Colorado to the Big 12 - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Colorado to the Big 12 (/thread-24302.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Colorado to the Big 12 (/thread-24302.html)
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - 2006alum - 07-27-2023
Sidestepping the key issues ("WTF Pac-12/10/9/X?," "Where does Stanford go from here?," "Who's next?"), has anyone else noticed how little anyone actually seems to care about Colorado moving to the Big 12 in and of itself? The story dropped off the front page of ESPN within hours, and it seems like all anyone cares about is what this means for future realignment moves / potential demise of the Pac-X. Had the move been made in other circumstances, I'm not sure I would have cared much at all. It's kind of remarkable how poorly Colorado's AD has performed, especially given the paucity of sports it participates in. I can't say I'm sad to see them go, but obviously it bodes extremely poorly for the road ahead.
And Brett Yormark deserves all those absurd bonuses Larry Scott paid himself. He's the one Conference Commissioner who actually deserves a fat paycheck, because he truly has outwitted, outsmarted, and outlasted the Pac-12. *Sigh*
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - OutsiderFan - 07-28-2023
I'm usually the devil's advocate guy who throws out ideas against the prevailing tide, so let's try another one...
At this point, based on contracts being signed, Kliavkoff has done absolutely the middle of a donut while those in his world have signed many contracts that impact his conference. So if you are to judge him on contracts he's signed, he's failing miserably. Now the devil's advocacy...
GK said last week that everything is fine and the Pac will land a very good media rights deal. If it is true that SDSU is actually more valuable than Colorado, and the Arizonas stay put, it is possible the conference isn't as dead as so many people are convinced is the case, because maybe he's right?
if he is, Colorado bolting is a tempest in a teapot.
This is the statement the Pac put out after Colorado left:
Quote:The Pac-12 is comprised of world-leading universities and athletic programs who share a commitment to developing the next generation of leaders, supporting student-athletes’ academic and athletic excellence, and broad-based athletic success. We remain committed to our shared values and to continuing to invest in our student-athletes. Today’s decision by the University of Colorado has done nothing to disrupt that commitment.
We are focused on concluding our media rights deal and securing our continued success and growth. Immediately following the conclusion of our media rights deal, we will embrace expansion opportunities and bring new fans, markets, excitement and value to the Pac-12.
The first paragraph is boilerplate pablum. The second contains some interesting breadcrumbs. To me, "new markets" means SDSU and SMU, but could be more.
I'd still rather see Cal, Oregon, Stanford, and Washington in the Big Ten, but whatever...
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - StanfordMatt - 07-28-2023
(07-26-2023, 05:07 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Stanford, Cal, Oregon, and Washington need a Big Ten invite. USC and UCLA will want them to cut down on travel.
The Big Ten may add PAC-12 teams eventually but it won't be because USC and UCLA want them. The Trojans and Bruins have lobbied the conference to have exclusivity as far as a West Coast presence within the Big Ten.
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - 82lsju - 07-28-2023
(07-28-2023, 07:36 AM)StanfordMatt Wrote:(07-26-2023, 05:07 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Stanford, Cal, Oregon, and Washington need a Big Ten invite. USC and UCLA will want them to cut down on travel.
The Big Ten may add PAC-12 teams eventually but it won't be because USC and UCLA want them. The Trojans and Bruins have lobbied the conference to have exclusivity as far as a West Coast presence within the Big Ten.
they might change their tune if they get a conference schedule that alternates home and away games that requires them to make four long trips in a season with all the away games starting at noon ET....
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - needle - 07-28-2023
Colorado is a big loss that really, really hurts the conference. Consider:
1.) The Deion effect is real and already quantifiable. This past spring, more than 40k showed up to watch the Buffs spring game: https://coloradobuffaloeswire.usatoday.com/lists/colorado-footballs-spring-game-attendance-ranks-nation/
2.) Though underutilized, having teams in the Mountain time zone offered some beneficial scheduling flexibility.
3.) The Denver media market is large (17th) and slowly but steadily growing. Only one conference team delivers that market, and soon that team is in the Big 12.
