Assuming that CU is in the North Division

[leftybuff]

IMO, the Pac 12, in any divisional set up, is going to be better for the Buffs than the Mack 10. I personally like the zipper format with:

Division 1:


1. USC
2. ASU
3. CU
4. Stanford
5. Oregon St.
6. UW

Division 2:

1. UCLA
2. WSU
3. Cal
4. U of A
5. Oregon
6. Yoots

 

[leftybuff]

You can't plus one your own post. Ridiculous.

I think it's permissible if you have multiple personalities....

 

[Sportsfan101]

You can't change the fact that the California schools will still get most of the best California players regardless of divisional makeup. If we had things more fair in the Big 12, I don't think it would have prevented Texas from becoming strong again and the same goes for Oklahoma.

Coming from a Sooner family, OU still won national championships even back in the Big 8 from recruiting Texas talent every year. The Arizona schools are seven to nine hours away from SoCal while OU is just a couple to a few hours away from Dallas so the Arizona schools don't have the kind of natural advantages that OU has.

One recruiting market that would open up to CU would be the Washington high school talent and if we can take some of those kids away from the NW schools plus recruit from California, we can weaken the NW schools. They do have some kids that can play...weren't we in the running for Jake Heaps before he decided on BYU? I don't have enough information on Utah's recruiting trends to determine how this impacts them.

The difference between being in the Big 12 and the Pac-12 is that in the Big 12, we were pretty much the only school getting more California kids & at the same time, we weren't recruiting very well in Texas due to the Texas visits twice every four years. In the Pac-12, we visit California at least once every year and three SoCal trips out of four years is well worth it.

And by not being in the South, we don't have to deal with having to top USC just like Nebraska...just imagine CU in the North without Nebraska.

Keep looking at the positives that I have posted and they far outweigh the negatives. Recruiting is just one piece of the big picture. The big picture here is that CU is in a conference with schools that think more like CU when it comes to academics and facilities which is in contrast with what the Big 12 schools do. The Big 12 schools sell their facilities over their academics while the Pac-12 schools are more apt to sell academics over facilities. I am aware that the Pac-12 schools aren't immune from building sports facilities but this isn't the Big 12 we are talking about.

I agree that the positives to the Pac outweigh the negatives. My point is that CU in the North Division (and without pods) is a much worse result than CU in the South. We can try to convince ourselves that it works out fine, but being in SoCal every year guaranteed is a much better result.

With respect to the B12, I agree that Texas and OU wouldn't stay down forever. But I don't think it's coincidental that the top 3 schools at the beginning of the B12 were CU, K State and Nebraska and now, over the past 10 years, the South has dominated. I strongly believe this is because the Texas schools (and OU is a Texas school) have better access to Texas HS football players. Same thing will happen in Pac 12.

SoCal football is also 500x better than Washington football. I know the NW produces some good players (see Mr. Suh), but it's far less common than in SoCal.

 

[NashBuff]

Has anyone considered that this divisional alignment makes the conference inherently less stable and therefore bad for everyone in the long run? It will gaurantee a situation where there are 'have's' and 'have nots' (big12 all over again?). The teams slotted to be in the north are going to fight this hard.

The west coast schools do not have the option of switching to a better conference like the Buffs do so the west coast schools are going to have to compromise and if they knew they were going to sense this kind of instability, why did they vote for expansion after all? They were falling behind the rest of the country and if this continued for another 20 years, they would be below the MWC in athletic prestige.

 

[NashBuff]

I agree that the positives to the Pac outweigh the negatives. My point is that CU in the North Division (and without pods) is a much worse result than CU in the South. We can try to convince ourselves that it works out fine, but being in SoCal every year guaranteed is a much better result.

With respect to the B12, I agree that Texas and OU wouldn't stay down forever. But I don't think it's coincidental that the top 3 schools at the beginning of the B12 were CU, K State and Nebraska and now, over the past 10 years, the South has dominated. I strongly believe this is because the Texas schools (and OU is a Texas school) have better access to Texas HS football players. Same thing will happen in Pac 12.

SoCal football is also 500x better than Washington football. I know the NW produces some good players (see Mr. Suh), but it's far less common than in SoCal.

We were still able to get some really good California kids when we were winning. Even if we were losing like this in the Pac-12 South, would we really get those top SoCal players? Look at Baylor and Texas A&M the last ten years.

Once we start winning again, we will get those great SoCal kids and be able to steal some recruits from the NW and Arizona.

