this aides us. The original Pac 8 will now clearly sit back and judge the merits of CU versus Baylor. As long as they disregard the bantering from the state of TX, CU wins that debate in a walk...
Good, if they're going to guage interest and it's not Scotts unilateral decision, there's no way Baylor passes the admin of the current Pac 10.
That said, CB is STILL a UT mouthpiece and pushing UTs agenda. Too much smoke saying CU is a sure thing, and has been.
Latest clip: Brown "feeling more and more like the Big 12 will stay together because of the B10 only looking for one team, ND. *ebraska could be a back up, but then that would only be one team that the B12 has to replace. Really thinking the B12 stays together."
UT mouthpiece pushing UT's agenda...
If they are listening to the current members about who to invite I feel much better.
Boulder, a West Coast city that is only lacking the beach access that some of the others have , Great Academics, Athletic Department with great history, available skiing during away games etc....
Waco, enough said
Waco only has Dr. Pepper to boast about.
Dont forget the Texas Ranger Hall of Fame.
Brown to interview Starr after his presser...
Just some Brown quotes...
"Nebraska has moved ahead of Missouri in getting an invite from the B10..."
B12 North holding the rest of the B12 hostage...
"I think Scott will extend the invite first to UT, OU and aTm then ask them (UT, OU, aTm) their feelings on the Colorado or Baylor situation...and also what the players in the B12 North are doing."
"My contacts, especially where the legislature is involved, are solid."
"I'm not trying to brag."
"The story is all about TV revenue, plain and simple." - THEN WHY IS BAYLOR EVEN BEING CONSIDERED BY THE PAC 10???
"Biggest story I've ever broke"
"B10 talking to ND, ND listening."
Machiavelli advises the Prince: "accuse your enemies of what you do".
and Darrell Scott's mom was given a bank job. :lol:
So we know we are good with current Pac members over who they would pick. I'm kind of wondering about one player that I am hoping will be an ally in this, albeit so far a very quiet one, and that is OU. As an old Big 8 school I am hoping they would rather have CU in conference than Baylor. Seriously I haven't heard a peep out of OU. They are a freaking giant of college football, they have to have some opinion on all of this.
The thing that drives me nuts with all of this, is that everybody keeps coming back to money. The only driver in all of this expansion talk is TV money. CU adds way more money to the deal than Baylor. Baylor probably results in a net loss of money to each member by being added, doesn't this seem obvious to everybody?
I don't think you'd get any argument from anybody the CU would bring more money of Baylor - the sticking point is would the Pac 10 be willing to forgo any lost revenue by losing CU to Baylor over the potential of losing any additional revenue gained by gaining Texas --
That I understand, but so far I have yet to see any indication that any posturing from the Baylor folks is going to amount to any more than that. Until I see an actual legal block of UT going to the Pac 10 without Baylor this is a no brainer. The way I see it, Baylor is trying to force UT into a package deal with themselves. Last I checked UT doesn't like to be forced into anything and I would imagine would not look kindly on being so tightly tied to Baylor against their will.
Texas would definitely prefer Baylor over CU to the Pac 10 - it would strenghten their voting bloc, make their travel easier, and eliminate the "anti-Texas" Buffs. But it's the Pac 10's call.
Won't stop UT and their "ambassadors" from lobbying on Baylor's behalf though.
Separate names with a comma.