If we're blaming him for that game, do we have to give him credit for 62-36?
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!
11-2 Colorado mentioned in ESPN's "results that will throw the College Football Playoff into chaos"
- Thread starter Tatanka™
- Start date
If we're blaming him for that game, do we have to give him credit for 62-36?
The rooting for those two teams to keep winning? Yeah, having Utah lose a few to give us some breathing room for the South would be nice, but there is a very outside shot at the Playoff of we go 11-2 with consecutive wins over highly ranked teams to end the season. Especially considering that by 11/26, if we continue winning, CU is probably ranked in the top 10-15.
Don't be obtuse.
oh, I was there for that too. Claimed.
UW wouldn't be a Top 5 team anymore if they lose to Utah. Honestly you gotta hope they beat Utah in overtime and Utah is like #12 or so with that being their only loss besides Cal. Then you can beat a #2 or #3 UW team because the B1G is gonna cannibalize itself to an extent. Beating a #12 and a #3 is better than beating a #8 and a #11
Good call, I wasn't thinking about Washington playing utah. In that case, definitely rooting for Wash.
Question about 2001 season. When we got left out of the championship game and went to the Fiesta Bowl instead. The players acted like they didn't give two ****s to play in it watching that bowl. Was that the mindset they had for you guys that were going there at the time? Fresno game ugh, all I got to say on that one.
ESPN: Five bold Pac-12 predictions for the second half of the season
The South will see its fifth champion in five years.
We’ve got a two-in-five shot at this one, so we’re rolling the dice. Remember, it was UCLA in 2012, Arizona State in 2013, Arizona in 2014 and USC last season. Right now Utah and Colorado are tied for the South Division lead with 3-1 conference records. FPI favors Colorado in the rest of their regular-season games and gives the Buffs a 60 percent chance to win the division. Utah has a tougher road, with trips to UCLA, Arizona State and Colorado, and they still have Washington at home later this month. Much can still happen, and three other teams are still in play. USC and Arizona State are right behind. USC has a tiebreaker over Colorado. Utah has a tiebreaker over USC. Those could and likely will play a role down the line, as they did last season. Just as we’ve seen the last couple of years, the South could come down to the final weekend and a rivalry game. Which means it might be time to start calling Utah-Colorado a rivalry.
The loser of the Pac-12 championship game will go on to win its bowl game.
Why is this bold? Because it’s never happened before. Recall the Interim Coach Bowl (officially the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl) in 2011 when UCLA lost to Illinois. Or the Holiday Bowl disasters of 2012 (UCLA losing to Baylor), 2013 (Arizona State losing to Texas Tech) and 2015 (USC losing to Wisconsin). Then there was the Fiesta Bowl in 2014 (Arizona losing to Boise State). But let’s assume that bold predictions Nos. 1 and 2 pan out. That means Washington wins the conference and either Colorado or Utah is the runner-up. Kyle Whittingham is as good a bowl-game coach as you’ll find in the country: The Utes are 9-1 in bowl games under his watch. And if it’s Colorado, I’m banking on the fact that those players will be so excited to be in a bowl game they will rise to the occasion.
I'm drowning in f'ing KOOL-AID!!!!
http://www.espn.com/blog/pac12/post...predictions-for-the-second-half-of-the-season
The South will see its fifth champion in five years.
We’ve got a two-in-five shot at this one, so we’re rolling the dice. Remember, it was UCLA in 2012, Arizona State in 2013, Arizona in 2014 and USC last season. Right now Utah and Colorado are tied for the South Division lead with 3-1 conference records. FPI favors Colorado in the rest of their regular-season games and gives the Buffs a 60 percent chance to win the division. Utah has a tougher road, with trips to UCLA, Arizona State and Colorado, and they still have Washington at home later this month. Much can still happen, and three other teams are still in play. USC and Arizona State are right behind. USC has a tiebreaker over Colorado. Utah has a tiebreaker over USC. Those could and likely will play a role down the line, as they did last season. Just as we’ve seen the last couple of years, the South could come down to the final weekend and a rivalry game. Which means it might be time to start calling Utah-Colorado a rivalry.
The loser of the Pac-12 championship game will go on to win its bowl game.
Why is this bold? Because it’s never happened before. Recall the Interim Coach Bowl (officially the Kraft Fight Hunger Bowl) in 2011 when UCLA lost to Illinois. Or the Holiday Bowl disasters of 2012 (UCLA losing to Baylor), 2013 (Arizona State losing to Texas Tech) and 2015 (USC losing to Wisconsin). Then there was the Fiesta Bowl in 2014 (Arizona losing to Boise State). But let’s assume that bold predictions Nos. 1 and 2 pan out. That means Washington wins the conference and either Colorado or Utah is the runner-up. Kyle Whittingham is as good a bowl-game coach as you’ll find in the country: The Utes are 9-1 in bowl games under his watch. And if it’s Colorado, I’m banking on the fact that those players will be so excited to be in a bowl game they will rise to the occasion.
I'm drowning in f'ing KOOL-AID!!!!
http://www.espn.com/blog/pac12/post...predictions-for-the-second-half-of-the-season
darth-horax
Well-Known Member
I was thinking about this all week. If we win the PAC12, worst case scenario is the Rose Bowl against potential Michigan, Ohio St, Wisconsin, or Nebraska.
