Why do we **** around with CSU in any sport? Serious question.

[4BienemyTDs]

Playing CSU is less boring than playing any other G5 school that you'd substitute. Do you really want to see a New Mexico, Utah State, SJSU, or a MAC school come to Folsom?

The only way to continue playing CSU is to play hardcore and basically say that it has to be a 2:1 or 3:1 ratio of the game at Folsom vs Credit Union Stadium. It is not a value add game except for home attendance. Playing at their stadium is worthless

 

[PAHIBuff]

The only way to continue playing CSU is to play hardcore and basically say that it has to be a 2:1 or 3:1 ratio of the game at Folsom vs Credit Union Stadium. It is not a value add game except for home attendance. Playing at their stadium is worthless

I agree that a home and away 1:1 isn't acceptable. But playing Akron, Bowling Green or Nevada instead of CSU wouldn't be value added games either.

 

[slider]

CSU every year was getting a little stale. I think they should be on our schedule consistently, but not every year.

 

[PAHIBuff]

Maybe playing CSU every other year and scheduling an interesting off-the-wall G5 opponent like UTSA, Florida Atlantic, or Louisiana might work. I just nod off into an unconscious stupor when I think of substituting another bottom feeder from the lower half of the MWC or anyone from the MAC. Let's mix it up a bit since we seem to be recruiting the southeast successfully now.

 

[Alfred91]

Isn't it amazing that we've had this reputation of being assholes and horrible fans for decades and yet have never once had to have our university president apologize on the behalf of the student body nor has there ever been a sign hung in at CU sporting event mocking the death of one of the opponent's student-athletes?

 

[hokiehead]

We play CSU because they’re the closest D-1 school to Boulder. We have a history with them. Just because a small portion of their student fan base are morons is not a justification for discontinuing any kind of relationship with them. We play them. We kick their ass. We move on. That’s the way it has always worked and that’s the way it will likely always be. Getting your pantries in a wad over it seems pointless. Just because it’s more beneficial, financially, for them that it is for us doesn’t mean it brings us no financial benefit.

if you don’t like it, fine, but I’d suggest getting used to the idea of playing them in just about every sport. Oh wait, we already do that.

very well stated

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

CSU every year was getting a little stale. I think they should be on our schedule consistently, but not every year.

The only thing stale about it has been the lack of competent football being played between the two programs and the apathy that had set in with the fan bases and the empty seats at Mile High. That's not really a byproduct of the matchup, though, but rather just how bad both programs have been.

It's still a top revenue producing game when played in Folsom, and it's a likely win. There aren't many other teams that bring both of those things for CU.

As I said earlier, schedule an FCS powderpuff at home, CSU on the campuses switching locations every year, and a P5 for the OOC schedule. That way, CU will always have 2 OOC games played in the state of Colorado and every other year, they will never have to leave the state for OOC, and all 3 OOC games will be at Folsom. Then you have 4-5 conference games at home, so there could be years where they legitimately only have 4 games played out of the state.

Too easy.

 

[Uncle Ken]

Isn't it amazing that we've had this reputation of being assholes and horrible fans for decades and yet have never once had to have our university president apologize on the behalf of the student body nor has there ever been a sign hung in at CU sporting event mocking the death of one of the opponent's student-athletes?

Huskers will always point to the game that got interrupted for the student section at Folsom.

 

[Alfred91]

Huskers will always point to the game that got interrupted for the student section at Folsom.

I just feel like snowballs don't rise to the same level as signs about people dying or chants about wars in other students homeland.

Call me a homer.

 

[4BienemyTDs]

Just thought of an idea for the CSU series
"Make it, Take it!"
Play the game, whoever wins, hosts the next game, and so on. We can keep it at Folsom forever if we keep kicking their asses

 

[MtnBuff]

FCS, CSU and P5 is the OOC schedule the football program should be playing every year as long as we are in a conference that plays 9 conference games.

It guarantees two in-state and/or home OOC games every year and some years all three, along with two very likely wins, meaning a losing conference record still gets us to a bowl game. It shouldn't be that hard.

Agree. Think though that we need to push on them hard and force the scheduling into a 2 for 1. We get two in Boulder, they can do their one in Ft. Collins or Denver.

Only FCS close is UNC, don't want to be bringing in the Dakota Schools, etc. In their place we can get some fairly close G5 schools that happen to be very bad to come in for a payday, looking UNM, NMSU, UTEP,

 

[patebuff]

The only thing stale about it has been the lack of competent football being played between the two programs and the apathy that had set in with the fan bases and the empty seats at Mile High. That's not really a byproduct of the matchup, though, but rather just how bad both programs have been.

It's still a top revenue producing game when played in Folsom, and it's a likely win. There aren't many other teams that bring both of those things for CU.

As I said earlier, schedule an FCS powderpuff at home, CSU on the campuses switching locations every year, and a P5 for the OOC schedule. That way, CU will always have 2 OOC games played in the state of Colorado and every other year, they will never have to leave the state for OOC, and all 3 OOC games will be at Folsom. Then you have 4-5 conference games at home, so there could be years where they legitimately only have 4 games played out of the state.

Too easy.

A two year on, one year off with Nebraska and CSU where you play one or the other every year, or both in some years. Then schedule your FCS creampuff every year. With Prime none of this matters, but the above is perfect IMO. Probably very hard to get this set up though.

