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!

Buffs picked #12 in Pac 12 via ESPN

boydbuff

Club Member
Just saw this and read through their arguments. Truth is, being objective, they are pretty valid points. The only thing we can hope for is that the team overperforms, that the young guys including FR play well and we in fact have a true QB leader emerge who can guide the team to victories, hopefully with a strong power running game and good defense.

Tad pulled off a massive improvement over preseason expectations. Can JE do the same?

Wishful thinking I know but....

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/38948/post-spring-pac-12-power-rankings

"12. Colorado: The most crushing injury this spring was Buffs WR Paul Richardson blowing out his knee. On the plus side, the offensive line looks solid, and Tony Jones stepped up at running back. If everyone stays -- or gets -- healthy, the linebackers will be first rate. And DE Chidera Uzo-Diribe could be a breakout player. But there are huge questions at receiver, on the defensive line and in the secondary. Colorado may play as many freshmen as any team in the country this year."
 
For a while now, I no longer feel disrespected about how we are thought of. Colorado simply has to earn back a solid reputation by winning. The rest will take care of itself.
 
And we were picked 10th preseason in Mens BBall.

The offseason blows. Can't wait for games to be PLAYED ON THE FIELD.
 
Thought it was pretty a decent write-up on the conference overall. Really, I think the bottom three teams in the South (us and the Zona teams) will all struggle mightily at times.

The conference also needs to get a whole lot better top to bottom.
 
Can't disagree. While I believe we will be better this year that doesn't always translate to Ws. I expect fewer blowouts and for us to be in the game in the 4th more often. JE has gotten rid of the loser mentality that plagued last year's team, but we are going to send a lot of young kids out there against guys that are 3-4 years older. Those guys will be bigger, stronger and faster than us and given that we haven't been recruiting lights out we will be undersized yet again.

Unless our QB is a stud it's going to be a difficult time. We need to keep it on the ground and have our OL and RBs keep us on the field for a good 35-40 minutes.
 
major-league-theyre-******.jpg
 
Can't really disagree with the overall summary. Still rebuilding after the program was "burnt to the ground".

A few points:
*I still think PRich is unproven. He had one killer game last year where he gained 1/2 his entire season total yardage. Other than that, he dropped lots of balls and really played poorly. Potential, yes; proven, no.
*The only position I have confidence in is the RBs. Every other position is a questions mark..yes, even the OL. Every year we hear about the strength of the OL and it consistently underperforms, so the jury is still out.
*The LBs could be good, but with injuries it's difficult to gauge from last year.
*OL, DL, TE, DB, QB, WR - lots of questions. Could be good, but all of them have to be good to compete in the PAC XII, and I don't see that happening this year.

That said, I still think we'll be 5-7 to 7-5, somewhere in there. We may finish last in the PAC XII, but I'm thinking/hoping more like 10th.
 
BuffClass90 said:
A few points:
*I still think PRich is unproven. He had one killer game last year where he gained 1/2 his entire season total yardage. Other than that, he dropped lots of balls and really played poorly. Potential, yes; proven, no.
*The only position I have confidence in is the RBs.
Click to expand...

Having a really hard time reconciling these two statements.
 
BuffClass90 said:
Can't really disagree with the overall summary. Still rebuilding after the program was "burnt to the ground".

A few points:
*I still think PRich is unproven. He had one killer game last year where he gained 1/2 his entire season total yardage. Other than that, he dropped lots of balls and really played poorly. Potential, yes; proven, no.
*The only position I have confidence in is the RBs. Every other position is a questions mark..yes, even the OL. Every year we hear about the strength of the OL and it consistently underperforms, so the jury is still out.
*The LBs could be good, but with injuries it's difficult to gauge from last year.
*OL, DL, TE, DB, QB, WR - lots of questions. Could be good, but all of them have to be good to compete in the PAC XII, and I don't see that happening this year.

That said, I still think we'll be 5-7 to 7-5, somewhere in there. We may finish last in the PAC XII, but I'm thinking/hoping more like 10th.
Click to expand...


PRich is a proven quantity. He may not be as consistent as you'd like but I don't think you can just say that it's potential.

As far as the ranking goes, I'm with the people who say that we need to play our way back to respect. Given all of the question marks on the team there's no reason to expect any higher ranking.

The link also proves, once again, that Miller kicks ass over the Big12 bloggers at ESPN.
 
I think the write up was a little generous to Utah - they were unimpressive last year and very inconsistent. As Boulder Buff has pointed out the PAC is not that impressive after you get by the top 2 or 3 teams. Although CU is ranked 12th I don't think there is a whole lot that separates the bottom eight teams(which in my book includes Utah).

Any team that has changed head coaches is going to be at a disadvantage this year...very seldom is an improvement seen in the first year - you are trying to change culture, implement new offenses and defenses and players do not alway buy into the new staff right away. I see Arizona, Arizona State, Washington State, UCLA as all having to go through that transition process and not being the better for it - plus they are all on our schedule. I still think that CU can get to a bowl game and mostly because I see our schedule as being favorable (no easy but not a death march either).
 
