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!
"Major" College Football Conference Realignment expected
- Thread starter Darth Snow
- Start date
If there is expansion in the PAC anything with UT and their private TV deal needs to be addressed. I don't see UT giving up any extra money anytime soon, and I assume the PAC will stick to equal revenue sharing. I think UT still feels that they can pull additional teams into the Big12-2-1+1-1+1 for expansion. UT adds a few cupcake conference members (csu loves this plan) and continues to battle OU for the league championship every year.
The issue with any POD is the non-cali schools all wanting maximum access to cali for games. I don't think the AZ & Pacific NW schools will vote for anything that puts them into a POD and reduces cali trips.
Last issue with number of games. I think if the conferences do expand from 12 to 14 or 16 before additional games are added, I think non-conference games will be reduced to allow for more conference games.
The issue with any POD is the non-cali schools all wanting maximum access to cali for games. I don't think the AZ & Pacific NW schools will vote for anything that puts them into a POD and reduces cali trips.
Last issue with number of games. I think if the conferences do expand from 12 to 14 or 16 before additional games are added, I think non-conference games will be reduced to allow for more conference games.
How bout we not rehash the pod/division debate for the millionth time? People are already getting their feathers ruffled for some stupid article that doesn't even really address Pac 12 expansion at all.
****. he's on to me.
This. No need for expansion and if Larry and the PAC presidents are smart (which every indication to date is yes) they are no longer considering the Texas schools. I further agree with Sack that UNM and UNLV are the most likely if they can get their act together.
The bottom line is that there is no scenario where the PAC 12 will be excluded from the party even if it stays at 12. No need to expand.
somebody
Well-Known Member
Yech, ptui! I'd rather resurrect the old Big 8 as the eastern side of this conference, just for old times' sake.
Based on all the rumors and reports out there, I'm not worried about ending up with Texas, Oklahoma or any other Big 12 schools. It looks much more likely that the Big10, Big12 and SEC are going to be the survivors in the midwest and the east, and the ACC and Big East are going to be the conferences being raided. They're both lower tier football conferences than the top 4 and the Big 12 is relatively stable... at least for now.
The real question then is how, or even if they'll bother, will the Pac get to 16 to stay in the picture.
The real question then is how, or even if they'll bother, will the Pac get to 16 to stay in the picture.
I don't think the Pac needs to expand to "stay in the picture". The Pac will be just as relevant at 12 as it would be at 16.
Staying in the Mountain & Pacific time zones, the ones that probably make the most sense:
New Mexico
UNLV
Boise State
San Diego State
(I would have put BYU in there, but there are issues with that which are likely insurmountable.)
P.S. In that scenario, I think that Utah goes to the North along with Boise State in order to make room for UNLV-SDSU-UNM in the South.
yes, but...
new mexico--- not a great tv market, really small stadium, no history of being competitive at sports.
unlv-- gambling center. the california schools will absolutely veto. the hate for unlv goes way back.
boise state---crappy academics, no tv market.
sdsu-- socal schools will veto as they view this as "their" tv market already. plus, academic issues.
byu-- never happen with the academic freedom issues.
i think things would have to be turned totally upside down before the pac added any of these schools. they want tv markets and comparable academic/athletics.
Swish
Half a bubble off
Sure hate to see us in a conference with the whorns again. Okie, Okie lite and the Sand Aggies not as bad.
The PAC 12 needs to keep in step with the trends to stay relevant. I think being first to the expansion plate several years ago is what has led to SEC domination as BCS champ lately. More schools > bigger fan base/larger tv market > more recruiting area > more money for coaches, facilities, promotion, etc... Soon everybody wants to play for a contender, more championship caliber teams in the SEC and the cycle is in motion. Like the move that brought us here if expansion is going to happen again I'd like to see the PAC leading the pack.
The PAC 12 needs to keep in step with the trends to stay relevant. I think being first to the expansion plate several years ago is what has led to SEC domination as BCS champ lately. More schools > bigger fan base/larger tv market > more recruiting area > more money for coaches, facilities, promotion, etc... Soon everybody wants to play for a contender, more championship caliber teams in the SEC and the cycle is in motion. Like the move that brought us here if expansion is going to happen again I'd like to see the PAC leading the pack.
If (and this is pure speculation) we end up with expansion to 14 or 16 I wouldn't count on Texas being a lock. They may actually be a better fit rejoining Aggie and going to the SEC. Baylor is a non-starter in the issue and Tech is highly unlikely for the PAC so if Texas did come in it wouldn't be on their terms with their friends.
I could see OU coming although they are joined at the hip with Okie Light. One school that I haven't seen mentioned that might have some appeal is Kansas. They are a research university, have medical and law schools, and have been fairly clean over the years. UNM would be a lock if they could ever get their acts together and be competitive and draw some fans.
I don't think the PAC has to go to 16, I think that 14 is a manageable number and makes sense if expansion happens. We also have to remember that the PAC and the Big 10+2 almost always vote together on these kind of issues and they may not be to happy about being forced to 16 either. They would be very happy to go to 14 if one of the schools was Notre Dame.
