NashBuff
CSU Knob-Slobberer
Way more than that. EVERY single sport that the Pac-12 has.
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 TV Deal with FOX+ESPN, worth $250m per year according to NYT
- Thread starter Jens1893
- Start date
Way more than that. EVERY single sport that the Pac-12 has.
You know, in an equal revenue sharing scenario, along an infinite timeline each of the Pac 12 schools will end up with (assuming similar levels of spending) equal-valued facilities, coaching salaries, stadium amenities, etc. - in other words, will be equal in the things that cost money.
That being said, along that infinite timeline, what will separate schools from one another will be the intangibles, which Boulder/Colorado is rife with. Advantage Buffs. Just sayin'.
That being said, along that infinite timeline, what will separate schools from one another will be the intangibles, which Boulder/Colorado is rife with. Advantage Buffs. Just sayin'.
NashBuff
CSU Knob-Slobberer
Love the idea but you got LA to deal with in addition to Seattle and the Bay Area. We don't have the advantage that we had over the Big 12 schools in the department anymore.
superdeluxe
Member
And the problem with that is? Do you know how many households across the country carry FX?
Oh, no problem with it, great HD channel in lots of homes. It's just probably later on in the pecking order, where I see some/most of our games landing.
I think you right. FX carries alot of CFB games and for those who don't have tickets to Buff games, now they won't be shut out. I know many were worried long before Scott was well into negotations that comcast might end up winning the TV rights and then hit up anyone who wanted to watch the game with a pay per view charge. For all I care, Comcast can go pound sand and eat donkey dicks!
superdeluxe
Member
FlatironsBuff
Well-Known Member
We had already been fighting with Cali schools for kids for a long time. So we are ok in regards to that. I think Boulder was so different form the B12 schools that some midwest kids didn't like Boudler. I think the west coast kids like Boulder more than east coast and (some) midwest kids. And we still are not even with all PAC schools-- USC and Oregon will still have substnacially more money. But nobody there will be so heads and shoulders above CU like Uterus was. I really, really hope the PAC is smart enough to never let Uterus into the PAC. Would love KU, KSU, MU, OU, OSU and ISU before that. A&M would be ok too, but never will want UT back in our conference. Screw them bitches. I want to see them die a slow death (which wil not happen, but I want it). I would rather have NU back than UT. But then I like to tease the NU people, but have never hated them as a whole. Just a few fans. But have hated a few CU fans and thier behavior on gameday too.
But then if you talked UT or CSU, I guess I would have to take UT. CSU would not have any drawing power. Not that they would ever be a choice for the PAC.
Not sure if this has been adressed anywhere in the previous 16 pages, but any of CU's non-conference games could be non-televised, correct? I know that 36 of our last 42 non-conference games have been televised (for free), I can recall 2 of those 6 were available for PPV (North Texas 2004, Washington State 2003)... Eastern Washington 2008, Miami OH 2007, Montana State 2006 (eesh), San Jose St. 2001 were non-conference games with NO TV anywhere...
Damn the Big 12 contract sucked. An average of 3 conference games per year not televised? Frigging inexcusable.
Damn the Big 12 contract sucked. An average of 3 conference games per year not televised? Frigging inexcusable.
My God Man, shut your pie-hole. CSU would be about a gazillion times more preferable than UT. UT is the conference killer. We have a great thing going. Don't mess it up by letting those assholes anywhere near the Pac 12.
Not really. Conference payout won't even cover half the CU AD's expenses. Ticket sales and donations make up most of the rest. Several Pac 12 schools have the potential to sell many more tix than the Buffs--for both football and basketball. USC and Oregon are always going to spend more than CU on athletics.
This is very true. The difference being that CU won't be in a no-win situation like it was with UT. UT is an animal all unto itself. Nobody generates or spends the kind of money they do.
You are ignoring the Phil Knight factor
Too bad UNLV is so worthless.
FlatironsBuff
Well-Known Member
Dont get me wrong. I don't want either. I would take NU before either one of them.
True. When the conference goes from 12 to 16 teams, it will be forced to lower it's standards a bit. SDSU, Fresno, Hawaii, Boise, UNLV, UNM, CSU... Throw a blanket over all of them. They're all the same.
superdeluxe
Member
I think those fears would be unfounded honestly. They killed the SWC/Big 12 because they did not have a counter balance to Texas.
The Pac-12 has one, it is called California.
Well I said infinite timeline, so I'm assuming that CU will upgrade/expand Folsom eventully to greatly diminish the gulf between CU and, say, USC (97K capacity). Also assuming that all of the potential CU donors who have literally been standing on the sidelines with cash will start to come out of the woodwork and lessen the gulf between CU and, say, Oregon (Phil Knight). I'm also assuming the Aztecs are wrong about 2012. All theory.
Dude, no offense, but you haven't dealt with these guys the same way we have. They suck the lifeblood out of every conference they're in. Every time, the conference *thinks* it has a counterbalance. You must trust us on this - you don't want Texas anywhere near your conference.
superdeluxe
Member
Then read this by Larry Scott:
He is saying that in his view there will be more expansion.
to Expand, and have everyone make the same amount of money that they were before, Those 4 teams would need to bring in a additional 100 million dollars revenue.
There is only a small handful of teams that can do that
superdeluxe
Member
And honestly, USC > Nebraska in terms of power and 'counter-balance'.
We've seen Texas ruin 2 conferences. Would you like the Pac-12/16 be the third?
SuperiorBuff
Well-Known Member
Keep Uterus out forever. They are a massive sucking black hole of a conference's soul. Uterus is the antithesis of what the PAC 12 and Big 10 media deals achieved, long term conference success.
superdeluxe
Member
They wouldn't ruin the pac-16
We might not know about the Big 12 and Texas, but you guys might not know about the power of California and USC
I see so the SWC and the Big 12 were just flukes. The Big 8 was a strong conference before Texas joined.
It's a losing battle guys. It's one of those things you have to experience first-hand to comprehend (like dating a gorgeous high maintenance girl). No matter how much you know you shouldn't do it, who can resist the temptation?
NashBuff
CSU Knob-Slobberer
Just like the Pac-10 being strong right now.
I can't see the Pac-12 accepting Texas unless Texas restructures their Longhorn Network to show sports that are not part of the Pac-12.
superdeluxe
Member
Bevo network only gets 1 television game correct? I am sure that could be worked in/around for the rest of UT inventory.
Scott is about generating revenue for his member schools and expanding the foot print.
We need to get into that Central standard Timezone. That would give us more programming hours which leads to greater $$$$$$$
