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
- Thread starter InTheBuff
- Start date
Suddenly PAC is entertaining a religious school. Desperate times comes desperate measures.
I'd rather have Fresno St, BSU or UNLV.
Think TV markets, though. Better to get a foothold in Dallas and replace some of the SoCal losses with SDSU than it is to jump into Fresno and Vegas.
These been the obvious two best adds on the board even if they aren't great. Dallas and San Diego market is huge.
Haven't been in this thread in about 2 days and it sounds like we've gone from Georgia State and Hawaii to SMU and SDSU. At least that's progress. I guess
No one has made a case for GA State or Hawaii over either one of these schools. This is very disrespectful. Come on, your better than this
I don’t remember 2006 being all that good either.
Would love the roadies to SD but I'm not sure those 2 are enough to save the PAC
Agreed. I think SDSU is a great choice, but I don't see how SMU brings many eyeballs to the PAC. I understand that Dallas has a lot of people, but does anyone in Dallas follow SMU? Seems like they are at best the #5 team in that market behind Texas, A&M, TCU, and Baylor. I wouldn't be surprised if OU, OSU, and Texas Tech even have more supporters in the area than SMU.
Fools errand to chase SMU for inclusion if you ask me.
Why do you consider Clemson and Florida Blue Bloods?
I think Clemson has entered the conversation as a modern BB with their success that was only topped by Bama, until Georgia became the best program in the country over the bast few years.
It’s hard to not include UF in the discussion with their historical success that spanned multiple staffs and different eras, but every year that passes now, with them being a non factor in the CFP or even SEC landscape and I think they start to fade from the discussion.
Have to define what a blue blood is, though.
I think at this point, the Pac is just trying to maximize revenue to the extent possible to hold it over for the next 5-6 years before things get shaken up again. Have to think the networks/streaming companies are basically telling them what each program addition brings to the table. Also think they are probably trying to bring on those schools at reduced payouts relative to the rest of the conference
Has to be per direction of whoever the conference is trying to partner with
You can technically say UofH is the 4th most popular team in Houston behind Austin, A&M, and LSU but P5 football is powerful. Every single Pac-12 school can attest to that.
The eyeballs they will being in now is different than it was playing irrelevant football as the masses see it.
To me, SMU and Tulane are excellent adds when you consider what's realistically left on the board and SMU makes more sense than Tulane.
SMU got media support and that's a massive value. They also have a history of being the most popular college team in the city during the 80s and they still have a lot of wealthy alums.
To me, you couldn't go wrong with either SMU or Tulane. That said, I feel the same about UNLV and SDSU as well. Those are mid adds but they are at least mid. Everything after that has a lot of reaching that's involved.
It obviously is. I've been telling you guys that inventory matters. 10 teams just isn't enough content. My guess is they will ask for SDSU and SMU to give a cut off top for the rest of the conference.
Still, great move for both schools and a good move by the Pac-12 going east. Probably the best play on the board for media reasons. 2PM EST on Amazon is feasible with SMU.
Going to the Pac-12 or Pac-14 is easy if that's what the media partners want. SMU, Tulane, SDSU and UNLV. Big markets. Easy money. 15 is tougher. I would personally do Hawaii football only and Gonzaga Olympics sports. Elite Basketball in Gonzaga which is a national brand. Hawaii add means an extra game for everyone who plays them, more money for the media partners and an added time zone more sponsorship money for T1 advertising. 16 is the hardest. That's the one that's a struggle. Maybe you stop at 15 and claim Hawaii and Gonzaga as 15/16 even if they aren't all sports members.
Last edited:
Ten works, but they would just have to make the schedule so everybody plays each other, just like the Big 12 has done for years. They must have been told that adding SDSU and SMU adds substantial revenue per school relative to staying at ten, or they are worried about the Big 12 scooping up SDSU and getting boxed out of SoCal.
Ten doesn't work anymore. It did when there was less options, less channels, and subs wasn't as big of a deal as getting national games was hard to do back then.
Big XII got smacked hard and was scrambling for survival not that long ago. That's not a good example.
The media deal dictates that which is why they are seriously considering adding two schools to replace SC & UCLA
I honestly feel OU and Texas lost will hurt the Big XII more than USC and UCLA. I understand media value that what I just said was stupid af but several of these brands can emerge from the Pac-12 and become national brands. TCU will never be a national brand. Nor will Baylor or OK State.
The PAC got Colorado/Prime, Oregon/Jerseys, Washington/Seattle, and everyone loves Stanford when they are good. SMU is in Dallas and no one is better at hype than a Dallas school and they are Dallas/JR Ewing to the core at SMU. If you look at what's left, PAC got better brands and SMU potential is there too. I don't know about SDSU potential but I guess it's like UCF equal for the Big XII add.
I think the Pac-12 can come out of this better than the Big XII but they will have to make the playoffs. That's going to be critical and send many teams.
The PAC got Colorado/Prime, Oregon/Jerseys, Washington/Seattle, and everyone loves Stanford when they are good. SMU is in Dallas and no one is better at hype than a Dallas school and they are Dallas/JR Ewing to the core at SMU. If you look at what's left, PAC got better brands and SMU potential is there too. I don't know about SDSU potential but I guess it's like UCF equal for the Big XII add.
I think the Pac-12 can come out of this better than the Big XII but they will have to make the playoffs. That's going to be critical and send many teams.
Everything was fine up until this point. Seriously- forget Hawaii. It’s not going to happen.
You must have a hate thing going on with Hawaii. StrangeEverything was fine up until this point. Seriously- forget Hawaii. It’s not going to happen.
No he isn't
It’s exactly the opposite. I don’t hate Hawaii at all. They’re just completely worthless as an addition to the PAC 12. No matter how hard you try to make it work, it never will.
I disagree. If you get to the stage where it's PAC 15 and 16. They make sense. You do realize every team that plays them is grandfathered an extra game. That revenue. Plus another time zone for your media partners for T1 content. Far from worthless.
Stanford doesn’t even love Stanford when they are good.
There’s at least 12 other schools that would be a better choice. Hell, CSU is a better choice and they’re a HORRIBLE choice. Hawaii is a non-starter for all the reasons that have been listed over and over again. Those reasons haven’t changed.
Stanford had an attendance of (maybe) 1,000 spectators versus ASU this past year. Here it is after the end of the first quarter:
www.outkick.com
Stanford Draws Nonexistent Crowd As Band Takes Shot At Administration
As Stanford football struggles to remain relevant, nobody is going to its games and the band is taking shots at the administration.
www.outkick.com
Stanford had an attendance of (maybe) 1,000 spectators versus ASU this past year. Here it is after the end of the first quarter:
Stanford Draws Nonexistent Crowd As Band Takes Shot At Administration
As Stanford football struggles to remain relevant, nobody is going to its games and the band is taking shots at the administration.
View attachment 58806
Looks a lot like a UCLA game at the Rose Bowl.