Deleted member 807
Guest
@Junk
I agree with your double post. FWIW, I have no agenda to keep CU in the B12. I have way more Texas fatigue than you could imagine. When it comes to the B12; Been there. Done that. I welcome a change. As this is a B10 thread, I'm making a case that the B10 > Pac10 finacially. TV coverage rules CFB, not geographic alumni distribution. I'm not turning my nose down at the B10 due to some spurrious cultural or mostly inconsequential alumni arguement.
The fundraising potential of the California's alum would get me more excited if CU had more success winning the support of Colorado based alum. There's no excuse for CU to have a smaller endowment than Baylor, Texas Tech, Mizzou, or Wazzou.
CU's endowment is $593M, placing it 9th in the B12 and 7th in the Pac 12.
Both UT and Stanford have endowments in excess of $12Billion. A&M and Cal are around $5Billion each.
The Billion dollar club also includes NU, UW, USC and UCLA, with KU knocking on the door.
I agree with your double post. FWIW, I have no agenda to keep CU in the B12. I have way more Texas fatigue than you could imagine. When it comes to the B12; Been there. Done that. I welcome a change. As this is a B10 thread, I'm making a case that the B10 > Pac10 finacially. TV coverage rules CFB, not geographic alumni distribution. I'm not turning my nose down at the B10 due to some spurrious cultural or mostly inconsequential alumni arguement.
The fundraising potential of the California's alum would get me more excited if CU had more success winning the support of Colorado based alum. There's no excuse for CU to have a smaller endowment than Baylor, Texas Tech, Mizzou, or Wazzou.
CU's endowment is $593M, placing it 9th in the B12 and 7th in the Pac 12.
Both UT and Stanford have endowments in excess of $12Billion. A&M and Cal are around $5Billion each.
The Billion dollar club also includes NU, UW, USC and UCLA, with KU knocking on the door.