Kickin' Kizla

[ScottyBuff]

I know Kiz is an idot of the first order and the paper he writes for, but this part of his article got me P.O.'d so I wrote him an e-mail. If he responds I'll share it here as well.

Here is the article

My e-mail:

In your most recent "Kickin' It" article you fielded this question from Scott in Denver:

"I'm confused. I've been a CU football season-ticket holder and a donor since 1991. What am I missing? The athletic department is all but broke, we can't pay our new football coach a $2 million salary and his assistant coaches are going to be on food stamps. But I was told by a regent a move to the Pac-12 would bring in $20 million to $25 million per year. If moving to a new conference is supposed to bring a tsunami of cash from the West Coast, where is it?"

And your response was this:

Kiz: "When some of us suggested joining the Mountain West Conference would be more in line with CU's budget restrictions and its ambivalent feelings about big-time football, die-hard alums took it as a slam. No slam was intended. The sushi is indeed tastier near the Pacific Ocean. But, contrary to what CU administrators led us to believe, maybe all the streets in California aren't paved in gold."

Are you serious? What part of "join the Pac-12 in 2011-12" school year is hard to understand and report to your readers? Last I checked we are still in 2010 and will be in the Big 12 for another 8 months. Our next conference "payout" won't come from the Pac-12, but the Big 12 in April/May of 2011. And that will be reduced due to the "exit fee".

None of that makes us "fit for the MWC" budget-wise. We still operate a much bigger athletic department than any Mountain West team and much more aligned with the Pac-12 schools.

But how you can fail to answer Scott from Denver's questions accurately makes me question your ability to report accurate facts.

Our first "paycheck" from the Pac-12 will come in the spring of 2012, and it won't be a massive increase compared to our Big 12 payouts, unless they renegotiate their TV deals ahead of time.

Our first paycheck that can be expected to be in the $15-20 million range will be the spring 2013 payout, after the conference has established a new TV contract or network, or both.
We have to "hold down the fort" until that time. If you were promised a $100,000 bonus from the Denver Post that would be paid as a lump-sum in three years, do you start spending that money now? Or do you wait for the money to actually be paid to you?

Thanks for doing nothing to enlighten the college fans in Colorado to the realities of what the Pac-12 membership will be like. Maybe you shouldn't discuss things you don't know and stick with coverage on the Mountain West Conference, since your ability to understand and report above that conference is severely lacking.

Sincerely,

Scott in Pueblo.

 

[Tractor]

Rep. That guy is an ass clown. He referenced his own (stupid) theory on a completely different subject.

Q: Why is grass green? A: It would benefit the grass to grow in a place where there's lots of rain.

Thanks, but you didn't answer my question in the slightest....I hate hate hate when people do that.

 

[ScottyBuff]

Here is his e-mail response:

Scott:
Thanks for writing. But, with all due respect, there's a bit of undue anger on your part, don't you think.
The move to the Pac-12 will cost CU $10 million in the short term for an athletic department already strapped for cash. This was reported very clearly by me during the past seven days, in a comment directly from Mike Bohn.
CU has oversold the financial benefits of moving to the Pac-12. I know that. And I suspect you do, as well.
All the best,
Mark Kiszla

My response:

Mark,

Thanks for taking the time to respond. Certainly frustration is something I feel when there is a lack of direct and accurate reporting to the question of CU's move to the Pac-12 being beneficial.

Yes, the short-term belt tightening is necessary. Scott from Denver was directing a question to you about why we didn't see an immediate flow of cash. You did not take the time to point out that the payoff won't happen for approximately two years. That is disappointing and frustrating to me, as you hold a position of large distribution of information to Colorado sports fans and seem to ignore that the long-term financial status of the CU athletic department can very well be in good shape.

Scott from Denver should have been told to be patient, we haven't moved to the Pac-12 just yet, and the paydays will come after we have been in that league for at least two seasons. Until that time, finances will still be tight at CU.

Thanks again for your time,

Scott from Pueblo

 

[92Buff]

Idots like Kizla are not even worth the pixels used up by their typing.

Any whackjob that ever stated anything about us joining the MWC being a good idea has their head so far up their ***** that they are hopeless. Wish there was a permanent ignore feature that could be enabled for so many of the media hacks in this town.

 

[Buffalo Brad]

What an asshat he is. Did he also forget to mention that the Pac was going to help subsidize the impact of the change so that CU would not have to take a major hit in any one year? Did he mention that our payout from the league is certainly going to increase substantially when the new TV deal is done, or that fact that there are parameters in the new deal to ensure that there is even Revenue distribution amongst conference members (granted with a threshold that needs to be reached)? No he did not. He just like to try and stick it to CU every chance he gets with his trusty pen at the post. He also is too lazy to go out and find the real facts, too much work. He would rather just make **** up to support his pathetic view of life and specifically CU. ****ing doorknob.

 

[ScottyBuff]

Here is the next round of e-mails:

Scott:
I have been direct and accurate about what the move to the Pac-12 means.
More direct and accurate than many CU officials, in my estimation.
Kickin It is a short give and take. Anybody who reads it regularly should be well aware of that fact.
I think CU administrators oversold the move. You feel differently. That's cool by me.
Mark Kiszla

My resply:

"Direct and accurate" is what I'm sure you consider it, but I fail to agree with that.

With comments in your past articles like these:

"The Buffaloes could use some creative thinking. So here's one modest proposal: What if Bohn shopped CU to the Mountain West with the idea of becoming a 12-team league eligible for a conference championship game in football?"

"Now is the time when a university athletic department must reveal if it is about anything more than chasing a buck."

coupled with:

"Although giddy about joining a new conference in 2011, the Buffaloes are clearly going to be out of their league when it comes to competing against the Nike football factory in Oregon or the outrageous salary USC gave unproven Lane Kiffin, being paid $4 million to learn on the job."

It is NOT accurate to suggest that joining the Mountain West would have done anything other than be an unmitigated disaster for the CU athletic department. While I am a fan of the MWC (Go Falcons), that league cannot begin to produce the revenue for its members like the Pac-12 will be able to. Your position that it was actually in their best interest was frighteningly silly.

You are not accurate when it comes to realizing or reporting the impact of the conference TV deal that will be struck in the next 12-18 months, and seem to constantly find ways to downplay the move to the Pac-12. So, you want them to make decisions that prove they aren't only after the buck, but then criticize them for not paying top-dollar for a coach?

No sane or realistic fan expects CU to pay a head coach $4 or $5 million in the current situation, but maybe in 5-10 years that will be possible. But, some of the best coaches in the nation earn far less than that, and many in the Pac-10 do not come close, either.

In the current Pac-10:
Steve Sarkisian, Washington ($1.8 million)
Chip Kelly, Oregon ($1.5 million)
Rick Neuheisel, UCLA ($1.275 million)
Mike Stoops, Arizona ($1.265 million)
Jim Harbaugh, Stanford ($1.25 million)
Kyle Wittingham, Utah ($1.2 million)
Mike Riley, Oregon State ($1 million)

Other top coaches:
Gene Chizik, Auburn ($2.05 million)
Bo Pelini, Nebraska ($1.9 million)
Mark Dantonio, Michigan State ($1.8 million)
Mike Gundy, Oklahoma State ($1.8 million)
Bret Bielema, Wisconsin ($1.5 million)
Chris Peterson, Boise State ($1.1 million)
Art Briles, Baylor (under $1 million)
Brady Hoke, San Diego State ($700k)

My point is that your reporting seems extremely biased towards a "glass is half full" when it comes to anything CU related. While I can understand when it comes to the previous coaching staff, the move to the Pac-12 and the financial future of the Buffs is another story altogether, and it would be appreciated by the CU fans in the state if "accuracy" meant more than just putting out your opinion and actually reported the "complete picture".

In my opinion, you are very wrong about the future financial impact that the Pac-12 will have on CU. However, I have no doubt, that when the day comes that we are seeing the positive windfall you will justify your past stance as "but at the time things were real bad".

It is all just opinions until time proves otherwise, but these decisions weren't made for the betterment of just one or two years; they were made for the benefit of the next several decades. It would be much more accurate of you to recognize that.

Regards,


Scott from Pueblo

 

[Buffnik]

So, since we may not pay a head coach salary that would be top 4 in the Pac-12 (over $2 million) that means to Kizla that we should have chosen to pay the Big 12 buyout in order to join a non-BCS conference and make about $8 million a year less in conference disbursements?

It's really sad that this is a major voice in the media for Buffs coverage. It's borderline retarded.

 

[sackman]

Scott, if I may offer up a small bit of advice: find a post by absinthe. Check out his sig line. Forget trying to convince Kizla of anything. The man is a walking brain fart.

 

[Deleted member 807]

Scott, if I may offer up a small bit of advice: find a post by absinthe. Check out his sig line. Forget trying to convince Kizla of anything. The man is a walking brain fart.

...and never get in an argument with someone who works for a company that buys ink by the ton.

