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!

Looking forward to the CSU game next year

Really? I'm not having this argument again. Here is the gist of the truth: You are ****ing stupid if you think recruiting rankings mean nothing. They are highly correlated with success. Anyone claiming that they don't is guaranteed to be the fan of a team that isn't doing well in the rankings. Do other factors influence success? Of course. But to completely discount (or even to largely discount) recruiting rankings is unrealistic and a sign of the stupid.
How'd all those 4 and 5* in football workout for you?

Also like I said earlier...CSU appears to be doing pretty damn well with our 0* recruits right?

I guess we should be going 0-30 every year because recruiting rankings are an exact science....
 
How'd all those 4 and 5* in football workout for you?

Also like I said earlier...CSU appears to be doing pretty damn well with our 0* recruits right?

What 4* and 5* kids?

There are busts and there are diamonds. That is true - but doesn't negate the general correlation between recruit ratings and success.

How about this - If CSU could get a 2* PG to sign or a 4* PG to sign - which would you prefer they take?
 
How'd all those 4 and 5* in football workout for you?

Also like I said earlier...CSU appears to be doing pretty damn well with our 0* recruits right?

I guess we should be going 0-30 every year because recruiting rankings are an exact science....

:lol:

Don't stop...

(BTW, I don't think anyone thinks CSU sucks in basketball)
 
What 4* and 5* kids?

There are busts and there are diamonds. That is true - but doesn't negate the general correlation between recruit ratings and success.

How about this - If CSU could get a 2* PG to sign or a 4* PG to sign - which would you prefer they take?
I'm not saying there isn't a correlation between high recruiting and success but you guys seem to think it is a guarantee.

Saying that CU is guaranteed to win because of your high recruits who haven't proven anything over our 0* recruits who are proven, beat you guys last year, beat three top 25 teams, and made the NCAA tournament.
 
How'd all those 4 and 5* in football workout for you?

Also like I said earlier...CSU appears to be doing pretty damn well with our 0* recruits right?

I guess we should be going 0-30 every year because recruiting rankings are an exact science....
well, dude, 59-19-2 all time suggests that the team that recruits better, overall, is gonna do better than the team that doesn't.

So I'm gonna say that on average all our 4 and 5 * recruits in football, for instance, mean that we are usually going to kick your ass.

Basically, you didn't understand my post and are attempting to use a few anecdotes to argue against unfavorable statistical evidence. And I never said it was an exact science. Stop making **** up.

I'm not saying there isn't a correlation between high recruiting and success but you guys seem to think it is a guarantee.

Saying that CU is guaranteed to win because of your high recruits who haven't proven anything over our 0* recruits who are proven, beat you guys last year, beat three top 25 teams, and made the NCAA tournament.
Who the **** said that? Are you really that dumb? Only one guaranteeing anything today is you. In fact, what we have repeatedly said is that the game is no guarantee for CSU and could go either way. Please read. Please god. I know its hard cause slider took all the learn to read pictures books away from you when you were a kid, but TRY! You can do it!
 
Last edited:
I'm not saying there isn't a correlation between high recruiting and success but you guys seem to think it is a guarantee.

Saying that CU is guaranteed to win because of your high recruits who haven't proven anything over our 0* recruits who are proven, beat you guys last year, beat three top 25 teams, and made the NCAA tournament.

Who said CU is guaranteed to win?
 
well, dude, 59-19-2 all time suggests that the team that recruits better, overall, is gonna do better than the team that doesn't.

So I'm gonna say that on average all our 4 and 5 * recruits in football, for instance, mean that we are usually going to kick your ass.

Basically, you didn't understand my post and are attempting to use a few anecdotes to argue against unfavorable statistical evidence. And I never said it was an exact science. Stop making **** up.
Pretty sure we're talking about the upcoming season. Not what happened 50 years ago
 
The only one guaranteeing wins is gasm.

Gasm belongs in the politics forum with the rest of them.
 
(BTW, I don't think anyone thinks CSU sucks in basketball)

No ****. Except for 2-3 posters who refuse to ever say anything nice about CSU, most of this board thinks CSU is a probable tourney team next year. So Gasm's persecuted act is really odd and out of place here. Normally blatantly obvious trolling like this gets moved to the island, but I'm kind of enjoying this.

I tell you, CSquared is quickly becoming one of my favorite posters on this board by virtue of NOT being Gasm.
 
Pretty sure we're talking about the upcoming season. Not what happened 50 years ago
You continue to deliberately shy away from all evidence disputing your points. You think no one notices that? You think that perhaps that hurts your credibility?
 
Darth Snow seems to think we suck. I mean those 4* recruits are going to beat our proven 0* recruits by 50 by his logic
 
You continue to deliberately shy away from all evidence disputing your points. You think no one notices that? You think that perhaps that hurts your credibility?
you realize recruiting rankings have really only been around for 10 years right?
 