Simply put, without the PAC and the Big 10 no plan is going to pass so I wouldn't get overly concerned yet.
I could see OU coming although they are joined at the hip with Okie Light. One school that I haven't seen mentioned that might have some appeal is Kansas. They are a research university, have medical and law schools, and have been fairly clean over the years. UNM would be a lock if they could ever get their acts together and be competitive and draw some fans.
I don't think the PAC has to go to 16, I think that 14 is a manageable number and makes sense if expansion happens. We also have to remember that the PAC and the Big 10+2 almost always vote together on these kind of issues and they may not be to happy about being forced to 16 either. They would be very happy to go to 14 if one of the schools was Notre Dame.
Simply put, without the PAC and the Big 10 no plan is going to pass so I wouldn't get overly concerned yet.
It would be a possibility.
Pros:
Academics (they're not as bad as we like to make them out to be)
Proximity to CU for a travel partner.
Administrative support - they're pouring money they don't have into that program right now.
Cons:
Facilities
Fan/alumni support - they don't travel well. Hell, they can't even get people to go to Ft. Collins to watch the games.
Little to no TV market - Ft. Collins/Loveland/Greeley needs to add about another 500,000 people before it registers as a legitimate TV market.
Non-factors - athletic success. It wasn't a factor for us, it wouldn't be for them.
At the end of the day, if CSU could improve it's facilities and figure out a way to fill their stadium while getting an extra half million people to move to Northern Colorado, they'd be a legitimate candidate.
14 would be cool if we added Oklahoma and Oklahoma State.
Utah would need to go to the North.
Maybe have a protected "rival" in the other division even if it needed to be manufactured.
CU would play its 6 divisional mates every year, Utah, and 3 of the other 6.
10 conference games, with 5 home and 5 away.
Then, 4 non-conference games.
I'd assume you'd need 7 wins with a 14-game schedule in order to be bowl-eligible, so I'd probably want to go no tougher than A-B-C-C for our OOC schedule.
Biggest issue is that Larry Scott doesn't want to repeat tv markets with expansion. He saw one of the biggest weaknesses of the Pac-10 as having 10 teams, but only getting 5 media markets out of it. He was willing to let that slide for OU/OSU + UT/TTU because of the national appeal OU/UT have and the size of the home Dallas + all Texas markets they command.
I used to think that, too. I don't anymore. I really don't want to have anything at all to do with our former conference mates. None of them.
So, what markets? Las Vegas, Albuquerque - and then the next options after that are in Texas really
If the travel didn't suck so bad, I'd recommend Hawaii. Honolulu is a pretty big city, believe it or not. And there are no professional sports that would compete for viewers. They don't support their athletic department at all, though. It's rather pathetic.
That's the trouble. The Pac-12 believes it can get the network on a basic tier of the cable systems in Albuquerque/Santa Fe and Las Vegas (and San Diego) without expanding. So what does expansion gain if it stays in the West? A larger game inventory, but that's about it. We're only talking about 2nd tier markets, too, so it's not like adding a Top 20 with Denver. There's not national appeal to make Fox and ESPN salivate, either.
Expanding into the Central time zone means a lot of good things.
1. New Top 20 (even Top 10 with Dallas & Houston) markets.
2. Time zone that allows for more television time slots for games.
3. Potential for programs that have national appeal.
It also means a lot of bad things:
1. increased travel for existing teams
2. dilution of the brand
3. scheduling issues.
1. and 3., they deal with by creating the east/west divisions to some extent. 2., they'd argue their brand is huge and covers a gigantic tv territory. i pretty sure they wouldn't see it as dilution.
they are going to go for tv sets via new markets. then, from there, they will look at cultural/academic/athletic fit. the univ. presidents won't approve of a boise state for example, even if bsu had a great tv market and the right sized facilities and such.
if this thing expands again, i think you can pretty much guarantee a ****ing texasssss school gets an invite. that's just my opinion of course.
:nod:
And while I think of it in terms of East/West for divisions, I'm sure the Pac would brand it as "West" and "Southwest".
Maybe its just because I live up in the Great Land where the shortest flight "outside" is 3+ hours but I just don't see #1 being a big deal for us. Our plane trips are just as short to Texas/Oklahoma as they are to Cali or Washington. It also only adds another hour our two to the West Coast teams although they would have to make a few extra trips. It seems the only incremental cost would be in fuel for the extra distance which would really be nominal. Am I missing the boat on cost being a factor here?
I think there would be one hell of a fight from those on the fringe if the super conference thing gets legs. Not an anti-trust expert, but you would think there would be some issues there. There is so much money to be lost from exclusion - there is going to be a fight. Maybe Congress threatens to look at tax-exempt status. I don't know. But this is BIG business.
I think there are many obstacles to this happening. Which is good. **** me if we have to join those assholes from Texas again.
I think there are many obstacles to this happening. Which is good. **** me if we have to join those assholes from Texas again.