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!

Sir Larry Scott.. (P12 considering buying out Larry Scott)

As much as I hate to say it, we need USC to get stupid good, we need Chip Kelly to get UCLA to a level where most of his Oregon teams were, and we need major rebounds by Stanford and Washington. CU getting back to 8+ wins/year wouldn’t hurt either.

Personally, I am all for CU being stupid good, but whatever makes you happy.
 
The most alarming issue is that recruiting doesn’t appear to be a huge issue just like with basketball. There are four pac 12 teams in the top 20 and 5 in the top 30 which is about where the conference should be (everyone is lagging way behind the SEC). The main difference is the lack of money from the TV deal, boosters and game day revenue is limiting the conference in terms of coaching salaries, support staff, facilities and probably nutrition to a certain extent. The pac 12 recruits really well in basketball and still can’t do **** on the court.

USC getting back to a top 10/5 program will certainly help but only so much. Cal should be recruiting in the top 30. CU in the top 35. This won’t change as much on the field as people think though.
 
The most alarming issue is that recruiting doesn’t appear to be a huge issue just like with basketball. There are four pac 12 teams in the top 20 and 5 in the top 30 which is about where the conference should be (everyone is lagging way behind the SEC). The main difference is the lack of money from the TV deal, boosters and game day revenue is limiting the conference in terms of coaching salaries, support staff, facilities and probably nutrition to a certain extent. The pac 12 recruits really well in basketball and still can’t do **** on the court.

USC getting back to a top 10/5 program will certainly help but only so much. Cal should be recruiting in the top 30. CU in the top 35. This won’t change as much on the field as people think though.
Washington carrying the conference in football can’t be the norm. Need USC to be a mainstay in the CFP conversation.
 
Washington carrying the conference in football can’t be the norm. Need USC to be a mainstay in the CFP conversation.

Yeah USC is embarrassing the conference. It all started when they played Alabama in Texas and they lost like 55-3 or something. They’ve sucked by their standards ever since and we showed the world we weren’t even close to competing.
 
Washington carrying the conference in football can’t be the norm. Need USC to be a mainstay in the CFP conversation.
Yeah but usc won the conference last year and won the rose bowl the year before and it didn’t help as much as we all thought. I agree they need to be a national player just like UCLA needs to be in basketball but there are more issues than that and I think those other issues are more important.

For example the ACC is not in good shape right now, their major programs in Miami and Florida State are really struggling and Clemson doing what they are hides some of those things but there are still some big underlying issues there,
 
Yeah but usc won the conference last year and won the rose bowl the year before and it didn’t help as much as we all thought. I agree they need to be a national player just like UCLA needs to be in basketball but there are more issues than that and I think those other issues are more important.

For example the ACC is not in good shape right now, their major programs in Miami and Florida State are really struggling and Clemson doing what they are hides some of those things but there are still some big underlying issues there,

The rose bowl feels like an eternity ago now though, but yes that was a plus. But winning the conference doesn’t mean much. ESPN/Fox love to talk about how bad we are and how great the big10/SEC are. So USC winning the conference is more like, “well they suck so it’s not impressive.”

The media loves to talk about the PAC-12’s struggles. If USC isn’t in the top 10 and in the playoff talk we’re going to continue to see the media slam us.
 
Yeah but usc won the conference last year and won the rose bowl the year before and it didn’t help as much as we all thought. I agree they need to be a national player just like UCLA needs to be in basketball but there are more issues than that and I think those other issues are more important.

For example the ACC is not in good shape right now, their major programs in Miami and Florida State are really struggling and Clemson doing what they are hides some of those things but there are still some big underlying issues there,
That’s because the Rose Bowl, when not part of the CFP, is completely meaningless. We can’t keep having 2 and 3 loss conference champs. Your Point about Clemson and ACC is right on, but nobody seems to care. They have one of two NC contenders year in, year out. We need at least one team to be dominant
 
That’s because the Rose Bowl, when not part of the CFP, is completely meaningless. We can’t keep having 2 and 3 loss conference champs. Your Point about Clemson and ACC is right on, but nobody seems to care. They have one of two NC contenders year in, year out. We need at least one team to be dominant

The Rose Bowl is completely meaningless? Come on.

It is consistently the most viewed game on New Year's Day.
 
Yeah but usc won the conference last year and won the rose bowl the year before and it didn’t help as much as we all thought. I agree they need to be a national player just like UCLA needs to be in basketball but there are more issues than that and I think those other issues are more important.

For example the ACC is not in good shape right now, their major programs in Miami and Florida State are really struggling and Clemson doing what they are hides some of those things but there are still some big underlying issues there,

Football, agreed. Basketball, they’re doing quite well, as usual.
 
The most alarming issue is that recruiting doesn’t appear to be a huge issue just like with basketball. There are four pac 12 teams in the top 20 and 5 in the top 30 which is about where the conference should be (everyone is lagging way behind the SEC). The main difference is the lack of money from the TV deal, boosters and game day revenue is limiting the conference in terms of coaching salaries, support staff, facilities and probably nutrition to a certain extent. The pac 12 recruits really well in basketball and still can’t do **** on the court.

USC getting back to a top 10/5 program will certainly help but only so much. Cal should be recruiting in the top 30. CU in the top 35. This won’t change as much on the field as people think though.
Limiting beliefs is what has hurt this program for too long. HCMT is of the top five mindset. The past is not a reflection of the future unless you believe it so.
 
The Rose Bowl is completely meaningless? Come on.

It is consistently the most viewed game on New Year's Day.
As it pertains to the national landscape and prestige of the conference, I don’t think it matters anymore. Pac 12 gets an auto bid into it. Right or wrong, all that’s being discussed is the 1 game the Pac 12 has won in the CFP’s history.
 
The rose bowl feels like an eternity ago now though, but yes that was a plus. But winning the conference doesn’t mean much. ESPN/Fox love to talk about how bad we are and how great the big10/SEC are. So USC winning the conference is more like, “well they suck so it’s not impressive.”

The media loves to talk about the PAC-12’s struggles. If USC isn’t in the top 10 and in the playoff talk we’re going to continue to see the media slam us.
I’m just pointing out that USC was a top 10 program for two years but it didn’t help the rest of the conference like we all thought it would. Revenues are becoming an huge issue for all programs outside of USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington and Stanford. The conference could be okay without usc being a top 10 program if it wasn’t in such terrible shape for those other programs, which was my larger point.
 
That’s because the Rose Bowl, when not part of the CFP, is completely meaningless. We can’t keep having 2 and 3 loss conference champs. Your Point about Clemson and ACC is right on, but nobody seems to care. They have one of two NC contenders year in, year out. We need at least one team to be dominant
Not really man, the national media absolutely loves the rose bowl and almost everyone attends. It gets a ton of exposure and has great history with the big 10 who is our strongest partner at the moment. Obviously it is best when we have a playoff team and a team in the rose bowl but it definitely isn’t meaningless.
 
Not really man, the national media absolutely loves the rose bowl and almost everyone attends. It gets a ton of exposure and has great history with the big 10 who is our strongest partner at the moment. Obviously it is best when we have a playoff team and a team in the rose bowl but it definitely isn’t meaningless.
It does nothing for the prestige of the Pac 12
 
As it pertains to the national landscape and prestige of the conference, I don’t think it matters anymore. Pac 12 gets an auto bid into it. Right or wrong, all that’s being discussed is the 1 game the Pac 12 has won in the CFP’s history.

It is the most prestigious bowl game in the country and it absolutely matters. National writers would actually say the exact opposite of whatever you are trying to say here.

Some of you are going off the damn deep end with some of these takes.
 
I’m just pointing out that USC was a top 10 program for two years but it didn’t help the rest of the conference like we all thought it would. Revenues are becoming an huge issue for all programs outside of USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington and Stanford. The conference could be okay without usc being a top 10 program if it wasn’t in such terrible shape for those other programs, which was my larger point.

Can’t disagree with that. The conference as a whole needs to be consistently good. But USC hasn’t felt like a top 10 team in awhile. I think the point a few are attempting to make is that USC historically can recruit at a ridiculous level, we saw this yesterday with both Ford and McCoy. We need them to be a top 5 school year in and year out. We need them to have the consistency of OSU, Alabama, Clemson, Oklahoma and be in the talk every year and a bad year being a 2 loss team. The last time time they were really, really good was like 2008. They were better in 16’ and 17’ but that gets over shadowed by their blowouts against Alabama/OSU and the fact that nobody takes the PAC seriously right now anyways.

They have only won the PAC once and their division twice since 2011 and they’ve looked bad against Alabama, OSU, Texas and they lost to Wisconsin and they’re 1-2 against ND just in the past few years. For a team that usually recruits in the top 10 how the hell can you not be more competitive? They make the PAC look bad against other conferences. They’ve lost as many games from 1993-2007 as they have from 2008-2018. We need them to come back to a 10 win team again. They’ve only done that 5 times in the last 10 years...
 
It is the most prestigious bowl game in the country and it absolutely matters. National writers would actually say the exact opposite of whatever you are trying to say here.

Some of you are going off the damn deep end with some of these takes.
National writers are the ones using the Pac 12 as a punch line, so while the Rose Bowl may be a nice game that is well covered, it just doesn’t do much for the prestige of the conference anymore.
 
No on No. 2. I went from one analogy to another. I edited it to be more clear. Mainly, I think the Championship playoffs have gotten stale. The same teams are in it every year. There is no parity in college football. The Championship playoffs have diluted the interest in the big bowl games.

My interest in this game is benign at best. I would like to see two new teams so the outcome not assured. So it’s interesting.

You and I both made a suggestion about some parity further back and in other places. And this idea is blasphemy to some. Yet, here we sit with multi year declining attendance, falling or stagnant ratings depending on conference, and an NC game thats being treated with indifference.

I may not remember the reasons correctly but the NFL faced a similar problem when the NFC Giants and Redskins kept destroying whichever AFC team unluckily made it to the super bowl in the 80s. I think it was then that they reduced roster size and the playing field got level in so much that different teams started making it to the super bowl and the afc drought ended.
 
National writers are the ones using the Pac 12 as a punch line, so while the Rose Bowl may be a nice game that is well covered, it just doesn’t do much for the prestige of the conference anymore.

It is one the few things that has national relevance for the conference. The Rose Bowl is not to blame for everything else wrong with the conference.

I look forward to you ****ting all over the Rose Bowl when the Buffs make it.
 
It is one the few things that has national relevance for the conference. The Rose Bowl is not to blame for everything else wrong with the conference.

I look forward to you ****ting all over the Rose Bowl when the Buffs make it.
You’re all over the place Duff. I am not blaming the Rose Bowl for anything. I’m blaming the traditional Pac 12 powers for not being able to represent for the conference on a bigger stage than the Rose Bowl (CFP). Why would I **** on the Rose Bowl if/when the Buffs get there? Winning the conference and playing in that game would be great for CU. It’s not great for the Pac 12, unless the Rose Bowl is part of the CFP that year, but would be amazing for CU.
 
You’re all over the place Duff. I am not blaming the Rose Bowl for anything. I’m blaming the traditional Pac 12 powers for not being able to represent for the conference on a bigger stage than the Rose Bowl (CFP). Why would I **** on the Rose Bowl if/when the Buffs get there? Winning the conference and playing in that game would be great for CU. It’s not great for the Pac 12, unless the Rose Bowl is part of the CFP that year, but would be amazing for CU.

You are all over the place.

Two years, USC finished #3 in the country and won arguably the best game of the bowl season, which made them a preseason darling for 2017 with Darnold as a trendy Heisman pick. Yet you are arguing it did nothing for the prestige of the conference, even though it put USC squarely in the CFP talk for the following year.

The Rose Bowl is not a problem in the slightest, but you are just reflexively ****ting on it because it involves the Pac-12. It is the one big thing the conference has going for it. If Washington had beaten Ohio State, it would have been noticed nationally. The Pac-12 losing the game is contributing to the national narrative, winning it more would reverse it.
 
You are all over the place.

Two years, USC finished #3 in the country and won arguably the best game of the bowl season, which made them a preseason darling for 2017 with Darnold as a trendy Heisman pick. Yet you are arguing it did nothing for the prestige of the conference, even though it put USC squarely in the CFP talk for the following year.

The Rose Bowl is not a problem in the slightest, but you are just reflexively ****ting on it because it involves the Pac-12. It is the one big thing the conference has going for it. If Washington had beaten Ohio State, it would have been noticed nationally. The Pac-12 losing the game is contributing to the national narrative, winning it more would reverse it.
Nobody has ever said the Rose Bowl is a problem, Duff. I said it’s meaningless relative to the CFP and how seriously the national media and CFB world takes the P12 conference. If it continues to be the biggest game of the season for the Pac 12 (unless it’s part of the CFP), year in year out, the conference is in trouble.
 
Nobody has ever said the Rose Bowl is a problem, Duff. I said it’s meaningless relative to the CFP and how seriously the national media and CFB world takes the P12 conference. If it continues to be the biggest game of the season for the Pac 12 (unless it’s part of the CFP), year in year out, the conference is in trouble.

And you are wrong. It is the most prestigious non-CFP game every single year. It is a great platform for the Pac-12 to show off quality teams.

The conference needs to make the playoff once or twice to really switch the narrative, but winning Rose Bowls against other P5 teams will help.
 
Back
Top