Agree with OP, CSU doesn't appear to be a good fit for any BCS conference, but then the Big XII is crazy and I have no idea what they might do. I realize the rivalry discussion here has been covered a few times (each week), and is tiring to some. but it's interesting to me.
'Nik's logic around the Cornhuskers as a rival is pretty solid. The fact that so many of you passionately don't want to renew the rivalry is actually evidence in support of his point. My thinking goes like this -- qualities desired in a "rival" are:
1. has a national reputation as a 'football' school
2. member of a BCS conference (which brings a degree of credibility in all sports) with a BCS athletic budget
3. road-trippable for fans and students (that road-trip limit was ~6 hours out East but I think my criteria have changed; anything < 10 hours is a now road trip this far West)
Those criteria limits CU's options to (correct me if I missed someone): Nebraska, Kansas, K-State, Oklahoma, and Texas Tech. I just have to believe that NU is more attractive than the others from any point of view except basketball.
Now, add a requirement of "the other school wants to build a rivalry with us". Now, this is an interesting question and I haven't followed those schools like you guys have.
Another criteria that I'd like to add is "co-location of student-candidate and alumni bases" -- for example, VT/UVA and Wisconsin/Minnesotta both pull students from the same high schools and both have grads who end up working in the same companies or living in the same metro areas. I'm not sure if there's another BCS school nearby that would share a high percentage of either with CU (further argument to support the CSU rivalry).
Waive point #2 and BYU could be added and this idea bears some thought. BYU has many of the qualities of a BCS school and is always part of expansion discussions. First, BYU went out on a limb with their independent status and is probably open to the idea of fostering long term rivalries more than the other schools I listed. Closer road trip than most. In terms of being a "big time" athletic school, despite the lack of BCS affiliation, they are there in terms of budget and national perception. If the series could be timed for UU off-years it could be perfect. My perception could be wrong here, but UU and BYU don't seem to share the same type of rivalry as most in-state schools and their respective fan bases seem to have more overlap -- it wouldn't surprise me if a BYU/CU rivalry also enhanced the CU/UU rivalry (especially if home games were in off years). Lastly, the idea of fostering a stereotype rivalry between future LDS missionaries and piss-balloon throwing dirty hippies is a fun thought experiment. Although, when I do think of BYU players, I like to imagine they're all like Jim McMahon. I do understand that tailgating at BYU might not the day-long drunken orgy that Buffs are used to.
Won't speak for anyone else, but I 100% agree with Skiddy's comments about the importance of games at rival campuses to my evolution as a college football fan. Dead fucjking on and very well put. Nothing better than watching your school complete a comeback on enemy turf and feel the emotions drain out of the home crowd.
I think the CSU rivalry should be nurtured. From what I understand of the legislative influences, the match-up isn't going away (not that I think it should). Having two legitimate football schools in the state boosts both (1) perception would change to where people didn't automatically assume CU got all the top in-state recruits and had to actually work for them (2) enhances the state as being a "college football state" which theoretically leads to increased retention of in-state athletes. Slider's comments about best outcome for CSU being in a conference with P5 leftovers seem legit to me, but academically the Rams are still below most of those schools. As expressed in other threads, and by Skiddy, the RMS need to be on the campuses.
