What's new
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 has rejoined the Big 12 and broken college football - talking out asses continues

USC will challenge tOSU for the cream of the conference most years, and they will be excited to play big programs like tOSU, UM, MSU, PSU, Wis, Iowa and yes, even Nebraska. However, those games might be 3/9 conference games, while the other 6 will be highly unattractive matchups against Minn, IL, Indiana, Purdue, Maryland, or Rutgers.

UCLA is the program that is likely to regret the move outside of no longer being cash strapped
Michigan does non consentual butt stuff to USC most years.
 
I think Riley is about to get SC back to tier 1 status. He needs to figure out the defensive side and Alex Grinch ain’t it, but once he does, they’ll be there with Bama, UGA, tOSU, Clemson, IMO
We will revisit this opinion in 3 or 4 years Yak. You could be right but I don't think USC will get there.
 
For those interested, nonconsentualbuttstuff is my onlyfanz.
disgusted go away GIF
 
That article was from over a year ago.
Huh? Dated 10/30/22. Did you know these facts a year ago?


"According to Ourand, the negotiating window for this contract wasn’t supposed to open until February of 2024, but new Big 12 commissioner Brett Yormark convinced the networks to open the exclusive negotiating window earlier. Yormark, who is only a few months into his tenure as commissioner, successfully secured the extension as the conference is dealing with uncertainty."
 
I like the Big 12's deal where you can watch Tier 3 on ESPN+. This is something that I had in mind for the P12 media rights if CU was to stay. If Tier 3 gets put on Amazon or Apple, that would still be great assuming the P12 isn't that far behind the B12.
 



Walton: "These same proponents of moving to the Big 10, are the first people I have ever encountered in my life, who have claimed economic hardship and limitations in Los Angeles, and that the solution lies in the Midwest."

He’s not wrong, but is this the big news that Wilner was teasing?

I suspect the rank and file fan bases of both schools are not overly thrilled about this arrangement. They see the economic realities and accept it, but they aren’t happy.
 
We will revisit this opinion in 3 or 4 years Yak. You could be right but I don't think USC will get there.
If you have them playing Nebraska, Minnesota, Northwestern, and Illinois most years they can.

Riley does need a new DC-and I do not want Alex Grinch anywhere near our HC gig.
 
I thought RWard over at 247 had some good info on the Big 12 deal.


No extra tier three rights.
Here are the money quotes. If so, it looks like the Pac 12 could be above that $50 million a year mark including Tier 1, 2, 3 rights. We'll see, but I think only 10 teams may actually be helpful. The only issue would be the streaming side and how impactful that will be to recruiting.

ESPN and Amazon Prime remain the front runners to pick up Pac-12 rights, with agreements potentially coming by the end of the year. It’s too early to describe what’s in those packages with any accuracy. But it’s important to note that ESPN’s Big 12 deal does not take it out of the running for Pac-12 rights. And Amazon still wants a package of college football games that can complement its Thursday night package of NFL games.
Pac-12 officials’ initial reaction when they heard of the Big 12’s deal was relief. Big 12 schools each will receive around $31 million per school as part of the deal, and Pac-12 officials are optimistic that they will be able to eclipse that figure. This means that unless the Big Ten or SEC come calling, it’s unlikely a Pac-12 school will be persuaded to leave the conference.
 
Here are the money quotes. If so, it looks like the Pac 12 could be above that $50 million a year mark including Tier 1, 2, 3 rights. We'll see, but I think only 10 teams may actually be helpful. The only issue would be the streaming side and how impactful that will be to recruiting.
It is more advantageous to stay at 10 teams?
Would there be some discussion within the negotiations to decide if adding San Diego State and possibly SMU adds the needed value?
 
Another thing that one article talks about is how badly Apple and Amazon want into the College Sports stuff, but does not have the infrastructure to do it. Sooooo, why are we not SELLING the PAC12 Network or leasing or whatever the assets of the network to Apple or to Amazon to help increase the payout over the next 5-6 years?


