Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Austin sports columnist: "70% chance UT moves to Pac, 30% chance it stays"

Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
One of the problems with adding the Big 12 schools is that the conference will be composed of three time zones - Central, Mountain, and Pacific. That could create some scheduling problems. A 2:30 time slot in California is a 4:30 time slot in Oklahoma/Texas. A 6:00 pm time slot in California is an 8:00 pm time slot in Oklahoma/Texas.
Click to expand...

I actually think this is one of the benefits of expanding east. We'll be able to get closer to that 12 noon ET Saturday time slot without playing a game that's retardedly early. I hate having to watch the stupid Big 10-11-12 games that dominate that first time slot.
 
Buffnik said:
Big 10 would be smart to move on Kansas, Missouri, Notre Dame and Maryland.

SEC would be smart to move on owning the south by taking Florida State, Virginia Tech and either North Carolina or NC State.

Pac would be smart to move on OU/OSU/UT/TTU.

Remaining ACC and Big East (football) should merge.

MWC should add ISU, KSU and Baylor in hopes that it can gain BCS status.
Click to expand...

Given the seismic shift that appears imminent, it's not all that far-fetched that the ACC in anything close to its current form could cease to exist.

The question, then: If football tepid and basketball is top-heavy, what’s the lure of the ACC? Tradition, yes. Seven of these 12 have graced the conference since 1953, the year it was formed. Academics, sure. In scholastic terms, this is considered the most serious of the six BCS leagues. But are history and academics enough in a business where millions of dollars flow to the schools that play the best football?

The ACC is in trouble. Its image — and the ACC cares about image — has been sullied. Georgia Tech had to forfeit the 2009 conference title and was placed on four years’ probation by the NCAA. North Carolina has been hit with nine rules violations ranging from impermissible benefits to academic fraud. Miami could well get the death penalty in the wake of Nevin Shapiro’s jailhouse accusations.

If you’re Florida State … if you’re Clemson … if you’re Virginia Tech … if you’re North Carolina State … do you want to stay in the ACC and play Class AAA football if you have big-league options? (And surely some among those will.) Are ACC matters apt to improve anytime soon? Is John Swofford the man to save his conference in the way Mike Tranghese did the Big East? And if Swofford seeks to raid some other league before his gets raided, where does he turn? Nobody’s leaving the SEC, and who in the football-playing Big East might be amenable? Louisville? West Virginia? South Florida?
Click to expand...

http://blogs.ajc.com/mark-bradley-b...ng-acc-survive-in-a-football-driven-industry/
 
http://www.statesman.com/sports/longhorns/could-be-good-bad-or-so-so-mystery-1801301.html

-- Bohls doesn't know ****. All he does is complain about how kept in the dark the media is regarding the football program as per his last few articles. So if he's so left in the dark, somehow we are supposed to think he and Deloss and the rest of Belmont are Gucci tight? Please. Texas will stay unless another team jumps ship. They are making too much money not to.




ChipBrownOB Chip Brown

Dodds: "A Big 12 committee is in place to look at all options ... so it will continue to be one of the top leagues in the country."
1 hour ago »



ChipBrownOB Chip Brown

Texas AD DeLoss Dodds: "We are strong supporters and members of the Big 12. Recent events have not altered our confidence in the league."
1 hour ago

​
 
If Texas joins the conference, they won't come in running the show. It wouldn't be the same as the B12.
 
superdeluxe said:
All would be resolved if we had four pods
Click to expand...

pod-people-invasion-of-the-bodysnatchers.png
 
UT will not get in the PAC 12 with their own network and they are not dropping the LHN. You have to remember that USC is probably richer than UT and they will see no reason to agree to anything that give UT an unfair advantage. Ditto for most of the other schools in the Pac 12. In the efforts to save the conference last year the member institutions killed the Golden Goose. In fact they made the situation worse...No conference under normal circumstances would have agreed for a member institution to have their own network. The Big 12 was desperate, just like agreeing to only allow a few schools to have a share of the exit money.
 
dio said:
I don't see Utah, CU and ASU voting for this. The swing vote is Arizona. These schools don't want to lose out on playing in Cali every year.
Click to expand...

They will when everybody gets 10MM more dollars a year and CU has the easiest pod schedule of the bunch. Plus you get games every year in Texas and Cali. I think this would be good for everyone.
 
Wyo Buff said:
They will when everybody gets 10MM more dollars a year and CU has the easiest pod schedule of the bunch. Plus you get games every year in Texas and Cali. I think this would be good for everyone.
Click to expand...

Yeah - I would love that pod arrangement for CU.

Add in the fact that you're guaranteed one game a year in California, one game a year in Texas (region) and one game a year in the northwest. I think that is a great schedule setup.
 
Let me explain the pod scheduling again:

The Pac-16 pods are as follows

California: USC, UCLA, Stanford, and Cal
NW: UO, OrSU, UW, WSU
Mountain: CU, UA, ASU, and Utah
SW: UT, TT, OU, OSU

This is what CU's schedule would be like for season one (season two is the opposite)

UA
@ASU
Utah
@OU
TT
@USC
Cal
@UO
WSU

Year three (year four is opposite)

UA
@ASU
Utah
@UT
OSU
@UCLA
Stanford
@UW
OrSU

We get one game in California, Arizona, the NW, and the SW.
 
Assuming the "pod" system happens -- what do they do with the winners of the "pods?"

Is there a 2 week play-off? Pod 1 v. Pod 3, Pod 2 v. Pod 4 one week, with the winners to play the next week?
 
Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
Assuming the "pod" system happens -- what do they do with the winners of the "pods?"

Is there a 2 week play-off? Pod 1 v. Pod 3, Pod 2 v. Pod 4 one week, with the winners to play the next week?
Click to expand...

Petition the NCAA for a 2-week playoff.

That's the big way the money starts to work. Our pod would be with the UT pod in the "East". The pod winners would play each other to determine the winner of the East and who gets to play the West winner in the Pac-16 Championship.
 
That could mean that some team plays 15 (or even 16) games!!

12 game regular season + pod semi final + conference championship + bowl game = 15

or -- 13 game regular season (including game at Hawaii) + pod semi final + conference championship + bowl game = 16
 
Another thing is that should add more conference games if we go to 16. I'm thinking 11 games would be doable since it's seven of your own division plus half of the other division. Could be a very winnable situation if done correctly.
 
NashBuff said:
Another thing is that should add more conference games if we go to 16. I'm thinking 11 games would be doable since it's seven of your own division plus half of the other division. Could be a very winnable situation if done correctly.
Click to expand...

That would pretty much eliminate non-conference games, though.
 
NashBuff said:
Another thing is that should add more conference games if we go to 16. I'm thinking 11 games would be doable since it's seven of your own division plus half of the other division. Could be a very winnable situation if done correctly.
Click to expand...

**** that noise. That is all.
 
Buffnik said:
Petition the NCAA for a 2-week playoff.

That's the big way the money starts to work. Our pod would be with the UT pod in the "East". The pod winners would play each other to determine the winner of the East and who gets to play the West winner in the Pac-16 Championship.
Click to expand...

I think this is exactly where the $EC is headed. I see them adding 3 more after aTm (Mizzou and two in the east, most likely) and going to a pod system with a two round conference playoff. If there's any conference out there that will lead the charge on expanding the season and expanding the conference championship game concept, it's the football crazed $EC.
 
NashBuff said:
Let me explain the pod scheduling again:

The Pac-16 pods are as follows

California: USC, UCLA, Stanford, and Cal
NW: UO, OrSU, UW, WSU
Mountain: CU, UA, ASU, and Utah
SW: UT, TT, OU, OSU

This is what CU's schedule would be like for season one (season two is the opposite)

UA
@ASU
Utah
@OU
TT
@USC
Cal
@UO
WSU

Year three (year four is opposite)

UA
@ASU
Utah
@UT
OSU
@UCLA
Stanford
@UW
OrSU

We get one game in California, Arizona, the NW, and the SW.
Click to expand...

It is awfully hard to find a legitimate objection to that.
 
Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
That would pretty much eliminate non-conference games, though.
Click to expand...

This is going to be the problem with the super conferences. There will not be any 4 game non-conference schedules. Best case is you will see 2 non conference games, and chances are everyone will schedule the directional schools just to get ready for conference play. You will not see CU making a trip to Florida, Ohio, or any other cool out of conference road trips.
 
I would love to add texas, Oklahoma, Kansas and Missouri. Not really excited about tech or osu
 
Daaah said:
This sucks.
Click to expand...

Agreed times a million. I don't want to play in Texas, I don't want to play in Oklahoma. I'm content with the money and schools/places we play in the new conference. I don't really understand why people live In Texas or Oklahoma and don't care to associate with them.
 
TimmyDUBs said:
Agreed times a million. I don't want to play in Texas, I don't want to play in Oklahoma. I'm content with the money and schools/places we play in the new conference. I don't really understand why people live In Texas or Oklahoma and don't care to associate with them.
Click to expand...

If the SEC goes to 16, the PAC will follow in the name of survival. And OU/OSU/UT/one other makes the most sense. I'd prefer things stay the way they are for a while, but it is what it is.
 
i don't imagine the shorthorns tucking their bevo tails and seeking shelter in the p12 quite yet. atm flippin' them the bird is just the first step. next, they will try to bring in some ****-tastic school like smu so that they can pad the "big 12" conference with a patsy and try to ensure an annual bcs bid for either them or the sooners. at the same time, they'll keep working the tv network angle so that they can try to go independent.

they will keep banging at the foregoing for at least awhile to see if they can make it work. if not, then they will try to go independent. and, finally, if they can't pull that off, then they will agree to equal revenue sharing and they'll kill the tv network and they will shop themselves like the whores they are to other conferences. they will pitch themselves as a huge addition to any conference and they will feign humility in the process, just like they did when they and their idiot fellow cheating brethren killed the swc. the p(12) and the sec and the b12 will each try to cut a deal with them that works. the whorns will then sell themselves to the highest bidder, willing to pay extra for an around the world with their disingenuous selves.

such is life.
 
I just dont want Texas..would love OU, and OSU, KU and MU would be my pick. If MU goes to the SEC then I would like New Mexico over Texas. Texas is probably the big dog in this though..they HAVE to give up the network and share revenue equally. If we can't keep them out, those two things have to be a priority. I still would love OU plus KU and MU if he had to take Texas.

Ohh......had to drive to take the girls to pick up from school, so had to let teh percosets wear off. Was in good pain, but now.....oh yeah. Need some Barry White and a disco ball. Feeling funky.
 
Hank said:
That would not be a bad set up for CU.

Still don't get the value of TT.
Click to expand...

Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
Texas Tech probably doesn't add any value, but I anticipate that UT will have to bring someone along for the ride, just as OU will have to bring OSU.
Click to expand...

When UT joins the Pac you can pretty much be guaranteed that they will bring another Texas school with them, and TT is the logical choice since A&M is headed to the SEC.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top