Winning does trump everything in this situation and that is what the Buffs need to do regardless of division.

 

[Sportsfan101]

We were still able to get some really good California kids when we were winning. Even if we were losing like this in the Pac-12 South, would we really get those top SoCal players? Look at Baylor and Texas A&M the last ten years.

Once we start winning again, we will get those great SoCal kids and be able to steal some recruits from the NW and Arizona.

Winning does trump everything in this situation and that is what the Buffs need to do regardless of division.

No question we need to win. But I believe it will be easier to win with yearly guaranteed access to SoCal (for recruiting sake).

 

[GoBruinz]

Sample Schedule

Here's a sample cross-divisional Colorado schedule if it splits North/South, with CU in the North, a 9 game conference schedule, and no dedicated cross-division rival:

Colorado
Year 1 @UCLA, vs. Cal, @Arizona, vs. USC (Socal 1, Nocal 1, AZ 1, Socal 2)
Year 2 vs. UCLA, @Cal, vs. Arizona, @USC (same, just reversed home/away)
Year 3 @Arizona, vs. USC, @Stanford, vs. Arizona State (AZ 1, Socal 2, Nocal 2, AZ 2)
Year 4 vs. Arizona, @USC, vs. Stanford, @ Arizona State (same, just reversed home/away)
Year 5 @Stanford, vs. Arizona State, @UCLA, vs. Cal (NoCal 2, AZ 2, Socal 1, Nocal 1)
Year 6 vs. Stanford, @Arizona State, vs. UCLA, @Cal (same, just reversed home/away)
Lather, rinse, repeat.

I really don't see that it's a bad schedule at all.

 

[leftybuff]

Here's a sample cross-divisional Colorado schedule if it splits North/South, with CU in the North, a 9 game conference schedule, and no dedicated cross-division rival:

Colorado
Year 1 @UCLA, vs. Cal, @Arizona, vs. USC (Socal 1, Nocal 1, AZ 1, Socal 2)
Year 2 vs. UCLA, @Cal, vs. Arizona, @USC (same, just reversed home/away)
Year 3 @Arizona, vs. USC, @Stanford, vs. Arizona State (AZ 1, Socal 2, Nocal 2, AZ 2)
Year 4 vs. Arizona, @USC, vs. Stanford, @ Arizona State (same, just reversed home/away)
Year 5 @Stanford, vs. Arizona State, @UCLA, vs. Cal (NoCal 2, AZ 2, Socal 1, Nocal 1)
Year 6 vs. Stanford, @Arizona State, vs. UCLA, @Cal (same, just reversed home/away)
Lather, rinse, repeat.

I really don't see that it's a bad schedule at all.

You won't get any argument from me, any schedule in the Pac 12 is better for the Buffs than playing the Mack 10 schools we are leaving behind.

 

[NashBuff]

GoBruinz: That is not a bad schedule. As long as every Pac-10 school gets a SoCal trip three out of four years, I do not see this as an issue with the Buffs being in the North.

I wouldn't be surprised if Bohn was asked by Scott to float the idea of CU going to the South to fire up the Cal and NW schools and steer them to working together towards a compromise. The Pac-10 was really between a rock and a harder place when it came to the long term so they will have to work things out.

 

[sackman]

The zipper still seems to make a lot more sense to me.

And I wanna be in the same division as Stanford, damnit.:Tantrum:

I want a game in Palo Alto every other year. At the end of the day, I really don't care about anything else. This is the sack-priority #1. The liklihood of this happening appears to be diminishing with every passing day. I'm pissed. issed3:

 

[NashBuff]

You won't get any argument from me, any schedule in the Pac 12 is better for the Buffs than playing the Mack 10 schools we are leaving behind.

And better than playing in Texas twice every four years. That has to be emphasized in a big way.

 

[NashBuff]

The zipper still seems to make a lot more sense to me.

And I wanna be in the same division as Stanford, damnit.:Tantrum:

I want a game in Palo Alto every other year. At the end of the day, I really don't care about anything else. This is the sack-priority #1. The liklihood of this happening appears to be diminishing with every passing day. I'm pissed. issed3:

The Buffs would still visit NorCal three times out of four years just like any other region.

 

[NashBuff]

I think I have stated my point more than enough in this thread and even if the Buffs end up in the South, I will still be one very happy CU fan!

