What's new
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!

#Fire Coach Dorrell

just got caught up on the weekend's games.

in the pro-sports leaning area that is Colorado, having Denver's NFL team at 2-0 while CU continues sucking the hind tit is about the worst possible scenario w/r/t maintaining fan interest, never mind growing it.

Sure, it doesn't help CU from a media standpoint when the Broncos are doing good but unless CU is relevant on the national stage they've always gotten minimal attention from the local media.
 
Sure, it doesn't help CU from a media standpoint when the Broncos are doing good but unless CU is relevant on the national stage they've always gotten minimal attention from the local media.
Jimmy Fallon Reaction GIF by The Tonight Show Starring Jimmy Fallon


"doing well"
 
Stay within context. Is Barnett = Saban? Hell no. But compared to what we've had since he left, he's a GD savant. Dude has 3 conference championships and multiple divsion championships (backed in or not). And don't tell me we wouldn't all give our collective right nut for prime Gary Barnett to walk through that door right now and take over.
Don't forge what he did at Northwestern! That was amazing as well
 
Who cares? They'd beat us up and they play plenty of P5 teams. Honestly, is the PAC12 better than the MWC right now? Honest question. The differences are smaller than I'd expected given the advantages to being P5? Styles have changed in CFB and being physical is important. All the teams I mentioned are well-coached, disciplined, and play tough. They have had poor recruiting.

Don't get me wrong, I like better recruits better than worse but the CU problems right now have less to do with talent than coaching.
Yes, the Pac 12 is significantly better than the MWC. Don’t go full Jalapeño.
 
Still confused by the Barnett knob slobbing. 2001 was awesome(ish). 2002, not bad, should have been better. 2003 - horrible. 2004/2005 - fluke winking the North on (on missed field goals in both seasons if I remember correctly) and absolute embarrassment in the B12 CCG. If you want to talk about how great he was because we made it to bowl games, cool. But to finish the conf .500 and win the North thanks to KSU, KU, ****ty Neb, mediocre ISU and think this guy is ****ting all kinds of football knowledge is revisionist history.
Barney mailed it in on the most important part of the job (recruiting) when the administration came down with their ridiculous (checks notes) recruiting restrictions after the psuedo "scandal."

He knew he had just been kneecapped, and well, he was. He didn't fight to keep his best recruiters around when other schools started poaching them, and it definitely did not help that a couple highly rated prospects turned out poorly.

At the end of the day, he's one of only three coaches to win a conference championship in two P5 conferences. And he's a coach that mailed it in the last few years when he felt betrayed /kneecapped by the administration. Those can both be true statements.
 
Recruiting WRs is the only thing Chev is proven at. Someone with resources could easily recognize and reward this.
 
Yes, the Pac 12 is significantly better than the MWC. Don’t go full Jalapeño.
Results that do the talking:

Oregon 31, Fresno St 24 (squeaker)
Nevada over Cal
Montana over UW (Big Sky, aka MWC minor league)
Utah St over WSU
Fresno St over UCLA
SDSU over Utah
SDSU over Arizona
NAU over Arizona (Big Sky, see above)

And, BYU has beaten Arizona, Utah and ASU this year, and physically manhandled each of them.

The PAC12 is NOT good and the top half of the MWC is competitive with the PAC12 middle tier (maybe better). I'd put SDSU up against ASU this year. Other than Oregon, I'm not sure anyone in our conference is really good.

But NOT when you look at recruiting rankings over any measure of time. The best MWC recruiting rankings still would fall in last place in the PAC.
The old debate is that once you are outside the top 25 year after year in rankings (and maybe it's top 15), the differences tend to get small. Small enough that good coaching (and player development) can fix a lot of it. I'm all for CU getting back to a top 15 in recruiting but it would help a lot if we looked like we could handle Montana. We could have top 10 talent right now and not get out of our own way.

Edit: another way to say that is I think Fresno State is better than us. Why can't we do with our talent what they are doing with theirs? That would turn some heads and we'd be back on our way after what, 20 years of hell?
 
Yes, the Pac 12 is significantly better than the MWC. Don’t go full Jalapeño.

The P12 should be significantly better than the MWC but the results say otherwise as @buffaholic pointed out. I never expected Washington to lose to Montana nor did I expect Utah State to beat North Dakota but that is what happened. That loss to Montana was embarrassing because the Griz didn't play last fall and only played a couple of scrimmages last spring. That UA loss to NAU is about as embarrassing as the Husky loss because the Lumberjacks are not going to be mistaken as a Big Sky championship contender most of the time and they are only a little better than UNC who CU "struggled" to beat 35-7. There is no defending the Pac-12's performance so far this season and trying to say the Pac-12 is significantly better than the MWC on any forum right now isn't the wisest thing to do.

