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!

Pac-10 to invite 6 Big 12 schools

I dont doubt that happened at all but I wish the PAC would have told them to pound sand and went after UTah instead. I just don't want CU to be permanently involved with Texas or anywhere east of the Rockies. Besides, I just dont see any of these schools other than CU be a cultural fit for the PAC. This sucks, but is slightly better than the crap we have now.

Actually competitively its worse if we continue to be indifferent to athletics.. We can flounder and not give a **** in the North because there isn't a big time power in football other than Nebraska and we can tread water with 3 to 6 wins a year.. Those 5 Big 12 South schools where we will be included with all CARE A LOT to be good in football.. If we don't get our act together, we'll be what Baylor was in the beginning of the Big 12 in this new conference.. We'll have more money to pocket though..
 
I dont doubt that happened at all but I wish the PAC would have told them to pound sand and went after UTah instead. I just don't want CU to be permanently involved with Texas or anywhere east of the Rockies. Besides, I just dont see any of these schools other than CU be a cultural fit for the PAC. This sucks, but is slightly better than the crap we have now.

Telling Texas to go pound sand when they alone coming to the conference might add 6-8 million more per year, per team is just not a prudent thing to do.

If Washington had that extra 10-20 million last year..maybe it wouldn't have had to cut its swim team.
 
One of the more intriguing aspects of the 16Pax is Colorado's central location.
CU is half-way between travel adverse Aggie those other pesky B12S teams and the 4 schools in the Pacific NW.

This geographic dimension puts the Pepsi Center and Potts Field as the go-to venue for the "meet in the middle" crowd.

It would be nice to host a few big-time conference basketball, volleyball, track, and even baseball tournements in Denver. Bonus!
 
Telling Texas to go pound sand when they alone coming to the conference might add 6-8 million more per year, per team is just not a prudent thing to do.

If Washington had that extra 10-20 million last year..maybe it wouldn't have had to cut its swim team.

Timbuff isn't the kind of chap who'd let $100M over five years get in the way of his feelings.
 
Does it take a 75% vote to get those fees waived? If so, I can't imagine any amount of arm twisting, short of threatening to lock a University President's daughter in a room with BCS for a weekend, that would get any school to vote to walk away from a couple years worth of conference revenue of 8 programs, to be split 4 ways. Our best bet would be that some conference wants KU for their hoops program (not all that hard to imagine) and KU would be the 9th escapee and 9th vote to waive the exit penalty...

The NCAA has a rule that if 50% of the Conference membership resigns from the conference, then that conference is considered to have disbanded.

I don't think any vote on waiving the fee is required if 6 teams leave the Big 12. If Missouri, Nebraska, and Kansas also leave then there is no question that the Big 12 would cease to exist as an NCAA sanctioned athletic conference.

In that same instance, IIRC, each basketball program is then allowed to carry their tourney credits over to their new conference as well. This is not the case normally when a school leaves a conference, the former conference would retain the credits earned up to that point.

The Pac-10 knows this, of course, and I think that is why the invite went out to the 6. Asking A&M to join means they make it easier for Texas to accept the invite and that A&M will see the writing on the wall and start talking up the SEC. I don't think they really want A&M, but they want to show them the conference is dying so they also leave. Once the Big 12's death is inevitable, then Kansas politicions will scramble to get their flagship school into either the Big Ten or Pac and realize that Kansas State's best option is the MWC or some new conference formed in the ashes of the Big 12 and with the Conference USA western schools.
 
yeah the SEC.. Tenn, Bama, LSU, UF and Auburn got screwed out of one..


It has some positives but the travel and the distance is going to a problem..


Not a huge fan of the Pac 10 so I'm still on the fence and holding out hope for the Big 12 to stay intact..

:nod: :iagree:
 
I forgot to add that I would also MUCH prefer Utah over TT. But I'm afraid Texas might be demanding TT come along. If you notice ALL the other schools have another school close by them for a natural rival. CU would have...TT???!?!? That is the one thing I don't like about this. If the PAC invited Utah instead of Tech, that would make this just about perfect.

