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!

Future of football series vs CSU

dply said:
Because we are irrelevant. Maybe scheduling a softer schedule would get us into some low bowl game. (which would be nice for practice sake) But if CU plays New Mexico in some lower bowl does anyone watch? If CU plays Aggie or TCU you will have the eyes of Texas on us. Maybe that helps us get a player or two that wouldn't have paid us any mind.

I look at all the Braves and Cub fans in Colorado and see how powerful getting a team in front of viewers can be. Getting stuff fixed with DirecTv would help. (I'm on Larry's side.) But getting us out of irrelevancy would help even more.
Click to expand...
You're living in a old ass world of thought, my man. And also ignoring that we are still going to be playing UCLA and USC on a yearly basis, among other teams in-conference who draw viewers. Recruits are not going to give a **** about us playing Texas or wahtever and losing. Wins > quality of team played when it comes to recruiting.
 
dply said:
People seem to think scheduling "tougher" opponents is all about wins and losses. More people will watch which helps recruiting. More players will want to play against the schools that spurned them giving our players a chip on their shoulders. The transient nature of Colorado will have the opposing teams fans come by Folsom to see their teams play which pads our pockets and also gives us the chance to win some of those fans over to our side when their teams are not playing us.

It's a ****ing chess match. Real life doesn't come with cheat codes. Mike Mac can't play NCAA 2015 on Freshman, build his team and then go after the big boys.
Click to expand...

Yep. I have accepted that this is the nature of things and what has to be done here. This isn't a state where the opponent doesn't matter and we'll see a sold out stadium for an FCS opponent. Games have to be events to draw eyeballs and fannies. Even road games need to be relevant enough that it could get picked up for a national broadcast. Inter-conference matchups between P5s do that, even if we're talking about CU going to Minnesota and being in that 10am Pacific Time slot on ESPNU with one of the female play-by-play announcers.

This is what CU needs to be.

Beyond that, when it comes to marketing I think it's good to zig when others zag. Standing out is important. Being known as the P5 program that will play anyone would be a good market position for CU that would mean something in recruiting and program culture. If that means playing 12 P5 games a year, I could get behind that. And, truthfully, if CU (or any other P5 team) can't go 6-6 against a P5 schedule then I don't think they belong in a bowl game anyway.
 
TSchekler said:
Ok, so going off this logic, had we scheduled LSU in place of Montana St. or Alabama in place of Sac St. and lost by 35 and 50, respectively, CU's program would be less irrelevant or done anything differently on delivering a bowl game? Makes sense.
Click to expand...

The macho approach would have added a few million in ticket sales and a few million more in network revenue.

Most importantly, it would have not masked how deep the hole is that was caused by the prolonged crisis in leadership
 
TSchekler said:
Also, the notion that we had some "adventure into pussy non-con scheduling" is just flat out wrong.

CU's non-con since 2006:

2006- CSU, Montana State, Arizona State, Georgia
2007- CSU, Arizona State, Florida State, Miami (OH)
2008- CSU, Eastern Washington, West Virginia, Florida State
2009- CSU, Toledo, Wyoming, West Virginia
2010- CSU, Cal, Hawaii, Georgia
2011- CSU, Cal, Hawaii, Ohio State
2012- CSU, Sac St, Fresno St.
2013- CSU, Central Arkansas, Fresno (Cancelled), Charlestown Southern
2014- CSU, UMASS, Hawaii

Of all those "pussy" teams we played over the past 9 seasons, we lost to 2 of them. So really, Skid, how did that truly affect the program again???
Click to expand...

Last 5 years. I made that clear.
 
This is an insane conversation. We need to win, first and foremost, before worrying about anything else. Nobody looks at a bowl team's resume and says, "Yeah, but one of those wins was against Nicholls State." They say, "You won (6 or more) games and are bowling" and recruiting/morale/competition at positions improves.

