What's new
By:
  • Prime Time. Prime Time. It's 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!
  • After multiple requests and discussion, Twitter/X links will again be allowed on the board. Be mindful of the content you choose to post. Inflammatory, misinformation, or any content that violates the ToS will be removed. Repeated offenses may result in temporary suspensions. If you would like to still have Twitter/X links hidden from your feed, send a PM to Bread. Any other questions can be discussed in the customer service/support forum. Examples of hide tweet options shown here: https://allbuffs.com/threads/twitter-x-ban.161161/post-3915936

Living up north

sackman said:
Why Nebraska? Why not Indiana, or Michigan State, or Purdue, or Minnesota? All are in places that would provide us better exposure. The idea of a series with NU alternating between Lincoln and Denver is appalling to me. Why give up the home date? That's just nuts. With CSU, we're gaining a home date, not giving one up.
Click to expand...

Because of my general distaste for Nebraska and my desire to beat them every year. I just don't have that passion for CSU.
 
BuffsNYC said:
CU will get $2 million for playing at Ohio State if it happens. That's double what CU makes at Invesco. According to your reasoning, CU can't afford not to play games like that. Perhaps CU should replace the CSU game with one shot away deals at big stadiums. Don't kid yourself, those programs are dying to get home games against beatable BCS conference teams, especially if they don't have to travel to Boulder in exchange.

The fact of the matter is that CU, by being locked into the CSU game every year, loses some opportunities. This will be even more bothersome if there are 9 conference games in the PAC 12, leaving only 3 non-conference games. Every game against CSU means one less chance to play in the Eastern or Central time zones (games I could attend), every game where CSU is the home team will be on the mtn. and unseen nationally. None of that is worth the $$, especially when opportunities exist to make more money and gain more recognition by playing at a top 20 program.
Click to expand...

You're making the assumption that CU could easily line up those kinds of games. Remember that the majority of conferences now are at 12 teams. That means most will have only three non conference games per year. Schedules have to be set several years in advance. With only three OOC games to play with, CU is probably looking at playing CSU, one BCS school, and one easy home game. We could still play those OSU type games and STILL get the payout from the RMS. We're not going to play two OSUs in one year, though.
 
CUFan said:
Because of my general distaste for Nebraska and my desire to beat them every year. I just don't have that passion for CSU.
Click to expand...

So your distaste for Nebraska is leading you to agree to a series that would heavily favor them, at our expense?

:huh:
 
BuffsNYC said:
CU will get $2 million for playing at Ohio State if it happens. That's double what CU makes at Invesco. According to your reasoning, CU can't afford not to play games like that. Perhaps CU should replace the CSU game with one shot away deals at big stadiums. Don't kid yourself, those programs are dying to get home games against beatable BCS conference teams, especially if they don't have to travel to Boulder in exchange.

The fact of the matter is that CU, by being locked into the CSU game every year, loses some opportunities. This will be even more bothersome if there are 9 conference games in the PAC 12, leaving only 3 non-conference games. Every game against CSU means one less chance to play in the Eastern or Central time zones (games I could attend), every game where CSU is the home team will be on the mtn. and unseen nationally. None of that is worth the $$, especially when opportunities exist to make more money and gain more recognition by playing at a top 20 program.
Click to expand...

I think that is a great point....IF CU could in fact make that scenerio (i.e. Ohio State, etc.) playout every year. However, that is a HUGE assumption. I just don't think those types of programs with access to those types of payouts tend to schedule that way.

Ohio State type programs only schedule 1 possible 2 OOC games against BCS teams. Look at Ohio State's OOC schedule in 2010: Miami, FL (BCS), Marshall, Ohio, Eastern Michigan. 2011: Miami, Fl (BCS), Akron, Toledo, TBA. 2012: California Cincinatti, UAB, Miami (OH).
 
Last edited:
sackman said:
So your distaste for Nebraska is leading you to agree to a series that would heavily favor them, at our expense?

:huh:
Click to expand...

Why exactly would it heavily favor them at our expense? How would it be different than us playing them every year in the Big XII? Wouldn't we only gain? We would be playing a program that cares about their team and invests in it. We would be playing a game that at the very least would be on regional TV. We would gain Midwest, often National, recruiting exposure. If we win (which is a big if against anyone right now) then we beef up our BCS resume. The only thing it seems we lose is we are giving up a home game every other year. If the game was at Invesco, I think CU fans would show up better than (or at the very least equal to) the CSU game. So it equates to a trip to Lincoln every other year. We already do that.

I'll take a CU/NU game over a CU/CSU game any day. Part of being Colorado is that we are not afraid to schedule good out of conference games. Plus if we are talking pure cash, I think it is safe to assume a CU/NU game will generate more than CU/CSU.
 
CUFan said:
Why exactly would it heavily favor them at our expense? How would it be different than us playing them every year in the Big XII? Wouldn't we only gain? We would be playing a program that cares about their team and invests in it. We would be playing a game that at the very least would be on regional TV. We would gain Midwest, often National, recruiting exposure. If we win (which is a big if against anyone right now) then we beef up our BCS resume. The only thing it seems we lose is we are giving up a home game every other year. If the game was at Invesco, I think CU fans would show up better than (or at the very least equal to) the CSU game. So it equates to a trip to Lincoln every other year. We already do that.

