Should CU End Their Series With csu?

[sackman]

Since when is playing in Denver considered a "home game."

Since it became part of the season ticket package.

And next year is an aberration that will probably be corrected.

It's all about the money. The money is good. The game stays. End of discussion. We can gnash our teeth and bitch and moan about it all we want.

 

[SanDiegoBuff]

Ditch it... it's a lose lose game.

If we lose, it looks TERRIBLE.

If we win, it does nothing for us, yeah, CSU isn't a D-II school, but they aren't a BCS school either.

We should schedule a BCS opponent. It would help recruiting and have a much better impact on our potential rank. If you lose to a top tier opponent it doesn't hurt you nearly as much, and there's much more to gain from kicking their ass!

LSU had 2 losses last year and still won the MNC. Kansas only had one, but their assbackwards non-conference schedule kept them out of the BCS all together.

(Yes, I know they went to a BCS game, but they had to buy their way in. They were chosen over Mizzou because they guaranteed their ticket sales, and Mizzou wouldn't.)

I'd rather have a non-conference loss to a top 5 team than go 4-0 angainst crap competition.

 

[Lt.Col.FrankSlade]

Since it became part of the season ticket package.

And next year is an aberration that will probably be corrected.

It's all about the money. The money is good. The game stays. End of discussion. We can gnash our teeth and bitch and moan about it all we want.

It is interesting that on a small scale vote, the number of people wanting to ditch the series outweighs those wanting to keep it 2-1.

 

[sackman]

It is interesting that on a small scale vote, the number of people wanting to ditch the series outweighs those wanting to keep it 2-1.

I'll say it one more time...

IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT WE SAY. The game isn't going anywhere. Get used to playing it. The AD makes money off the game and isn't interested in giving that revenue up and looking like they're ducking their little sisters in the process. All the whining and moaning isn't going to change that. OMG, why do we have to have this same discussion EVERY FREAKING YEAR??? It's always the same thing "It's a no-win situation for CU" "Ditch the game, play AFA instead", "I'd rather have another BCS game" - the last one is truly ludicrous. Can you imagine replacing CSU with Wisconsin, Cal, UCLA, Georgia or Ohio State this year? The answer of course is NO. So who do we replace them with? AFA? OK, so we're going to give up playing the equivalent of 7 home games with the revenue that comes with it to play 6? Insane.

Everybody needs to take DBT's advice and grab your trousers and give them a good tug because our collective panties are in a bunch.

 

[Unleash Hell]

We just look like a bunch of pussies if we drop it. I would rather see Darrell Scott run all over the lambs the next 4 years!:thumbsup:

 

[Lt.Col.FrankSlade]

I think it is a legitimate discussion. Certainly if CU wants to become a legitimate national player, which I assume they do, then their schedule is going to become of major importance.

As it currently stands, the 2010 game is the last game in the CU/CSU series. Then the series resumes in 2014 for one year. And, the location for the 2009 and 2010 games are still not known.

The CU/CSU series could return for the 2011 season, but as of right now it would be the 3rd game of the season if they did decide to renew the rivalry, as that is the only week CU has an opening.

In 2012, the Buffs only have five home games currently scheduled. They play at Minnesota and at Fresno State. If the CSU series is renewed - I can't imagine they would decide to play the game in Denver - because that would only present ONE non-conference game (and Utah, at that) to be played in Boulder.

 

[Deleted member 807]

Lamb Chop!
Double post. How did that happen?

Economics: CU receives $650-750K for the RMS. That's about $20/ticket if you assume CSU and the Buffs split the gate 50:50. Who gets the TV revenue? Who else gets a cut of the box office? Where does the parking and concession money go?

Nowainaminit. This deal looks weak. Why isn't the AD coming out of Denver with more cheddar?

 

[Deleted member 807]

I'll say it one more time...

IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT WE SAY. The game isn't going anywhere. Get used to playing it. The AD makes money off the game and isn't interested in giving that revenue up and looking like they're ducking their little sisters in the process. All the whining and moaning isn't going to change that. OMG, why do we have to have this same discussion EVERY FREAKING YEAR??? It's always the same thing "It's a no-win situation for CU" "Ditch the game, play AFA instead", "I'd rather have another BCS game" - the last one is truly ludicrous. Can you imagine replacing CSU with Wisconsin, Cal, UCLA, Georgia or Ohio State this year? The answer of course is NO. So who do we replace them with? AFA? OK, so we're going to give up playing the equivalent of 7 home games with the revenue that comes with it to play 6? Insane.

