Tigerboard.com, not drinking the Buff kool-aid

[Unleash Hell]

Missouri has advantages we can only dream of. They're the only D-1 program in a state that has more people than Colorado and has two major metropolitan areas within a two hour drive from campus. Their location allows them to have the ability to recruit from a larger area as well. Fly to St. Louis? sure. Fly to KC? sure. Drive from any one of ten states in the immediate viscinity? sure. Of all the teams in the North, Missouri has the most inherent advantages of any of them. I'm surprised they haven't been kicking our asses for the last 50 years.

We get it, you have a hard on for Mizzou!

 

[CUwhit21]

I think they will struggle with Nevada, that team has a legit offense that can put up points in bunches. Not exactly the best team to play on the road when you're breaking in a ton of new guys on offense.

I think Mizzou will beat Nevada pretty easily. Last year, Nevada only scored 17 points on Missouri and 19 points on Texas Tech. Missouri still has some good players returning (Derrick Washington, Sean Witherspoon) and while I do think this will be a different Missouri team, I still think they are good enough to beat WAC teams on the road.

 

[dply]

Missouri has advantages we can only dream of. They're the only D-1 program in a state that has more people than Colorado and has two major metropolitan areas within a two hour drive from campus. Their location allows them to have the ability to recruit from a larger area as well. Fly to St. Louis? sure. Fly to KC? sure. Drive from any one of ten states in the immediate viscinity? sure. Of all the teams in the North, Missouri has the most inherent advantages of any of them. I'm surprised they haven't been kicking our asses for the last 50 years.

I'll take one Denver over both Kansas City and St. Louis any day.

 

[The Guest]

I'll take one Denver over both Kansas City and St. Louis any day.

For recruiting???

 

[dply]

If the one positive is recruiting then I guess yeah. Besides I would perfer us to kick butt in California and Texas.

 

[sackman]

We get it, you have a hard on for Mizzou!

Did you read any of what I said there? It's not about having a hard on for Mizzou. Facts are facts. They have advantages that we don't have.

Or should I have replied "We get it, you're clinging to a notion that Mizzou will somehow fall off a cliff this year"?

 

[Duff Man]

Did you read any of what I said there? It's not about having a hard on for Mizzou. Facts are facts. They have advantages that we don't have.

Or should I have replied "We get it, you're clinging to a notion that Mizzou will somehow fall off a cliff this year"?

Nice.

I don't really have a problem with a Mizzou board thinking we're not a threat. I would not either in their position. Just thought their reasoning was very odd-we're good enough to win home games, but not good enough to win the North. Odd.

 

[FlatironsBuff]

The last time those fans saw CU, Missouri was bitch slapping us around to the tune of 58-0. Is it really that hard to imagine why they would think so poorly of us?

We have given then no reason to fear us. We have a dozen reasons why a team that lost 58-0 last year can come in and beat them this year, because 'we know stuff about Colorado that they don't.' Well, guess what, there is stuff that they know about Mizzou that we don't, and plus, any argument about returning starters would strike zero fear in a team that utterly dominated us the last few years. Until we beat them, not much will change there-- to no one's surprise.

Why would that shock anyone? they killed us the past 2 years,if the role was reversed I doubt we'd be saying they'd beat us.:huh:

Even with getting killed by them we can still come up with reasons why we will win. I would expect that the team on the winning side of ass-beatings for several years in a row would have fans that could do the same.

We get it, you have a hard on for Mizzou!

Hey, we get it, you cannot objectively look at any other team. Less in state competition for recruits, more fertile recruiting ground to recruit from is truth and common sense.

Nice.

I don't really have a problem with a Mizzou board thinking we're not a threat. I would not either in their position. Just thought their reasoning was very odd-we're good enough to win home games, but not good enough to win the North. Odd.

I think the 'they are talented enough to win home games' thing was an attempt to play nice. The truth is they do not think that we can win the north, even with the hardest games at home, and they may be right. Or they may be wrong. They have no more authority on the subject than we do. It's all prognostication, BS and guesses seen through team colored glasses for most of us right now.

My guess is that if you look at fan sites for KU, NU, ISU, OU, UT, OSU and the like, none of them will think that we can beat them, or will at least give a dozen reasons that they can win. Fans being fans. (included OU since they will have reasons why they will beat UT and see us in the B12CCG)

 

[Lt.Col.FrankSlade]

My guess is that if you look at fan sites for KU, NU, ISU, OU, UT, OSU and the like, none of them will think that we can beat them, or will at least give a dozen reasons that they can win. Fans being fans. (included OU since they will have reasons why they will beat UT and see us in the B12CCG)

When it comes to games against Big 12 South foes, most OU fans / commentators think KU will lose all 3 of its games against Big 12 South foes (KU plays OU, @ Tech, and @ Texas); think Nebraska will lose to Tech and OU, and win @ Baylor; and think Colorado will lose @ Texas and @ OSU, but beat A&M in Boulder.

They therefore believe the winner of the Big 12 north will probably be largely decided by the games between Big 12 North teams. Colorado has an advantage there, in that Kansas, Missouri and Nebraska all play IN BOULDER this year. Nebraksa plays @ Missouri and @ Kansas. Kansas plays Missouri in KC.

Most OU fans / commentators think the Big 12 North champion will have at least 3 losses this year.

 

[CarolinaBuff]

I think Mizzou will beat Nevada pretty easily. Last year, Nevada only scored 17 points on Missouri and 19 points on Texas Tech. Missouri still has some good players returning (Derrick Washington, Sean Witherspoon) and while I do think this will be a different Missouri team, I still think they are good enough to beat WAC teams on the road.