Yeah - we deserve to be ranked last until we prove otherwise.

I think it will be interesting, as BnG pointed out, to see all these teams with new coaches. UCLA, ASU, Utah should be winnable games at home (ASU the most) - even Washington is beatable with their turnover. WSU and Arizona should be winnable on the road. So, Nine winnable games on the schedule....

And I also agree with BnG - Utah seems vastly over-rated. They weren't that spectacular last season, and they were the recipients of one of the easier schedules in the nation and within the Pac 12. They are in the same boat again this year.

I think the Buffs will be fun to watch. Embree talked about the speed being vastly improved, and I am excited to see the new crop of playmakers start to emerge.
 
We will be 12th in literally every preseason publication, and it doesn't remotely anger me. Prove otherwise.
 
CVilleBuff said:
We will be 12th in literally every preseason publication, and it doesn't remotely anger me. Prove otherwise.
Click to expand...

Yup although I don't think we will finish last, this spot will be filled by Arizona. Rich Rod has a bad record of winning his first year IIRC.
 
Does anyone think the P12 is harder than the B12 top to bottom?

CU could find a way to knock off somebody in the old conference just by nature of the Folsom home field advantage.

In the new conference, I don't see Arizona or ASU or UCLA as being any more or less formidable than an ISU or KU or KSU. Washington isn't any more scary than Baylor or TTU or OSU. I expect that CU will put up a good fight against ASU, UCLA, Washington and Utah, and probably wins enough of those to be better than #12.

It just seems Stanford and Oregon and USC draw more of a defeatist attitude under Embree than what we saw when a Hawkins team faced an OU or Texas or Nebraska.
 
Skidmark said:
Does anyone think the P12 is harder than the B12 top to bottom?

CU could find a way to knock off somebody in the old conference just by nature of the Folsom home field advantage.

In the new conference, I don't see Arizona or ASU or UCLA as being any more or less formidable than an ISU or KU or KSU. Washington isn't any more scary than Baylor or TTU or OSU. I expect that CU will put up a good fight against ASU, UCLA, Washington and Utah, and probably wins enough of those to be better than #12.

It just seems Stanford and Oregon and USC draw more of a defeatist attitude under Embree than what we saw when a Hawkins team faced an OU or Texas or Nebraska.
Click to expand...

I don't know. When a Hawkins team played Mizzou, I pretty much knew there was no reason to watch.
 
sackman said:
Having a really hard time reconciling these two statements.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I can see why.

We just disagree on PRich. As far as the RBs go, last year gave me hope as I thought Jones was a better runner than Speedy...esp in EB's system. But time will tell.
 
Skidmark said:
Does anyone think the P12 is harder than the B12 top to bottom?

CU could find a way to knock off somebody in the old conference just by nature of the Folsom home field advantage.

In the new conference, I don't see Arizona or ASU or UCLA as being any more or less formidable than an ISU or KU or KSU. Washington isn't any more scary than Baylor or TTU or OSU. I expect that CU will put up a good fight against ASU, UCLA, Washington and Utah, and probably wins enough of those to be better than #12.

It just seems Stanford and Oregon and USC draw more of a defeatist attitude under Embree than what we saw when a Hawkins team faced an OU or Texas or Nebraska.
Click to expand...

No, not even close
 
Well, I think USC & Oregon are top of the heap, followed by UW and Stanford. Cal is in that last group in talent, but they have been chronic underachievers.

Utah, OSU & WSU are less talented than the above, but they won't be hoping freshmen can come in and fill big holes. They've had complete recruiting classes, without major attrition, and with coaching continuity. And they have experienced QBs. They have a depth chart with guys who've been in the program awhile at the positions they are listed at.

UCLA, AZ and ASU can also fill out a depth chart with guys who've been on campus for a few years, but the new coaching situation certainly puts a lot in question. Their talent level is somewhere above Utah, OSU & WSU, but new systems could prove difficult.

Colorado is the only team in the league who have holes in the 2-deep where the only options are players who've changed positions, are walkons or will be true freshmen. Count TE, FB, WR on offense and DE, DT, and CB on defense as needing to find bodies in the fall. Utah may end up playing true freshmen, but they are not desperate to do so.
 
Couldn't have said that better myself, Buffaholic. Great summary of the situation we are in w/ respect to the Pac 12. Not good but many of us try to look at the glass as half-full. It is a little difficult this year b/w new QB, tons of freshmen playing and the loss of PRich.
 
How many of the so called experts picked CU to win the conference tournament and get to the 2nd round of the NCAA tournament?
 
buffwings said:
CU will get no respect until they prove they compete. I sincerely hope Embree can turn this thing around.
Click to expand...
End of story. I do think we have a much better coaching staff, and last's year's recruiting was a big improvement. It's still a work in progress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top