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!

Just for discussion sake, where do we rank to start 2017?

I suspect, with the number of losses CU has that CU won't be ranked to start the season. Perhaps mid 40s.
 
Agree with the ORV. Highly doubtful we'll ranked.

Oddly, assuming we'd be 3-0 with our dog**** OOC schedule, we should at that point be ranked, even though it's a dog**** OOC.

Concerning Oregon, no way are they ranked going into the season. Their season this year, plus their recent trajectory, combined with a coaching change - they won't even get one vote.
 
I would be pleasantly surprised if we were ranked to start next year. Less so if we win on the 29th.
 
We need to look at who's coming back at QB in the Pac-12 as well.
 
I think the variable people on here aren't considering is how many coaches we lose.

Sorry to be that guy, but the number will be > 0
 
ZandiBuff said:
I think the variable people on here aren't considering is how many coaches we lose.

Sorry to be that guy, but the number will be > 0
Click to expand...

Losing coaches is not always a bad thing and comes with the territory for successful teams. In fact, I would argue a little bit of turnover is healthy long-term. Also, the success tends to allow you to attract better replacements.
 
I'm
Duff Man said:
Losing coaches is not always a bad thing and comes with the territory for successful teams. In fact, I would argue a little bit of turnover is healthy long-term. Also, the success tends to allow you to attract better replacements.
Click to expand...
not sure there is a better replacement for JMFL . . .
 
just outside the top 25, and that's ok. Better to lose early and / or work your way from the bottom of that list.
 
Buffnik said:
Oregon won't be ranked before games are played in 2017.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure. ESPN loves money and Nike and so does everyone else. I do agree they're not looking so promising but I just have that feeling they'll find a way to overhype them somehow.
 
Believe we will be somewhere around the top 20 level if we finish with a win in the bowl game. Lose and I think it will be last 5 of the top 25
 
sackman said:
I see Stanford and possibly UCLA and Utah being ranked higher than us going in to next year. If Rosen comes back, UCLA for sure. That's just in the PAC 12.
Click to expand...

UCLA's OC hire is going to be key.......If I'm a neutral guy, I'd hesitate to rank them above CU until I know who will be their play caller.
 
ahoelsken said:
UCLA's OC hire is going to be key.......If I'm a neutral guy, I'd hesitate to rank them above CU until I know who will be their play caller.
Click to expand...

Especially if Tuiasosopo (QB Coach) gets the Nevada HC gig. Talk about shaking things up like crazy over Rosen's 3 years with OC & QB Coach changes.
 
Agree with the 20-25 crowd.

We know that some of the "traditional" powers are going to get in. There are a certain number of voters who just automatically put them in deserved or not. Notre Dame will get votes because they are Notre Dame. A bunch of SEC teams will get votes because they are SEC.

CU will get a bunch of votes simply because a lot of the voters look at who was in it last year and vote for them again, we will get enough of those to put us in the rankings.

20-25 is a good spot to be in as well. It doesn't carry the pressure of being a top 10 or close. It still means that our scores and news gets run on the tickers and some wins move us up to a solid position before the start of conference play.
 
Actually rankings are pretty reflective of how the previous season ended for the most part.
We win our bowl, we will be ranked no question.
We also bring back almost everybody on offense next year and have a more favorable start to the season.
 
CUBuff2481 said:
lol, then WTF is the point of a discussion? This thread should have zero replies by your logic.
Click to expand...
You said you had a lot of faith in the guys moving up. The voters don't have any idea who the guys moving up are. That's why I asked if you are a voter. This isn't a thread about where we feel we should be ranked. It's a thread about where we likely will be ranked. I have faith in the guys coming up, too. That and a quarter will get you a phone call to somebody who gives a sh!t.
 
We are ranked #10 right now. If we win, one could say we could crack the top 6 or so. Voters don't look that hard. We will be ranked.
 
I actually hope we're not ranked.

I loathe going into the CSU game ranked - it turns a no win game into even more of a no win.

But, I'm guessing that we'll be 20 +/- 3.
 
If CU wins the Alamo, CU will be ranked at the lower end of the top 20 for next year. As it should be, what with losing all them seniors and such. Fairly easy preseason schedule to get their footing, and then we'll see as the season progresses....The thing is, there will be a lot of good young talent coming up the pipeline for several years. Next season will be interesting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top