Darth Snow seems to think we suck. I mean those 4* recruits are going to beat our proven 0* recruits by 50 by his logic
:lol: what fantasy are you living in? Disputing your bull**** points doesn't mean I think that. In fact, if you could read, you would know that in fact I think it is going to be a close game and could go either way. Maybe if I repeat that a few more times, you will figure it out.
you realize recruiting rankings have really only been around for 10 years right?
Facts:
1. Historically, CU recruits better than CSU.
2. That is reflected in the all time series record.
3. Isn't CU 7-3 against CSU in the last 10 years?
4. :lol:
 
Last edited:
Our Freshman will be involved, but will not be heavily relied upon. We have a possible lottery draft pick, a PG who started every game as a Freshman and was our most clutch scorer for that season, a back up PG/SG who played significant minutes last year and could go on scoring hot streaks better than thousands of players.

As for the players we are bringing in, we don't need them to come score 15 for us. The sheer athleticism that is proven already from them will suffice for them to defend, rebound, and get easy buckets.

Do you ever understand what you are talking about?

In other words, we went on our post-season run with an 8-man rotation. We lost 3 of the 8 and added a Top 25 recruiting class. There will be growing pains with the roster changes, but we got more talented, don't lack for experience, and we also have a European preseason tour that will give us time to work out a lot of the kinks before games start to count.
 
:lol: what fantasy are you living in? Disputing your bull**** points doesn't mean I think that. In fact, if you could read, you would know that in fact I think it is going to be a close game and could go either way. Maybe if I repeat that a few more times, you will figure it out.
You are living in the fantasy world where you think your recruiting class has more talent then our entire roster. So if we made the NCAA tourney last year, you guys must be a national title contender if 5 players have more talent then our 12
 
You are living in the fantasy world where you think your recruiting class has more talent then our entire roster. So if we made the NCAA tourney last year, you guys must be a national title contender if 5 players have more talent then our 12
You can keep running to new off-tangent points of questionable basis and stupid logic, but all it does is make you look like an idiot.
 
First of all we are talking about basketball right? Right? Someone tell me why football recruiting is coming up in a basketball thread... Everyone in the country knows that talented freshman have a much higher chance of coming and competing and raising the overall talent level immediately in basketball than in football. Not a guarantee but the odds are much more in their favor on the hardwood. Second we left 23 free points on your floor last year. We make half of those and we win big. You say your most talented player had an off night, ya ours did too so those points cancel. CSU should be embarrassed they won by a single point after the ****** game we played. The fact you guys rushed the court after the win tells me just how important it is to beat CU. Nothing else matters to you all. We won our conference tournament and beat the MWC's best team in the NCAA tourney. Fact is our team is overall more talented, better coached, and has a greater home field advantage.

I am not guaranteeing we win, but I am also not blind to the writing on the ****ing wall... I honestly cant wait for the game to show CSewe what a true college basketball atmosphere really is. One without a stupid noise meter that doesn't even work. This game is where the true rivalry from the two schools will grow. The football one is dieing because of the talent gap and the gap in wins in that game. I look forward to the basketball game and enjoy Gasm's input from the other side however do not come onto our boards and start claiming absolute victory, especially when the lines in vegas are set, you will be the underdogs. Not CU.
 
we could lose to CSU, still win our conference tourney and an NCAA tournament game, so the game just isn't as big of a deal as football will be.
 
You can keep running to new off-tangent points of questionable basis and stupid logic, but all it does is make you look like an idiot.
Not really, thats your main argument point.

Arguing your recruits are better than our entire team when you haven't even seen them step on the court yet
 
Not really, thats your main argument point.

Arguing your recruits are better than our entire team when you haven't even seen them step on the court yet
So do you admit that your fantasy claim about me saying that CU was guaranteed to beat CSU was complete and total nonsense?
 
Not really, thats your main argument point.

Arguing your recruits are better than our entire team when you haven't even seen them step on the court yet

Kinda like proclaiming CU has no shot at home and automatically dismissing the incoming players?
 
Kinda like proclaiming CU has no shot at home and automatically dismissing the incoming players?
I'm not automatically dismissing them, but our players are already proven and they're not 18 years old with the muscle mass of a small child
 
Really? What post? Do you read what you respond to? Or just assume what it means?
You said your 5 recruits have more talent then our whole team. You said they have better offers. You said you have multiple good players returning including a possible lottery pick. Sounds like you think your team is a lot better, when none of those are proven
 
I'm not automatically dismissing them, but our players are already proven and they're not 18 years old with the muscle mass of a small child
Umm, do you realize how dumb this is? It should be pretty obvious.
 
Not really, thats your main argument point.

Arguing your recruits are better than our entire team when you haven't even seen them step on the court yet

No one said our recruits are better than your entire team. We said we have a very good recruiting class coming in to supplement our returning players and it leads us to believe we will have a talented and partly experienced squad. Stop making **** up.
 
Back
Top