San Diego State is a nice school/program. I would very much like to see it added to the conference. But it would not be better than having Colorado.
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - TriangleTree - 07-28-2023
(07-28-2023, 07:36 AM)StanfordMatt Wrote:(07-26-2023, 05:07 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Stanford, Cal, Oregon, and Washington need a Big Ten invite. USC and UCLA will want them to cut down on travel.
The Big Ten may add PAC-12 teams eventually but it won't be because USC and UCLA want them. The Trojans and Bruins have lobbied the conference to have exclusivity as far as a West Coast presence within the Big Ten.
Then they’re idiots
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - PVTree - 07-28-2023
Some potential expansion schools I'd like the PACxx to explore:
-SDSU (SoCal Market)
-UNLV (Entertainment Capital and loading up with pro teams)
-Rice (good academics and large market city)
-SMU (large market city)
-UTEP (in Texas)
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - Mick - 07-28-2023
(07-28-2023, 01:48 PM)PVTree Wrote: Some potential expansion schools I'd like the PACxx to explore:
-SDSU (SoCal Market)
-UNLV (Entertainment Capital and loading up with pro teams)
-Rice (good academics and large market city)
-SMU (large market city)
-UTEP (in Texas)
While we're on that topic, why don't we poach Vandy from the SEC? Great academics (4.8%), perennial dormat in SEC country. And let's add Northwestern. Maybe Duke and Michigan. We'll call it the COPALDEWEAR (Conference of Players Aware that Life Doesn't End At Retirement).
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - oman - 07-28-2023
(07-28-2023, 01:48 PM)PVTree Wrote: -SDSU (SoCal Market)
-UNLV (Entertainment Capital and loading up with pro teams)
-Rice (good academics and large market city)
-SMU (large market city)
-UTEP (in Texas)
Switch UTEP and UTSA and you have the trifecta of the large Texas cities.
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - 81alum - 07-28-2023
Colorado is a serial conference changer and should never have been in the Pac-12. If the conference collapses because of their exit, then the conference deserves to die. The loss of USC and UCLA after more than a century in the same league as Stanford is what counts, not the exit of an on-again off-again team located 1500 miles away.
I will save my hate for the SoCal schools and the inept Pac12 leadership. As for Colorado, good riddance.
By the way, I have not seen a mention of Boise State. Idaho is the 2nd fastest growing state in the nation, and BSU is its only serious Div I team. And Boise is a heckuva lot closer than Boulder.
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - chrisk - 07-28-2023
(07-28-2023, 08:26 AM)82lsju Wrote:(07-28-2023, 07:36 AM)StanfordMatt Wrote:(07-26-2023, 05:07 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Stanford, Cal, Oregon, and Washington need a Big Ten invite. USC and UCLA will want them to cut down on travel.
The Big Ten may add PAC-12 teams eventually but it won't be because USC and UCLA want them. The Trojans and Bruins have lobbied the conference to have exclusivity as far as a West Coast presence within the Big Ten.
they might change their tune if they get a conference schedule that alternates home and away games that requires them to make four long trips in a season with all the away games starting at noon ET....
The existing Big 10 teams are not going to want to give up playing USC and UCLA as often as possible in the near future. Most schools will be playing USC and UCLA in alternate years so they will typically have a game in LA every other year.
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - Softball Fan - 07-28-2023
Article written today. Speculation seems to be in line with many of the posts in this thread.
https://www.cbssports.com/college-football/news/pac-12-expansion-candidates-san-diego-state-smu-among-targets-to-stabilize-league-after-colorado-exit/
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - Canalejas - 07-28-2023
I guess I’m that stereotypical Stanford snobby fan that other fan bases imagine. I didn’t want the CSU campuses in the conference. But I’d much rather add one or all of them now than even think about Boise.
Hell, I’d rather call up UC Davis from the FCS ranks than add Boise. Are you kidding me? Boise?
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - 82lsju - 07-28-2023
(07-28-2023, 04:43 PM)chrisk Wrote:(07-28-2023, 08:26 AM)82lsju Wrote:(07-28-2023, 07:36 AM)StanfordMatt Wrote:(07-26-2023, 05:07 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Stanford, Cal, Oregon, and Washington need a Big Ten invite. USC and UCLA will want them to cut down on travel.