That was a weak sauce argument and you should be forced to eat 50 fresh jalapenos without anything to relieve the burn.
 
Results that do the talking:

Oregon 31, Fresno St 24 (squeaker)
Nevada over Cal
Montana over UW (Big Sky, aka MWC minor league)
Utah St over WSU
Fresno St over UCLA
SDSU over Utah
SDSU over Arizona
NAU over Arizona (Big Sky, see above)

And, BYU has beaten Arizona, Utah and ASU this year, and physically manhandled each of them.

The PAC12 is NOT good and the top half of the MWC is competitive with the PAC12 middle tier (maybe better). I'd put SDSU up against ASU this year. Other than Oregon, I'm not sure anyone in our conference is really good.

But NOT when you look at recruiting rankings over any measure of time. The best MWC recruiting rankings still would fall in last place in the PAC.
The old debate is that once you are outside the top 25 year after year in rankings (and maybe it's top 15), the differences tend to get small. Small enough that good coaching (and player development) can fix a lot of it. I'm all for CU getting back to a top 15 in recruiting but it would help a lot if we looked like we could handle Montana. We could have top 10 talent right now and not get out of our own way.

Edit: another way to say that is I think Fresno State is better than us. Why can't we do with our talent what they are doing with theirs? That would turn some heads and we'd be back on our way after what, 20 years of hell?
I still can’t believe how many posters think the the Pac is better than the Big 12
 
just got caught up on the weekend's games.

in the pro-sports leaning area that is Colorado, having Denver's NFL team at 2-0 while CU continues sucking the hind tit is about the worst possible scenario w/r/t maintaining fan interest, never mind growing it.

When CU is good, the Denver media covers them. 2016 was the most recent example-the Broncos were playing meaningful games in late November and December, and the game with Utah that year still got a fair amount of attention locally.
 
Results that do the talking:

Oregon 31, Fresno St 24 (squeaker)
Nevada over Cal
Montana over UW (Big Sky, aka MWC minor league)
Utah St over WSU
Fresno St over UCLA
SDSU over Utah
SDSU over Arizona
NAU over Arizona (Big Sky, see above)

And, BYU has beaten Arizona, Utah and ASU this year, and physically manhandled each of them.

The PAC12 is NOT good and the top half of the MWC is competitive with the PAC12 middle tier (maybe better). I'd put SDSU up against ASU this year. Other than Oregon, I'm not sure anyone in our conference is really good.

But NOT when you look at recruiting rankings over any measure of time. The best MWC recruiting rankings still would fall in last place in the PAC.
The old debate is that once you are outside the top 25 year after year in rankings (and maybe it's top 15), the differences tend to get small. Small enough that good coaching (and player development) can fix a lot of it. I'm all for CU getting back to a top 15 in recruiting but it would help a lot if we looked like we could handle Montana. We could have top 10 talent right now and not get out of our own way.

Edit: another way to say that is I think Fresno State is better than us. Why can't we do with our talent what they are doing with theirs? That would turn some heads and we'd be back on our way after what, 20 years of hell?

For starters, Fresno has had an identity for the better part of 2+ decades. That's a gritty as **** program who will go anywhere and play anyone. They took Minnesota (who finished 10th in the country) to double OT and lost by a TD at USC two years ago. They beat UCLA by 24 in 2018. We saw what they did in Eugene-they probably should have won that game.......and that was two weeks before Jake Haener threw for 450 on UCLA despite getting the hell beat out of him.

Can we say that about this program?
 
Really the point I'm trying to make is not to debate how important recruiting is, but to point out that there's a lot of programs having reasonable success with much lower recruiting rankings over the last 5 years than Colorado.

But I'm not willing to give KD, or any of the coaches an excuse for why we are so bad right now. Because the talent on this roster is not largely their doing. They can't use that as the out. Our recruiting classes are way better than any team in the MWC along with a lot of programs that look reasonably good including the Gophers who just schooled CU.
 
Really the point I'm trying to make is not to debate how important recruiting is, but to point out that there's a lot of programs having reasonable success with much lower recruiting rankings over the last 5 years than Colorado.

But I'm not willing to give KD, or any of the coaches an excuse for why we are so bad right now. Because the talent on this roster is not largely their doing. They can't use that as the out. Our recruiting classes are way better than any team in the MWC along with a lot of programs that look reasonably good including the Gophers who just schooled CU.
But the point is, those G5 teams can win the one-off games here and there against the middle or bottom of the Pac 12, but they won’t do it playing a Pac 12 schedule. Lower recruiting with elite coaching can get a program to a successful point at the G5 levels but it’s not going to be sustained in the P5. Even if Matt Campbell stayed at ISU for another 5 years, they aren’t sustaining 9+ wins with that level of recruiting.
 
