So let me get this right... you're saying that CU alums in California are most likely retired new graduates with $750,000 mortgages on their parents' basements???? :huh:
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!
Chicago Sun-Times: CU on Big Ten radar
- Thread starter UrbanaBuff
- Start date
So let me get this right... you're saying that CU alums in California are most likely retired new graduates with $750,000 mortgages on their parents' basements???? :huh:
Deleted member 807
Guest
Yes. Not only that, CU alum have singlehandedly brought economic colapse to the Golden State. Operation Buffalo has been a near success.
Deleted member 807
Guest
Retired, unemployed, or facing steep house payments. If you buddies are donating to the CUAD, good for them.
The point is: what is the value of CU's alumni in California, and does that value justify, in and of itself, CU's movement to the Pac10?
I'm sorry, California as a retirement mecca?? That's just plain wrong. The reason there are so many CA alums is because every year the incoming freshman classes are filled with California kids (2nd most after CO). A lot of these kids move back after they graduate, so not surprisingly the are a lot of CU alums in CA.
The value is getting your "product" which is CU football in this case, in front of the people most likely to buy it...alums.
That is a more reasonable way to make the argument. There better be solid financial fundamentals behind the move beyond just the AD grasping at straws as a way to get their mojo back. Particularly if there is going to be a payout.
Having lived in both Chicago and San Francisco, I've been to watch parties in both cities. There really is no comparison. Hundreds of people turn up for watch parties in San Francisco and like 10 in Chicago.
Deleted member 807
Guest
The thing is, when CU fans go to watch CU football in California stadiums, it enriches the California schools. Not CU.
What enriches CU is when visitors come to Boulder.
I have not seen UCLA nor USC fans file into Folsom in nearly the same volume as Nebraska, OU, Texas, OSU, or A&M fans. Californians don't like to travel outside of their state to visit square fly-over states.
What is good for CU is $$$. The Big 10 brings in alot of network cash because it's eastern and central time zone is more compatible with the viewing schedules of 2/3rds of the US population. The west coast games are too late, and west coast schools suffer because of it. There is a reason the Pac 10 doesn't have the same sized contact as the Big 10 or SEC.
If the Pac 10 offers the same money as the Big 10, then it's a wash. Go with the Pac 10 due to the overballyhooed alumni arguement. But if the Big 10 offers even as little as $1M more, then CU should follow the money and go Big 10.
Big 10 schools travel really well too
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
as an informal, non-scientific on-the-ground measure of student geography, I'd say in an average CU class of 40 students there are about 20-25 CO kids, 7-9 CA kids, maybe 2-3 from Chicago, NY/New England/NJ, and Texas each. and then outliers like Oregon, Oklahoma, PA, Idaho etc. based on nearly a decade of teaching and having access to student profile info.
Last edited:
CU fans in a California stadium does enrich the Cali school, but IMO the goal isn't to get as many visiting fans as possible into Folsom. What helps CU is when Bohn travels to road games, to be able to golf with and glad hand CU alums. The more contact the AD can have with alums the better, and I just think we can do a lot better in the Bay Area, SoCal, and Arizona than we can in Ames, Stillwater, Waco, Norman, etc.
Deleted member 807
Guest
The key measure isn't on the front end...where students come from.
The critical measure is on the back end...where do these graduates and CU boosters end up earning their living? Some out of state kids stick around Colo upon graduation and some go back or move on. Some Colo kids leave the state. Regardless of from where they came, I suspect that around 70% of CU's graduates are instate. 10-12% move to California, and the rest are spread everywhere else.
Who knows if the 12% from Cali donate more or less per capita than the 18% who migrate elsewhere.
The follow-up question is the degree in which these alum and boosters stay connected to the university through the purchase of football tickets and donations.