Everybody needs to take DBT's advice and grab your trousers and give them a good tug because our collective panties are in a bunch.

Someone once said that the customer comes first. Sometimes people working in some sectors of the economy lose sight of that. You say 'panties in a bunch.' I say 'excersizing a customer's right to complain.' We are, after all, the ticket buyers and TV viewers.

The reason the AD collects the extra dough on the RMS is because that is what the market will bare. If over the course of the next 4 years this matchup turns into a one-sided clunker, then Invesco might not sell out and TV revenues might not materialize.

As an out-of-state alumnus, I have CSU fatigue. Been there. Done that. Frankly I find the promotion of this event as some sort of bitter rivalry to be disingenuous pandering by the sponsors that is a necessary evil that is required to put butts in seats. But should the game be reduced to a lopsided beatdown, at some point CSU fans will stop showing up and that extra revenue will dry up with it.

For 2008: The matchup is not yet lopsided. It's good business and good luck the game was moved to Sunday, where it competes with neither the NFL nor other college matchups. Ka-ching!

But at some point, the RMS can serve up a plate of crap and call it steak, but this customer ain't buying now and won't buy again next year either. I find the antoganism between the fans of schools unimpressive at best. At worst gameday in Denver is an unnecessarily violent, profanity spewing, excersize in binge drinking. (and that's just me.) There are better, classier and more meaningful fan experiences on the schedule that have successfully competed for my money and my time.

 

[sackman]

Someone once said that the customer comes first. Sometimes people working in some sectors of the economy lose sight of that. You say 'panties in a bunch.' I say 'excersizing a customer's right to complain.' We are, after all, the ticket buyers and TV viewers.

The reason the AD collects the extra dough on the RMS is because that is what the market will bare. If over the course of the next 4 years this matchup turns into a one-sided clunker, then Invesco might not sell out and TV revenues might not materialize.

As an out-of-state alumnus, I have CSU fatigue. Been there. Done that. Frankly I find the promotion of this event as some sort of bitter rivalry to be disingenuous pandering by the sponsors that is a necessary evil that is required to put butts in seats. But should the game be reduced to a lopsided beatdown, at some point CSU fans will stop showing up and that extra revenue will dry up with it.

For 2008: The matchup is not yet lopsided. It's good business and good luck the game was moved to Sunday, where it competes with neither the NFL nor other college matchups. Ka-ching!

But at some point, the RMS can serve up a plate of crap and call it steak, but this customer ain't buying now and won't buy again next year either. I find the antoginism between the fans of schools unimpressive. There are better fan experiences on the schedule that have successfully competed for my money and my time.

This is the first (and second) post in this thread that is actually an objective, non-emotional response. What you say is true, that if this deal stops making money, then it will be discontinued. However, as it stands right now, we're looking at what amounts to an extra home game in terms of revenues. Now it's not entirely representative of an extra home game, but about 2/3 of the amount. But anytime you can increase your income, you do it. However, I'll disagree that there's a lot of CSU fatigue. The vast majority of CU season ticket holders may gripe about having to pay for an extra game (my Dad being one), but they'll pay just the same.

 

[Deleted member 807]

I'd make a case that CSU fatigue isn't as much a front range problem as an out-of-state issue. If I lived within 200 miles, I'd be there. But this game is competing against WVag & UTerus. In fact, even Eastern Washington is more attractive simply because that game won't be televised. I went to MoFO last season for that very reason.

In summary, watching CSU live Denver is less appealing that watching it on TV, but better than streaming the audio off the Internet.

 

[Liver]

i'd drop the game entirely if it were within my power.

playing them annually falsely implies to the casual sports fans in the state of colorado that CU and the sheep are somehow of "equal" stature in the college sports world. that, as we all know, is patently false.

so, when our Buffs play them at all (and even worse, lose, once in awhile), it gives an unecessary boost to a lesser university and lesser program. it makes it somewhat harder to recruit in-state and it adds a competitor to the landscape on things like tv ratings, season tickets, and donations.

granted, they are small time, and the boost they've actually gotten is fairly limited. but, why, on our home turf, should we give any boost to any competitor, no matter how small? i wouldn't do this in business and i don't think we should do it in sports either. yeah, it is a "feel-good" story for the local pols and the press. and, yeah, CU does "ok" financially from the game. but, proportionately, the sheep do much better --- this is their biggest revenue game of the year, every year.

the absolute nail in the coffin for me will be if they do try to move this to a normal home and home series. then, CU actually LOSES money by playing them up at fort flatlands. the sheep can't afford to pay CU the typical fee it would receive for a roadgame because their concrete mausoleum is too small to generate enough gate. in such a case, CU would be far better off scheduling a pissant directional school at folsom and paying them their lousy fee, thus, keeping all the gate revenue and added cash from another home game.

this series is worthless. kill it. i'd give them a game AT BOULDER maybe every 6-8 years or so. same thing with the afa...

 

[sackman]

i'd drop the game entirely if it were within my power.

playing them annually falsely implies to the casual sports fans in the state of colorado that CU and the sheep are somehow of "equal" stature in the college sports world. that, as we all know, is patently false.

so, when our Buffs play them at all (and even worse, lose, once in awhile), it gives an unecessary boost to a lesser university and lesser program. it makes it somewhat harder to recruit in-state and it adds a competitor to the landscape on things like tv ratings, season tickets, and donations.

granted, they are small time, and the boost they've actually gotten is fairly limited. but, why, on our home turf, should we give any boost to any competitor, no matter how small? i wouldn't do this in business and i don't think we should do it in sports either. yeah, it is a "feel-good" story for the local pols and the press. and, yeah, CU does "ok" financially from the game. but, proportionately, the sheep do much better --- this is their biggest revenue game of the year, every year.

the absolute nail in the coffin for me will be if they do try to move this to a normal home and home series. then, CU actually LOSES money by playing them up at fort flatlands. the sheep can't afford to pay CU the typical fee it would receive for a roadgame because their concrete mausoleum is too small to generate enough gate. in such a case, CU would be far better off scheduling a pissant directional school at folsom and paying them their lousy fee, thus, keeping all the gate revenue and added cash from another home game.

this series is worthless. kill it. i'd give them a game AT BOULDER maybe every 6-8 years or so. same thing with the afa...

Oy.

It's all about the money. Plain and simple. Once again, playing the game in Denver acts as a 7th home game. That means money in the CU AD's coffers. This isn't rocket science. It's economics. As long as the game continues to be profitable, Mike Bohn doesn't give a damn whether you want the game or not. And rightfully so. Adding Air Force is fine, so long as the game is played in Denver and we get around $750K just for showing up.

You know why Nebraska makes so much money? Because they have 8 home games a year. EIGHT.

CSU is a nothing. A nobody. A big zero in the State of Colorado. Nobody outside of Ft. Fun gives a rats ass about them EXCEPT for the day they play CU. Then all of the washed out losers who flunked out of high school and view CU as this arrogant snobby institution can come out of the woodwork and claim lifelong allegiance to the goats. For me, that's perfectly fine so long as it means the AD is pulling in money. As it sits right now, that's what's happening. Until that changes, the game is going to continue regardless of how many folks argue the point on an internet message board. :huh:

 

[Liver]

Oy.

It's all about the money. Plain and simple. Once again, playing the game in Denver acts as a 7th home game. That means money in the CU AD's coffers. This isn't rocket science. It's economics. As long as the game continues to be profitable, Mike Bohn doesn't give a damn whether you want the game or not. And rightfully so. Adding Air Force is fine, so long as the game is played in Denver and we get around $750K just for showing up.

You know why Nebraska makes so much money? Because they have 8 home games a year. EIGHT.

