They didn't cost us a chance at the title in 2001, we cost ourselves a shot when we **** the bed against Fresno state.
They cost us a chance at the title in 94, 95, and 96. But 94 is the one that hurts. That was the best team in school history.
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 realignment thread - SEC formally invites OU and Texas to join the conference in 2025
They didn't cost us a chance at the title in 2001, we cost ourselves a shot when we **** the bed against Fresno state.
They cost us a chance at the title in 94, 95, and 96. But 94 is the one that hurts. That was the best team in school history.
You hate everything lol
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
That Fresno State game is a game I will never forget. Horrid.
I still dont know why we tried a straight roll out on the goal line instead of just running right at them.
BerkeleyBuff
Well-Known Member
Not necessarily, despite the popular narrative. Ether way OU and UT are obviously waaaay higher on the B1G's list. In terms of "realistic" (discounting ACC) targets, I imagine we'd be in the B1G's top 5 candidates. But I really hope we never ever go to the B1G
BerkeleyBuff
Well-Known Member
What this guy said.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
I don’t know why we did anything stupid that day. Never should have lost that damn game.
BerkeleyBuff
Well-Known Member
Even in the worst case scenario of PAC armageddon, it's difficult to imagine we would ever even remotely be in danger of not having a P5 home. That's a very good place to be indeed.
20 plus million dollars extra a year says otherwise
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
Wrong. We ended fusker football as they knew it, and they still went to the Rose Bowl ahead of us. You can talk about Fresno or the Texas loss (which was cancelled out by the win over them in the Big 12 title game) all you want-but seasons like 2001 are why we have the playoff now.
There’s a lot more important things than money. I’m willing to have a little less money to not be in the B1G. Money hasn’t bought Indiana or Rutgers any real success.
BerkeleyBuff
Well-Known Member
Culturally we certainly fit in the PAC much better, and our alumni are clustered out here. And to your point, yes - at some point the bloated conferences like the SEC and B1G just statistically eliminate the odds of any individual team succeeding when only 1/14 or more can win the conference.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
If Texas leaves the Big 12, they're going indy. They're a big enough name to go off by themselves. No ACC team is an option for the Big 12 because they're all tied up via grant of rights into 2030. Oklahoma ain't going anywhere without little brother-I'd bet money on it. The one thing I've always hated about this league is Nebraska not being in it/our absence of a rival the last decade, and its why I've been saying we need to be playing the Nubs as often as we possibly can in this setup. Look at the buildup to last year's game and it starting back up again for this year-they get this fanbase fired up like no other opponent can, and games with them force the local media to pay attention. If the Big 10 wanted us, I for one would want to go tomorrow-more money. better conference leadership, and the fact we've got an actual rival in that league make it make a lot of sense.
And for Berkeley-we're the same team who played a ****ing road game at UMass because RG's predecessor thought we had enough alumni in the Boston area for that to make sense. We have alumni everywhere.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
Difference between us and Indiana and Rutgers-We've got a national championship, and neither of them do. We're also still one of the 30 winningest programs in the sport despite 15 years of stinkage. If we had a neg rep function on here, I'd use it on you for lumping us with those two.
BerkeleyBuff
Well-Known Member
Oh I agree indy is what UT's first choice may be if the Big XII ever folds. OU I think could theoretically split from OSU, and many OU fans and donors are vocally supporting exploring the B1G or SEC, but who knows. Completely agreed on the lack of a rival. I'd love it if we scheduled Nebby every year OOC.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
I'm expecting to hear four more games with them in May of 2020 at least.
BerkeleyBuff
Well-Known Member
Hope you're right on that.
They went to the rose bowl because we lost to fresno st at home, in a game we had no business losing. It also didnt help that we had let ourselves get routed at texas in October and then let texas back into the b12 championship game because of that stupid fake punt.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
You don't get into the playoff or a title game ahead of a team you lost to by 4 touchdowns. Sorry.
Im not saying nebraska deserved to be in that rose bowl. Nebraska being in that game was a joke. But Nebraska didnt keep us from doing anything, we did, by losing two games earlier in the year, one if which was at home to a so-so fresno st team. We take care of business in that game and we’re in the rose bowl.
Larry Scott would love you!
'99 was extrememly painful even though we didn't have as much on the line. Aldrich with the missed FG at the end of regulation. Ugh. I don't think I slept that night.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
So-so? That Fresno team was 11-3. They won here, then went to Corvallis and beat an Oregon State team that was ranked 10th in the country at the time, and then one-upped that by winning at Wisconsin. They were really, really good. I look at that season as one of the main arguments for a system like the CFP.
BerkeleyBuff
Well-Known Member
Both Oregon State and Wisconsin ended that year with only 5 wins apiece. Fresno was a solid team but let's not exagerrate what they were either. On a related note, kinda feel Fresno has a strong shot against USC this year.
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
Oh I completely agree-and I think them dropping an opener like that would probably send their season off the tracks right off the bat.
Not Sure is always speaking from his own selfish preferences, rather than what’s good business and best for the long term health of the program and AD.
Not always. Usually only when I’m expressing my personal opinion on a specific issue.
Here are some western population statistics with the national rank for our geographic footprint:
Total Population
#1 California
#13 Washington
#14 Arizona
#21 Colorado
#27 Oregon
#30 Utah
#32 Nevada (recently passed Kansas, Mississippi and Arkansas; about to pass Iowa)
#36 New Mexico (bigger than Nebraska and West Virginia)
#39 Idaho (still a bit smaller than West Virginia & would be smallest state with an FBS program; close to passing WV, NE and NM)
% Increase (2010-2018)
#1 Utah - 14.4%
#4 Colorado - 13.2%
#6 Nevada - 12.4%
#7 Arizona - 12.2%
#8 Washington - 12.1%
#9 Idaho - 11.9%
#11 Oregon - 9.4%
#19 California - 6.2%
#38 New Mexico - 1.8%
When I look at this, I see real value in adding Nevada and possibly Idaho to complete our footprint with a Pac-14.
I see the absolute most value with a Pac-16 that adds UNLV, Oklahoma, Texas and Texas Tech.
Texas: #2 population / #2 population growth rate
Oklahoma: #28 population / #23 population growth rate
And if we couldn't get OU and UT, I'd be very much in favor of Boise State, New Mexico and San Diego State instead. (San Diego is the 17th largest metro in the US - I'd take them if we couldn't at least poach TTU from a Big 12 breakup. Also, TTU could make UNM superfluous and replace them with SDSU added.)
That looks like a true regional conference that dominates the west to me. My strong preference is getting something into Texas. TTU is the clearest relationship due to it being the only TX FBS west of the I-35 corridor and it having been in a conference with UA, ASU and UNM from 1932-1956 (Border Conference) and with CU from 1996-2011 (Big 12). There's a cultural affiliation and a history there.
So I guess where I land is that while OU and UT are the ultimate prizes in the next round of realignment, I'd be very happy with a Pac-16 that added Boise State, UNLV, New Mexico/or SDSU and Texas Tech. On the surface that may not look exciting since it lacks big name programs that obviously move the needle. But I believe that it creates true regional excitement and makes a ton of sense.
And I wouldn't be opposed to expansion to 16 through a regional rivalry model the Pac-8 and Pac-10 were based upon: adding CSU and either BYU or Utah State for 14; TTU and UNM could make 16 -- or UNLV plus either Nevada or SDSU could also make 16.
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_statistical_areas
Total Population
#1 California
#13 Washington
#14 Arizona
#21 Colorado
#27 Oregon
#30 Utah
#32 Nevada (recently passed Kansas, Mississippi and Arkansas; about to pass Iowa)
#36 New Mexico (bigger than Nebraska and West Virginia)
#39 Idaho (still a bit smaller than West Virginia & would be smallest state with an FBS program; close to passing WV, NE and NM)
% Increase (2010-2018)
#1 Utah - 14.4%
#4 Colorado - 13.2%
#6 Nevada - 12.4%
#7 Arizona - 12.2%
#8 Washington - 12.1%
#9 Idaho - 11.9%
#11 Oregon - 9.4%
#19 California - 6.2%
#38 New Mexico - 1.8%
When I look at this, I see real value in adding Nevada and possibly Idaho to complete our footprint with a Pac-14.
I see the absolute most value with a Pac-16 that adds UNLV, Oklahoma, Texas and Texas Tech.
Texas: #2 population / #2 population growth rate
Oklahoma: #28 population / #23 population growth rate
And if we couldn't get OU and UT, I'd be very much in favor of Boise State, New Mexico and San Diego State instead. (San Diego is the 17th largest metro in the US - I'd take them if we couldn't at least poach TTU from a Big 12 breakup. Also, TTU could make UNM superfluous and replace them with SDSU added.)
That looks like a true regional conference that dominates the west to me. My strong preference is getting something into Texas. TTU is the clearest relationship due to it being the only TX FBS west of the I-35 corridor and it having been in a conference with UA, ASU and UNM from 1932-1956 (Border Conference) and with CU from 1996-2011 (Big 12). There's a cultural affiliation and a history there.
So I guess where I land is that while OU and UT are the ultimate prizes in the next round of realignment, I'd be very happy with a Pac-16 that added Boise State, UNLV, New Mexico/or SDSU and Texas Tech. On the surface that may not look exciting since it lacks big name programs that obviously move the needle. But I believe that it creates true regional excitement and makes a ton of sense.
And I wouldn't be opposed to expansion to 16 through a regional rivalry model the Pac-8 and Pac-10 were based upon: adding CSU and either BYU or Utah State for 14; TTU and UNM could make 16 -- or UNLV plus either Nevada or SDSU could also make 16.
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_population
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_statistical_areas
Last edited:
P.S. -- if we go by academic research intensity and what our presidents & chancellors seem to value, the most likely 4 (assuming we can't get UT or OU) would be the Tier 1 research universities: CSU, UNM and TTU with UNLV being on the cusp of moving up and maybe getting it in 2020 when the next Carnegie evaluations are due to come out. I'm not sure that would be all that horrible, actually.
Agree. The rust belt sucks.