Best case scenario is a playoff appearance.
Would hte system keep a P5 winner out of hte playoff?
Best case scenario is a playoff appearance.
Would hte system keep a P5 winner out of hte playoff?
its simple math. 4 playoff spots, 5 power conferences, someone has to be left out every year.
Fortunately the Big 12 is dog poop.
iwastoldtherewouldbenomath.gif
Now wouldn't that be Allsome.
King_George_XXIV_Rules
Well-Known Member
It would require a miracle to beat a Top-5 UW team in a hypothetical Pac-12 Championship game, because the deck would be highly stacked against the Buffs as far as the officiating goes. Recall the bad spots and roughing the punter non-calls during the USC game. It would be even worse the Championship.
A Top-5 UW team (say they're #3) is likely still undefeated in the regular season - any loss likely drops them out. Alabama probably runs the table. Clemson could. And either Michigan or Ohio St. could also, but obviously not both. If UW does too, then they and three of these other teams would be the in the Playoff assuming they all win their conference championship games.
The Pac-12 Conference elders want their champion to be in the Playoff, period. If the Buffs win the Championship game, it likely eliminates UW from playoff consideration and the Pac gets left out again. The Buffs have no realistic shot at the Playoff, even if they beat UW. Therefore, if the Buffs win, no Pac-12 team gets into the Playoff. The conference doesn't want that to happen. The refs will be highly encouraged to see to it that UW wins that game. Even Hillary would have to admit the system is rigged.
Officiating?
Look, I'm really proud of our Buffs' team. But USC really exposed us, and while we were respectable against Michigan, they found a way, and the game wasn't close.
I'd say we should tap the brakes on the "would beat Washington, but can't because it defies the conference agenda" talk. I think Washington is a really, really, really good team this season. CU is a good team. There's a difference.
Look, I'm really proud of our Buffs' team. But USC really exposed us, and while we were respectable against Michigan, they found a way, and the game wasn't close.
I'd say we should tap the brakes on the "would beat Washington, but can't because it defies the conference agenda" talk. I think Washington is a really, really, really good team this season. CU is a good team. There's a difference.
King_George_XXIV_Rules
Well-Known Member
You are correct that the Buffs did not lose the USC because of officiating, but bad calls don't help and bad calls are a reality of the game, and should even out. In the USC game, it seemed that every bad call turned out to be in favor of USC though. A running-into-the-kicker penalty vs. a roughing-the-kicker penalty is a pure judgment call, but the result (a 5-yd penalty that just gives the punter a shorter field, and is often so worthless it gets declined vs. a 15-yd gain and automatic first down) can be a game-changer.
My only point was that, until that's the case (unlikely), officiating is the least of worries where Washington is concerned.
Exposed? That's a strange way to characterize a four point loss on the road with a backup QB. Yeah, USC looked stronger on the lines, but "exposed" is what you say when you get dominated by three touchdowns. Who's to say we don't win that game if Sefo is healthy and pushing the tempo or if the game is in Boulder? Or what happens if Witherspoon gets that pick?
"Exposed" is what CU did to ASU.
@ the bold: yeah, they just knocked our QB out of the game. oh, and our punter was their MVP. I'm not saying we'd beat Wash, but the USC game is a much better example than Mich is.(still a little sore about that game).
I think we were "exposed" as a decent team, but something short of the amazing team that seems to be fueling the discussion on this board. The score was somewhat aided by Schuster taking a seat instead of sauntering into the end zone, and also numerous turnovers (which I acknowledge we created). Perhaps exposed was the wrong term, but we were beaten, and unlike Michigan, USC looked like a much better team than CU to my eyes (keep in mind that's difficult for me to say--I ****ing hate USC, and really wanted that game).
You and I are in the same place. Special teams are a major part of the game, though, and Michigan dominated us in that phase. That counts. Sefo's loss was unfortunate, and potentially a game-changer. But this one still stings for me a bit. It was winnable.
I think USC definitely exposed CU a little bit. It would have been a blowout had Darnold not fumbled 3 times and throw a pick. Fact is, USC dominated up front on both sides. Our skill positions held their own, but we are simply not there in the Front 7 or on the OL, IMO.
We also didn't have sefo for that game either.
True, and maybe that would have been the difference in a 4 point game. My point was that USC exposed our trenches more than any other team we've played. IMO, it was a game that was not as close as the score indicated.
Is this not the ESPN Midseason Awards that has it's own thread?
Yeah, Michigan did the same thing but didn't turn it over as much and they put up 45. I didn't think USC was on that level up front offensively but I thought the Buffs came out a lot stronger against Michigan than they did USC. So while the score didn't indicate the competition very well, it definitely had a little something to do with the Buffs too.
No idea, just saw Ted Miller tweet it out but I couldn't read it.
Buffs defense deserves plenty of credit for forcing those turnovers and keeping us in the game, because they did force them. There was just never a time when I was confident CU would consistently move the ball. After two straight weeks of dominating, they made Montez look like the RS Frosh with 2 starts that he was. Looking back, I thought the best case scenario was being able to put up maybe 20 or 24 points against them, while the 21 points they did score was almost the worst case for them.
It's actually a different article than was originally referenced in the Midseason Awards thread.