I still haven't seen much debate about how games against the California schools (assuming recruiting is a non-issue) and how much history we have with them. We shouldn't be put in the South just because Neushiel is the coach at UCLA...that is a dumb argument IMO. I like the idea of playing the Arizona schools because of the Four Corners stuff and what could come out of it but I'm trying to find something with the Cal schools.

SHOULDER TO SHOULDER!
GO BUFFS!

 

[NashBuff]

I want to see an argument for the Buffs in the South besides recruiting reasons. Bring it on!

 

[Buffnik]

I want to see an argument for the Buffs in the South besides recruiting reasons. Bring it on!

The natural regional pod for us is with 4 corners states. It would be a shame not to play Arizona and Arizona State every year. Those games would sell well and be natural rivalries that would grow way beyond anything we will have with the Pacific Northwest schools.

P.S. If we see the pod proposal become the divisional alignment, I believe that's a clear signal that the long-term plan is a Pac-16 conference. We'll look at UT-TTU-OU-OSU as the 4th pod, pair it with CU-UU-UA-ASU in a division. Then each pod will play its 3 pod games + 2 teams from each of the other 3 pods to make up its 9-game conference schedule.

 

[sackman]

The Buffs would still visit NorCal three times out of four years just like any other region.

Visiting NorCal isn't the issue. Visiting Stanford is. I really don't care about Cal. Cal is on the other side of the bridge.

 

[sackman]

I want to see an argument for the Buffs in the South besides recruiting reasons. Bring it on!

How about: We're closer to those schools than we are to the ones in the Pacific Northwest? By a lot.

 

[Goose]

I wanted ASU, but I'll settle for the Oregon cheerleaders I guess.

I still like the idea of the following divisions:

Hot Women: ASU, CU, OU, UCLA, USC, Utah*
Average Women: UA, Cal, OSU, Stanford, UW, WSU

* - willing to negotiate sixth spot after personal interviews.

 

[NashBuff]

The natural regional pod for us is with 4 corners states. It would be a shame not to play Arizona and Arizona State every year. Those games would sell well and be natural rivalries that would grow way beyond anything we will have with the Pacific Northwest schools.

I truly want to play both Arizona schools every year because of this Four Corners stuff. We will need to all try to play New Mexico & NMSU as much as possible in OOC play. I have said that if the Buffs are in the North, UA and ASU needs to be the protected games and we still get one California trip every year as a result but that means two SoCal trips in four years.

I haven't forgotten about how many UNM basketball games went to a game at CEC not that far back so your point seems valid.

 

[Sportsfan101]

I want to see an argument for the Buffs in the South besides recruiting reasons. Bring it on!

Dude, you can't be this dumb.

Top reasons to play in South:

No. 1 -- we have a ton of alums in SoCal. Many, many more than we have in Oregon, Washington, and Utah combined.

No. 2 -- it's closer geographically.

No. 3 -- it's easier to fly into So Cal than get to games in Corvalis or Pullman.

No. 4 -- more media attention in So Cal.

No. 5 -- more people live in SoCal, so opportunity to cultivate more fans exists there.

These are all BESIDES recruiting. Case closed. You lose.

 

[NashBuff]

How about: We're closer to those schools than we are to the ones in the Pacific Northwest? By a lot.

Unfortuantely the other Pac-12 schools have a lot of SoCal alums too. Something has to give.

 

[Sportsfan101]

Unfortuantely the other Pac-12 schools have a lot of SoCal alums too. Something has to give.

Just not quite sure why that thing that has to give is CU.

Seems like we've been doing an awful lot of bending in the Big 12, and I don't want to see the trend continuing in the Pac 12.

 

[Buffnik]

CU into the South Division with a breakup of the California schools is the best for CU and probably the best for the conference.

I just don't think that will happen because it takes a 9-3 vote to get anything else and the CA Bloc (4) is enough to veto anything else. If we all want the votes on revenue sharing, giving them a division is the likely compromise.

 

[GoBruinz]

The fact is in the proposed geographic split, the WA and OR schools are "losing" too. But playing in L.A. 2 out of every 3 years is really not bad, especially since CU has only played in LA once every (10? 15?) years or so.

 

[NashBuff]

Dude, you can't be this dumb.

Top reasons to play in South:

No. 1 -- we have a ton of alums in SoCal. Many, many more than we have in Oregon, Washington, and Utah combined.

No. 2 -- it's closer geographically.

No. 3 -- it's easier to fly into So Cal than get to games in Corvalis or Pullman.

No. 4 -- more media attention in So Cal.

No. 5 -- more people live in SoCal, so opportunity to cultivate more fans exists there.

These are all BESIDES recruiting. Case closed. You lose.

1. Will those SoCal alums invest in a losing football program at this point? They will do that right now until the novelty wears off. When the Buffs are winning, the local fans run out to the stores to get CU gear and when we are losing, the local fans buy CU gear on clearance.

2. Yes that is true but any other Pac-12 game will still be far away from us.

3. Corvallis isn't that far away from the airport in the Eugene area. Every Pac-12 school has complained about having to go to Pullman so that would be nothing new.

4. This will be be less of an issue with a conference TV network. When we are winning, we get more media attention. While going to college on the east coast, WSU did get some attention when they went to the Rose Bowl against Oklahoma. No one wants to see losers on TV...no one cares about Iowa State and Baylor.

5. Very true...but isn't there room to grow that fanbase in the NW too? Some Utah & Oregon State fans on another board have said that CU was long their favorite Big 12 team and don't underestimate the appeal of the Ralphie tradition...when I wore my CU stuff, all everyone wanted to do was talk about Ralphie. She is a national icon.

 

[Sportsfan101]

1. Will those SoCal alums invest in a losing football program at this point? They will do that right now until the novelty wears off. When the Buffs are winning, the local fans run out to the stores to get CU gear and when we are losing, the local fans buy CU gear on clearance.

2. Yes that is true but any other Pac-12 game will still be far away from us.

3. Corvallis isn't that far away from the airport in the Eugene area. Every Pac-12 school has complained about having to go to Pullman so that would be nothing new.

4. This will be be less of an issue with a conference TV network. When we are winning, we get more media attention. While going to college on the east coast, WSU did get some attention when they went to the Rose Bowl against Oklahoma. No one wants to see losers on TV...no one cares about Iowa State and Baylor.

5. Very true...but isn't there room to grow that fanbase in the NW too? Some Utah & Oregon State fans on another board have said that CU was long their favorite Big 12 team and don't underestimate the appeal of the Ralphie tradition...when I wore my CU stuff, all everyone wanted to do was talk about Ralphie. She is a national icon.

I figure you're joking with your responses above.

The ONLY potential positive that I can see in being in the North (and this may be a s-t-r-e-t-c-h) is that, once the Big 12 blows up (and we al know it will), if we're in the Pac-12 North does that make it harder to lump us in with the Big 12 South schools that move to the Pac 16? I mean, God help us if we're stuck in a division with roadies at Lubbock, Stillwater, Norman, and College Station.

 

[NashBuff]

The fact is in the proposed geographic split, the WA and OR schools are "losing" too. But playing in L.A. 2 out of every 3 years is really not bad, especially since CU has only played in LA once every (10? 15?) years or so.

That is the compromise that every Pac-12 fanbase in SoCal (except for USC and UCLA of course) will have to deal with.

Since it seems like almost no school is winning this battle, this should turn out to be a positive thing for the Pac-12 down the road. There was a lot of hype for the Big 12 and ACC when they first became 12 team divisions but have faltered. If the hype is low enough, the disappointment won't be as great if there is any. I really do feel good about the Pac-12 down the road after everything is decided on.

 

[NashBuff]

The ONLY potential positive that I can see in being in the North (and this may be a s-t-r-e-t-c-h) is that, once the Big 12 blows up (and we al know it will), if we're in the Pac-12 North does that make it harder to lump us in with the Big 12 South schools that move to the Pac 16? I mean, God help us if we're stuck in a division with roadies at Lubbock, Stillwater, Norman, and College Station.

Shhhhhhhhh..........you are ruining a great plan!

 

[Sportsfan101]

Since it seems like almost no school is winning this battle

Uhhhhh.....Arizona schools and Californa schools would be the clear winners in the divisional battle.

 

[NashBuff]

CU into the South Division with a breakup of the California schools is the best for CU and probably the best for the conference.

I just don't think that will happen because it takes a 9-3 vote to get anything else and the CA Bloc (4) is enough to veto anything else. If we all want the votes on revenue sharing, giving them a division is the likely compromise.

That's the sad reality here. Even if there is a California zipper, who will CU's protected games be with the NW schools because the CA schools are taken in that situation? The N/S split with the pod scheduling seems to be the best option right now and there are no perfect options...only good options.