In 1985, a year that the program was desperate to break through (not dissimilar to where we are now),Mac 1.0 went 1-11 playing Michigan State, Oregon, Notre Dame, and UCLA in non-conference (getting throttled). When he finally broke through in 1988, it was Fresno State, Oregon State, CSU and Iowa. More manageable opponents (Iowa was ranked) is the way to go. Once you're competing with the big boys, then start scheduling them.

Those of you wishing that we had been mudholed worse the last several years, or who want to make our path back to bowl games and competing for hardware more difficult than it already is, clearly have not been traumatized as much as I have been by the years of losing.
 
Last edited:
As far as recruiting goes, it would be kind of badass to play nothing but legitimate P5 teams. What better way than to change the attitude of the program than tell recruits we won't shy away from anybody and every year they can play some of the elites from the SEC, B1G, ACC, and Big 12. I don't endorse it, in fact I think one patsy "preseason" game is a good tune up, but otherwise 2/3 being tough teams sounds awesome to me.
 
BuffNut99 said:
This is an insane conversation. We need to win, first and foremost, before worrying about anything else. Those of you wishing that we had been mudholed worse the last several years, or who want to make our path back to bowl games and competing for hardware more difficult than it already is, clearly have not been traumatized as much as I have been by the years of losing.
Click to expand...


What pisses you off more, losing to USC by 50 or losing to Toledo by 16? I broke my remote against the wall for the Toledo game.
 
BuffNut99 said:
This is an insane conversation. We need to win, first and foremost, before worrying about anything else. Those of you wishing that we had been mudholed worse the last several years, or who want to make our path back to bowl games and competing for hardware more difficult than it already is, clearly have not been traumatized as much as I have been by the years of losing.
Click to expand...
The schedule over the next several years is hardly daunting. It will not be the reason for not winning enough.
 
'Tini said:
You're living in a old ass world of thought, my man.
Click to expand...


Maybe but your youth might have you rushing things that cannot be rushed. Well, it can be rushed but you need to go the Baylor and other route and we don't have the admin or fan base.
 
Last edited:
dply said:
What pisses you off more, losing to USC by 50 or losing to Toledo by 16? I broke my remote against the wall for the Toledo game.
Click to expand...

I still have visions of Pat Mahnke's slow ass chasing the Toledo WRs all over the field and looking like he was running in mud
 
dply said:
What pisses you off more, losing to USC by 50 or losing to Toledo by 16? I broke my remote against the wall for the Toledo game.
Click to expand...

Agree. Losing to Ohio State and walking away with $1.2M payroll > Paying Montana State $600K to kick our asses in Folsom.

Losing in Toledo on a Thursday night for a $700K payoff from ESPN < Losing to LSU on a Saturday where network payouts are double.

The 2012 Fresno State was as ugly as it gets. 35 points against the D in the 1st quarter. And the money for that game wasn't much due to the nature of the 2-1. Only FSU and a few masochistic buff fans stuck around to watch all 4 quarters of that stinker.
 
Duff Man said:
The schedule over the next several years is hardly daunting. It will not be the reason for not winning enough.
Click to expand...

Have they announced what the future OOC schedule is? The website only has 2015 and fbsschedules.com, which has up to 2019/2020 for some schools, only has 2016.
 
Skidmark said:
Agree. Losing to Ohio State and walking away with $1.2M payroll > Paying Montana State $600K to kick our asses in Folsom.

Losing in Toledo on a Thursday night for a $700K payoff from ESPN < Losing to LSU on a Saturday where network payouts are double.

The 2012 Fresno State was as ugly as it gets. 35 points against the D in the 1st quarter. And the money for that game wasn't much due to the nature of the 2-1. Only FSU and a few masochistic buff fans stuck around to watch all 4 quarters of that stinker.
Click to expand...

Hell, I'm not even talking about playing Ohio State and LSU level opponents for the non-conference. Maybe one team like that. I'm talking about scheduling a game against Kansas over a game against Utah State. No bigger risk of a loss and it brings a hell of a lot more attention (tv views and ticket sales). I'd rather see the Buffs play VA Tech than LA Tech.

