Why did CU want to be in the PAC?

Because it looked like 6 teams from the Big XII were gonna go to the Pac-10, and it was down to Baylor and CU, and CU jumped the gun trying to cock block baylor.

Oops.
 
I'm a proponent of the Big12 and regional conferences. I wished we still had the original Big12 in it's original form. I can easily see why Nebraska and Colorado bailed. Colorado would be very happy to be the Baylor of the Pac12 taking in money in lieu of winning.

Nebraska is doing well in the B1G and that's where they belonged. Mizzery was one of the forgotten five when there was talk of a Pac12 expansion and the B1G wasn't interested in them so I understand their intentions to be the Baylor of the SEC and collect money in lieu of wins.

No one can rationally explain aggy to me. No one. I sincerely hope they revert to firing coaches every few years, continue to be made fools of in the second half of games and enjoy their loves fest with their SEC partners who they really do not understand nor compare.

The Big 12 continues to wallow in legal problems (see WVA) and possible penalty in TV contracts (see Fox) and all because the leadership was content. We are paying the price.

With all that said the Big12, in spite of the problems, still has a lot of ranked teams and great games and should see a successful bowl season ahead.
 
If I was CU. I would have done exactly what they did - join the PAC. That was a smart move on their part.

That said, their FB program is in the shitter and there is NO excuse for that. They have a great location and an awesome campus. The place sells itself - they need a quality AD. That program should consistently be a 8-4 or better program.
 
CU was a bad program for most of the 60's and 70's, was good to great for most of the period between 1990 and 2005, then made a bad hire with Hawkins, which killed the program (not unlike what happened to Arizona when they replaced Tomey with Mackovic).

They went to the Pac 10 for several reasons: (1) more money and better regional affiliation (their prime recruiting grounds are in Cali), (2) better academic conference that would help them move up in USNWR and generate more research dollars, (3) the Big 12 was very unstable and they were concerned that it would implode, and (4) political pressure was being applied in Texas to replace CU with Baylor in the six team deal and they wanted to say "yes" before their offer could be rescinded. Plus, they view their rival as Nebraska, and Nebraska was gone.

Even though their program is down, its a better fit for them. More money, better athletic conference, more prestigious academically, etc. CU will get back to winning eventually. They just need to find the right coach and invest some more in their program.
 
Touchdown, I agree with most of what you said but I disagree on the Big 12 legal problems. As of now, the conference has no legal problems as far as I can see other than threats. The TAMU exit fee will most likely be negotiated. Missouri wants to leave but has no home yet. If Mizzou leaves and no other comparable team joins then I would say Missouri has legal problems for damages to the conference but only if the TV networks make an issue out of it. With WVU on the horizon, the TV guys may let things slide if Mizzou sticks around a year or two. It seems a year delay for the SEC if not a big issue. WVU is the only entity with a current legal problem in their dueling lawsuits with the Big East..

This is how I see it: the WVU issue to be negotiated to one more year in Big East plus cash, Mizzou for one more year in B12 plus cash and TAMU for cash. TCU will be in next year. The B12 will have 10 teams each season just as they have now and the TV guys will be OK with it all. Then, we will all be wondering where the conference will pick up two more mid-level teams to get back to 12 teams and a moneymaking conference championship game.
 
The better question is why did the Pac want Colorado? As a Pac 10 fan, this UU-CU addition was freaking horrible. Great we have a championship game - to be played on a FRIDAY. CU and UU bring NOTHING to the table. From what I've been able to gather online (so it must be true) the Pac would have gotten the same TV $$ money without them, so they are a net negative. It must be their elite basketball programs....oops. Baseball? Uh no. So they must have come in to the top academically.... wrong again.

The ONLY reason CU got the invite was because Larry Scott tried to scuttle the Big 12 with NU leaving and MU trying to get out in an effort to force UT-OU to come West. Almost pulled it off, but when it didn't work the Pac said "crap we can't stick with 11 so we'll add Utah". Then the Pac had the opportunity to snag OU-OSU and didn't do it. Freaking stupid. League Presidents are morons. They stuck with Tom Hansen for years, finally jettison him to bring in Larry Scott to be a "forward thinker" and when he proposes radical moves (e.g. adding UT-XX-OU-OSU) they balk at the LHN. Then they balk at just the OU-OSU addition to move to 14. The kicker is that supposedly the strongest opposition to the addition came from, you guessed it, CU and UU.
 
CU didnt want to goto the PAC. they went early because they thought we were going. that is the only reason. they are not making more money right now and it wouldnt matter. their athletic program is in a major hole and they would need 2 teams worth of SEC money to get out of it.
 
According to several reports in the Denver newspapers, here are the primary reasons:

Talk of Colorado joining the PAC 10 has swirled in Boulder for decades. The Buffs turned down an invitation from the PAC 10 in the mid 1990s. (The University of Colorado claims their institution shares and embraces the same philosophy and culture that exists at PAC 12 schools.)

Colorado's $47.4 million annual athletic budget is more in line with a majority of league members in the PAC 12. (It ranked near the bottom of the Big 12, nearly three times smaller than conference leader Texas.)

The most tangible beneficiary is expected to be the athletic department's ledger, which six years ago offered a picture so bleak that the school extended an $8 million loan to make ends meet. The new PAC 12 TV network will double Colorado's annual conference revenue (to $19 million from the current $9.5 million within five years), and target a much deeper pool of potential alumni donors. (More than 35,000 Colorado alumni live in the current PAC 12 states, compared to less than 11,000 in the Big 12 states outside of Colorado.)

PAC 12 membership will enhance Colorado's academic standing as well as its visibility to prospective out-of-state and international students, who pay about $21,000 more a year for undergraduate tuition than in-state students. (Colorado officials also tout existing research partnerships with PAC 12 schools and say they hope to establish more.)

The move to the PAC 12 is expected to boost alumni ticket sales, gifts, donations, and memberships to the Buff Club. (Ticket sales are the No. 1 revenue generator for college sports programs, while gifts and donations are No. 2. California ranks second only to Colorado as the state with the most Colorado undergraduates (1,954 in fall 2009) and alums (23,444). Yet, entering the 2010 football season, only 97 of those alums were members of the Buff Club, Colorado's booster group.)

The advantages of jumping to the PAC 12, though, are expected to extend beyond the bottom line. The University of Colorado believes the move is an opportunity to re-brand, re-commit, and start fresh. (Whatever that means.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top