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!

CU-CSU back to Invesco for a good long while

I

  • Hate Invesco

    Votes: 48 47.5%

  • Love Invesco

    Votes: 13 12.9%

  • Am neutral on the site

    Votes: 24 23.8%

  • Dont give $hit

    Votes: 16 15.8%
  • Total voters
    101
What's the upside? Did CU get a guaranteed TV contract and any extra cash out of the deal? Or is this just an other government subsidy for Colorado State?

Invesco capacity: 76,125
Tickets @ 65 each
60:40 revenue split with CSU.
CU ought to be getting $2M per game plus a cut from the networks.
That allows CSU and the good and generous people at the Denver Athletic Commission to fight over the remaining $3M plus concessions and parking.
 
buffsyko said:
Cu has one home game in OOC, the csu game will be at invesco. So, while our big 12 counterparts are playing 7-8 home games we play 5?
Click to expand...


Maybe we'll get another game in. I still think this is a good deal for the buffs. I think the people who don't think it's that great are not really thinking about it.
 
Unleash Hell said:
Maybe we'll get another game in. I still think this is a good deal for the buffs. I think the people who don't think it's that great are not really thinking about it.
Click to expand...

I've thought about it, what did cu gain out of this? What other bcs school gets tied up in 10 year deals and panders to a non bcs school?
 
Unleash Hell said:
Maybe we'll get another game in. I still think this is a good deal for the buffs. I think the people who don't think it's that great are not really thinking about it.
Click to expand...


I'm reserving judgement until the numbers are posted.

In the last contract, It didn't appear that CU was getting anywhere close to seven figures out of the deal. Someone's getting rich off of this match up, and it's not CU.
 
Best way to kill this series is to win this year and then go 10-0 at Invesco. We push the all-time record to 70-19-2 with 12 straight wins and 16 out of 17, I can't see a lot of interest in renewing it.
 
I like the deal.. No reason why we shouldn't play CSU every year.. Yeah, it would be nice if CSU actually had a college stadium so we could play in college campuses, but we all know that's impossible..



CU gets good coverage and its always a national TV game and its been a competitive game this whole decade.


Although I agree, its imperative that we still get 6 home games every year.. If that means playing a Div 1AA team every year, so be it..

CSU in Denver
BCS team
Div1AA home game.
non-BCS home game.

I think this year's nonconference schedule (albeit without going to Toledo) is exactly the kind of nonconference schedule Bohn should be playing.. CSU, two cupcakes and a BCS team.. :thumbsup:
 
buffsyko said:
I've thought about it, what did cu gain out of this? What other bcs school gets tied up in 10 year deals and panders to a non bcs school?
Click to expand...

:congrats:

And why be satisfied with 6 homes games? With the advent of the 12-game schedule, many programs are now routinely scheduling 7 or 8 games.
 
the simple truth is that the game is good for colorado football.

even though the lammies are not in a bcs conference it is the only in-state rivalry we have right now. that is good local football.

that said, i'd like to see the buffs do a rotation between the lammies and the zoomies on alternating years...

this contract may negate that possibility.

and that is unfortunate.
 
FChairbanks said:
the simple truth is that the game is good for colorado football.

even though the lammies are not in a bcs conference it is the only in-state rivalry we have right now. that is good local football.

that said, i'd like to see the buffs do a rotation between the lammies and the zoomies on alternating years...

this contract may negate that possibility.

and that is unfortunate.
Click to expand...

It's only good for football in the state if it brings more fans and sup[port. Once this game is over,we know none of the fans are going to csu games and cu doesn't sell out every game so until it brings more money and support for the ENTIRE SEASON, it isn't.
 
FChairbanks said:
the simple truth is that the game is good for colorado football.
Click to expand...