I'll take a CU/NU game over a CU/CSU game any day. Part of being Colorado is that we are not afraid to schedule good out of conference games. Plus if we are talking pure cash, I think it is safe to assume a CU/NU game will generate more than CU/CSU.
Click to expand...

It would be different because you're also assuming that Nebraska would be willing to share that cash payout equally. It would not. CU would be forced to make concessions on that end as well to revive any type of series with the Huskers.
 
Last edited:
CsquaredCC said:
It would be different because you're also assuming that Nebraska would be willing to share that cash payout equally. It would not. CU would be forced to make concessions on that end as well to revive any type of series with the Huskers.
Click to expand...

I am not assuming anyone would share cash equally. There is just more money in the pot to divy up. Again, if you are just looking at it from purely a cash perspective, CU would likely end up better (or at the very least equal).

In terms of reviving a rivalry you are correct. This entire discussion is theoretical since we have to play out the CU/CSU contract anyway.
 
CsquaredCC said:
This is such a tired argument. Outside of the financials that equate to nearly $500,000 in additional revenue for CU, revenue that the atheletic dept. has desperately needed over the last 10 years.
Click to expand...
I don't buy Bohn's $500k number, I think he pulled it out of the air to support his argument. CU is allocated 37K seats at Invesco, shares concession revenue with CSU and the city of Denver, who receives the largest share, shares parking revenue with CSU and the city of Denver, who receives the largest share. In Boulder, CU has a 54K seat stadium of which 3k - 5k are allocated to visitors, receives 100% of concessions and 100% of on campus parking. Using these numbers CU would struggle to make more at Invesco even if Folsom were half empty for another non-BCS program. I believe that CU could schedule a 7th home game against just about anyone every year and get the same financial result.
 
CUFan said:
I am not assuming anyone would share cash equally. There is just more money in the pot to divy up. Again, if you are just looking at it from purely a cash perspective, CU would likely end up better (or at the very least equal).

In terms of reviving a rivalry you are correct. This entire discussion is theoretical since we have to play out the CU/CSU contract anyway.
Click to expand...

You're going to have to do this math for me. You're saying that there's more money to be had by playing the fuskers in Denver once every two years than there is in playing CSU in Denver every year.

That's some fuzzy math, there.
 
sackman said:
You're going to have to do this math for me. You're saying that there's more money to be had by playing the fuskers in Denver once every two years than there is in playing CSU in Denver every year.

That's some fuzzy math, there.
Click to expand...

I don't begin to write to you that I have any sort of intimate knowledge of how a potential series would pay out to both schools. However, I can say that there would probably be just as much local interest in a CU/NU game as CU/CSU. And there would obviously be more national interest in such a game. Split the money up however it needs to be, but I can't imagine CU would come out any worse.

Others have written here that us playing CSU at Invesco generates an additional $500k to us every year. I presume that means over and above what a typical home and home with CSU would bring. I would think it is safe to assume that a home and home with NU would generate significantly more cash in total than one with CSU. While I understand the split would not be equal you are splitting from a bigger pie. Seems to me there is probably room to make that work.
 
my only complaint with the CSU game/Invesco is I'd like to see it be the 2nd or 3rd game of the year. too much weird stuff happens in the opener...it's their Super Bowl....and the longterm effects of a CU loss in that one are year-round. and weird stuff is compounded when we stink.

as Recht-fieldish as Hughes may be, if both teams don't turn it around....i'd rather see the campus sites host instead of a half-full Invesco.

on the other hand, i wouldn't miss the game at all in favor of a few years of home-home with AFA.
 
SuperiorBuff said:
I don't buy Bohn's $500k number, I think he pulled it out of the air to support his argument. CU is allocated 37K seats at Invesco, shares concession revenue with CSU and the city of Denver, who receives the largest share, shares parking revenue with CSU and the city of Denver, who receives the largest share. In Boulder, CU has a 54K seat stadium of which 3k - 5k are allocated to visitors, receives 100% of concessions and 100% of on campus parking. Using these numbers CU would struggle to make more at Invesco even if Folsom were half empty for another non-BCS program. I believe that CU could schedule a 7th home game against just about anyone every year and get the same financial result.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the benefit the City of Boulder receives from having home games in Boulder, the benefit the team gets from playing in it's home stadium and having all of it's usual, customary, every day training table, etc...

There are many many many many reasons to play games in Boulder. There is only ONE reason to play a game elsewhere - and that reason is MONEY. If the MONEY is not significantly more than what can be made in Boulder - then the games should be played IN Boulder.
 
sackman said:
You're going to have to do this math for me. You're saying that there's more money to be had by playing the fuskers in Denver once every two years than there is in playing CSU in Denver every year.

That's some fuzzy math, there.
Click to expand...

A game against the huskers would bring a higher TV payout than against CSU.
 
Absent any of the other theoretical crap we have been discussing here, I echo what SuperiorBuff and Lt.Col.FrankSlade just wrote. Keep em in Boulder.
 
Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
Not to mention the benefit the City of Boulder receives from having home games in Boulder, the benefit the team gets from playing in it's home stadium and having all of it's usual, customary, every day training table, etc...

There are many many many many reasons to play games in Boulder. There is only ONE reason to play a game elsewhere - and that reason is MONEY. If the MONEY is not significantly more than what can be made in Boulder - then the games should be played IN Boulder.
Click to expand...

Haven't we already established that CU sees significantly more money by playing CSU at Invesco? (i.e. $5 Million over 10 years.) Seriously, outside of a few people questioning Bohn's numbers....that is not in dispute.
 
Last edited:
Buff_since76 said:
Didn't Fairchild say the same thing last year?
Click to expand...

I think when he said "We suck" didn't mess with what was happening in practice. This time when he said "We suck" it really looked like they sucked. On offense at least though.
 
CSU's offense has a lot of work to do to get ready for the Sept. 4 season-opener against the University of Colorado, coach Steve Fairchild said Saturday after a 2-hour, 45-minute practice at Hughes Stadium that included 47 plays scored as a scrimmage.
The Rams' defense, though, looked pretty solid and won the scrimmage 33-25 under the modified scoring system used by Colorado State University's football team, with points awarded to either the offense or defense on every play.

How do you have a 47 play scrimmage that takes 2:45?
 
I wouldnt put too much stock into what either coaching staff is saying, All I know is CU absolutely has to have this game. A loss just might put a chokehold on this new confidence and swagger our players have.
 
Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
Not to mention the benefit the City of Boulder receives from having home games in Boulder, the benefit the team gets from playing in it's home stadium and having all of it's usual, customary, every day training table, etc...

There are many many many many reasons to play games in Boulder. There is only ONE reason to play a game elsewhere - and that reason is MONEY. If the MONEY is not significantly more than what can be made in Boulder - then the games should be played IN Boulder.
Click to expand...

Unless we're talking about adding a 7th home game to the schedule every year, this argument doesn't hold water. The merchants in Boulder will get six home games a year regardless of whether CU is playing CSU at Invesco or at home. CU/CSU was in Boulder last year and guess what? CU had six home games last year.
 
remember Barney used to have those type of "modified scoring" scrimmages and except for outright gashers....kind of hard to tell one way or the other. if a point is being given for each play, D could conceivably get 2 points for first, second down plays and then give up 10+ for a conversion....until you know how that's scored....impossible to know.

you have 47 plays and 55 total points awarded. with one each play, as stated in the article, hard to know what's going on the remaining 8 plays to deserve multiple "points"....and add 2 TD's in the mix for the QB, how is that scored?
 
BuffLuKe said:
I wouldnt put too much stock into what either coaching staff is saying, All I know is CU absolutely has to have this game. A loss just might put a chokehold on this new confidence and swagger our players have.
Click to expand...

Might? A loss to CSWho again this year would absolutely kill this team's confidence. :huh:
 
CarolinaBuff said:
A game against the huskers would bring a higher TV payout than against CSU.
Click to expand...

This math still doesn't add up. The CSU game is a 7th home game, for all intents and purposes. We get that EVERY YEAR. A home/home with the fuskers would only be every other year, and would have to be in addition to our regular six game home schedule to even approach the same kind of payout.

You can't tell me that playing six games, one of which is at Invesco, can possibly pay more than playing seven games, one of which is at Invesco. That math doesn't add up. Then add to that the fact that we'd only be playing NU every other year in Denver, and this makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.
 
After T+1, I'm done with Nebraska. Adios bugeaters. Not scheduling them is a great way to get the red out.

As an OOS fan, I end up avoiding the CSU-CU game at Invesco.

I much prefer the game day in Boulder. When Invesco was first used at the RMS, it was fun because it was new. Now it's old hat. Same ol' same ol'. The CSU game is for the local yokels and is just not attractive compared to other options, like roadies at West Virginia or Cal or Hawaii or tOSU.

I'd jump at any chance to CU play at AFA. I'd even get excited about a game at Hughes, since it's been over 20 years since the Buffs played there.

But Invesco vs CSU? Yawn.
 
Skidmark said:
After T+1, I'm done with Nebraska. Adios bugeaters. Not scheduling them is a great way to get the red out.

As an OOS fan, I end up avoiding the CSU-CU game at Invesco.

I much prefer the game day in Boulder. When Invesco was first used at the RMS, it was fun because it was new. Now it's old hat. Same ol' same ol'. The CSU game is for the local yokels and is just not attractive compared to other options, like roadies at West Virginia or Cal or Hawaii or tOSU.

I'd jump at any chance to CU play at AFA. I'd even get excited about a game at Hughes, since it's been over 20 years since the Buffs played there.

But Invesco vs CSU? Yawn.
Click to expand...

We played at Hughes in in '96 or '97
 
sackman said:
Unless we're talking about adding a 7th home game to the schedule every year, this argument doesn't hold water. The merchants in Boulder will get six home games a year regardless of whether CU is playing CSU at Invesco or at home. CU/CSU was in Boulder last year and guess what? CU had six home games last year.
Click to expand...



7 is better than 6, is it not?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top