CSU is a nothing. A nobody. A big zero in the State of Colorado. Nobody outside of Ft. Fun gives a rats ass about them EXCEPT for the day they play CU. Then all of the washed out losers who flunked out of high school and view CU as this arrogant snobby institution can come out of the woodwork and claim lifelong allegiance to the goats. For me, that's perfectly fine so long as it means the AD is pulling in money. As it sits right now, that's what's happening. Until that changes, the game is going to continue regardless of how many folks argue the point on an internet message board. :huh:

i would say that you are taking a short-term view of the situation and, strategically, our Buffs are better off treating the sheep like the ignored, non-bcs, irrelevant little pissants they are than like "equals" by playing them annually.

why split any mindshare at all in your local market with another team just up the road? that costs real money over the long haul.

and, you whole argument fails in its entirety if the Buffs are forced to play in the fort flatlands mausoleum. then, the economics don't work at all.

and, you aren't LISTENING. drop them and add a REAL homegame at FOLSOM. EVERY YEAR, you can bring in a lower division cupcake to get b-slapped around rather than playing the sheep. CU will keep all the money in that case, except for the small appearance fee paid to the hapless victim.

 

[dio]

I like the game - Love talking smack and taunting my family after the games. 1/2 my family went CU, 1/2 CSU.

 

[66BUFF]

Liver and Sacky are both right and wrong.

This game is about money but, what it really is about is fan interest. know why the fuskers have 8 home games? because their fans will show up to all of them. CU needs this because our fans will not.

 

[sackman]

i would say that you are taking a short-term view of the situation and, strategically, our Buffs are better off treating the sheep like the ignored, non-bcs, irrelevant little pissants they are than like "equals" by playing them annually.

why split any mindshare at all in your local market with another team just up the road? that costs real money over the long haul.

and, you whole argument fails in its entirety if the Buffs are forced to play in the fort flatlands mausoleum. then, the economics don't work at all.

and, you aren't LISTENING. drop them and add a REAL homegame at FOLSOM. EVERY YEAR, you can bring in a lower division cupcake to get b-slapped around rather than playing the sheep. CU will keep all the money in that case, except for the small appearance fee paid to the hapless victim.

CU has played the goats more than any other school. Tell me again how this is a short term view? We've played them nearly every year since 1983. CSU has had an un-craptacular team for maybe 5 of those 25 years. The game will always have interest regardless of how good the goats are because, as I said, there's a ton of people who really don't give a crap about them, but hate CU, so they support CSU for one game a year. The game is always televised, which is also a good thing. A jelly doughnut B-slapping team like Utah State or Ball State, even if played at Folsom, won't be televised. It all gets back to money. CU won't play up in Ft. Flatlands without a ginormous guarantee, so yes, that is about money, too.

At the end of the day, I really don't mind the game down in Denver. If the AD makes money, and I still get my regular dose of 6 home games at Folsom, I kind of like the change of pace.

If it ever comes to pass that the game isn't a money maker for the athletic department, then I'm certain changes will be made. Until that happens, the argument is moot.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

Definitely give it the axe.

Schedule a cupcake, instead.

Your such a woss on this subject...

 

[Lt.Col.FrankSlade]

Your such a woss on this subject...

Something is eventually going to have to give.

Either:

A) The scheduling must be altered, so that it is easier to the Buffs to field a competitive team,

or

B) The expectations must be altered, so that fans / AD expect 7 and 8 win seasons, with the hope for occasional 9 and 10 win seasons.



NOBODY schedules like Colorado does. I understand that it creates a sense of pride and I know Hawkins said last week that he uses it as a recruiting tool, to tell student athletes that they have the opportunity to play against the best teams in the country --- but I think Hawkins would be the first to admit that it is MUCH easier to recruit when you are 11-1 than it is to recruit when you are 6-6, regardless of the schedule.

If Colorado had the money / facilities of Oklahoma, Texas, Ohio State, Notre Dame, etc. I wouldn't have any problem with the scheduling. But Colorado doesn't have the resources or facilities of those schools. And -- even THOSE SCHOOLS don't schedule like Colorado does.



Personally, I've come to embrace the latter philosophy. I don't expect Colorado to be much better than a 7 or 8 win team anymore - because the school puts itself behind the 8-ball before the season even starts with their impossible scheduling. Sure, there will be occasions when the school jumps up and wins 9 or 10 games, but those will be the exception, not the rule, imo.