Statistically, I'm not sure it's good for Colorado football.
CU-CSU series record since 1983
In Boulder: CU leads series 7-1. .875
In Ft Fun: CU leads series 3-0. 1.000
In Denver: CU leads series 6-4. .600
Total series: CU leads 16-5. .762

Philisophically, I'm not sure it's good for Colorado football.
- Takes game off campus. Result? Neutral site turns both fan bases into animals. Denver is not the most family friendly atmosphere, which is bad for football.
- CSU fans make token appearance in Denver, and blow off games in Hughes, like church goers who only attend mass on the holidays. As a result, CSU is dependent upon CU like crack addicts for revenue and fan support. It undermines the stand-alone viability of CSU.
- Both CU and CSU are getting screwed out of money by Denver. Both schools should net seven figures for playing at Invesco. The money generated at Invesco is lining the wrong people's pockets.
- The opportunity cost for CU playing CSU every year is at the expense of playing at AFA, which has a pretty campus that CU fans don't get to experience.
 
Skidmark said:
Statistically, I'm not sure it's good for Colorado football.
CU-CSU series record since 1983
In Boulder: CU leads series 7-1. .875
In Ft Fun: CU leads series 3-0. 1.000
In Denver: CU leads series 6-4. .600
Total series: CU leads 16-5. .762

Philisophically, I'm not sure it's good for Colorado football.
- Takes game off campus. Result? Neutral site turns both fan bases into animals. Denver is not the most family friendly atmosphere, which is bad for football.
- CSU fans make token appearance in Denver, and blow off games in Hughes, like church goers who only attend mass on the holidays. As a result, CSU is dependent upon CU like crack addicts for revenue and fan support. It undermines the stand-alone viability of CSU.
- Both CU and CSU are getting screwed out of money by Denver. Both schools should net seven figures for playing at Invesco. The money generated at Invesco is lining the wrong people's pockets.
- The opportunity cost for CU playing CSU every year is at the expense of playing at AFA, which has a pretty campus that CU fans don't get to experience.
Click to expand...

Awesome post! :bowdown:
 
In reference to Skiddy's post, I love how the stats show that in the last 25 years (at least), the rammies haven't been able to beat us in their own house. :smile2:
 
People, you still don't get it! We get 6 home games a year plus an opportunity to beat CSU every year as well. It's a good deal! CSU is not gonna be all that competitive with us anyway and anybody who thinks this sucks is just afraid of csu.
 
Unleash Hell said:
People, you still don't get it! We get 6 home games a year plus an opportunity to beat CSU every year as well. It's a good deal! CSU is not gonna be all that competitive with us anyway and anybody who thinks this sucks is just afraid of csu.
Click to expand...

Afraid of csu :lol:
 
buffsyko said:
nope
Click to expand...

Then why is this such a big deal? With 6 home games, this should be another great opportunity to get another easy W every year. With CU's history of scheduling in a way it's like 7 home games every year. Or look at it a different way and it's 6 home games plus an easy road W. I think this makes creates a good way to get more wins per season.
 
Certainly do not love this move. I question people who say CU makes more by playing at Invesco. Multiply 70 (at the least) times 42,000 (non-student tix) = 2.9 million. Add club, suite, concessions and parking revenue, you gotta be kidding me to say CU makes more money at Invesco. Bull s***.

Also, CSU fans (and lets be fair, CU fans) are far more obnoxious (and even violent) than they would ever be in Folsom or whatever the eff CSU's stadium is called, which means the kids I plan to have in a few years will not be allowed to attend this game until about 2025. Kinda sad.
 
Unleash Hell said:
Then why is this such a big deal? With 6 home games, this should be another great opportunity to get another easy W every year. With CU's history of scheduling in a way it's like 7 home games every year. Or look at it a different way and it's 6 home games plus an easy road W. I think this makes creates a good way to get more wins per season.
Click to expand...

Mix it up. The idea of playing the same team every year (that's not in the north division) bores me.
 