“Amazon and Apple want to be in the college live-sports programming space but neither has the infrastructure to produce games. Amazon uses the NFL Network for the Thursday Night Football production. The Pac-12 Networks already handles production of 36 football games,” Canzano wrote.
 
If you have them playing Nebraska, Minnesota, Northwestern, and Illinois most years they can.

Riley does need a new DC-and I do not want Alex Grinch anywhere near our HC gig.

I was responding to Yak speculating that USC will get up to current CFP levels - Bama, tOSU, UGA, Clemson. I grant you that USC will likely get good enough to win the B1G West most years.
 
Another thing that one article talks about is how badly Apple and Amazon want into the College Sports stuff, but does not have the infrastructure to do it. Sooooo, why are we not SELLING the PAC12 Network or leasing or whatever the assets of the network to Apple or to Amazon to help increase the payout over the next 5-6 years?


“Amazon and Apple want to be in the college live-sports programming space but neither has the infrastructure to produce games. Amazon uses the NFL Network for the Thursday Night Football production. The Pac-12 Networks already handles production of 36 football games,” Canzano wrote.
Who's to say they won't ?
 
I was responding to Yak speculating that USC will get up to current CFP levels - Bama, tOSU, UGA, Clemson. I grant you that USC will likely get good enough to win the B1G West most years.
That's part of this conversation. If they're good enough to win the B1G West.....yeah they're a playoff contender.
 
It is more advantageous to stay at 10 teams?
Would there be some discussion within the negotiations to decide if adding San Diego State and possibly SMU adds the needed value?

Don't need 12 teams to in order to have a CCG but I still would go ahead with 12 teams.

SDSU would help add more value to P12 basketball and I think SMU could do the same thing. UNLV would be a good backup if SMU decides to not make the move west or the Big 12 gets proactive and adds SMU.
 
I think we will see expansion. Commish K has been saying that all along (or having it leak).

SDSU and FSU help mitigate the loss of USC & UCLA.

UNLV works as a sub for FSU. It could also be paired with BSU to fill the western map.

SMU and UTSA are on the table if TX expansion is the strategy.

I don't think more than 14 makes sense in one shot (unless it was UNLV/UNM accepting non-football invites to go to 16).
 
I think we will see expansion. Commish K has been saying that all along (or having it leak).

SDSU and FSU help mitigate the loss of USC & UCLA.

UNLV works as a sub for FSU. It could also be paired with BSU to fill the western map.

SMU and UTSA are on the table if TX expansion is the strategy.

I don't think more than 14 makes sense in one shot (unless it was UNLV/UNM accepting non-football invites to go to 16).
UNLV doesn't get you anything you don't already have IMO. Take the two Texas schools and the California schools and call it a day.

Barf at the rest of that list.
 
UNLV doesn't get you anything you don't already have IMO. Take the two Texas schools and the California schools and call it a day.

Barf at the rest of that list.
Do you think there's value in breaking the MWC?
 
It is more advantageous to stay at 10 teams?
Would there be some discussion within the negotiations to decide if adding San Diego State and possibly SMU adds the needed value?
Some are saying that 10 teams can be an advantage. That gives ESPN/Amazon the ability to negotiate with the league on who to add that gives more value.
 
Do you think there's value in breaking the MWC?
MWC Media payout is between $3-4 million per team. The entire league has the media value that we are looking for per team in the PAC.

I don't see a single MWC team that comes close to adding value to the league that is anywhere close to what their share would be.

It isn't going to happen right away but I don't think the answer to surviving the re-organization is pulling up more current G5 schools.

Rather the eventual answer is to say that we have two conferences, the SEC and B1G, that dominate in terms of media, recruiting, etc. The best alternative for those left out of those two conferences who want to remain relevant is not to further dilute the system.

Eventually it will make sense for the top remaining schools outside of those two conferences to align into a third superconference excluding those schools that don't participate and generate media value at that level.

In the PAC - USC/UCLA you see Oregon State and Washington State and likely Cal excluded, similarly the new B12 splits with about half left out, ACC as well.

You end up with a 14-20 team league that spans the country and while not as rich as the SEC/B1G is well above the rest of what is left in media value.
 
Back
Top