Dan Hawkins is 2-0 against Tech. I like those odds.
 
Perhaps, but the TT and OSU invites are a real head scratcher. They don't bring any TV sets, and don't bring any athletic prestige, either. It could be that UT demanded TT come along and OU did the same for OSU. Still, all this talk about "academic integrity" just got thrown out the window with these invites. There's so much about this that doesn't make sense to me.

OSU and TT are passengers, not drivers. There's no doubt about that. Both schools have a few things in common. Both of those middle of nowhere programs have visionary state politicos who are strong advocates for the entirety of their state higher ed institutions. Both of those programs have had major stadium innovations funded by big time donors. The energy around the athletic departments in both places have allowed these programs to hang out in the top 25, and place a few big time play makers into the NFL.

One can only wonder what might have been possible if Colorado lawmakers and University administrators banded together CU, CSU and AFA into a more cohesive, tight nit package deal. But such organization is culturally impossible for whatever reason. This lack of common bond in Colorado is one of the reasons the TT and OSU of the world are allowed to live another day.
 
Imagine what we could do with an extra $12 million a year. We can build a new basketball practice facility EVERY single year.
 
Imagine what we could do with an extra $12 million a year. We can build a new basketball practice facility EVERY single year.

We could fire our slack-ass good for nothing incompetent head football coach and not bat an eye.

In all seriousness, it would help with facilities - a lot. I would imagine that Bohn is already drawing up plans. He's said that football facilities are next on the list of improvements, so it could be interesting to see what comes from all this. Stadium expansion? New fieldhouse? Once they get their act together with regards to football facilities, I think they start to bring back some sports. Whoever we get to replace Hawkins will be pretty well paid, too.
 
Imagine what we could do with an extra $12 million a year. We can build a new basketball practice facility EVERY single year.

Maybe during our next coaching search we could actually consider people with talent. And the fact that hiring them would require $3mil a year would not be a roadblock.
 
We could fire our slack-ass good for nothing incompetent head football coach and not bat an eye.

In all seriousness, it would help with facilities - a lot. I would imagine that Bohn is already drawing up plans. He's said that football facilities are next on the list of improvements, so it could be interesting to see what comes from all this. Stadium expansion? New fieldhouse? Once they get their act together with regards to football facilities, I think they start to bring back some sports. Whoever we get to replace Hawkins will be pretty well paid, too.

And once you start reinvesting in the AD through facilities and adding additional sports, you begin to bring in more revenue across the board. As with any business though, it needs to be done intelligently.
 
So here is the $20M question:

How many Buffs fans are going to blow a gasket when our cable and satellite company tells us we have to pay $20/month for the 16-Pac premium channel?

How often will viewers get to watch the Buffs on a basic channel?
 
do you think they will... people in big 10 country get the big10 network in a regular package
 
Last edited:
OSU and TT are passengers, not drivers. There's no doubt about that. Both schools have a few things in common. Both of those middle of nowhere programs have visionary state politicos who are strong advocates for the entirety of their state higher ed institutions. Both of those programs have had major stadium innovations funded by big time donors. The energy around the athletic departments in both places have allowed these programs to hang out in the top 25, and place a few big time play makers into the NFL.

One can only wonder what might have been possible if Colorado lawmakers and University administrators banded together CU, CSU and AFA into a more cohesive, tight nit package deal. But such organization is culturally impossible for whatever reason. This lack of common bond in Colorado is one of the reasons the TT and OSU of the world are allowed to live another day.

AFA???

AFA is a private military academy. Not exactly comparable to TT or OSU. Actually it's comparable to 2 other schoosl. Army and Navy.
 
So here is the $20M question:

How many Buffs fans are going to blow a gasket when our cable and satellite company tells us we have to pay $20/month for the 16-Pac premium channel?

How often will viewers get to watch the Buffs on a basic channel?

