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!

Cool blog

BuffNut99

BuffNut99

Club Member
If you need something college football-related and daily, check out what the NY Times blog is doing:

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/

They are counting down each team (from 120 to #1). I am very impressed with the depth of research and quality of breakdowns so far. Can't wait to see where the Buffs land and what they have to say about CU.
 
It is a good thing I do not psot on allbuffs very often, hard getting used to seeing another BuffNut out there....creepy.
 
Some good info, but mathematically challenged:

equal to is not more than
"...the Pokes scored more than 20 points only twice in these eight games (in addition to S.D.S.U., a 31-20 loss to Colorado State"

85 is not 89
"Four Wyoming coaches have gone on to win at least 89 games after leaving Laramie. Bob Devaney finished 101-20-2 at Nebraska from 1962 to 72, Pat Dye went 99-39-4 at Auburn (1981-92). Dennis Erickson, has gone 125-54-1 at (5 schools) since 1987, former Purdue coach Joe Tiller finished 85-62 with the Boilermakers from 1997 through last fall."
 
zbuff said:
Some good info, but mathematically challenged:

equal to is not more than
"...the Pokes scored more than 20 points only twice in these eight games (in addition to S.D.S.U., a 31-20 loss to Colorado State"

85 is not 89
"Four Wyoming coaches have gone on to win at least 89 games after leaving Laramie. Bob Devaney finished 101-20-2 at Nebraska from 1962 to 72, Pat Dye went 99-39-4 at Auburn (1981-92). Dennis Erickson, has gone 125-54-1 at (5 schools) since 1987, former Purdue coach Joe Tiller finished 85-62 with the Boilermakers from 1997 through last fall."
Click to expand...

I noticed the 20 point error, didn't catch the 89 win problem.... :lol:

Here's a link to the Wyo page - they came in at #111....

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/13/no-111-wyoming/

I particularly liked this part....

High point: The 16-13 win over Tennessee gave the Pokes a 3-1 mark under Glenn against SEC opponents. Though Tennessee Coach Phil Fulmer was fired earlier in the week, the victory also insured that the nation would soon be enjoying the blissful era of the new U.T. Coach Lane Kiffin, whose wit and tact have charmed all of the college football nation. Wyoming’s lone Mountain West victory came in a 35-10 win over San Diego State. S.D.S.U. also fired its coach, Chuck Long, after the season; Wyoming: coach killers
Click to expand...

Sounds like Hawk better be careful... :lol:

ISU also came in at #112

http://thequad.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/no-112-iowa-state/
 
I think a realistic spot for CU to be in would be somewhere in the mid 30's to high 40's. That's where I'd put them at this point.
 
I think there should be 5 wins for CU we "should" count on. CSewe, UW, Toledo, KSU, and ISU. So CU just needs to find 2 more to keep most people happy. I think between Mizzou, nubs, 'Neers, and eaTme, CU should be to go at least 50/50. with 1 or 2 more wins most people will have CU as an underdog. So, 8 or 9 wins plus a bowl win will make for a pretty nice season.
 
toledo returns a lot of guys and could be a tough opponent on the road. I don't see it as an easy W by any stretch.
 
buffaholic said:
toledo returns a lot of guys and could be a tough opponent on the road. I don't see it as an easy W by any stretch.
Click to expand...

Toledo itself doesn't scare me, it's the game. We play CSU on a Sunday night and then Toledo on that Friday on the road. Take away the travel day and that is 3 days to prepare for a road game after a rivalry game! That game will tell a lot about the character of our team. I am really worried about it and any buff fan should IMO.
 
Unleash Hell said:
Toledo itself doesn't scare me, it's the game. We play CSU on a Sunday night and then Toledo on that Friday on the road. Take away the travel day and that is 3 days to prepare for a road game after a rivalry game! That game will tell a lot about the character of our team. I am really worried about it and any buff fan should IMO.
Click to expand...

Our recent performance doesn't really give us the right to take anyone for granted, but if we're serious about becoming a top flight program then these are the games we should be able to win with 2nd teamers. Hope that's the case again someday.

Also, I would bet that given the short week before Toledo, the staff will probably use some of fall camp to gameplan for this game as well.
 
"Who is No. 43?: Our next university has produced the fourth-most astronauts of any university, not including the service academies."

Does CU fit that description?
 
So, to summarize, 7 of the teams we play this season are below us in this poll: ISU (112), Wyoming (111), Toledo (88), CSU (73), ATM (72), KSU (70), and Mizzou (53). With us at 43, that leaves Kansas and Nebraska (BOO!!!), OSU, Texass, and WVU. I'm hoping that KU and kNU show up soon because they should not be too far above us, WVU slightly less so. I guess we'll just have to wait and see...
 
I can't say I'm unhappy about how we were reviewed here. I think that most of the stuff he brought up was fair and accurate and he definitely did his research. I'll leave the specifics to others but I'm pleased with this. Plus, Allbuffs got a shout out!
 
GoldenBuff said:
I can't say I'm unhappy about how we were reviewed here. I think that most of the stuff he brought up was fair and accurate and he definitely did his research. I'll leave the specifics to others but I'm pleased with this. Plus, Allbuffs got a shout out!
Click to expand...

Yeah. A few minor mistakes but nothing major. He seemed to get it about right to me. Pretty much everyone can see that this team has potential but at this point it's pretty much a wait-and-see mode for us buff fans.
 
GoldenBuff said:
I can't say I'm unhappy about how we were reviewed here. I think that most of the stuff he brought up was fair and accurate and he definitely did his research. I'll leave the specifics to others but I'm pleased with this. Plus, Allbuffs got a shout out!
Click to expand...

:woot:

I thought it was a very fair piece. Best case scenario Top 25 if injuries and breaks go their way, more likely somewhere around 7-5 (I would probably say 8-4, but whatever). QB is key. And the o-line and running backs poised to be exceptional in 2010. All fair comments.

I was ready to jump on him for calling Sanders a guard and Head a center, but in the next sentence he commented on Sanders starts at C, so I think that was just a simple mistake.

The online translator bit was pretty funny, though. Coach "Falcon". :lol:
 
After reading the Quad write-up, I have an added appriciation for how much Tim Griffin sucks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top