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 $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Official Bowl Games Thread
- Thread starter Duff Man
- Start date
L Buff
Commissar of the Albuffs Collective Left
Sykobuff
Well-Known Member
Oh ... and BTW ... it's delusional. Spellcheck is your friend ... use it.
You're the badass snowflake. Reality is your friend, use it. I said 6-7 wins.
Everyone else is on the decline? Good call tini.
L Buff
Commissar of the Albuffs Collective Left
Sykobuff
Well-Known Member
Buffenuf
massive tool
If regular and continued "STOOPID looks" on his face were a measure of coaching ability, Mora would be laughed out of the PAC.
I've never been sold on his coaching. Or even recruiting. Yeah, top physical talent, but where's the heart and motors on any of those guys?
Buffenuf
massive tool
Glad someone recalls that! The SWC (UT, SMU and A&M) was mired in scandal. SoCal (U$C & UCLA) and the Bay Area (Cal & Furd) were mired in mediocrity or their styles clashed with what Mac wanted, option running game versus pass-first pro-style. Mac had some huge advantages in recruiting that haven't existed for some time.
Saw the score this morning and was shocked that UCLA only lost by 8. I turned it off in the 2nd quarter figuring Nebraska was going to steamroll them. Bruins clearly didn't want to be there with one OL signing with an agent so he couldn't play, guys going off the field for every little boo boo, no fire at all. I thought the Nubs would end up winning by 20+.
Cu winning the south with our road schedule? Hilarious. We couldn't beat those teams at home and some of them had a down year (Arizona and Oregon). I'm hoping the team can beat somebody on the road they aren't supposed to beat. But that may only happen once.
Id rather the team just defend Folsom and we beat everyone coming here. That would be a good showing.
And Mac had Iowa St and KSU to play against. KU and MU had ups and downs, but weren't anything special.
Id rather the team just defend Folsom and we beat everyone coming here. That would be a good showing.
And Mac had Iowa St and KSU to play against. KU and MU had ups and downs, but weren't anything special.
BlackNGold
Club Member
The PAC 12 suffers from having fan bases that do not travel well which effects the bowl tie ins. Washington and Oregon maybe travel well. Nebraska got in because the Bowls believe they will travel.
The bowls believe that because it's factual! Nubs travel well. They also eat a lot.
Yeah. It's a carry-over from the old days when attendance is what drove bowl revenue & team selection. Now that this has become very secondary compared to which teams will draw tv ratings, we're starting to see better bowl alignments for the Pac-12.
I'm not sure that attendance isn't a big thing though. Many of these bowl games are propped up by the local communities who are looking forward to the economic impact that the fans will have as they descend onto their city.
One thing for sure is that me and my buddies will travel the next time the Buffs get in a bowl. We've been waiting awhile....
You are right Holic. Most of these bowls cost their communities money. The cities provide a lot of extra services, the business community provides a lot of in kind donations.
They are sold on doing this by two things. One is national TV exposure for their cities and the other is the idea that visiting fans will drop a lot of money on hotels, meals, etc.
The fuskers are legendary for spending money at bowls. They have fans that travel from all over the country to all over the country for the games and it is the highlight of their year. They come in bigger numbers, stay more days, and spend more money than a lot of other fan bases do.
It makes a lot of sense because there isn't much worth spending your time an money on in Nebraska itself. The bowl game is their escape from a dreary mid-western winter.
The bowls also know that the fusker fans who can't make it to the game will be watching on TV, again all over the country. Better ratings make it easier for them to negotiate more money in their future TV contracts.
BlackNGold
Club Member
Nik your are out of touch. Ticket allotments make big money for the Bowl games. Stanford sold 30,000 tickets to the Rose Bowl this year (student tickets start at $75 each and regular ticket start at $150) plus Stanford charged $7 each for people to enter the lottery for the tickets. On the negative side - unsold ticket allotments cost the schools a lot of money. Plus as Mountain said - the communities put a lot of investment into these events and expect people to show up. The Alamo Bowl claims a $46 million positive economic impact on San Antonio due to the people traveling into the community to support their school.
Look at bowl attendance in general. Schools buy the minimum allotment. We keep getting more bowls because of what tv pays and the national tv exposure that the sponsor gets. You're the one who is out of touch here. If it was about attendance and the local community, we'd still have all of the bowls sponsored by a local agricultural product.
TV is clearly the driver. Nebraska provides a bit of both (versus other teams with comparable records). The local businessmen prosper from selling out the buffet line and the sponsors get some tv exposure. I hate Nubs, but they do love their CFB team (along with Estes Park, all-you-can-eat buffets, and overalls).
It wouldn't happen without TV money. They are the ones who make it financially possible.
The attendance and the TV viewership from the participating schools though are what makes the difference between success and failure. They are what make it possible to get the community participation ($$$$) to put the event on.
Certain schools are known to generate a lot of money for host communities, others are known to not show up with open wallets.
The attendance and the TV viewership from the participating schools though are what makes the difference between success and failure. They are what make it possible to get the community participation ($$$$) to put the event on.
Certain schools are known to generate a lot of money for host communities, others are known to not show up with open wallets.
So how does that work for CSU's "bowl" this year?
I would guess that that particular bowl isn't going to be around a lot more years.
Assume that the local bowl committee when through the process of organizing the game and getting approval from the NCAA with the assumption that they would be able to get a contract, likely with ESPN, for coverage. Somehow it didn't happen
So annoying that the only Pac 12 loss is a heavily favored UCLA team against a crappy Nebraska team that didn't even qualify for a bowl.
I seriously can't get it over it. It's driving me nuts.
Do they have an argument? It seems that they were in every game except maybe Purdue, and they beat Michigan State. There are reasons for them to be hopeful.
We've been a hopeful fanbase with fewer positives to rally around.
EDIT: Oh for ****'s sake. **** off Surveyor.
Last edited:
It would just inflate their win total though since most of the teams they lost to were not good teams. Their win over Michigan St. was complete BS too.