The same question was asked when the Big 10 set up their network, and the format has worked out pretty well for them. Some fans will be disappointed, of course, but I doubt many blow a gasket. The vast majority of fans don't see most of the games now anyway without paying for the sports tier on their cable/satellite package. The Pac-16 channel will be added to one of those, much like the Big-10 network. The fans will suck it up, and those that could take it or leave it will continue to go with the flow.

For those that can't pay for it and still want to see the games, there's always the interwebs. Can still find any game you want being streamed as long as it's on TV somewhere.
 
For CU to get a bump up in status, just merge w/ CSU.
Little Bro gets to cheer with, instead of against, the state flagship.
The collective Colorado University approaches big boy size, gets a bump in alumni size and donations. There is and an infusion of fans into the stadium. A pooled AD allows for the collective school to consider baseball, gymnastics, swimming, and allows for a bigger budget for coaching salaries.

This is how CU might raise itself from a pretender to a contender in the 16Pac.

Sell off all the crappy CSU departments to Devry of UNC to keep up some semblence of academic integrity.

Badabing. Badaboom.

You would do anything to get our football coach wouldn't you Skidmark. :smile2:
 
So here is the $20M question:

How many Buffs fans are going to blow a gasket when our cable and satellite company tells us we have to pay $20/month for the 16-Pac premium channel?

How often will viewers get to watch the Buffs on a basic channel?

Why would it be 20$ a month? I pay 5$ a month to get 10 channels, which includes the BTN.
 
AFA???

AFA is a private military academy. Not exactly comparable to TT or OSU. Actually it's comparable to 2 other schoosl. Army and Navy.

This is a fact. It's also a fact that AFA and CU might as well be on different planets ever since the Vietnam War.

I think it's a shame that AFA and CU have burried the relationship for all these years. Here we have two D1 schools that are sepparated by less than 90 miles who ignore and schedule around eachother.

All of us are feeling jerked around by TTU being CU's defacto rival because of Texas politics.

In my view, there are two parts in this equation. 1) Texas politics are too strong; and 2) Colorado politics are too weak.

In Texas, Oklahoma and Kansas, the in-state schools HATE each other, just like CU-CSU. But when it comes to conference building, only Colorado lacks the political will to force any bundling. In turn, CO gets paired with a single child like Nebraska, or gets forced into bizzaro world rivalries like Tech.

I'm aware that AFA is a service academy, and that there is no state mandate for AFA and CU to play together in the same sandbox. But the logistics of an AFA/CU bond just makes too much sense. It would be great if CU and AFA had displayed the human capacity to work together to force a package deal. AFA is a great fit for the Pac16 culturally, due to the strong military presense throughout the region and across the nation. AFA-CU makes a natural geographic pair.

But both CU and AFA hang around back to back with our dicks in our hands. And we are bitching about Texas, who actually knows how to play the game to win.
 
I wonder if the reason Tech is included instead of Utah is to ensure their vote in favor of waiving any exit penalties for the teams leaving the Big XII...

EDIT: Or after reading Scotty's post above, to ensure that enough teams leave the Big XII for it to officially be considered disbanded...
 
Skid, I'd love to see us schedule AFA. I grew up on AFA football and I'm enamored with the pageantry that surrounds the Academy. One of the best places in the country to see a college game.

The two schools just have two totally different goals at the end of the day and are so night and day different. We would never replace Army or Navy as a primary rival.
 
You would do anything to get our football coach wouldn't you Skidmark. :smile2:

It's not so much getting yours, but getting rid of ours. We can do 3-9 by ourselves already, thank you very much.
 
You would do anything to get our football coach wouldn't you Skidmark. :smile2:

Don't let it go to your head. At this point, we'd do almost anything to get just about anybody's football coach.... :sad1:

Imagine what we could do with an extra $12 million a year. We can build a new basketball practice facility EVERY single year.

FF_154569_xl.jpg


41-06-41-06782-F.jpg
 
Back
Top