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
- Thread starter Duff Man
- Start date
If UT doesn't want to play ball, who should be the targets?
Probably lock up OU/Okie Lite and go from there.
It seems to me that you are placing too much value on the numbers 14 and 16 without putting much thought into what actually makes sense from an expansion perspective. Simply moving up to 14 or 16 will not give us an SEC or Big Ten contract.
Adding OU and Okie Lite doesn't suddenly give us the eyeballs that will cause the networks to pay that kind of money. KU will divide the pie, not increase it. Tech, too. Houston is a commuter school, and I highly doubt the Pac actually considers them.
Every Western school threatens to divide the pie, not increase it. UNLV, UNM, SDSU - no one's going to pay us more for that ****.
Anyway you look at it, UT is the lynch pin, and it's obvious that there are serious issues with their wants and "needs" and what Larry Scott is willing to give them. So, again, unless UT is going to suddenly decide to give up all their power in the Big 12, their network, and most important, their pride, it's not happening.
But by all means, let's continue to chase our tail.
Adding OU and Okie Lite doesn't suddenly give us the eyeballs that will cause the networks to pay that kind of money. KU will divide the pie, not increase it. Tech, too. Houston is a commuter school, and I highly doubt the Pac actually considers them.
Every Western school threatens to divide the pie, not increase it. UNLV, UNM, SDSU - no one's going to pay us more for that ****.
Anyway you look at it, UT is the lynch pin, and it's obvious that there are serious issues with their wants and "needs" and what Larry Scott is willing to give them. So, again, unless UT is going to suddenly decide to give up all their power in the Big 12, their network, and most important, their pride, it's not happening.
But by all means, let's continue to chase our tail.
I am not placing too much value on the number 16. It seems pretty obvious that is the logical destination for the P5 conferences. Can you give a legitimate argument to the contrary? And no, "nothing the other conferences do has any effect on the Pac-12" is not a legitimate argument.
I have yet to hear a compelling argument from the opponents of expansion about how not expanding is anything but a bad thing for the Pac-12 in competition with other conferences.
I have yet to hear a compelling argument from the opponents of expansion about how not expanding is anything but a bad thing for the Pac-12 in competition with other conferences.
I'm cool with it but only want certain teams.
The argument is simple - adding 2 or 4 schools in the hope of getting the money that other conferences are getting is reckless. Most of the schools that are thrown around here do nothing to add value to the conference, and will just serve to reduce every school's share. There are two schools that add value - OU and UT. That's it.
OU comes with baggage though - Okie Lite. They're not going to expand that pie that much, especially when you realize we're just double-dipping.
All roads lead to UT. Please tell me how we rationally work around that.
This argument is impossible at this juncture because the current college football landscape looks nothing like what it will inevitably become.
I don't believe it's going to be 5 conferences with their own networks, fighting over the big network money, with unequal scheduling and different rules. At some point, I believe it's going to be one entity, with one governing body, where rules are equal, conferences have the same amount of teams, and the TV rights will be split between a few different networks, similar to how things are in the NFL in that regard.
Expansion is about more than just doing what's best for the PAC 12, financially, in the short term. Its about keeping up and staying relevant in what is inevitably going to be a drastically different landscape in ~ 5-10 years.
I don't believe it's going to be 5 conferences with their own networks, fighting over the big network money, with unequal scheduling and different rules. At some point, I believe it's going to be one entity, with one governing body, where rules are equal, conferences have the same amount of teams, and the TV rights will be split between a few different networks, similar to how things are in the NFL in that regard.
Expansion is about more than just doing what's best for the PAC 12, financially, in the short term. Its about keeping up and staying relevant in what is inevitably going to be a drastically different landscape in ~ 5-10 years.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
The TV contracts this conference has suck, and are a much bigger priority than any sort of expansion IMO. One, we're a major conference who has put a team in the CFP two of the three years it's been in existence. We don't need to be playing our championship game on a Friday night, especially once the Big 12 brings back a championship game. Second, I think these late starts are an issue-we avoided them for the most part this year, but had several in 2015. Cal had 8 or 9 of them this year. There's gotta be a way to say one team can have a max of......say three of them in our spots.
lvbuff
Well-Known Member
Was at a cocktail party talking with a PAC 12 network producer. He was saying the production costs far outweigh the revenue stream at this point. Says they are all nervous about increasing rev.
Really need those Texas tv sets to make this work.
we're going to 16, just like the other p5 conferences. it is just a matter of time. i don't believe texas is mandatory although the eyeballs and footprint will be compelling.
at the end of the day, there will be 5 or perhaps 6 sixteen team conferences, with a fully baked playoff schedule. the tv revenue will be epic and the product will be national, like the nfl. that's why it can be made to work without texas, but texas would be a profitable get.
at the end of the day, there will be 5 or perhaps 6 sixteen team conferences, with a fully baked playoff schedule. the tv revenue will be epic and the product will be national, like the nfl. that's why it can be made to work without texas, but texas would be a profitable get.
It'll probably include Texas.
Not going to go look it up but the 2024 timeframe is interesting. If I am not mistaken the agreement holding the B12 together expires in 2023 or 2024.
UT, OU, OSU, KU, and probably TCU will land in power conferences. KSU and TTU are likely but could be left out. Iowa State and Baylor can scramble for C-USA or the MWC.
UT will be the big prize but I don't think they end up in the PAC. It is possible, maybe likely that we see a team or two from the SEC and the B1G shuffle out and be replaced.
UT, OU, OSU, KU, and probably TCU will land in power conferences. KSU and TTU are likely but could be left out. Iowa State and Baylor can scramble for C-USA or the MWC.
UT will be the big prize but I don't think they end up in the PAC. It is possible, maybe likely that we see a team or two from the SEC and the B1G shuffle out and be replaced.
Blah, blah, blah, Texas... blah blah blah, Oklahoma...blah blah blah the sky is falling if we don't expand... blah blah blah we are getting left behind and the only solution is whoring ourselves out to a couple schools that will ultimately destroy the conference...
But he's OUR tick!!
It should be Texas, aTm (poached from the SEC), OU and OSU. aTm and Texas not in the same conference is ridiculous. Then you'd have CU, OU, OSU, UT, aTm, UU, UA and ASU in one division and Cal, USC, UCLA, Stanford, UW, WSU, UO and OrSU in the other.
Then you'd have a 10 game conference schedule plus Championship game and a 3 game out of conference schedule after NCAA goes to a standard 13 game schedule. There would be four 16 team super conferences. Each would have a Conference Championship game. Each Comference champion would join a 6 or 8 team playoff with the additional teams being "at large" teams which could include non conference champions.
Then you'd have a 10 game conference schedule plus Championship game and a 3 game out of conference schedule after NCAA goes to a standard 13 game schedule. There would be four 16 team super conferences. Each would have a Conference Championship game. Each Comference champion would join a 6 or 8 team playoff with the additional teams being "at large" teams which could include non conference champions.
bigskybuff
Well-Known Member
I find it extremely hard to fathom those schools leaving Texass behind. When your whole recruiting strategy begins and ends in the state I doubt they go anywhere without UT. So, unless you think grabbing these two will force Texass to join as well, you start with Texass first, not the Okie schools
I think we need more exposure across the country. The only way I see to do that is to add central time zone teams.
I also think the PAC needs to fight more for good time slots (if that's possible). People just don't get to see the games because they're on too late or on Friday or some garbage like that. I assume adding central time zone teams would help this.
I also think the PAC needs to fight more for good time slots (if that's possible). People just don't get to see the games because they're on too late or on Friday or some garbage like that. I assume adding central time zone teams would help this.
The bolded part can't be emphasized enough to help close the gap in national appeal of this conference relative to the Big 10 and SEC. They'll likely never reach the level of appeal those 2 conferences have but there's plenty of ground that can be made up and no other schools in the Mtn or Pacific timezones bring any relevant national appeal whatsoever with the exception of BYU, and they're not feasible.
3 of the teams you mentioned would be good candidates since it would give the conference a presence in Texas but I've never understood the allure of KU. All of the conference expansion and realignment movement has been driven by football and KU brings nothing to the table football wise.
The more the Big 12 gets left out of the 4 team CFP, the more likely this is going to happen IMO.
vinniew_11
Well-Known Member
Yes, football does drive BUT they are a blue-blood MBB program and is a lock for the tourney every year. Lots of eyes watch them. Kansas games vs AZ would be must watch every year.
Only if the playoff stays at 4 teams though.
I think it stays at 4 until the Big 12 dies, then goes to 8. 4 Conf Champs + 4 At large. Pod System with 16 teams is going to change the way the post season of CFB looks and I am kind of excited about it.
Oklahoma is 30th in all time BBall wins as well.