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!

TT instead of KU is a big mistake.

Because CU failed to forge any strong alliances, this is all idle talk. Bohn and the Regents and DiStephano would not demand our participation is contingent upon a swap between TT or OSU in exchange for NU, UU or KU.

We're going to get what we get, so don't pitch a fit.

Guys and gals, we're not driving this bus. And given CU's irrelevance and ineptitude during the past decade, we ought to feel damn grateful to have been offered a seat on this bus in the first place.

My thoughts exactly, Skiddy. We can either take our seat on the bus, or they can give it to someone else and we can be left holding the bag with KSU, ISU and Baylor. Not a position I want CU in, to be sure. But hey, then CSU can finally be a conference game, right?

:puke:
 
according to what was said at Orangebloods yesterday, if OU and OSU split seems more likely that OU goes to the SEC. Whether the Pac wants OSU on its own, dunno?
 
I can justify Tech. They've got a strong plan in place (fully funded) to become a Tier 1 university and AAU member. West Texas is a real growth area, too.

Oklahoma State is hard for me to see. Texas A&M is an awful cultural fit.

I'm hoping that when the dust settles those two teams are in the SEC and the Pac gets KU and Utah instead (maybe UNM as an alternate to the Utes).

It is tough to swallow taking a couple of schools that spend more on football then research (OU/OSU) when we were hoping for a step up in academic prestige and more level playing field for the academic qualifications of recruits.
 
according to what was said at Orangebloods yesterday, if OU and OSU split seems more likely that OU goes to the SEC. Whether the Pac wants OSU on its own, dunno?

That's what I heard, too. I'm kind of in wishful thinking mode. The SEC would love to get TAMU and OU. Both of those schools and fanbases see the SEC as a better cultural fit. No way the Pac takes OSU without OU, imo. So I think we'd be looking at UT and CU to bring it to 12. If the politicos in Texas force it, then TTU comes along for the ride and Utah makes 14. It would be hard to justify going to 16 unless there was just so much money tied to a semifinal round in football. Then maybe we're looking at Kansas and New Mexico to round things out. Hmmm...

Pac West: USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Washington State divided into 2 pods
Pac East: Colorado, Texas, Kansas, Texas Tech, Utah, New Mexico, Arizona and Arizona State divided into 2 pods

I'd love that. I just don't see it happening. Texas needs its annual games with Oklahoma and Texas A&M. No way in hell they're going to play a conference schedule with those 2 in the non-conference also, imho.

14 seems the right number in the TAMU-OU to the SEC scenario, though. Two divisions of 7 teams give 3 home/3 away for conference schedule within the division. Then add 1 paired rival you play every year from the other division and 2 more rotating games (play twice in 6 years) among the rest of the other division. That's a 9-game conference slate. UT would have a truly brutal schedule, though, with TAMU and OU stacked on it and I think it may be even less likely they'd go for this.
 
A blog on ESPN says tough **** for KU - Conference expansion won't care about hoops.
http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebask...60/conference-expansion-wont-care-about-hoops

It could be mere rumor. It could be completely true. That's not really the point I'm interested in.

I am, however, interested in this:
The issue no one seems to be commenting on here is how little anyone regards basketball in this decision. [...] I'm not mad about it. I get it. Basketball is always going to play second fiddle to football, no matter the level of the game. That's just how it is. Forget baseball, these days football is america's past time. I love it too.

Its just depressing to realize that something that I -- and countless others around the country -- care about so passionately is actually nothing more than an afterthought to the people that make decisions.​
That's Ballin' Is A Habit's Rob Dauster lamenting the notion that the Pac-10 and Big 12 would move in such an obviously football-heavy way when considering expansion. If the rumored Pac-10 southern raid worked out, the Big 12 -- or Big 6, or whatever -- would be left with Kansas, Kansas State, Baylor, Missouri, Nebraska and Iowa State. Missouri and Nebraska have been mentioned often in Big 10 expansion talks, too, so this might even be the Big 4. Either way, it's obvious that basketball isn't the concern here. Football is. And if a historical marquee program like Kansas' manages to get lost in the fray, so be it.

Lame, right? Lame. But it's worth reminding folks that this is the attitude conferences are going to take. College basketball barely registers on the list of major conferences' expansion concerns. It just doesn't matter.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top