The Big Ten may add PAC-12 teams eventually but it won't be because USC and UCLA want them. The Trojans and Bruins have lobbied the conference to have exclusivity as far as a West Coast presence within the Big Ten.
they might change their tune if they get a conference schedule that alternates home and away games that requires them to make four long trips in a season with all the away games starting at noon ET....
The existing Big 10 teams are not going to want to give up playing USC and UCLA as often as possible in the near future. Most schools will be playing USC and UCLA in alternate years so they will typically have a game in LA every other year.
yes, Big 10 will get 8 trips a year to LA (4 to each of USC and UCLA) and like to keep those, although we'll see how many are thrilled with 7pm or 8pm PT kick-offs which some of the games will get, but that was not my point
my unclear point was USC and UCLA might be more interested in more west coast teams if their conference schedule was something like
home game
@Rutgers
home game
@UM
home game
@Minnesota
home game
@Nebraska
USC/UCLA game
which would require four midwest/east coast road trips a year (and 5 every other year if USC continues to play ND), if they had back-to-back road games they could spend the week between games in Big 10 country like some NFL teams do when they have consecutive games in the east to reduce total travel.
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - 81alum - 07-28-2023
(07-28-2023, 05:54 PM)Canalejas Wrote: I guess I’m that stereotypical Stanford snobby fan that other fan bases imagine. I didn’t want the CSU campuses in the conference. But I’d much rather add one or all of them now than even think about Boise.I have my own reasons for not liking Boise (blue field and serious academic concerns), but it seems logical in a kind of mercenary way. I grew up near Boise, and I could barely recognize the place last time I returned--its population has tripled--so I anticipate a growing market there. In general, Boise and its university is a lot like Fresno--those two universities have monopolies on sports in their areas and thus have devoted fans--no competition from other Div I teams or pro teams. Boise sells out their stadium every game--though it seats just 35k.
Hell, I’d rather call up UC Davis from the FCS ranks than add Boise. Are you kidding me? Boise?
I do wonder why San Diego gets more attention than Fresno. Both Boise and Fresno draw more fans than San Diego. I suppose the TV market for San Diego is more lucrative, but that market has a lot more competition for eyes than Boise or Fresno.
I believe the University of Idaho was in the original PCC with us for many decades--Montana also. They were gone before my time, and don't seem a fit today if the object is revenue.
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - BayAreaCardinal - 07-29-2023
^Yes, nowadays it is all about revenue and TV contracts.
Losing Colorado really does hurt. If one of the Arizona schools leaves for the B12 also, it could really put a hurt on the conference...
Hieronymus - Hieronymus - 07-30-2023
I end up with 4 interrelated thoughts here:
1. It seems dangerous to me for the big 10 to sit back and wait on Oregon and UW. They maybe are premium brands now, but will they still be in 4 yrs if the PAC continues to diminish? Heck is UW really a premium brand even today?
2. Figure this all condenses to 40-48 teams. When all is done say roughly 70 schools will end up in a Power Five conference at some point. There are going to be a lot of losers in the end.
3. Do the SEC and Big 10 start purging weaker members at some point? Does Northwestern really make it to the end versus say North Carolina? Seems unlikely to me, but the mechanism to purge right now isn’t evident. I expect that when enough money is on the line though, one will get invented.
4. In the end do NCAA sports become a regional thing just in the Midwest and the South and if so how much does that reduce the money pot? Do the survivors really win in the end or do they end up with a greatly diminished pie albeit split with fewer parties?
Not sure how much I want Stanford to play this game anymore. It is going to get a whole lot uglier soon.
RE: Hieronymus - 82lsju - 07-30-2023
(07-30-2023, 12:26 AM)Hieronymus Wrote: I end up with 4 interrelated thoughts here:
1. It seems dangerous to me for the big 10 to sit back and wait on Oregon and UW. They maybe are premium brands now, but will they still be in 4 yrs if the PAC continues to diminish? Heck is UW really a premium brand even today?