Buffsfan09
Member
Hundreds....I doubt that...and that momentum can change. CU to the Big 10 would create momentum in the alumni base in others areas untapped today. I would also argue that football has more passion in the Midwest than in Cali...party because the PAC-10 is virtually irrelevant with the exception of USC and a decent Oregon team from time to time. Why do you knowingly want to put us into a bad situation if we could get into a much more lucrative one?? The worst teams in the Big 10, Indiana, Northwestern, Minnesota would still bring out the alumni base in Colorado....Washington State, Oregon State, and most of the others would stay home...not passionate. And where the worst football teams in the Big 10 fail, their basketball teams would more than make up for. Big 10 HO!!!!
Deleted member 807
Guest
You make a good point. There is, however, a cultural difference. Don't the Californians resent paying exhorbidant out of state tuition? Since CU is a public institution, don't many Californians have a natural bias against donating money to a public out-of-state school? I understand that private Stanford has very generous benefactors. USC might get a lot of Hollywood dollars. But in general, do californians readily make donations to public universities?
In the B12, the concept of donating mad amounts of money to your state school is part of the culture. A kNU fan donates $70 to see the spring game. The Texas and Oklahoma alumni donations are awsome both their their numbers and magnitude.
Bohn would have some cultural challenges to get California alums excited to open up their wallets after already being soaked by paying 4x tuition.
how did they get that number? tickets sold? did you go to the game, it was like a home game for CU. I would guess that we had easily twice that many fans there.
Bohn already has that challenge, the CA alums are our alums no matter what conference we're in.
And I would take the opposite view - culturally speaking, CU is much more like the Pac 10 schools that don't have mega boosters funding their athletic programs. CU just can't compete financially with the Billionnaire Boys Club, and the T Boone Pickens of the world.
UrbanaBuff
Member
For what it's worth, during my time at CU, I met more kids from Chicago than California. While I admit that may be an aberration since I'm from Chicago, I would not be surprised if Illinois is the second largest market of out-of-staters at CU behind California.
UrbanaBuff
Member
Good point. In the Big Ten, every school stands up to be counted. The worst football schools of late, Illinois & Indiana, make up for it as two of the most storied basketball programs in the conference. And though Northwestern sucks in sports, they are the conference flag-bearer in academics.
Compare this to the Big XII... many dead-weight schools such as Iowa State, TT, Baylor, K-State. This likely explains the uneven revenue sharing.
Compare this to the Big XII... many dead-weight schools such as Iowa State, TT, Baylor, K-State. This likely explains the uneven revenue sharing.
Ok, maybe not hundreds, but certainly over a hundred and quite possibly over 200.
I have no facts to back this up other than my own impression from my time as a student, but I would have guessed Texas as next after CA.
Or maybe fans of all stripes might be a little more willing to travel for conference games that actually mean more than for out of conference games.
How many visiting fans were in Folsom when we've played Big Ten teams there? We might have to go back to the days of Jeff George and the Illini or the Michigan series to answer that, but it still might give us some indication whether or not Big Ten fans are going to be more likely to travel to Folsom than Pac-10 fans are.
:yeahthat: That's a much bigger issue than whose fans are going to come to Boulder. For one thing, given the size of Folsom, with even a halfway decent product CU fans shouldn't be leaving massive numbers of tickets for visiting fans to buy anyway...
Don't all out of state alumni pay the same out of state tuition? Are you saying no out of state alums donate? And we should just give up on donations from out of state alumni? Or just Californians in general who don't make donations to Universities?? Because, I guess, Californians are just anti-education but Texans, Oklahomans, Nebraskans and midwesterners in general have money just falling out of their pockets they are just dying to give to public universities in general and CU in particular??
The fact, which has been restated over and over and over here, is that CU has more alums in California than anywhere else outside Colorado. By a wide margin. It is also a fact that alums are a critical source of support for CU. You can create speculative reasons that may not be the case as much as you like, and try to apply it specifically to California, but it doesn't change the fact...
Sorry Skiddy, but your reasoning in this thread makes no sense, aside from an "I want CU to play in my state every year so I'll argue against change" sort of thought...
UrbanaBuff
Member
Yep, Illinois played at Folsom in '89 I believe, led by #1 pick Jeff George. CU won that game. However, the return game to Champaign in '90 was CU's only loss during during our title run.
