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!
Predictions for RMS
- Thread starter OMFGasm
- Start date
I predict a familiar outcome.
Even if they hadn't lost all the guys they did on the front lines they are still a team that has gone 3-9 each of the last 3 years in the MWC. Their last two recruiting classes were mostly FCS guys. Even their "strengths" are guys who have deficiencies that kept them out of getting the offers that would put them in major conferences like being slow or undersized.
As long as the Buffs don't pull a Hawkins and overlook the game or try to get fancy and forget to run the Rams over this should be a game that gives us a chance to develop some depth.
I agree, we grinded them last year. It will be more of the same this year. It will be a good game for one of the young backs to really establish themselves as the man. Helluva opportunity.
:rofl:
:lol:
BF is hilarious.
No citing of his knowledge of "conference circles."
No commentary on why adding CU was just "dipping their feet in" but adding CSU means that the PAC now "dominates" the Denver market. :rofl:
As much as the obvious delusion amuses me, it doesn't surprise me in the least. I have to expect that if we were in their shoes, we'd be desperately searching for any justification for inclusion in an expanded Pac that we could find. They're grasping at straws, there's no doubt about it. I also can't blame them for doing so.
I can blame some of them for being obviously delusional/stupid. A few of the less retarded members of that board shot this nonsense down with no response from the stupids. There is a line, and these guys LIVE on the wrong side of it.
I saw this post yesterday looking on there and wanted to either post it here or respond there. Was laughing to hard to do either.
I still am trying to figure out why the PAC would want to give a full conference share in excess of $30 million a year to a school that has a hard time drawing 20k fans at home (and about 4,500 for BB when they are winning,) has no appeal to TV audiences, doesn't draw flies when they travel, has no tradition (other than losing in epic numbers,) and that most of the country doesn't know exist.
Pure, complete delusion. It would be like arguing with a group of madmen.
The simple fact is that if the system goes to superconferences they are out, pure and simple.
It's true that these kinds of expectations are not healthy to their program. But it's not just them that are spewing this stuff. Didn't McElwain say something to the effect that pairing CU and UU didn't make sense, and that CSU would be a natural companion for CU in an expanded Pac? I could swear that I saw a quote from him along those lines, probably in this thread somewhere. He's setting the expectations unreasonably high without any means to accomplish those goals. It's hard to blame the fans for feeding off what he's saying.
The system has already gone to superconferences. They ARE out. They just don't realize it yet.
The problem over there is they are convinced that not only will the PAC-12 take on four teams in the current footprint of the conference, but that the PAC-12 will be forced to take on four teams in the current footprint because there are no other options. The truth is, no one has a freaking clue as to what Larry Scott is thinking and just as importantly, the guy is very unlikely to be forced into anything. Expect the unexpected.
What makes BeerFight the funniest poster on that site is he honestly thinks CSU offers a compelling case while constantly trying to tear CU down. The most inconsistent logic you will ever see. Plus he still wants to go to with the ASU analogy. It simply does not fit.
What makes BeerFight the funniest poster on that site is he honestly thinks CSU offers a compelling case while constantly trying to tear CU down. The most inconsistent logic you will ever see. Plus he still wants to go to with the ASU analogy. It simply does not fit.
To the bolded: absolutely. I wonder if anybody has pointed out that there isn't much reason for the Pac 12 to expand beyond 12 teams.
someone did point that out... but the response was "BUT EVERYONE ELSE IS GOING TO 16!!!"
Yeah, I figured as much. The problem is that the Pac doesn't need to expand. If every other conference in the country was at 16 teams, that wouldn't have the slightest impact on the Pac 12.
Yup. As long as we got a spot in the playoff near guaranteed along with dominating the western 3d of the country, we are happy.
BlackNGold
Club Member
Two years ago conferences were believing that going to 16 teams was an attractive conference size for television contracts. Over the past two years the networks don't seem to care if the conference is 12 teams or more. So the conferences are starting to realize that adding teams can reach a diminishing return...the share you have to pay out to new teams could be greater than the additional TV revenue. I see a more careful approach to conference expansion. SEC added Missouri and A&M - this gets the SEC into two more large markets.
A school like CSU's only hope is that when another conference gets raided (Big East, ACC, ) that conference will expand in a desperation mode rather than a strategic mode. Unfortunately their geographical location is not attractive to the Eastern Conferences...(I expect the Boise and SDSU move to the Big East for Football only to end up being awkward). CSU's best hope is for OU and OSU to move to the PAC leaving the Texas conference (called the Big 12) to look to add bodies although the attractiveness of that conference to TV would rapidly start diminishing.
PAC 12 will not be expanding for awhile - there is no need.
This is what I have seen as well. IMO, if the Pac 12 absolutely positively had to expand by two more teams in the west, they would go with New Mexico and Nevada to get the flagship schools for those states along with their growing media markets. Of course it is a moot point because the Pac 12 isn't expanding.
Yeah, that lock rusted, didn't it? These guys are clowns for my amusement.
CUFan
Welcome back
The PAC and Big 10 +1 +1, do not need to expand. Under no scenario will either be excluded. They have a stranglehold on their existing markets. Now they have come together not only on the Rose Bowl, but on this inter-conference play deal. This further intertwines the two making it all but impossible to exclude either from the party even at their sizes.
At this point all expansion targets should only be accretive. Sorry little sister.
At this point all expansion targets should only be accretive. Sorry little sister.
:ban:
