Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
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!

Big 12 Championship Tie Breaker

The Alabaster Yak said:
BYU is a 1 to 2.5 point underdog against ASU next week (depending on the book) and your predictions about how these last few weeks were going to play out have been about as accurate as my election predictions. šŸ˜‚
Click to expand...

First of all, as I said before, eat ****, lol.

Having said that, yes, I admit that I was utterly wrong about ISU, and I'm very happy about that. We'll see about BYU. They didn't look great against Utah, but that's a rivalry game so whatever. I'm just curious to see if then beating up on each other caused both Utah and BYU to fade late in their respective games yesterday.
 
The calculator shows CU losing all tie breakers to ISU, BYU and ASU so they need to win on Saturday, unless ISU loses AND BYU wins.

ASU is a sneaky dark horse here as they control their own destiny.
 
manhattanbuff said:
After the ADā€™s comments, I think that they will not get any favorable calls against us next week.
Click to expand...
BuffWarHog said:
Stay With Me Professor GIF
Click to expand...
Sadly, I donā€™t think there were any ā€œobjectionableā€ calls yesterday. That would have been icing and cakes and whatnot.
 
Buffnik said:
We control our own destiny. Win out. That's all that matters.
Click to expand...
Been said before but if we canā€™t beat KU then we really donā€™t deserve to go. This tiebreaker talk is nonsense

Reminds me of the mid 2000s when ISU lost on the last weekend a couple years in a row and CU won the B12 north only to get to stomped by Texas bc we only got there cuz someone else lost
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
BYU is a 1 to 2.5 point underdog against ASU next week (depending on the book) and your predictions about how these last few weeks were going to play out have been about as accurate as my election predictions. šŸ˜‚
Click to expand...
Thats all? **** I was expecting ASU to be favored by more.

Just keep winning.
 
Bison said:
Divisions again? Pass.
Click to expand...
I'm undecided. On the one hand, I like playing regional rivals every year. In the Big 12, I don't want a season without ASU and Utah where we get UCF & Cincy instead. On the other hand, divisions makes it like it's 2 different conferences with a scheduling alliance.

My plan would be a League of 60 D1 programs.

6 divisions of 10 teams each, grouped by region.

Play 9 games against your division every year.

Play 5 games outside your division every year (1 game against each of the other divisions; opponents determined by last season's order of finish in your division).

So, 14 game schedule.

Playoff is the 6 Division winners plus however many wildcards you want to do.
 
Buffnik said:
I'm undecided. On the one hand, I like playing regional rivals every year. In the Big 12, I don't want a season without ASU and Utah where we get UCF & Cincy instead. On the other hand, divisions makes it like it's 2 different conferences with a scheduling alliance.

My plan would be a League of 60 D1 programs.

6 divisions of 10 teams each, grouped by region.

Play 9 games against your division every year.

Play 5 games outside your division every year (1 game against each of the other divisions; opponents determined by last season's order of finish in your division).

So, 14 game schedule.

Playoff is the 6 Division winners plus however many wildcards you want to do.
Click to expand...
Playing in FL and TX as often as possible is crucial to recruiting, IMO. I was ecstatic we didnā€™t end up with a locked in scheduling rival when the B12 rolled out schedules last year.
 
Highlander said:
Playing in FL and TX as often as possible is crucial to recruiting, IMO. I was ecstatic we didnā€™t end up with a locked in scheduling rival when the B12 rolled out schedules last year.
Click to expand...
Is it?

I mean, there are opportunities to leverage the local market exposure and presence from those games - but are they really crucial? Big Ten teams seem to be doing just fine.
 
Buffnik said:
I'm undecided. On the one hand, I like playing regional rivals every year. In the Big 12, I don't want a season without ASU and Utah where we get UCF & Cincy instead. On the other hand, divisions makes it like it's 2 different conferences with a scheduling alliance.
Click to expand...

That's kind of where I'm at too. I was all for getting rid of divisions but then we saw the downside last year. The advantages for divisions is you get a clear-cut winner (usually) in each division but the downside is you often get scenarios where 1 division is much stronger than the other and 1 team ends up in there that clearly isn't one of the 2 best teams. OTOH no divisions gets you the 2 best teams, at least theoretically, but with larger conferences you get unbalanced schedules and often get into quirky tiebreakers.

The obvious solution is to have conferences no larger than 10 teams where everyone plays each other but that's long gone and I don't see it going back to that.
 
CarolinaBuff said:
That's kind of where I'm at too. I was all for getting rid of divisions but then we saw the downside last year. The advantages for divisions is you get a clear-cut winner (usually) in each division but the downside is you often get scenarios where 1 division is much stronger than the other and 1 team end up in there that clearly isn't one of the 2 best teams. OTOH no divisions gets you the 2 best teams, at least theoretically, but with larger conferences you get unbalanced schedules and often get into quirky tiebreakers.

The real solution is to have conferences no larger than 10 teams where everyone plays each other but that's long gone and I don't see it going back to that.
Click to expand...
The perfect size for a conference would be 9.

In football- 8 conference games, everyone plays everyone, and everyone gets 4 home & 4 away. Tons of regular rivalries with flexibility to play new teams (or non-conference rivals) 1/3 of the time.

In basketball- 16 conference games with everyone playing everyone twice: 1 home & 1away. Do that with a couple "Clallenges" with other conferences and you have one hell of a fun schedule.
 
Buffnik said:
Is it?

I mean, there are opportunities to leverage the local market exposure and presence from those games - but are they really crucial? Big Ten teams seem to be doing just fine.
Click to expand...
A large part of Michigan, Penn State and Ohio State recruiting comes fromā€¦ Michigan, Pennsylvania and Ohio. Of course they dip down into FL and TX but blue bloods can do that.

CU is obviously not a blue blood but they are a national recruiting program under Prime. The difference is the draw is Prime, not Colorado, so giving local recruits in hotbed areas a chance come see Prime and CU in person is important. UCF and TTU games last year were prime examples (no pun).

Houston on the road would have been a great recruiting opportunity until they moved it to Friday night (honestly wouldnā€™t be surprised if Houston pushed for this to avoid it being a CU recruiting game).
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
A large part of Michigan, Penn State and Ohio State recruiting comes fromā€¦ Michigan, Pennsylvania and Ohio. Of course they dip down into FL and TX but blue bloods can do that.

CU is obviously not a blue blood but they are a national recruiting program under Prime. The difference is the draw is Prime, not Colorado, so giving local recruits in hotbed areas a chance come see Prime and CU in person is important. UCF and TTU games last year were prime examples (no pun).

Houston on the road would have been a great recruiting opportunity until they moved it to Friday night (honestly wouldnā€™t be surprised if Houston pushed for this to avoid it being a CU recruiting game).
Click to expand...
I think there is an advantage to be able to tell recruits that family and friends will be able to see them play via a car ride for a lot of games. We saw that dynamic drastically unbalance recruiting over time in the Big 12. "5 games in TX or Oklahoma locked into the South schedule + 1 or 2 conference home games from playing the North teams + we schedule at least 3 non-conference home games to be home or local = everyone can easily see you play in person for 9-11 of your games."
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
A large part of Michigan, Penn State and Ohio State recruiting comes fromā€¦ Michigan, Pennsylvania and Ohio. Of course they dip down into FL and TX but blue bloods can do that.

CU is obviously not a blue blood but they are a national recruiting program under Prime. The difference is the draw is Prime, not Colorado, so giving local recruits in hotbed areas a chance come see Prime and CU in person is important. UCF and TTU games last year were prime examples (no pun).

Houston on the road would have been a great recruiting opportunity until they moved it to Friday night (honestly wouldnā€™t be surprised if Houston pushed for this to avoid it being a CU recruiting game).
Click to expand...
Agree with everything, just pointing out that considering Houston is such a major football metro and with Dallas only being ~ 4 hour drive, there will still be plenty of kids who make the effort to come see CU/Prime
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top