Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by sackman, Jun 12, 2010.
I voted Kansas because I think they bring in more revenue in a TV deal. They have made big commitments in football and we all know their BB prowess.
utah, the more newcomers the better
i dont think cu was a good fit in the big 12 and i dont want any of them to come with us.
It's the PAC not a merger between the PAC 10 and 6 schools from the Big 12. Utah is part of the west and Kansas really isn't. Plus, Salt Lake City has already passed Kansas City in population and has one of the highest growth rates of any city in the country. KC, not so much. We need to be looking to the future instead of holding onto the past.
What nik said. I will always fondly remember the Big 8 but those days are dust. Time to move on.
Either would be better than A&M (hope they go to the SEC). Between the two I like Utah - a school we could develop a rivalry with. Agree that Utah is part of the west and Kansas really isn't.
This comment regarding football from a KU fan is priceless..
"Sure we could consistantly beat Colorado, Oklahoma State and Maybe Arizona."
My gawd, they couldn't even beat the 2009 team. We're 42-24-3 against those guys and are 6-4 over the last 10 games against them.
AFA. Much closer. Beautiful setting. National awareness.
The stereotypes of the Academy fan: straight-laced, sharp edges, impeccably dressed, followers of all rules, focus on winning and domination and strategy
vs. Boulder fans: loose, casual, like sports if they don't interfere with a good time, "rules are made to be bent", sunshine and flatirons... not so much strategy as karma ...
Just an interesting contrast. (And yes, I know not all fans fit either stereotype. But it could be an interesting culture clash nonetheless.)
Truthfully, if the choice were between AFA and CSU, I'd choose CSU. Top end potential is much higher, and there's already an established rivalry there. Neither brings much to the table, though. Both would be horrible choices.
Utah, Salt Lake would be a better market than KC plus KC is going to be too split up with all the Fuskers clamoring for Big 10 games...
If I thought the Pac would even consider AFA, I would pull hard for them. It would fit with the Pac format Oregon/OSU, UW/WSU, USC/UCLA, Cal/Stanford, ASU/UA, TT/UT, OU/OSU, CU/AFA. But Cal would never let that happen. Too bad CSU doesn't bring jack to the table, otherwise I'd support that decision too. As it is, Kansas has a way bigger national following than Utah and is just as "West" as OU, OSU and UT so that argument is bogus.
I'm indifferent honestly. If all things were created equal, I would say Utah in a heartbeat. KU has history with us, also a top notch basketball program. Major problem is it's in the middle of no-where. Still, there is some significant benefits to them as a conference partner.
I think either team could fit as a rival. I want to say Utah, from a "Conference of Champions" standpoint, KU is probably the better fit athletically.
Utah, imagine losing the red out of Folsom AND the Blue out of Coors?:thumbsup:
I voted Utah. Not that I want to piss on Kansas and fellow Big 8 brother but the school is on the other side of the state and isn't a Western or Southern School. The football rivalry is meaningless and while the KU basketball fans fill up Coors once a year we can't ever beat them. I'm going with Utah.
I think Kansas fits better with the SEC, Big East or Big Ten anyway. But I can't deny they would be a nice pickup for the Pac 10 in basketball.
That argument may be true if you live in New York or Alabama, but people from Kansas don't surf or snowboard, people from California on the other hand... Kansas is miles apart from Utah, both geographically and culturally. Kansas brings alot to the table, but so does Duke and Louisville... Why not go for them too?
Utah is red as well....
Separate names with a comma.