Fair points, but they go from a record-setting, Heisman-contending QB to no experience at the position, and they lose their top 3 receivers. I don't think they'll be terrible, just not nearly as good as they have been the past 2 seasons. They'll go 7-5 or 6-6, going 4-4 or 3-5 in conference.

 

[CUwhit21]

Fair points, but they go from a record-setting, Heisman-contending QB to no experience at the position, and they lose their top 3 receivers. I don't think they'll be terrible, just not nearly as good as they have been the past 2 seasons. They'll go 7-5 or 6-6, going 4-4 or 3-5 in conference.

I agree. I still have trouble picking us to beat them though with the way this game has gone in recent years. In last year's game, you can take out Daniel, Coffman, Maclin and it still would've been tough for us to win with 0 points.

 

[Kameltosis]

UGH MY EYES!! That forum was a cluster **** of un-organization.

How could anyone enjoy posting there?

 

[Hugegroove]

UGH MY EYES!! That forum was a cluster **** of un-organization.

How could anyone enjoy posting there?

 

[Unleash Hell]

Did you read any of what I said there? It's not about having a hard on for Mizzou. Facts are facts. They have advantages that we don't have.

Or should I have replied "We get it, you're clinging to a notion that Mizzou will somehow fall off a cliff this year"?

Yes, last year is irrelevant. YOU are not paying attention to what Mizzou loses. Teams change fast in college football. Tell me this Sacky, what happened in 2005? Cu beat the **** out of Mizzou. What happened the last 3 years? Mizzou beat the **** out of CU. Thats just an example of how fast things can turn in this game. Mizzou loses an aweful lot, and they will be lucky to go to a bowl, and they will be lucky to not only beat CU, but stay within 2 TD's of CU IMO.

 

[Kameltosis]

TIGERS

 

[CarolinaBuff]

I agree. I still have trouble picking us to beat them though with the way this game has gone in recent years. In last year's game, you can take out Daniel, Coffman, Maclin and it still would've been tough for us to win with 0 points.

I agree about the result not being much different if you took out those 3 in last year's game, but they're not around this year and we're all expecting a much different CU team this year.

I'm pretty sure that Kamel was referring to the layout on tigerboard.com. :huh:

 

[SBG]

I agree. I still have trouble picking us to beat them though with the way this game has gone in recent years. In last year's game, you can take out Daniel, Coffman, Maclin and it still would've been tough for us to win with 0 points.

Valid point. However, the fact that MU scored very quickly set the tone of the game. We had to play catchup and frankly we didn't have the weapons. Our offense only scored on average, what, 14 points last year? In the arms race we had a slingshot, while they had bazookas. This year I think it'll be different, although they do return a pretty good RB.

Another thing: If we show up rushing 3, and sometimes dropping one of them back like the past 2 years I think it's time we end up with a new D coordinator. Seriously, we would have lost those games either way, but the plan was to "not lose big" and unfortunately that failed miserably.

 

[sackman]

Another thing: If we show up rushing 3, and sometimes dropping one of them back like the past 2 years I think it's time we end up with a new D coordinator. Seriously, we would have lost those games either way, but the plan was to "not lose big" and unfortunately that failed miserably.

This has been my point all along. We have gone into that game with the wrong gameplan for the last three years. And each year it has gotten worse. If we use the same gameplan this year, I will very likely have a brain aneurism right on the spot. It won't matter who we have or who they lost if we employ the same strategy to beat them as we have the last three years.

 

[Unleash Hell]

This has been my point all along. We have gone into that game with the wrong gameplan for the last three years. And each year it has gotten worse. If we use the same gameplan this year, I will very likely have a brain aneurism right on the spot. It won't matter who we have or who they lost if we employ the same strategy to beat them as we have the last three years.

We wont

 

[FlatironsBuff]

UGH MY EYES!! That forum was a cluster **** of un-organization.

How could anyone enjoy posting there?

Which is why I don't post at Netbuffs any longer. In addition to liking the people over here better, the format is just crappy to me. I like to click on a thead and read at least 10 posts here.

 

[SBG]

This has been my point all along. We have gone into that game with the wrong gameplan for the last three years. And each year it has gotten worse. If we use the same gameplan this year, I will very likely have a brain aneurism right on the spot. It won't matter who we have or who they lost if we employ the same strategy to beat them as we have the last three years.

Just to clarify for some people, but rushing 3 isn't a problem if you run a 3-4. Rushing three and having everyone else fall back is, imo, not a real 3-4. Some 3-4 looks could be good for the team this year, as long as it's used the right way with a lot of misdirection and confusion.

 

[sackman]

We wont

Oh, well. That settles it then. Leash says we won't. Alrighty then.

 

[Unleash Hell]

Oh, well. That settles it then. Leash says we won't. Alrighty then.

thank you

 

[Darth Snow]

Oh, well. That settles it then. Leash says we won't. Alrighty then.

:lol:

We are actually gonna just rush 1.... Kasa.

 

[absinthe]

:lol:

We are actually gonna just rush 1.... Clark Evans.

FIFY:thumbsup:

 

[96 Buff]

:lol:

We are actually gonna play just 1....Clark Evans.

More FIFY'd.

 

[CarolinaBuff]

FIFY:thumbsup:

I was waiting for that one. :lol:

 

[Darth Snow]

:lol: talk about a slow one over the plate.