LIB,MR BEARS said:
Do they make another big push for schools that will bring viewers and dollars or, is everyone that fits that description already locked into a long-term contract?
When Colorado joined, the PAC was in a position of power, with a lucrative new TV deal. That was really the PAC's one chance at stealing OU, UT or the like and they whiffed. Honestly I think there's a better chance that part of the PAC would join the Big XII at this stage (but that said, I'm talking 0.01% chance).gobears20 said:
But I thought Colorado was going to turn everything around lol
It's still a good conference for baseball, swimming, volleyball and cornhole.GRIZZLY79ER said:
Its cultural...CFB isnt a priority except among a sliver of population out West...and it is losing interest fast. I think there is a chance that some PAC12 members drop out of P5 football altogether at some point. Cal being the lead there and perhaps CU close behind. Oregon State and Washington State may want to keep going but may just simply not be able to afford it.
GRIZZLY79ER said:
Its cultural...CFB isnt a priority except among a sliver of population out West...and it is losing interest fast. I think there is a chance that some PAC12 members drop out of P5 football altogether at some point. Cal being the lead there and perhaps CU close behind. Oregon State and Washington State may want to keep going but may just simply not be able to afford it.
GRIZZLY79ER said:
Its cultural...CFB isnt a priority except among a sliver of population out West...and it is losing interest fast. I think there is a chance that some PAC12 members drop out of P5 football altogether at some point. Cal being the lead there and perhaps CU close behind. Oregon State and Washington State may want to keep going but may just simply not be able to afford it.
Aliceinbubbleland said:
LTbear,
Not sure this link will work if you don't have a subscription but it's worth a try. CU may be closer than anyone other than Cal to put a fork in football.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/18/sports/colorado-football.html
Aliceinbubbleland said:
LTbear,
Not sure this link will work if you don't have a subscription but it's worth a try. CU may be closer than anyone other than Cal to put a fork in football.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/18/sports/colorado-football.html
GRIZZLY79ER said:Aliceinbubbleland said:
LTbear,
Not sure this link will work if you don't have a subscription but it's worth a try. CU may be closer than anyone other than Cal to put a fork in football.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/18/sports/colorado-football.html
Yep...
Mostly true but the Big XII isn't really as secure as the ACC right now, simply because the ACC has their rights locked up for so long with ESPN. The Big XII's TV right expiring within a few years naturally makes it more vulnerable.Redbrickbear said:
Honestly New England and the West coast are becoming lost to college football.
And yes yes I know USC and Oregon....and blah blah blah.
I'm talking long term fan interest, students caring passionately about football, fans willing to pay growing ticket prices, actual butts in seats, university officials willing to keep forking out big bucks to the programs, etc
College football's future is in the Midwest, Dixie, and the Texas-Oklahoma corridor.
The Big 12 is better positioned to ride the coming storm of disruption in college football than the PAC or ACC.
Provided the Big 12 can stick together, stay on the same page, and get some decent leadership.
Ok well whatever you do, do not mention their names or our Regents will try to recruit them to our board.LTbear said:Aliceinbubbleland said:
LTbear,
Not sure this link will work if you don't have a subscription but it's worth a try. CU may be closer than anyone other than Cal to put a fork in football.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/18/sports/colorado-football.html
We (CU alumni) have all read the articles. CU isn't close. There are two regents who have long been known to express anti-football sentiment, and one of the two actually loves football but is a young gun who uses hot issue talking points to make a name for himself. They're rare exceptions, not the norm. The administration, faculty, and alumni overwhelmingly support the Buffs, and the huge donation spike the university received after their recent 10-win year didn't hurt either.
Good call.PartyBear said:Ok well whatever you do, do not mention their names or our Regents will try to recruit them to our board.LTbear said:Aliceinbubbleland said:
LTbear,
Not sure this link will work if you don't have a subscription but it's worth a try. CU may be closer than anyone other than Cal to put a fork in football.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/18/sports/colorado-football.html
We (CU alumni) have all read the articles. CU isn't close. There are two regents who have long been known to express anti-football sentiment, and one of the two actually loves football but is a young gun who uses hot issue talking points to make a name for himself. They're rare exceptions, not the norm. The administration, faculty, and alumni overwhelmingly support the Buffs, and the huge donation spike the university received after their recent 10-win year didn't hurt either.