2. Figure this all condenses to 40-48 teams. When all is done say roughly 70 schools will end up in a Power Five conference at some point. There are going to be a lot of losers in the end.
3. Do the SEC and Big 10 start purging weaker members at some point? Does Northwestern really make it to the end versus say North Carolina? Seems unlikely to me, but the mechanism to purge right now isn’t evident. I expect that when enough money is on the line though, one will get invented.
4. In the end do NCAA sports become a regional thing just in the Midwest and the South and if so how much does that reduce the money pot? Do the survivors really win in the end or do they end up with a greatly diminished pie albeit split with fewer parties?
Not sure how much I want Stanford to play this game anymore. It is going to get a whole lot uglier soon.
on #3, I have a hard time seeing schools getting booted out of a conference, has that ever happened? US sports seem willing to tolerate poor teams in conferences/leagues. To make it interesting they should have a promotion/relegation process...
Hieronymus - Hieronymus - 07-30-2023
(07-30-2023, 07:44 AM)82lsju Wrote:(07-30-2023, 12:26 AM)Hieronymus Wrote: I end up with 4 interrelated thoughts here:
1. It seems dangerous to me for the big 10 to sit back and wait on Oregon and UW. They maybe are premium brands now, but will they still be in 4 yrs if the PAC continues to diminish? Heck is UW really a premium brand even today?
2. Figure this all condenses to 40-48 teams. When all is done say roughly 70 schools will end up in a Power Five conference at some point. There are going to be a lot of losers in the end.
3. Do the SEC and Big 10 start purging weaker members at some point? Does Northwestern really make it to the end versus say North Carolina? Seems unlikely to me, but the mechanism to purge right now isn’t evident. I expect that when enough money is on the line though, one will get invented.
4. In the end do NCAA sports become a regional thing just in the Midwest and the South and if so how much does that reduce the money pot? Do the survivors really win in the end or do they end up with a greatly diminished pie albeit split with fewer parties?
Not sure how much I want Stanford to play this game anymore. It is going to get a whole lot uglier soon.
on #3, I have a hard time seeing schools getting booted out of a conference, has that ever happened? US sports seem willing to tolerate poor teams in conferences/leagues. To make it interesting they should have a promotion/relegation process...
Here is the thought experiment. Right now the Big 10 and SEC are set to have 32 teams combined shortly. Let us be a little harsh here and say we end at 42 teams. So we have spots for only 10 more.
Let’s say something like Notre Dame, Clemson, Oregon, UW, Arizona, Florida St, BYU, Baylor, Oklahoma St, and Kansas. This is a very arbitrary list using some mix of academics, geography and football/basketball strength. But that is 10 so that is every school that survives in this thought experiment.
I will exclude likely no-hopers like Wash St, Oregon St, and Wake Forrest; but that still leaves 20-25 potential schools out: Stanford, Cal, Colorado, Utah, Fresno St, SDST, UNC, NC St, Syracuse, Miami, Virginia, Iowa St, SMU, WVU, Virginia Tech, Houston, TCU, Texas Tech, Cincinnati, BC, Louisville, Pitt and Duke. Given this list do you think Rutgers, Vandy, maybe Purdue, and maybe one of MS St/ Ole Miss make the final cut? In a world where cash is king, my gut says no. Even having 48 schools survive in the end doesn’t change the basic analysis much. Doesn’t mean I am right though.
RE: Colorado to the Big 12 - msqueri - 07-30-2023
I think it may end up being survival of the fittest but just as (if not more) likely to be self-selection as it is to be conferences picking who to exclude. If schools want to play ball in the super conference game they will but some of those fringe teams you mention may not be viable economically, values-wise (depending on what the model ultimately looks like, etc.). I also think the sorting could end at 48 or 50 something or 64 rather than 42, and it could take a few decades to settle. Ultimately I think it may be more about hierarchy and commitment to major college sports than about the old considerations of how/why to constitute a conference.
Regarding Big 10 calculus regarding Oregon and Washington, uncertainty about the quality and/or longevity of their brands may be exactly why the Big 10 isn’t in a hurry. The smart thing is to wait for Notre Dame and go from there.