Dorrell should have never been hired. I know you guys got left in the lurch by he who shall not be named, but this was a lazy, lowest common denominator hire, and now you're screwed. The dude couldn't win at UCLA, CU brass hiring him was 100% capitulation to "we just want to make a bowl game once in a while".
 
So Dorrell is likely going to be 6-6 through his first 12 games (losses vs ASU and USC and then a win vs Arizona). What are the odds he is able to go 3-3 down the stretch against Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, UCLA, Washington and Utah and finish year 2 with a .500 overall record (5-7 this year)?

That feels like best case scenario at this time, and would likely pull me back in a bit, but very unlikely.
 
So Dorrell is likely going to be 6-6 through his first 12 games (losses vs ASU and USC and then a win vs Arizona). What are the odds he is able to go 3-3 down the stretch against Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, UCLA, Washington and Utah and finish year 2 with a .500 overall record (5-7 this year)?

That feels like best case scenario at this time, and would likely pull me back in a bit, but very unlikely.
Thankfully none of those teams are as talented as A&M. But the only thing pulling me back is getting rid of chev ASAP.
 
So Dorrell is likely going to be 6-6 through his first 12 games (losses vs ASU and USC and then a win vs Arizona). What are the odds he is able to go 3-3 down the stretch against Cal, Oregon, Oregon State, UCLA, Washington and Utah and finish year 2 with a .500 overall record (5-7 this year)?

That feels like best case scenario at this time, and would likely pull me back in a bit, but very unlikely.
I don't see how there is anyway that happens even with changes at OC and quarterback. The offense is just that putrid and coaching is even worse.

The only hope I can find is that Dorrell has been so hands off with the offense that he completely interjects and somehow finds something that CU can at least get some first downs with. Then possibly grind out games with their defense. From what we know, Dorrell is not that creative, so I don't see how anyway this changes. At this point we'd be lucky to get 3 wins and completely start over next year on offense with a new staff and new scheme.
 
I don't see how there is anyway that happens even with changes at OC and quarterback. The offense is just that putrid and coaching is even worse.

The only hope I can find is that Dorrell has been so hands off with the offense that he completely interjects and somehow finds something that CU can at least get some first downs with. Then possibly grind out games with their defense. From what we know, Dorrell is not that creative, so I don't see how anyway this changes. At this point we'd be lucky to get 3 wins and completely start over next year on offense with a new staff and new scheme.
I just have to believe the offense will be better than it was last week. I don’t know how they go from scoring 25-28 ppg even in the “bad” games last year, to scorning 3.5 ppg over the last two FBS matchups.

If the offense truly stays that bad, then they won’t win another game and it’ll be a 1-11 season. There’s no coming back from that, IMO, and RG will have no choice but to admit mistake and clean house after the season.
 
I just have to believe the offense will be better than it was last week. I don’t know how they go from scoring 25-28 ppg even in the “bad” games last year, to scorning 3.5 ppg over the last two FBS matchups.

If the offense truly stays that bad, then they won’t win another game and it’ll be a 1-11 season. There’s no coming back from that, IMO, and RG will have no choice but to admit mistake and clean house after the season.
Agreed. If the offense is the way it has been the last 7 quarters, the wheels will be completely off. I don't even think the offense was this bad during the 2012 season.
 
But the point is, those G5 teams can win the one-off games here and there against the middle or bottom of the Pac 12, but they won’t do it playing a Pac 12 schedule. Lower recruiting with elite coaching can get a program to a successful point at the G5 levels but it’s not going to be sustained in the P5. Even if Matt Campbell stayed at ISU for another 5 years, they aren’t sustaining 9+ wins with that level of recruiting.
I think you are kidding yourself. Maybe there's a "get up for the big boys" factor that you can't replicate over a 12 game schedule. But all those losses by the PAC12 that I cited are because those programs are very close together in talent. The difference between #5 and #20 in recruiting rankings, year after year is huge.
The difference between #30 and #45 is likely close to zero. This is a very non-linear relationship that fans seem to think makes a difference.

I am pretty sure Matt Campbell would sustain that level as well. Please explain why you think he wouldn't. Is he surprising teams that they are soundly handling still several years later? I don't think so. They are beating way more gifted athletes over and over.

The Fresno State QB looks much better than the UW QB he lost his job to. Why? Coaching. UW bungled their OC hire apparently. Coaching matters.
 
Back
Top