 

[crsbuff]

go buffs

 

[BehindEnemyLines]

kory sperry
dion and damon morton
ricky brewer
jake portoff

yeah we

If memory serves me correct, Sperry was a CU verbal. Dion and Damon visited but the Buffs only had one schollie to give - the staff wanted one of the 2 to grayshirt.

 

[DBT]

I'm sorry, but I cannot get why anyone, especially someone from Colorado, would want to cancel the series. Thats just insane.

 

[dyemeduke]

Sperry wasn't a verbal, but Brewer was until Barnett got fired. Sperry was being recruited by CU pretty good - he was an exceptional athlete.

Sacky - you give great arguments, and I agree with you. However, I honestly see CU on the rise and CSU on the decline. When the contract is up, I just don't see the game being too appealing, and I'm not sure that the revenue will be generated to keep the game. I say axe it - unless CSU surprises us and becomes a good team. I hate the game personally, because I can't stand CSU fans that week. I actually like CSU and AFA and wish them the best throughout the year. However, the **** talk is so moronic, illogical and over-abrasive. They're such an annoyance for that one week...I can't stand it...

 

[AV Buff]

CSU is a nice little school.

 

[BuffsRising]

I wouldn't mind if we replaced the CSU series for Air Force, but since that's unlikely I would rather have a tv game at Invesco than a cupcake.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

Something is eventually going to have to give.

Either:

A) The scheduling must be altered, so that it is easier to the Buffs to field a competitive team,

or

B) The expectations must be altered, so that fans / AD expect 7 and 8 win seasons, with the hope for occasional 9 and 10 win seasons.



NOBODY schedules like Colorado does. I understand that it creates a sense of pride and I know Hawkins said last week that he uses it as a recruiting tool, to tell student athletes that they have the opportunity to play against the best teams in the country --- but I think Hawkins would be the first to admit that it is MUCH easier to recruit when you are 11-1 than it is to recruit when you are 6-6, regardless of the schedule.

If Colorado had the money / facilities of Oklahoma, Texas, Ohio State, Notre Dame, etc. I wouldn't have any problem with the scheduling. But Colorado doesn't have the resources or facilities of those schools. And -- even THOSE SCHOOLS don't schedule like Colorado does.



Personally, I've come to embrace the latter philosophy. I don't expect Colorado to be much better than a 7 or 8 win team anymore - because the school puts itself behind the 8-ball before the season even starts with their impossible scheduling. Sure, there will be occasions when the school jumps up and wins 9 or 10 games, but those will be the exception, not the rule, imo.

Good answer. But your forgetting one thing. Attendance at CU (and ticket sales) are not so good when we play cupcakes. People are very distracted these days and I believe it takes something more than just fielding a decent team against Montana State to put butts in seats.

 

[The Monk]

Maybe we should start a series with UNC or CSU-Pueblo?

 

[FlatironsBuff]

Neffermind!!

I vote to keep it. I have relatives that went to CSU, and since I don't see them winning much for a long time, I get to rub it in to them all year long. I don't want to give that up.

 

[96 Buff]

I'm sorry, but I cannot get why anyone, especially someone from Colorado, would want to continue the series. Thats just insane.

Fixed.

 

[Lt.Col.FrankSlade]

Good answer. But your forgetting one thing. Attendance at CU (and ticket sales) are not so good when we play cupcakes. People are very distracted these days and I believe it takes something more than just fielding a decent team against Montana State to put butts in seats.

Attendance at CU games generally sucks, regardless of the non-conference opponent. Folsom seats approximately 55,000 when the suites/luxury boxes are figured in. Here are the attendance numbers for some recent games.

FSU 2007 - 52,900
Miami Ohio 2007 - 45,000

MSU 2006 - 45,500
ASU 2006 - 47,700

CSU 2005 - 54,900
New Mexico State - 44,700

CSU 2004 - 54,900
North Texas 2004 - 46,400

UCLA 2003 - 48,500
WSU 2003 - 48,100

 

[14ers4me]

CSU is a nice little school.

3AM??? You need to get a life, bro. I'd rather CU schedule AFA over CSWho any day. They have a decent sized stadium and great atmosphere, plus their fans are classy. You don't typically see tear gas after an AFA victory.

Go Buffs.
Huskers suck.