BTW I find it highly doubtful either of your other two alma maters will be giving up P5 football.LTbear said:Good call.PartyBear said:Ok well whatever you do, do not mention their names or our Regents will try to recruit them to our board.LTbear said:Aliceinbubbleland said:
LTbear,
Not sure this link will work if you don't have a subscription but it's worth a try. CU may be closer than anyone other than Cal to put a fork in football.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/18/sports/colorado-football.html
We (CU alumni) have all read the articles. CU isn't close. There are two regents who have long been known to express anti-football sentiment, and one of the two actually loves football but is a young gun who uses hot issue talking points to make a name for himself. They're rare exceptions, not the norm. The administration, faculty, and alumni overwhelmingly support the Buffs, and the huge donation spike the university received after their recent 10-win year didn't hurt either.
Colorado certainly won't. Cal, in some weird world, might be the most ideologically likely to think of such a move, but the new chancellor here is very athletics friendly, with a particular interest in football, and the university also invested hundreds of millions in the stadium recently (which they'll be paying off for a long time), so that makes it a bigger leap.PartyBear said:BTW I find it highly doubtful either of your other two alma maters will be giving up P5 football.LTbear said:Good call.PartyBear said:Ok well whatever you do, do not mention their names or our Regents will try to recruit them to our board.LTbear said:Aliceinbubbleland said:
LTbear,
Not sure this link will work if you don't have a subscription but it's worth a try. CU may be closer than anyone other than Cal to put a fork in football.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/18/sports/colorado-football.html
We (CU alumni) have all read the articles. CU isn't close. There are two regents who have long been known to express anti-football sentiment, and one of the two actually loves football but is a young gun who uses hot issue talking points to make a name for himself. They're rare exceptions, not the norm. The administration, faculty, and alumni overwhelmingly support the Buffs, and the huge donation spike the university received after their recent 10-win year didn't hurt either.
Both Utah schools, population base is growing like crazy.PartyBear said:
Both Utah schools? The Utah schools would add nothing to the XII. The Pac probably really didnt want Utah but was stuck with saving face when they took CU and then Texas, OU said, ok on second thought we are staying where we are and btw Tech and OSU have to as well since we arent doing anything.
I mean, not really. Most projections have the entire state not even reaching 7 million until around 2065.OldBurlyBear86 said:Both Utah schools, population base is growing like crazy.PartyBear said:
Both Utah schools? The Utah schools would add nothing to the XII. The Pac probably really didnt want Utah but was stuck with saving face when they took CU and then Texas, OU said, ok on second thought we are staying where we are and btw Tech and OSU have to as well since we arent doing anything.
That's NFL footballOldBurlyBear86 said:
NFL in Los Angeles is killing both ratings and attendance.
****ty performance by the two largest bacon makers (USC & UCLA) does not help either.
I would love to nab both Utah and Zona schools and dump WVU
I mean, really. Utah is the 3rd fastest growing state in the country and they have national brand in BYU. Might as well kick out Kansas, Iowa and W. Va. since they are already smaller than Utah, have less disposable income, and are not growing.LTbear said:I mean, not really. Most projections have the entire state not even reaching 7 million until around 2065.OldBurlyBear86 said:Both Utah schools, population base is growing like crazy.PartyBear said:
Both Utah schools? The Utah schools would add nothing to the XII. The Pac probably really didnt want Utah but was stuck with saving face when they took CU and then Texas, OU said, ok on second thought we are staying where we are and btw Tech and OSU have to as well since we arent doing anything.
That high rate of growth isn't translating to a crazy boom in actual population though - it's still a very small population state, and the idea of taking two schools from that same population just really doesn't make much sense, especially when so many people have already pointed out the financial constraint on the Big XII as is with our double-dipping into multiple small-market states.OldBurlyBear86 said:I mean, really. Utah is the 3rd fastest growing state in the country and they have national brand in BYU. Might as well kick out Kansas, Iowa and W. Va. since they are already smaller than Utah, have less disposable income, and are not growing.LTbear said:I mean, not really. Most projections have the entire state not even reaching 7 million until around 2065.OldBurlyBear86 said:Both Utah schools, population base is growing like crazy.PartyBear said:
Both Utah schools? The Utah schools would add nothing to the XII. The Pac probably really didnt want Utah but was stuck with saving face when they took CU and then Texas, OU said, ok on second thought we are staying where we are and btw Tech and OSU have to as well since we arent doing anything.
So really.
Almost forgot, Utah is bigger than Arkansas as well and the Mormons have better hygiene.
Shame that Colorado is growing so fast, but at least my other potential long-term homes are still pretty low on the list.Texasjeremy said:
ESTIMATED GROWTH SINCE 2010 CENSUS
666,368 - Colorado (+13.2%)
72,890 - Montana (+7.4%)
27,207 - Alaska (+3.8%)
14,111 - Wyoming (+2.5%)
PartyBear said:
To put it in perspective since 2010 when Utah joined the PAC, Texas has grown by more than Utah's current population and I bet 80% of that growth has occurred along the 35 corridor between DFW and SA.