Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by buffedup, May 15, 2015.
So you're paying part of the buyout on Sparkles contract? It's actually a pretty good model since they're going 'all in.' Bobo has a similar clause in his contract.
How is it a good model when they are operating out of there revenue range? They're trying to act like a P5 school with 1/25th the budget.
Notice how I said a few years? The buyout will likely last 3, maybe 4 years before the well runs dry. Better hope Bobo pulls a McElwain. Given that McElwain did probably the greatest coaching job in CSU history, statistically your odds are low to get a repeat. If he doesn't, then CSU gets to deal with the fun of also buying out their coach.
We should UAB CSU.
Potential neg rep for implying we are a part of the same university system as CSU.
I'm going to assume that they have some grasp on the financials with all this. I do wonder if they aren't closer to a P5 invite than any of us think.
Perhaps I am way off on this one, but I just don't think CSU has the national recognition to garner an invite. I grew up on the East Coast and had never heard of CSU or ever saw a game of theirs on television before arriving in CO. I can imagine the reaction from Big 10 followers being "Who?" if CSU was ever invited. Maybe it would be a different story with a Big 12 invite.
Just like those realistic revenue numbers from the feasibility study?
I wonder just how long will they be able to pay there student athletes stipends? Once the bill comes due for there new stadium, that may end?.
they are doing the right thing. they are caught in the land of the also-rans. they have to keep pushing as if they were not an also-ran-- it is their only hope of keeping their program in d1 in the near to medium term. they are betting they can draw a p5 invite. it is their only play, other than drop down or drop football.
give them credit for seeing the writing on the wall and doing what they can to to try land on the right side of the fence.
exactly what I was thinking - at least they try.
Sure it's a decade or more after Utah, TCU and Boise figured it out. And a solid 40 years behind the Arizona schools.
But better late than never, right?
I have to give them credit for that and taking advantage of any opportunities they might have right now. If we left the proverbial door open for them they are doing everything they can to get in by capitalizing on some recent on the field success, a coach leaving for a big name position, recent early round draft picks, and an in state rival who hasn't had a pulse in a decade.
If this works you would have to give them huge props. If it doesn't, the financial aspect is going to be very bad for their University as a whole. I think its safe to say they are "all in" at this point.
CSU = Unbroken up until the last 5 minutes of the movie. We shall see how this one ends.
they're acting just like the US Government thats been doing it for decades. Debt is A-OK. And when your a government entity that can issue bonds forever.....
Ft Collins is exempt from TABOR.
I admire what they are doing. They are trying to develop a vision and set goals to achieve it just as we are. I question if they will ever have the fan base to get where they are aiming. I assume they believe they do or will have that fan base. It's kind of the chicken/egg argument. But to be picked up by a P5, I question whether or not a 40,000 seat stadium will impress anyone and am sure a half full 40,000 seat stadium will.
The only problem that I have with them trying is that I have a feeling that students and taxpayers will be footing the bill for what will eventually be remembered as an extravagant waste. Chances of a P5 invite are small.
CSU is in a better position than many think.
shut up, goat ****er.
when we want your opinion, we will knock on the side of the trailer.
Translation: bent over with pants around ankles.
I would love to hear the reasons...
Wake up call, bitch...
If one is running a $18 million subsidy on a $36 million dollar department, can one actually say that these stipends are being paid for with the buyout money? Seems to me they could also use the money to reduce the subsidy. It's unrestricted. So by a more appropriate accounting method, the school is paying for the entirely of the stipends with subsidy money.
Now if this were donor money that was given with the RESTRICTION that it only be spent on stipends, then maybe the school could claim it's coming from entirely no school sources.
Also, CSU shouldn'r really be counting the road game payout as part of the buyout. Florida was going to pay some school that much money to play a road game. CSU could have sold themselves to many other schools for a similar amount.
Could the Mountain West veto this for CSU if all the other member institutions decide this isn't a strategy they would like to adopt? It would seem that there is a clear competitive advantage for CSU over the other MWC schools if they are recruiting the same pool of players, yet CSU is the only one who is paying out stipends.
CSU announcing is in response to Wyoming doing the same.
Does anyone know what the formula uses to calculate the COA? Boise is over $5,000?
Separate names with a comma.