We are seeing absolute crap. Look at this year's schedule in the non-conference. Hawai'i, CSU, Nicholls State, UMass. Come on, man. If CU wins all 4 as it should and it allows the 2015 Buffs to sneak into a bowl game, that is acceptable considering where the program has been. But it has to be a short-term thing. Buffs are moving to moderate scheduling. Starting in 2016, it looks like we'll play at least 1 P5 a year except for in 2017. Starting in 2020, we may be able to start playing 2. Beginning in 2022, it could be 3.
 
Buffnik said:
They've got it through 2024 with the games that have been scheduled. Still a lot of openings to be filled. http://www.fbschedules.com/ncaa/pac-10/colorado-buffaloes.php
Click to expand...

Thanks. The year drop down only goes to 2016.

So from your OOC rating idea, I see (not in order by game #):

2015- BCCC
2016- ABC
2017- BCC
2018- ABC
2019- ABB
2020- B
2021- BC
2022- B
2023- A
2024- A

Hardly daunting, and room to add some others in that low A or B range, IMO.
 
I might be in the minority but I want Lsu and teams like that on the schedule. Just don't do one-off bull****. Make them come to Folsom too. Acting like big boys, you gotta carry your brand that way too. If we're truly turning a corner, don't duck anyone. Recruits will see that and know, damn if I go there, it's primetime games. Take our licks along the way but you don't get better playing Nicholls St. Wanna get better in the Pac? Test yourself, you'll find out quickly where ur as a program.
 
BuffLuKe said:
I might be in the minority but I want Lsu and teams like that on the schedule. Just don't do one-off bull****. Make them come to Folsom too. Acting like big boys, you gotta carry your brand that way too. If we're truly turning a corner, don't duck anyone. Recruits will see that and know, damn if I go there, it's primetime games. Take our licks along the way but you don't get better playing Nicholls St. Wanna get better in the Pac? Test yourself, you'll find out quickly where ur as a program.
Click to expand...

I don't think you are in a minority. Non-Con SoS is a topic that polarizes opinions among fans,

Most fans just want to be entertained on a Saturday afternoon. And it's not entertaining to watch the Buffs beat or lose to an inferior team.

Memories are made when CU knocks off ranked opponents or gets knocked off by a non-P5 opponent.
 
TSchekler said:
Thanks. The year drop down only goes to 2016.

So from your OOC rating idea, I see (not in order by game #):

2015- BCCC
2016- ABC
2017- BCC
2018- ABC
2019- ABB
2020- B
2021- BC
2022- B
2023- A
2024- A

Hardly daunting, and room to add some others in that low A or B range, IMO.
Click to expand...


one off road games versus P5 opponents should be listed as F
 
The best part about this blow up is I do not think the spectrum of opinions is that different, and yet it has created pages upon pages of posts with people digging in on the fringe of their opinion.

As an aside, I have been very carefully only bringing my girls to the CU games against "B or C" opponents these past few years. I want them to think the Buffs actually field a competitive football team (they do not watch them on TV), as opposed to watching them get blown out against a top team.
 
TSchekler said:
$1.45mm payout
Click to expand...


fine change it to F+.

I don't think the problem is money anymore, it is perception. Do you think Michigan would come here for $1.5 million for a game with no return game. Well yes they probably would because we suck, but if we were good, there is no way in hell they would do that.
 
Hopefully, in 2016, CU has reached the level of competitiveness to be able to go into Ann Arbor, beat Michigan and get paid doing it. I have a feeling Harbaugh is going to dominate there but it's going to take a year or two.
 
TSchekler said:
A mandate dictating a uniform number of conference games across the P5 conferences is needed first and foremost. Period. Then, and only then, will multiple, OOC P5 opponents being scheduled become the norm.
Click to expand...

why? I don't see any reason for this is "needed", much less "needed first and foremost". College football has risen to incredible levels of popularity without such a policy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top