They're refusing to renew the series with Colorado State after 2020 because CSU is not a P5, Pac12 schedule , Colorado has nothing to gain, everything to lose, blah, blah, blah.

Cowards. College football in the 2020s will suck.

Recruits pay attention to instate rivalry games.

(02-21-2017 07:57 AM)Wolfman Wrote:  Recruits pay attention to instate rivalry games.

Arkansas doesn't play Arkansas State unless forced to by some third party post-season event. Several years back the two met in the women's NIT and AState pounded the Hogs to a pulp. Immediately after that the two schools went head-to-head for three recruits and the Hogs signed all three.

I doubt Colorado's success or failure hinges on how well they recruit in-state and out-of-state, well if CU can't out-recruit CSU there, the problem isn't their non-conference scheduling.

In state rivals should always play.

More conference games (9/10) is not a good thing IMO as it takes away regional games like this because schools have so many requirements.

That being said CU is a sorry arse AD in general and this move doesn't surprise me as with all thier advantages they are barely a better program than CSU.

(02-21-2017 07:57 AM)Wolfman Wrote:  Recruits pay attention to instate rivalry games.

Not this one. Blue chip players tend to go out of state.

CU and CSU did not play for decades until the Colorado Legislature required it. That law has passed its sunset time. Since resuming the series in 1983, CU is 21-8. Overall CU is 64-22-2. That is not much of a rivalry.

(02-21-2017 12:19 PM)p23570 Wrote:  In state rivals should always play.

More conference games (9/10) is not a good thing IMO as it takes away regional games like this because schools have so many requirements.

That being said CU is a sorry arse AD in general and this move doesn't surprise me as with all thier advantages they are barely a better program than CSU.

Would OU and OSU want to play Tulsa?

It's the same thing, really. CU is in a different world than CSU.

Besides which, nobody should "have to" play anyone.

(02-21-2017 12:36 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  

(02-21-2017 12:19 PM)p23570 Wrote:  In state rivals should always play.

More conference games (9/10) is not a good thing IMO as it takes away regional games like this because schools have so many requirements.

That being said CU is a sorry arse AD in general and this move doesn't surprise me as with all thier advantages they are barely a better program than CSU.

Would OU and OSU want to play Tulsa?

It's the same thing, really. CU is in a different world than CSU.

Besides which, nobody should "have to" play anyone.

OU and OSU play Tulsa regularly but Tulsa is a little tiny private school with 5k students.

Not comparable to CU and CSU. CU and CSU are like OU and OSU but with half the fans and terrible football.

CU and CSU are actually much closer as AD's. The PAC paycheck is the real difference and even with that $ CU isn't' that much better at fotball.
50 Colorado Pac-12 $67,852,236 $65,273,311 $12,216,734 18.00
70 Colorado State Mt. West $38,451,203 $38,781,340 $20,412,573 53.09

This is garbage. So is the inability to schedule Utah-BYU.

This is not news. It has been known for some time. When the P12 went to 9 games the game was doomed. This was the last of P5 vs G5 rivalries to die left, besides Navy vs ND (CSU should have looked at that model, home games for the P5 rotated with neutral site ... but it has a big money TV package)

The reality of P5 schools needing 6 home games and to preserve a neutrals site game for a P5 opponent with National TV and higher revenue, meant the Mile High game was an expensive luxury that costs Colorado at least $2m a year in lost revenue (look at the Kickoff games). Simply put the game doesn't work for them. CSU did not want to play the game in Boulder, and could not offer anywhere near enough money for the game to get played in Fort Collins, ruling out a home and home series. For Colorado, that frees up the possibility of neutral site 7th home game.

While it's lamentable the G5 vs P5 games are vanishing, especially the old long playing annual rivalries (think Tulane-LSU, SJSU-Stanford, USU-Utah, Memphis-Ole Miss), it is the reality of more conference games and SoS that require a P5 OOC game, some schools playing two such. There are only half as many P5 vs G5 matches as there were a decade ago. Future schedules show a little more erosion. Basically P5 want one or two home games against a P5 for the revenue they get with their conference network and the gate. CSU like all G5 (except the academies) lack the media contracts to make those games of much value.

I frankly think there will be another adjustment in the coming decade, as the SEC and ACC will eventually move to 9 games. That and SoS could see the number of G5 vs P5 drop from 125 or so today to as few as 65-70 around 2025.

If Colorado State crosses over to P5 the game could start up again, because they'd have a media contract. Yes it is hard for a G5 to get top players now. The NFL draft last year confirmed it, 90.4% of the 1st & 2nd round picks were from P5 schools, 80% of the 3rd round. G5 and FCS evenly split the other 6 players in the first two rounds, or about 5% each. Players coming out of HS are well aware of this, which is why the balance has been shifting even more to P5 (that and money which is making recruiting a more scientific WAG; still some guys are late bloomers or have other reasons to play in the lower level schools).

It is what it is.

This article says CU and CSU are going to play a home/home in 2023/2024, and that they don't want to schedule more games in Denver.
Colorado State, CU planning on-campus football games in 2023-24

CU also has a home/home series with Air Force in 2019 and 2022.

The state legislature needs to step in. That's what happened here in Kentucky. It was with basketball though. UK refused to play even after Louisville won the title in 1980. State legislature recognized that the game kept money in the state.