In addition to the Michigan series in like '93 or '94, I believe we played Wisconsin too. Kind of odd to play two Big Ten teams non-conference concurrently. And those UM and UW teams were tough too.
Then we played Wisky again in a bowl game in '02, I think.
In addition to the Michigan series in like '93 or '94, I believe we played Wisconsin too. Kind of odd to play two Big Ten teams non-conference concurrently. And those UM and UW teams were tough too.
Then we played Wisky again in a bowl game in '02, I think.
Last edited:
Deleted member 807
Guest
Make no mistake. My arguement is simple. Given the choice between the Pac10 v Big10, CU should follow the money.
I am merely questioning what the value might be to the "more alumns in California" arguement.
I am asserting that California alumni view football differently than B12 or B10 based alumni. I suspect that out of state alumni to the east are more willing to donate to the university's athletic program on a per capita basis than the left coast alumni. This is because football-mania is a given in the B12, B10 and SEC. The Pac 10 is not known for it's rabid support for football, other than the Los Angeles propensity to cheer on a winner, like U$C.
The 2002 game in @UCLA was following CU's appearance in the Fiesta Bowl. I'm comfortable that CU coming off a B12 championship would draw more LA fans than a 3-9 team. We'll see how well the Buffs draw @ Cal. I'm guessing over 10K would be astounding.
The second piece of the arguement is that the relatively large numbers of fans/alumni in California don't automatically equate to donations or network dollars.
CU has about 275K alumni. Let's say 12% live in California. That makes 33K CU alum in California. Although big, it's not big enough to drive a conference re-allignment discussion. It wouldn't hurt if some of those CA alum included a few $1M benefactors, a couple dozen $100K donors, and several hundred $1,000 friends, and several thousand $100 gift givers.
It's one thing to say the potential exists for this to happen, versus such California generousity actually being a fact.
No one has said that
Ha. I was back in Chicago for that game and watched with hs buddies who were Illini. They were calling Bieniemy 'The Enemy'. They were right from their point of view. He had a big game.
Deleted member 807
Guest
Amazing. That's how many people visit Disneyland on a single day. That's about the size of...of...Stillwater, OK.
OMG!
I'll agree with your argument, to an extent. The $$ is going to be a big factor in where CU decides to land. Academics are suitable with either conference, there's no other big factors either way. So let's look at $$. Obviously the big $$ is going to be the conference payout. I don't think anybody is saying that the alumni $$ is going to trump that. But if CU can choose a conference that allows them to connect more strongly with alums without sacrificing a lot of money, it makes sense to do that. It makes sense from a PR perspective and it makes sense financially. You keep arguing that alums aren't really worth much financially, but CU alums donate tremendous sums of money to the school every year. You can speculate that midwestern alums would donate more for football than California alums, but bear in mind that this move wouldn't just impact donations for football. It will let CU connect with alums with all kinds of interests. The AD, the Chancellor, the President can all travel for these games, they can all meet with alums, they can drum up donations for academics and arts just as well as sports. And the fact is that their chances of raising money are just much better where there are more alums. And outside of Colorado, the most alums are on the west coast. That fact is inescapable. It's not the final word on the decision, but it is relevant...
I don't see the fit from either side. The Big Televen has expansion options to the east of them (Rutgers, Syracuse, Pitt, maybe even UVA...), to the west of them/east of CU (Mizzou, fuskers), and even in their midst (Notre Damn....). For that matter, if they're willing to look at UNL academically, KU and its hoops program becomes a possibility. They can even shoot for the brass ring and approach Texass. For CU, the only natural rivals would be the fuskers, and maybe Mizzou. Travel/road trips to Penn State, Syracuse, Pitt and even Ohio State make most of the Pac-10 roadies look like cross town bus rides, there is little overlap in terms of recruiting territory, alumni bases or anything else. I can see that CU might have interest simply in terms of $$, but I'm having a big problem seeing just what would make the Big 11 really get serious about adding CU.... :huh: