Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
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!

We are going to beat California

Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
They beat Colorado like a $3 rented mule last season.

You guys crack me up.
Click to expand...
Cal also has the third worst road split in the country and went 1-4 last season on the road with their lone win coming over a lowly 2-10 WSU team by seven points. Cal, like CU, is a much, much different team on the road.
 
CVilleBuff said:
Weak. Mizzou handed out rings for North Division "Co-Championships" too, doesn't mean they won it.
Click to expand...

I am not sure, but if I recall correctly, since the Big 12 has been formed, there have been no ties in the conference championship game, particularly not those games in which Missouri played. I suppose there could be a conference "tie" this year, since there is no conference championship game.

Cal's conference championship is just that - a shared conference championship. There were no "divisions" in the PAC-10 in 2006.

Pretty sure Colorado claims a championship that was shared.
 
Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
I am not sure, but if I recall correctly, since the Big 12 has been formed, there have been no ties in the conference championship game, particularly not those games in which Missouri played. I suppose there could be a conference "tie" this year, since there is no conference championship game.

Cal's conference championship is just that - a shared conference championship. There were no "divisions" in the PAC-10 in 2006.

Pretty sure Colorado claims a championship that was shared.
Click to expand...

And they lost to USC. That's settled.
 
Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
I am not sure, but if I recall correctly, since the Big 12 has been formed, there have been no ties in the conference championship game, particularly not those games in which Missouri played. I suppose there could be a conference "tie" this year, since there is no conference championship game.

Cal's conference championship is just that - a shared conference championship. There were no "divisions" in the PAC-10 in 2006.

Pretty sure Colorado claims a championship that was shared.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry I hurt your feelings Frank. That, btw, was a well thought out argument, even though it omitted a rather important fact.
 
CVilleBuff said:
And they lost to USC. That's settled.
Click to expand...


Yes, but since not every PAC-10 team played each other in 2006 - they are both considered "co-champions."

The PAC-10 has had "co-champions" many many times over the years. (2007, 2006, 2002, 2000, 1999, 1997, 1995, 1993, 1992, and 1987)
 
Skidmark said:
Based on last year's experience in Berkeley, in my mind's eye each of these Cal posters are butterface asian lesbians with itty bitty racks. But to their credit, they have hot blonde trophy wives.
Click to expand...

Ummm... That girl that told snow she was a lesbian at the bair's lair was blonde and had huge tits. True story.
 
Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
Yes, but since not every PAC-10 team played each other in 2006 - they are both considered "co-champions."

The PAC-10 has had "co-champions" many many times over the years. (2007, 2006, 2002, 2000, 1999, 1997, 1995, 1993, 1992, and 1987)
Click to expand...

Except for that ever so important tie-breaker they lost called head-to-head, which sent USC to the Rose Bowl.

Oh, and BigXII schools didn't play identical schedules either. So by your logic, Mizzou really has been North "Co-Champions"
 
CVilleBuff said:
Except for that ever so important tie-breaker they lost called head-to-head, which sent USC to the Rose Bowl.

Oh, and BigXII schools didn't play identical schedules either. So by your logic, Mizzou really has been North "Co-Champions"
Click to expand...

But the Big 12 division winner is totally different from the conference champion. You can win your division and not win the conference -- that has happened every year until this year. Nobody gives a **** who wins the division. The conference championship is all that matters.

2011 is the first time the Pac-12 has ever had divisions. Prior to that, they didn't all play each other, and there were no divisions to separate the teams- so when teams finished with the same conference record - they were CO CHAMPIONS even if one team beat the other.

Look I'm not making this **** up. Go look it up. According to the Pac-10, they were "co-champions."


Colorado was Big 8 conference "co-champions" in 1976 (a three way tie that year - Colorado got to go to the Orange Bowl based on the conference tie-breaker rules) and again in 1991 (tied Nebraska - Nebraska went to Orange Bowl based on tie-breaker rules).
 
Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
But the Big 12 division winner is totally different from the conference champion. You can win your division and not win the conference -- that has happened every year until this year. Nobody gives a **** who wins the division. The conference championship is all that matters.

2011 is the first time the Pac-12 has ever had divisions. Prior to that, they didn't all play each other, and there were no divisions to separate the teams- so when teams finished with the same conference record - they were CO CHAMPIONS even if one team beat the other.

Look I'm not making this **** up. Go look it up. According to the Pac-10, they were "co-champions."


Colorado was Big 8 conference "co-champions" in 1976 (a three way tie that year - Colorado got to go to the Orange Bowl based on the conference tie-breaker rules) and again in 1991 (tied Nebraska - Nebraska went to Orange Bowl based on tie-breaker rules).
Click to expand...
Gotta agree that its pretty weak to claim a championship when you lost to the team you are tied with tho. Also, OU sucks and I hope they stay in the texas 12.
 
SnowBuff said:
Gotta agree that its pretty weak to claim a championship when you lost to the team you are tied with tho. Also, OU sucks and I hope they stay in the texas 12.
Click to expand...

It does not appear likely that OU is going to stay in the Big 12. Everything the "insiders" down here are saying is that OU and OSU are heading to the Pac 12, possibly as soon as next week.
 
Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
It does not appear likely that OU is going to stay in the Big 12. Everything the "insiders" down here are saying is that OU and OSU are heading to the Pac 12, possibly as soon as next week.
Click to expand...
Don't take this personally, but you really really suck tonight.
 
SnowBuff said:
Don't take this personally, but you really really suck tonight.
Click to expand...

Believe me, the last thing I want as a Colorado fan is to have to compete against Oklahoma every year again.

But it sounds like OU is dissatisfied with Texas, as well, and they realize that Texas has driven away Nebraska, Colorado and soon to be Texas A&M. They realize that Texas is interested in one person, and only one person -- Texas. OU is not afraid of the equal sharing model of the SEC, Big 10, and Pac-12 the same way Texas is.
 
Lt.Col.FrankSlade said:
Believe me, the last thing I want as a Colorado fan is to have to compete against Oklahoma every year again.

But it sounds like OU is dissatisfied with Texas, as well, and they realize that Texas has driven away Nebraska, Colorado and soon to be Texas A&M. They realize that Texas is interested in one person, and only one person -- Texas. OU is not afraid of the equal sharing model of the SEC, Big 10, and Pac-12 the same way Texas is.
Click to expand...
The funny thing is, Texas's refusal to go to the pac 12 is really about prestige and power within the conference, not $. Even if the money was equal (it isn't), Texass just wants to be a big fish, and it doesn't care about the size or quality of the pond. And now that pond is shrinking into ****** mud, and they don't care as long as they are the big fish. ****ing assholes.
 
Back on topic...

bigbang said:
I am going to call it here and now, We are going to beat Cal.
Click to expand...

tumblr_l9lgi6vkKr1qzx2fh.gif
 
Daaah said:
Ummm... That girl that told snow she was a lesbian at the bair's lair was blonde and had huge tits. True story.
Click to expand...

I loved her. Still have the picture of us together as my phone background. /socreepyimightkillherjustsoshecan'tbewithanyoneelse
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top