 

[Darian3Hagan]

You want to change the media's hate of CU? Stop buying their ****ing papers!!

 

[ScottyBuff]

I just got back from playing hockey and found round 4 in my inbox. I guess Kiz loves to drop the quick and dirty "your stupid, I'm smart" conversation enders.

Kiz:

Scott:
My point is this: When somebody disagrees with me, I don't assume they are inaccurate, frighteningly silly or biased. But that is the way many Americans feel these days, I know. I'm afraid it leads to paralysis by bitterness. But that's just one man's opinion.
Have a good one,
Mark Kiszla

My last reply:

Mark,

Maybe I am naive to expect a sports journalist at the Denver Post to value analysis and fact-finding over their own opinions.

Maybe that helps your readership by firing off antagonistic remarks without actually challenging your position, and then hiding behind generalizations of American readers.

I have done more than an average persons' share of editorial writing about sports and I truly value thoughtful opinions and counterpoints, and I know what it is like to write an article that gets blasted apart for a myriad of reasons. My point is this: your CU Buffs articles are ignorant of the "big picture" benefits and are solely focusing on the "doom and gloom" of the short-term. When someone asks "where is the Pac-12 money?", the answer is not "where", but "when".

Sorry for expecting more from a "reporter", I guess the Post is nothing more than a group of bloggers with credentials.

I won't always agree with you, and in this case not all. I value an unbiased press, more than you can appreciate, but I value a fair and well-researched one more than a inflammatory one.

Best of luck to you in the future,

-Scott

 

[ScottyBuff]

Scott, if I may offer up a small bit of advice: find a post by absinthe. Check out his sig line. Forget trying to convince Kizla of anything. The man is a walking brain fart.

...and never get in an argument with someone who works for a company that buys ink by the ton.

You want to change the media's hate of CU? Stop buying their ****ing papers!!

I should have taken your advice earlier!

Oh well. I don't read the Post as a subscriber, just their internet postings, so I don't feel like I "support" them. But, I just got fed up with their "CU Sucks" gang-bang of articles lately. How ****ing short-sided are they? And they are supposed to be the "voice" of the people.

It really is no surprise that newspapers are dying off, but why can't you die an honorable death?

 

[Tractor]

Wow, he sure proved his point by not referencing a single fact after his first response. Did I miss anything after the whole "It'll cost 10 mill" tidbit?

Like others on this board, I do not condone trying to show him the error of his ways. It's like trying to teach a dog a card trick. I do however commend your effort. If you wish to continue this, I did a bit of digging that may help illustrate in rather simple terms that the PAC12 > MWC. Maybe, just maybe even a tard monkey can see.


Option A:

MWC currently has a 10 year, 120 million contract, so 1.2 million per year per team.
http://www.idahostatesman.com/2010/06/04/1216770/bsu-move-could-be-worth-millions.html
Now they lose 2 of their top 3 schools and gain 3 schools. We’ll go ahead and assume the deal goes up somehow but everybody still gets 1.2 milyear (unrealistic). So they break their old contract, and without the state of Utah increase it to 132 million dollar contract over 10 years.
It’s also worth noting that the MWC didn’t have a very good TV deal with BYU and Utah. Remove the Utah schools and replace them with Boise State, Nevada and Fresno State, and there’s much less appeal for ESPN. (Nevada brings nothing to the table. FSU brings something, I suppose, but not much.)
Don’t be surprised if the real MWC revenue for Fresno State and Nevada might not quite match the projected MWC revenue for the newcomers.
http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2010/08/18/mwc-expansion-wac-reduction-thoughts-on-a-wild-wednesday/



Option B:

With the addition of CU and Utah, Navigate projects the Pac-10's next TV deal should be worth about $14.5 million per member school. That's nearly three times the Pac-10's current deal and more than $5 million more than CU received last year from the Big 12.
http://www.denverpost.com/colleges/ci_15334642
(how about using references from the Denver post, is that too much?)


Or perhaps, since we're dealing with the Kizz: Would you rather get paid $12,000 a year to write crap, or $145,000 to write the same crap?


Now I guess the 13.3 million dollar question is, why the hell would we choose the MWC over the PAC12?


And to your point about it not being where is it but when is it? How many years of 13.3 million dollar differences between these conferences does it take for the PAC12 to be better for CU than the MWC?

I realize this is a simplification and doesn't factor in expenses, or alumni donations and support etc, but I'm pretty sure we'll have to start small for him....
Good luck if you continue this nonsense. Keep us informed.