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!

Bubble Watch - Saturday 3/12

Watching conn and Louisville right before this game is funny. It makes this like a high school game. I think I have watched about six hours of b ball today
 
for the people who aren't watching. Utah state was up nine. now two straight turnover later it is a four point game
 
Boise State is even more terrible. I looked up their roster and they've got 8 seniors. That's all it takes in the WAC to be the 2nd best team. They totally suck, but it's a veteran suckitude. And that was enough to give Utah State all they wanted.
 
Weird that he has Michigan (0-8 vs. RPI Top 25) or Clemson (0-5 vs. RPI Top 25) ahead of CU (4-3 vs. RPI Top 25); it should be noted that CU is the only team on that extensive list with greater than .500 record vs. RPI Top 25.
 
i suppose one could argue that 3 of those wins were against the same team. but, still. i'm a fan of Jerry and it worries me he doesn't have us in. the other guy i like, Warren Nolan, mostly because his "Nitty Gritty Report" (which he copied from Palm) isn't a pay-per page like JP's these days......had us at 11 playing St Johns in Chicago.

edit: but even if it's the case you say KSU is 3 top 25 W's, then you have to include KU as 3 of those losses. losing to KU is no crime....asshats have won 30 games and the Big XII.
 
Last edited:
and somebody please explain to me why Missouri is out of this discussion?

edit: re: CU, i suspect for Palm it's that big fat rpi in the 60's. and history bears that out, mostly...anything in the 50's has been iffy over the years. he may be working the trend and being the numberbot that has served him well over the years (Purdue math grad degree). though, i think this year's CU team fits the exception (i hope).
 
Last edited:
Good question about Missouri. It's probably the perception that since we both went 8-8 in conference that we're equivalent there, which leaves non-conference to compare and Missouri clearly has a better non-conference record including games against Georgetown, ODU, Vandy, and Illinois that they went 3-1 in. But the problem is that our conference records of 8-8 plus the tourney are not equivalent. Ours is far more impressive than Mizzou's because they only went 1-6 against the top 4 while we went 4-4.
 
Mick Ronson said:
and somebody please explain to me why Missouri is out of this discussion?

edit: re: CU, i suspect for Palm it's that big fat rpi in the 60's. and history bears that out, mostly...anything in the 50's has been iffy over the years. he may be working the trend and being the numberbot that has served him well over the years (Purdue math grad degree). though, i think this year's CU team fits the exception (i hope).
Click to expand...

I agree re: Mizzou. I have no idea, aside from name recognition, what is so different between them and CU that they're getting projected as a 8 seed and we're supposedly clinging to the bubble.

As for Palm, there are 3 more teams in the tourney this year, which pretty much inevitably means that the level of RPI it takes to get in is going to drop, too.
 
CarolinaBuff said:
Good question about Missouri. It's probably the perception that since we both went 8-8 in conference that we're equivalent there, which leaves non-conference to compare and Missouri clearly has a better non-conference record including games against Georgetown, ODU, Vandy, and Illinois that they went 3-1 in. But the problem is that our conference records of 8-8 plus the tourney are not equivalent. Ours is far more impressive than Mizzou's because they only went 1-6 against the top 4 while we went 4-4.
Click to expand...

i agree. i think objectively speaking they are a team in decline (and despite Anderson's good NCAA record at MU and UAB, with the novelty of the way they play hard to prepare for in a "one-off", all considered....they are a team i bet against in a 8/9 game)....but, i guess, having spent the early part of the year solidly in the top 25 (top 10 when we beat them)....and then lurking around the edge....they get benefit of the doubt. i don't think it's right, but i suspect that's the reason. i don't think their OOC results are overwhelming by any means....esp since they were a top 10 team at the time.
 
Lunardi has us playing St. John's in Tampa in a 6/11, winner playing the winner of Kentucky/Morehead St.

I wouldn't mind that setup.

Richmond's up big on Dayton so far.
 
If this Carolina/Duke game is any indicator of how good the rest of the ACC is, no way Va Tech, Boston College, or Clemson deserve a bid.

This game is ugly.
 
neil29fp said:
Weird that he has Michigan (0-8 vs. RPI Top 25) or Clemson (0-5 vs. RPI Top 25) ahead of CU (4-3 vs. RPI Top 25); it should be noted that CU is the only team on that extensive list with greater than .500 record vs. RPI Top 25.
Click to expand...

The reason he gives is CU's weak OOC schedule. And yet he's got both VCU and George Mason in, with more games against teams 200+ RPI, weaker SOS and fewer top 25 wins. Complete inconsistency. Don't know if he's trying to make some point for small conferences, east coast teams, Virginia, or what. But it's not hard to see the holes in his logic...
 
ESPN streamer just listed CU as one of B12 at large-teams and didn't list them as one of last 4 in or 4 that just missed getting in
 
Mick Ronson said:
i agree. i think objectively speaking they are a team in decline (and despite Anderson's good NCAA record at MU and UAB, with the novelty of the way they play hard to prepare for in a "one-off", all considered....they are a team i bet against in a 8/9 game)....but, i guess, having spent the early part of the year solidly in the top 25 (top 10 when we beat them)....and then lurking around the edge....they get benefit of the doubt. i don't think it's right, but i suspect that's the reason. i don't think their OOC results are overwhelming by any means....esp since they were a top 10 team at the time.
Click to expand...

ESPiN is reporting that Arkansas is going to fire their coach and go after Anderson to replace him...
 
Junction said:
ESPiN is reporting that Arkansas is going to fire their coach and go after Anderson to replace him...
Click to expand...

battle of Wal-Mart money. i think MU steps up to keep Anderson. i think MA is ready to be his own man and not Nolan's heir at this point. he goes back to Tulsa with Nolan, if he was an Arkie grad, maybe. he's got a good thing going at MU and a new arena.

i liked Pelphrey at first...but, i guess he didn't get it done and he always looked Hawkishly confused during games. he recruited pretty well as did Stan Heath but they've been mediocre for a while now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top