1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Still hoping it's CU & Utah to PAC12...

Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by Timbuff10, Jun 7, 2010.

  1. Timbuff10

    Timbuff10 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,779
    Likes Received:
    73
    This gives the pac a championship game now and the ability to add four more schools in the future when/if UT and OU figure out how to cut ties with their little brothers.
     
  2. UrbanaBuff

    UrbanaBuff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2010
    Messages:
    1,270
    Likes Received:
    13
    Yeah, what he said.
     
  3. Sexton Hardcastle

    Sexton Hardcastle Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    17,472
    Likes Received:
    367
    I believe this option was shot down by the Pac10 already. No?
     
  4. JimmyBuff

    JimmyBuff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    16,901
    Likes Received:
    227
    They aren't crazy about it but its not completely off the table.
     
  5. Buffnik

    Buffnik Real name isn't Nik Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    80,747
    Likes Received:
    16,459
    I believe that's what that Chip guy who writes for the Orange said. But sometimes it's hard to understand him since he's talking with Deloss Dodds' **** in his mouth.

    Seriously, I don't think it's been reported by anyone else. Other reports are that the Pac-16 proposal garnered the most interest because it was worth the most money (by far). And that Larry Scott has unprecedented support and trust from the current Pac members to orchestrate the right deal for the conference. CU-UU isn't off the table, it's just not Plan A any more.
     
  6. MiamiBuffs

    MiamiBuffs Wᴉɐɯᴉ qnɟɟs Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2005
    Messages:
    36,156
    Likes Received:
    2,028
    They only want us if the get the financial jugernaut that is UT. UT only goes if OU and A&M are part of the package. Its a tough spot to be in. :rolleyes:
     
  7. MrFrumpylane

    MrFrumpylane Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2008
    Messages:
    2,463
    Likes Received:
    194
    Plan B has been scary most times, but I just might enjoy it this time.
     
  8. Timbuff10

    Timbuff10 Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    3,779
    Likes Received:
    73
    That was one of the rumors but who knows who started it. Texas?
     
  9. superdeluxe

    superdeluxe New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2009
    Messages:
    287
    Likes Received:
    3
    I don't think the pac-10 expands if it doesn't get the 6.
     
  10. NW Buff

    NW Buff Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    7,124
    Likes Received:
    741
    :yeahthat:

    While I hate to say it, I don't think that UU-CU is compelling enough to the Pac10 for them to do it.
     
  11. chipwich

    chipwich Administrator Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    20,698
    Likes Received:
    1,683
    I thought the PAC 10 said they would stand pat before they added only 2 teams.
     
  12. TheEvilBeak

    TheEvilBeak Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2008
    Messages:
    557
    Likes Received:
    20

    I would expect you will have a pretty good idea come this Monday. I think most of the pertinent details of NU to the B10 will be out by then. The aftermath will be fun to watch.
     
  13. UrbanaBuff

    UrbanaBuff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2010
    Messages:
    1,270
    Likes Received:
    13
    But a CCG will undoubtedly increase the value of the TV contract, no?

     
  14. MiamiBuffs

    MiamiBuffs Wᴉɐɯᴉ qnɟɟs Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2005
    Messages:
    36,156
    Likes Received:
    2,028
    They want UTs $130mm athletic budget in their fold along with all the eyeballs in the Houston, Dallas, Austin, and San Antonio TV markets. They want a CCG and they probably want to start a Pac 10 network.

    One thing is for certain; in the end the haves and have nots will get even further apart.
     
  15. DBT

    DBT Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2005
    Messages:
    58,578
    Likes Received:
    4,717
    I was a lot more excited about the CU & Utah rumor than the six team rumor. With the six team move, we essentially move to the Big XII South with, maybe, one trip to Cal every year. Kind of bums me out.
     
  16. Buffnik

    Buffnik Real name isn't Nik Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    80,747
    Likes Received:
    16,459
    Depends on how they set up the "pods" system.

    If it's like this, I won't mind so much:

    Pacific A: USC, UCLA, Cal Stanford

    Pacific B: Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State

    Pacific C: Colorado, Texas Tech, Arizona, Arizona State

    Pacific D: Texas, Texas A&M, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State

    - 9 conference games per year
    - 3 games against your own pod
    - 4 games against 1 of the other 3 pods
    - 2 games against 1 of the other 3 pods

    This way, you play everyone in your pod every season and all other teams on an every-other-year basis. Playoff for the conference championship is 2 rounds. Semi-finals would be the four pod winners, seeded by overall conference finish with the #1 seed playing a home game against #4 / #2 playing a home game against #3. Winners play a neutral-site championship game.

    As long as it's this (which I have seen mentioned by some reputable sources in some form), then I have no problem with the expansion. What I don't want is to be in an 8-team division where CU plays all 7 teams every year and then plays 2 teams from the other division. In that setup, we'd only play the other division teams once every 4 years. All indications are that setup is not the way this is going.
     
  17. dio

    dio Admin Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2007
    Messages:
    30,126
    Likes Received:
    2,550
    That above scenario would be the awesome
     
  18. SkiTownUSA

    SkiTownUSA Administrator Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2008
    Messages:
    7,411
    Likes Received:
    198
    You put us in the softest "Pod" there. I like it. I can't see a better way to arrange the "pods", but ours would be soft compared to the others.


    edit: You think both UT and OU would want to have to be in the same pod? I assume they'd want to play each other yearly, but to have 2 of the top 3 teams in the same pod?
     
  19. leftybuff

    leftybuff Iconoclast Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2005
    Messages:
    25,004
    Likes Received:
    2,723
    I'm still hoping ND takes the Big 10 offer, leaving NU and MU in the B12, the TX schools stay put and the Pac 10 adds CU and UU to get a CCG, swapping BYU into the B12 to replace CU. Long shot? Probably, but that is my hope.
     