After the series started in basketball the two schools meet in all sports

Good luck to Colorado State. Hopefully this gets worked out for everyone
CJ

Sent from my XT1565 using CSNbbs mobile app

When it comes to states with dual-flagship public schools that both have FCS and/or FBS football teams, only Colorado and Utah have one in P5 and one in G5.

Granted, Utah's case is greatly complicated by BYU ... with Utah perhaps even trying to schedule Utah St so it can pretend like it can't schedule BYU.


Most states with dual's, they're in the same conference. Iowa's aren't, but they find a way to play every year. New Mexico's aren't, but play every year. Texas's now aren't, and they aren't playing. Pennsylvania's are sporadically playing. And the ones straddling the ACC-SEC are playing every year.

I don't consider Boise a flagship in Idaho. The case in Pennsylvania is also complicated ... with Pitt perhaps being or perhaps not being a public flagship for the state. I consider them one, but others may not. And I don't consider Temple one, though they might argue they're even moreso than Pitt.

I guess there's New York, as well, as the only one with a G5 and FCS. They play sporadically.

(02-21-2017 12:30 PM)lew240z Wrote:  

(02-21-2017 07:57 AM)Wolfman Wrote:  Recruits pay attention to instate rivalry games.

Not this one. Blue chip players tend to go out of state.

CU and CSU did not play for decades until the Colorado Legislature required it. That law has passed its sunset time. Since resuming the series in 1983, CU is 21-8. Overall CU is 64-22-2. That is not much of a rivalry.

Truth. CSU fans WANT it to be a solid rivalry, and the W-L record doesn't bear that out. Colorado record: 64 wins, 23 losses, 2 ties -- a 73% success rate.

Also, CU really-really-really wanted Nebraska to be THE rivalry every year. Nebraska's record v Colorado: 49 wins, 18 losses, 2 ties -- a 71% success rate.

Now let's switch sides of the issue and look at a one-sided rivalry: Oklahoma-Okie State. Oklahoma's record: 84 wins, 19 losses, 7 ties -- a 79.5% (80%) success rate.

Rivalries can take all shapes. Underdog fans would prefer a more-contested result (50% success rate), while overdog (?) fans prefer a larger success rate... which has strong implications of a rivalry. I'd prefer the FORCING of the series to stop and the CHOOSING the series's continuation to be free-will. College football is better in Colorado (the state) when Colorado, CSU, and AFA are all doing well and playing each other.

Does Air Force recruit a lot of Colo high school players for football?

(02-21-2017 01:27 PM)CardinalJim Wrote:  The state legislature needs to step in. That's what happened here in Kentucky. It was with basketball though. UK refused to play even after Louisville won the title in 1980. State legislature recognized that the game kept money in the state.

After the series started in basketball the two schools meet in all sports

Good luck to Colorado State. Hopefully this gets worked out for everyone
CJ

Sent from my XT1565 using CSNbbs mobile app

Wins are wins, and losses are losses. No excuses. And... the past 15-20 years have mostly been close football games between the 2 schools. The Rams have crapped themselves while CU stepped up & made plays when the time was appropriate.

Roundball is different, as the series is much closer: 30 Colorado victories and 22 CSU victories since 1949-50, including the 72-58 whuppin' we put on them in Boulder this year.

Colo St really isn't that much different than Wash St, when it comes to endowment, enrollment, research numbers, etc.

Be interesting if Colorado was added to PAC back then, if CO St would be in PAC today.

(02-21-2017 01:08 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  While it's lamentable the G5 vs P5 games are vanishing, especially the old long playing annual rivalries (think Tulane-LSU, SJSU-Stanford, USU-Utah, Memphis-Ole Miss), it is the reality of more conference games and SoS that require a P5 OOC game, some schools playing two such.

Besides the aforementioned, what are some other P5 vs. G5 rivalries, or at least historical games?

The former SWC games
New Mexico-Arizona/Texas Tech
Tulane-Ole Miss
Tulsa-Arkansas/OU/OSU
Memphis-Tennessee (home and home in the 80's and 90's)
SDSU-UCLA (home and home in the 80's and 90's)
Temple-Pitt/Penn St.
Navy-Virginia/Pitt
UMass/UConn-BC
UTEP-Arizona/ASU
Army-Rutgers/BC/ND
Washington St.-Idaho

(02-21-2017 12:46 PM)p23570 Wrote:  

(02-21-2017 12:36 PM)BearcatJerry Wrote:  [quote='p23570' pid='14109087' dateline='1487697561']
In state rivals should always play.

Would OU and OSU want to play Tulsa?

OU and OSU play Tulsa regularly but Tulsa is a little tiny private school with 5k students.

Tulsa/OkSt have agreed to a 2 for 1 F-ball series beginning in 2019.

OSU AD Mike Holder is on record that he’d like to play Tulsa every year
but Tulsa AD Derick Gregg has “reservations” about doing so.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/os...3a79c.html

Univ of Ok AD Joe Castiglione is open to playing a game in Tulsa.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/sportsextra/tu...3c8c7.html

The “other” P5 school located w/n 2 hours of the Univ of Tulsa campus, them “Hawg-warts” will NEVER EVER play a F-ball game in Tulsa.

Tulsa does have difficulty scheduling other P5 teams in the area such as JayHacks, Mizzu, & K St mostly because Tulsa F-ball is competitive & might not look good for local area recruiting purposes to loose to good ‘ol TU.

(02-21-2017 01:44 PM)MplsBison Wrote:  Does Air Force recruit a lot of Colo high school players for football?

I count 4 on their 2016 roster.