 

[patebuff]

Agree. Think though that we need to push on them hard and force the scheduling into a 2 for 1. We get two in Boulder, they can do their one in Ft. Collins or Denver.

Only FCS close is UNC, don't want to be bringing in the Dakota Schools, etc. In their place we can get some fairly close G5 schools that happen to be very bad to come in for a payday, looking UNM, NMSU, UTEP,

2 for 1's really don't happen anymore. Its either one offs or single game

 

[MtnBuff]

2 for 1's really don't happen anymore. Its either one offs or single game

They aren't as common but they do sometimes happen.

Point is that CSU wants to control some games but CU has the leverage. It is in CUs advantage to play the game, CSU needs the game. Under no circumstances should the series be played if CU isn't getting the majority of the games in Boulder. Make CSU deal with it if they want the game to happen.

 

[Not Sure]

2 for 1's really don't happen anymore. Its either one offs or single game

What’s the difference between a one off and a single game?

 

[Buffnik]

For scheduling, I'd love an 8 game conference schedule, Nebraska every year, 2-year rotations of AFA & CSU, and 2 bag games to get 7 at Folsom with very likely wins.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

For scheduling, I'd love an 8 game conference schedule, Nebraska every year, 2-year rotations of AFA & CSU, and 2 bag games to get 7 at Folsom with very likely wins.

No thanks to AFA. Talk about a game with zero upside for CU and takes a lot of valuable practice time that is irrelevant for the rest of the season.

 

[Buffnik]

No thanks to AFA. Talk about a game with zero upside for CU and takes a lot of valuable practice time that is irrelevant for the rest of the season.

It cracks me up how much people worry about playing them. They're only dangerous as a P5 if you suck and are undisciplined.

The upsides are that it's a national broadcast, inexpensive on travel when it's there + an easy road trip for fans, inexpensive on their travel when it's here (lower appearance fee), and connects CU with the 2nd largest metro in the state.

I look at Notre Dame's record vs Navy, which they play every year. It doesn't cause any problems for them because - and this is the key - they don't suck. All the concerns about AFA are grounded in fear based on 15+ years of CU sucking. We don't suck any more.

 

[PAHIBuff]

I'd be careful about putting an FCS game on the schedule every year. If the Buffs are going to get as good as we think they're going to, you don't want to get possibly screwed out of the playoffs some year if you're on the bubble and Strength of Schedule comes into play. I'd be happier with a P5 and 2 G5s. And if we get really good who wants to watch the Buffs roll up a 59-7 score on some clearly undermanned FCS outfit from the hinterlands?

 

[CarolinaBuff]

2 for 1's really don't happen anymore. Its either one offs or single game

Yea they still happen, I'm just not sure how widespread they are. USF does a bunch of them - with Florida, Miami, Alabama, and it also looks like they're finishing off a 2-for-1 with ND in 2029 and 2031.

 

[Buffnik]

I'd be careful about putting an FCS game on the schedule every year. If the Buffs are going to get as good as we think they're going to, you don't want to get possibly screwed out of the playoffs some year if you're on the bubble and Strength of Schedule comes into play. I'd be happier with a P5 and 2 G5s. And if we get really good who wants to watch the Buffs roll up a 59-7 score on some clearly undermanned FCS outfit from the hinterlands?

It's about being competitive with other contenders and getting 7 games a year at Folsom.

2023 schedules:

tOSU plays FCS Youngstown State
Alabama plays FCS Chattanooga
Georgia plays FCS TN Martin
Clemson plays FCS Charleston Southern
LSU plays FCS Grambling
Penn State plays FCS Delaware
Florida State plays FCS North Alabama

I'm not sure why CU should be expected to play a tougher schedule than those programs.

 

[patebuff]

I'd be careful about putting an FCS game on the schedule every year. If the Buffs are going to get as good as we think they're going to, you don't want to get possibly screwed out of the playoffs some year if you're on the bubble and Strength of Schedule comes into play. I'd be happier with a P5 and 2 G5s. And if we get really good who wants to watch the Buffs roll up a 59-7 score on some clearly undermanned FCS outfit from the hinterlands?

If CU or anyone is on the bubble for 12 team playoff then they are just happy to be there. No chance at winning it all

 

[MtnBuff]

It's about being competitive with other contenders and getting 7 games a year at Folsom.

2023 schedules:

tOSU plays FCS Youngstown State
Alabama plays FCS Chattanooga
Georgia plays FCS TN Martin
Clemson plays FCS Charleston Southern
LSU plays FCS Grambling
Penn State plays FCS Delaware
Florida State plays FCS North Alabama

I'm not sure why CU should be expected to play a tougher schedule than those programs.

I understand what you are saying and agree to an extent. When I do the other games threads I usually end up making fun of the SEC because near the end of the season they have a two week stretch where almost everybody plays FCS type teams, pad the record, rest their key players, give some time to the depth players.

SEC teams though also get a pass on weak scheduling because, well, they are SEC. CU in the PAC won't get that same benefit of a doubt.

I don't mind scheduling the occasional FCS team for the same reasons I listed for the SEC teams. I would rather though schedule a bad G5 team in those places. In this region we have schools like New Mexico and New Mexico State, UTEP, that are weaker than some of the FCS teams in the region. Scheduling these schools should be easy because they are in the region and looking for a payday.