  20. DBT

    DBT Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2005
    Messages:
    58,578
    Likes Received:
    4,717
    Thanks for the explanation. That would be much more plapable.
     
  21. Buffnik

    Buffnik Real name isn't Nik Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    80,747
    Likes Received:
    16,459
    I had the same questions you did. But this is how I've seen it laid out to ensure rivalry games (high tv ratings) and the best travel partners (cost and attendance). I suppose they could "zipper" the coast teams as well as the southwest teams, but it gets clunkier and you'd have things like USC and UCLA missing each other some years.
     
  22. CarolinaBuff

    CarolinaBuff Weekend Poster Club Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    18,651
    Likes Received:
    523
    I think if ND goes to the Big 10 (which I hope they do), then that could be the end of the conference movement assuming the Big 10 stops at 12 teams, which is what the rumors are in the talks between ND and the Big 10. Because then NU/MU wouldn't be receiving offers to go to the Big 10, which means that UT won't be interested in leaving the Big 12. And I just don't see the Pac-10 expanding by only 2 with us and Utah, because their main expansion target is UT.
     
  23. sackman

    sackman Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    48,531
    Likes Received:
    4,521
    This.

    We're not hearing jack from the Pac 10. All we're hearing is stuff from this Chip Brown douche. If the 6-team deal falls through, the Pac is in a precarious position. They need 12 teams for a CCG. They want an expanded presence in another time zone. They want more media markets. The only one saying the 2-team expansion is off the table is Chip Brown, from what I can gather. That doesn't mean anything to me. I suspect that the 6-team expansion is their ideal, but when faced with a scenario where they are losing market share and a strengthened MWC barking at their heels, they'll add CU and UU.
     
  24. sackman

    sackman Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    48,531
    Likes Received:
    4,521
    Their main expansion target was never UT until UT went to them for their "backup" plan.
     
  25. CarolinaBuff

    CarolinaBuff Weekend Poster Club Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    18,651
    Likes Received:
    523
    Fair enough, I wasn't aware of that. But I don't think that CU and Utah would add enough of a market-share and TV revenue increase to justify slicing up the revenue 12 ways instead of 10 and come out that much ahead, if at all. SLC is a decent-sized market but the Pac-10 still wouldn't be completely solid there because of the presence of BYU. And we all know that Denver is a pro sports-dominated market, so who's to say how much of a gain the Denver market would really be for the Pac-10?
     
  26. leftybuff

    leftybuff Iconoclast Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2005
    Messages:
    25,004
    Likes Received:
    2,723
    All good points. But if the Pac 10 gets used by UT, they may react and expand anyway, and to a lesser degree, so they don't look like chumps. The Pac 10 has put their cards on the table, coming up empty might be too much for Scott to bear, do not understimate the power of ego and the desire to save face.
     
  27. MtnBuff

    MtnBuff Not allowed in Barzil 2 Club Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Messages:
    26,453
    Likes Received:
    2,353
    The PAC wants UT and their dominance over the Texas media markets throughout the state as well as their national name. Logically they will put all their efforts into making that happen so that is the face they put on.

    Trouble is that for UT joining the PAC in the format that is being proposed doesn't change much for them to the positive. They are still playing the same Big XII south teams they always have, they replace at least one OOC game they control for an out of division game in the PAC that they don't control meaning one less cupcake on the schedule, one less guaranteed home game, and less revenue since they can pay some no-name school a relative pitance to come in and get pounded instead of having to distribute revenue based on the conference formula.

    Bigger is that the PAC will not let Texas dominate TV money distribution and even bigger with a PAC media package including a PAC network there is no space for a Texas network. The Texans have to decide if they can make more money joining the PAC with its national media appeal and take their share or stay with a more regional Big XII and take the lions share of a smaller media package.

    If Texas decides to go the PAC route then the only question is does the PAC hold their ground and insist on CU and the Denver market or do they buckle under and take Baylor. If Texas decides to stay in the Big XII then the PAC still has to make some decisions. They can talk about standing pat but then looking at the money that would be generated by a conference championship game is very appealling. Again it wouldn't be Texas but if they go to a conference network adding Colorado and Utah adds a lot to the market reach of the network.

    At this point I think odds are that Texas will decide to stay put a kill the six team expansion, then the PAC will take a little time but then extend the invite to CU anyways along with one other school, most likely Utah. If Mizzou, Nebraska, and CU all bail on the BigXII the Texans may actually be happier because they then go to work forming SWC ver. 2 raiding the MWC and the C-USA for Texas schools as well as maybe Tulsa. With this bunch Texas, OU, and aTm could be the elephants in the room and take the majority of the wins, money, and attention and the others would be happy just to be along for the ride.

    Anyone not happy with the situation would be free to look elsewhere in a market that doesn't have a lot of options to go to. ISU, OSU, KSU and even Kansas get screwed in the deal but for UT that's no big problem. Of those only KU might have real options to look for greener pastures because of their basketball power.
     
  28. sackman

    sackman Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    48,531
    Likes Received:
    4,521
    The Baylor thing has pretty much been put to bed so far as I can tell. That was nothing more than a bunch of noise. It never made any sense to begin with.
     
  29. SINKRATZ

    SINKRATZ Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2008
    Messages:
    5,176
    Likes Received:
    1,161
    Totally agree. The Pac 10 has no title game and the worst TV deal in the BCS - their business model becomes less and less viable as compared to other conferences that are growing. I don't believe for a minute that Plan B is off the table.
     
  30. UrbanaBuff

    UrbanaBuff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2010
    Messages:
    1,270
    Likes Received:
    13
    Carolina... is your avatar Shania Twain??

     

Share This Page