Unleash Hell said:
People, you still don't get it! We get 6 home games a year plus an opportunity to beat CSU every year as well. It's a good deal! CSU is not gonna be all that competitive with us anyway and anybody who thinks this sucks is just afraid of csu.
Click to expand...

I agree Unleash... Its not like CU football is selling out all their other nonconference games at Folsom...



Its good for the state, its good for the schools and we get the opportunity to show how better we are than CSU every year.. Its a win-win-win for CU.. :thumbsup:
 
JimmyBuff said:
I agree Unleash... Its not like CU football is selling out all their other nonconference games at Folsom...



Its good for the state, its good for the schools and we get the opportunity to show how better we are than CSU every year.. Its a win-win-win for CU.. :thumbsup:
Click to expand...

Second that! It gets the Metro area CFB fans who are too lazy or too afraid of dredlocked trustafarians in Boulder, to experience the atmosphere of a football game without all the trappings of the NFL (e.g. floozies for "cheerleaders"; stinkin' drunk lowlife fans---not even CSMoo fans can rival the Donks' fanbase; commercialized everything: Broncos' Toilet paper, a constant barrage of advertising....ad infinitum, ad NFL nauseum!)

It also gives us some pretty decent entertainment and a near certain win. Fairchild will bring his program around and make it more competitive. Also it appears not all games will be season openers, but sprinkled in.

Other Big12 fans are stupid enough to fork over $50 to $150 per seat to watch their guys whupp ass on East Stroudsburg State, (Can you hear me, Mack Brown and Bo Peep?) but theres a bit more to do here(i.e. competing recreational activities, go see Boulder Mtn Parks trails on game days when the temp exceeds 70) so might as well have a little fun with the Lammies.
 
Unleash Hell said:
People, you still don't get it! We get 6 home games a year plus an opportunity to beat CSU every year as well. It's a good deal! CSU is not gonna be all that competitive with us anyway and anybody who thinks this sucks is just afraid of csu.
Click to expand...


I get this. Whether or not CU schedules 6 home games has little to do with Invesco and much to do with the Colorado athletic department.

I get that there are 120 D1 Schools.
I get that B12 + CSU = 11% of that total.
75% of CU's future schedule is made up of B12 + CSU.
89% of the NCAA will either have to be scheduled during OOC or be matched up in a bowl game. Face it, maybe 15% of the remaining NCAA roster will face CU in the next decade, but three quarters of D1 teams will never even have a chance schedule the Buffs because of this inbred, provencial scheduling. With home and away arrangements, a CU fan has very little likelihood to see the Buffs play against three quarters of the football teams of this nation. It has nothing to do with being afraid of CSU, but afraid of being bored by the same old schedule year after year.

As to the CSU series, history indicates CU wins 9 of the next 12 games agains the Rams. CU gloats, CSU bitches and moans. Repeat. Life is too short to waste a quarter of CU's OOC slots playing the same old school time and again at Pat Bowlen's house with the same old predictable "rivalry" rhetoric and the same old predictable outcome.

I'm not saying that CU should never play CSU, either. Once every other year or once every three years is fine.

And then there is the money issue. The group at Invesco should be paying $2M for the privilege of CU gracing their presence. To say it's a good deal without knowing the value of the contract is just premature.

If you like making value judgements without knowing the finances, then I have a car to sell you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
For the people that are bitching about other schools that are scheduling 7 homes games a year, remember this: we can't sell out games against ****ty D1A or D1AA teams. We can't get a lot of teams that will sell Folsom out to agree to a 1 for 1 let alone a single home game. So, this game serves a nice purpose of acting like a seventh home game but with a guaranteed payout. We can continue filling out our 6 home games like we've been doing and be sure to get a nice big check for the 7th in a pretty friendly location against a team that we should be favored to beat every year.

I don't like subsidizing CSU's football program, but until the Buffs are a national powerhouse and can sell out home games against Prairie View A&M, this is a pretty solid deal for us. Now, we can question the 10 year portion of the deal, but otherwise I'm not upset about this at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top