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!

Pac-12 expansion is now inevitable

zbuff said:
I didn't read the methodology yet, but am not shocked that they rank their conference ahead of everyone except the 2 obvious leaders. Are they trying to prove relevance? I ask because I seem to have read a lot that suggests this expansion is motivated by panic.
Click to expand...

It seems that geography paid a big part in his analysis. The west is big and half empty compared to the population density of the rest of the US.

I would say this is valid because it ties in a lot to attendance, traveling to road games within the conference, interaction between fan bases, your media exposure of other conference programs, etc.

When I have talked about "Pac-12 Culture" in this thread, I have been talking about this along with Tier 1 research as something that makes the Pac-12 what it is. Also, in-state rivalries have historically been important for the overall conference buzz. Frankly, this is one of the best arguments for the Pac-12 to look at CSU if it decides to expand. Utah State is an R2, but otherwise would fit the conference model. Then, Nevada + UNLV in the future if they obtained Tier 1, effectively giving the conference dominance over every state with a population of over 3 million people within the MPTZ and having strong in-state rivalries.

The other scenario is to target the major metros in the West. The stick out like crazy within a sea of nothing as you link the west on the interstate highways. San Diego, Las Vegas, Albuquerque, Boise, Reno, Colorado Springs. Some combination of SDSU, UNLV, UNM, BSU, UNR and AFA would also make an expanded Pac-12 feel like it was culturally maintained but grown.

Conversely, chasing the money with programs in the Central TZ changes culture in significant ways. Maybe in a good way, maybe not. But if, for example, a Pac-16 means the addition of OU, UT, UH and TTU then I think we'd have to admit that while the money would be much better and the R1 criteria would make the presidents happy, it would significantly alter conference DNA in other ways. Maybe we don't want that and maybe the Pac-12 doesn't need that. At some point, isn't there a diminishing return on what a bigger media contract means for the ability of the conference to fund sports, build facilities and hire great coaches? It's not like we're seeing the Pac-12 suffer in any of those areas.
 
Buffnik said:
It seems that geography paid a big part in his analysis. The west is big and half empty compared to the population density of the rest of the US.

I would say this is valid because it ties in a lot to attendance, traveling to road games within the conference, interaction between fan bases, your media exposure of other conference programs, etc.

When I have talked about "Pac-12 Culture" in this thread, I have been talking about this along with Tier 1 research as something that makes the Pac-12 what it is. Also, in-state rivalries have historically been important for the overall conference buzz. Frankly, this is one of the best arguments for the Pac-12 to look at CSU if it decides to expand. Utah State is an R2, but otherwise would fit the conference model. Then, Nevada + UNLV in the future if they obtained Tier 1, effectively giving the conference dominance over every state with a population of over 3 million people within the MPTZ and having strong in-state rivalries.

The other scenario is to target the major metros in the West. The stick out like crazy within a sea of nothing as you link the west on the interstate highways. San Diego, Las Vegas, Albuquerque, Boise, Reno, Colorado Springs. Some combination of SDSU, UNLV, UNM, BSU, UNR and AFA would also make an expanded Pac-12 feel like it was culturally maintained but grown.

Conversely, chasing the money with programs in the Central TZ changes culture in significant ways. Maybe in a good way, maybe not. But if, for example, a Pac-16 means the addition of OU, UT, UH and TTU then I think we'd have to admit that while the money would be much better and the R1 criteria would make the presidents happy, it would significantly alter conference DNA in other ways. Maybe we don't want that and maybe the Pac-12 doesn't need that. At some point, isn't there a diminishing return on what a bigger media contract means for the ability of the conference to fund sports, build facilities and hire great coaches? It's not like we're seeing the Pac-12 suffer in any of those areas.
Click to expand...
I did read that much and I generally agree with it. What's sketchy to me is that the Big 12 is seen as being better off in this regard. The PAC includes LA metro, which is a much larger population center than the Big 12 can boast. And if they're comparing the outlying travel, it's further from Lubbock to Morgantown (1465 mi) than from Seattle to Boulder (1309 mi).
 
zbuff said:
I did read that much and I generally agree with it. What's sketchy to me is that the Big 12 is seen as being better off in this regard. The PAC includes LA metro, which is a much larger population center than the Big 12 can boast. And if they're comparing the outlying travel, it's further from Lubbock to Morgantown (1465 mi) than from Seattle to Boulder (1309 mi).
Click to expand...

I believe what he did was look at the geographic centerpoint of each conference and measured from there. In his expansion analysis for the Big 12, I believe that resulted in UConn being closer to the conference geography than BYU.

I agree that the methodology is questionable because I'm not sure the weight he attaches to the variables are correct or if the way he quantified the variables is the best way to do so.
 
Outside of BYU (I don’t want any part of BYU), the Pac already has all of the top academic schools in the footprint. So I don’t see any expansion in the near or distant future. Big mistake in my opinion, but my motivation is for a stronger athletic conference. Seems the presidents are more motivated by impressing folks at cocktail parties.

Why an athletic conference would cut its nose off to spite its face is beyond me. These egg heads need to understand high profile football and basketball teams raise the profile of a university more than any Tier 1/AAU status ever will. The year Florida won the NC in football and basketball they almost doubled applications for their undergrad schools. I wonder if they were able to raise the academic level of the student population when they had twice as many students to pick from.

I’m sure glad the Pac wants to be the Ivy League of the west. They are well on their way; the nation can’t watch Ivy League football either.
 
Buffnik said:
I believe what he did was look at the geographic centerpoint of each conference and measured from there. In his expansion analysis for the Big 12, I believe that resulted in UConn being closer to the conference geography than BYU.

I agree that the methodology is questionable because I'm not sure the weight he attaches to the variables are correct or if the way he quantified the variables is the best way to do so.
Click to expand...
Kind of like reading the dog**** site your team cheats too, where only wildly ridiculous weightings can make the Belicheats look better.
 
boulder77 said:
And brie. Will there be brie?
Click to expand...

Yum. Add some fig jam to that with some toast points and maybe some olives, prosciutto and roast almonds... we've got ourselves a wonderful Napa style bento box. Make it happen, Lobos!
 
Buffnik said:
Yum. Add some fig jam to that with some toast points and maybe some olives, prosciutto and roast almonds... we've got ourselves a wonderful Napa style bento box. Make it happen, Lobos!
Click to expand...
Robert Sinskey vineyards in Napa Valley puts out almonds that are roasted with rosemary, sage, and probably crack, that are insanely good. Lobos - that is your target. Make it happen.
 
Would Nebraska feel they might do better in the PAC rather than being irrelevant in B1G whatever west division and losing to Wisconsin Badgers every year? Would they value the rivalry with CU again? Maybe Nebraska would come West?
 
UtahaluminTX said:
Would Nebraska feel they might do better in the PAC rather than being irrelevant in B1G whatever west division and losing to Wisconsin Badgers every year? Would they value the rivalry with CU again? Maybe Nebraska would come West?
Click to expand...
No, different conference, same story. They always relied on Texas recruiting and have removed themselves from that. Maybe they get traction with Calibraska, I doubt it, but they need to figure an identity out or get in a conference with a Texas school or at least close by like the original Big 8.
 
Lulz.

The Iowa S&C coach is paid $$$, therefore the PAC 12 must expand.

It's hard to argue logic like that.
 
sackman said:
Lulz.

The Iowa S&C coach is paid $$$, therefore the PAC 12 must expand.

It's hard to argue logic like that.
Click to expand...


It doesn’t have to expand. Something needs to change. I didn’t feel the linked article justified a new thread. I thought this was the logical place for it.


Next time I will check with you before I post. Sorry to offend you.
 
leftybuff said:
UNM has always seemed to me, at least, to be a solid candidate for either the B12 or P12. Decent MBB, growing part of the southwest, that state's flagship University, and geographically a good fit. I always wondered why they didn't get more traction.
Click to expand...

I would think whenever the Pac-12 expands next they will be up for consideration.
 
Scotch said:
I would think whenever the Pac-12 expands next they will be up for consideration.
Click to expand...

And they'd be in a much better position if they'd had 7 or 8 years in the Big 12 first in order to get things built up. I would love it if the Big 12 takes them.
 
Buffs35 said:
It doesn’t have to expand. Something needs to change. I didn’t feel the linked article justified a new thread. I thought this was the logical place for it.


Next time I will check with you before I post. Sorry to offend you.
Click to expand...
You didn't offend me, but the whole "checking in with me first" thing is probably a good idea.
 
leftybuff said:
UNM has always seemed to me, at least, to be a solid candidate for either the B12 or P12. Decent MBB, growing part of the southwest, that state's flagship University, and geographically a good fit. I always wondered why they didn't get more traction.
Click to expand...
Because Sacky says Albuquerque is a dump.
 
I like UNM much better than pretty much any of the other schools that have been tossed around for consideration. That said, Albuquerque really is a dump.
 
UtahaluminTX said:
Would Nebraska feel they might do better in the PAC rather than being irrelevant in B1G whatever west division and losing to Wisconsin Badgers every year? Would they value the rivalry with CU again? Maybe Nebraska would come West?
Click to expand...
**** that! Nebraska would never go to the CrPAC 12. And Nebraska wouldn't value a rivalry with CU even if they did change conferences. My guess Iowa is an adequate rival in the B1G. Iowa fans are just full enough of themselves to feel "Coloradoistic".

Hey! Buff fans on this board aren't so bad, so don't kill the messenger.
 
All the disjointed conferences not fighting to keep CFB relevant in the future. Major changes coming in sports entertainment -forget what you know about TV markets. Demographics shifting away from traditional CFB watchers. Game attendance is dropping annually. Have to fill big stadiums with passionate fans or it starts to unravel. Got to maintain/enhance/create school and regional rivalries - current adhoc realignment is KILLING PASSION. Conferences must realign together to maximize relevance in next 10,20,30 years.
 
Imagine P5 with 16 teams each. 16 team nonP5 pseudo conference (only for CFB) that relegates worst four teams over four years back to their home conferences every year. One OOC game for everyone. Six conference winners go to playoffs. We got all the major conference alumni watching. We got the Cinderella story for everyone else. Four teams play as many as three rounds. Two highest ranked teams face-off in round 1 but winner gets huge second round buy.

CFB needs strong & stable B12 geographically located in/around Texas. drops Baylor, ISU and WVU. Picks up CSU, Wyoming, SMU, UH, UNM, NMSU, Texas A&M, Arkansas, LTech.

ACC picks up WVU like made GD sense all along. It loses GT, FSU and Clemson, but gains South Florida, Central Florida and UMASS

B10 drops Nebraska then picks up UND, ISU and Mizzou

SEC drops A&M, Mizzou, and Arkansas and picks up FSU, Georgia Tech and Clemson

PAC12 gains Nebraska (CU rival & CA recruiter), BYU (Utah Rival). Builds future CFB tradition in major San Diego market: San Diego State (no worse academically than ASU) and UC San Diego (SD fn needs it’s major university, with tons of rich alumni, to have a div 1 FB team).

How's that for figuring out a way to procrastinate balancing my family budget.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top