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!

Wow

A lot of sandy vaginas around here. For a program that just five years ago couldn't imagine the thought of playing in the NCAA tournament, the progress is undeniable.

It was a bad game against a good opponent. That's all. There's nothing more to it than that. It exposed a few areas where we need to improve. But it's not like we all didn't know those areas existed in the first place.

32 teams will lose in the first round of the NCAA tournament. That's not bad company to be in.
 
Shldr2Shldr said:
An NBA lottery pick will do that.
Click to expand...


As in look better but not be better, was my point.

I knew SD was good but my opinion of him has skyrocketed after this year.

Well, now I can move on and root for Arizona, New Mexico, and Gonzaga the rest of the way
 
SECOBuffsFan said:
I find it hard to believe people can't see how losing Spencer DID change this team and made a huge impact in what we could have been and what we ended up being. You took a pro...maybe the only pro on this team at this point...out of the lineup. That was a huge turn of events.
Click to expand...

:nod: The Buffs were on their way to a special season before the injury. They had 4 more wins in them and a 2 seed in the Pac-12 tourney. I firmly believe that, they were playing that well. I also completely agree with the criticisms of the offense right now. But, anyone who says this team wasn't that different after SD went down wasn't paying attention, or is letting yesterday's loss affect their judgement(CVille I'm looking directly at you on the latter.)
 
Scotch said:
:nod: The Buffs were on their way to a special season before the injury. They had 4 more wins in them and a 2 seed in the Pac-12 tourney. I firmly believe that, they were playing that well. I also completely agree with the criticisms of the offense right now. But, anyone who says this team wasn't that different after SD went down wasn't paying attention, or is letting yesterday's loss affect their judgement(CVille I'm looking directly at you on the latter.)
Click to expand...

I've never once said Spencer's loss changed nothing. I don't for one second buy that we're a 3 seed with Spencer. As I've said, it's my belief we're more like a 6. As much as you're accusing me of revisionist history, you're doing the same overlooking our issues with Dinwiddie. Our offense still sputtered, Spencer still went invisible at times. Everything wasn't completely rosy with Dinwiddie. It just wasn't.
 
CVilleBuff said:
I've never once said Spencer's loss changed nothing. I don't for one second buy that we're a 3 seed with Spencer. As I've said, it's my belief we're more like a 6. As much as you're accusing me of revisionist history, you're doing the same overlooking our issues with Dinwiddie. Our offense still sputtered, Spencer still went invisible at times. Everything wasn't completely rosy with Dinwiddie. It just wasn't.
Click to expand...

It wasn't Rosy but they were winning games because of him not in spite of him. They did win 7 games without him and made the semi's of the conference tourney. Their record would have had a significant bump if he doesn't get injured.
 
Scotch said:
It wasn't Rosy by they were winning games because of him not in spite of him. They did win 7 games without him and made the semi's of the conference tourney. Their record would have had a significant bump if he doesn't get injured.
Click to expand...

Maybe we win @ Washington? Probably @ Cal? Have a hard time finding anything else. We're not beating Arizona or UCLA with Dinwiddie in my opinion. So, another couple wins. 6 seed.
 
CVilleBuff said:
Maybe we win @ Washington? Probably @ Cal? Have a hard time finding anything else. We're not beating Arizona or UCLA with Dinwiddie in my opinion. So, another couple wins. 6 seed.
Click to expand...

Yes, @Wash and @Cal. UCLA in Boulder is a win. They were within striking distance all game in that one without Dinwiddie(Played them tough on the road until the end as well). @Utah is another game I think they could have won, as I don't think the wheels would have come off in the beginning of the 2nd with Dinwiddie playing.

Maybe 3 seed is high, but I can't agree they would have been no better than a 6 seed.
 
Scotch said:
Yes, @Wash and @Cal. UCLA in Boulder is a win. They were within striking distance all game in that one without Dinwiddie(Played them tough on the road until the end as well). @Utah is another game I think they could have won, as I don't think the wheels would have come off in the beginning of the 2nd with Dinwiddie playing.

Maybe 3 seed is high, but I can't agree they would have been no better than a 6 seed.
Click to expand...

5. Final offer!
 
CVilleBuff said:
UCLA has owned us. Major stretch.
Click to expand...

With a minute left we were down 6. SD makes up for that himself. We also missed 8FT's. Not only does SD hit most of those, but we end up shooting more because of how he plays. We had 17 TO's. A number that goes down because SD was a much more efficient ball handler than Ski or Talton were at that time.

I see 3 probably 4 more wins on that schedule.
 
dply said:
Go **** yourself with your pseudo intellect. The art of war is the douche-bag's bible that is why I used the roll eyes smiley.
Click to expand...

ROTFLMAO! :rofl:

You credentialed, but unedjamacted, doofuses are all alike: "They made me read Sun Zu in a B-school seminar and it sucked!"

Guess that's why that 3,000 year old wisdom is taught in every major military academy on the planet, eh? Because its douchey?

Figure out who Burnside is, yet, there, Plato?
 
Shldr2Shldr said:
With a minute left we were down 6. SD makes up for that himself. We also missed 8FT's. Not only does SD hit most of those, but we end up shooting more because of how he plays. We had 17 TO's. A number that goes down because SD was a much more efficient ball handler than Ski or Talton were at that time.

I see 3 probably 4 more wins on that schedule.
Click to expand...

You make a good case. My viewpoint comes from we probably don't win every winnable game, and there's really only 4 max to claim as winnable.
 
CVilleBuff said:
You make a good case. My viewpoint comes from we probably don't win every winnable game, and there's really only 4 max to claim as winnable.
Click to expand...
You forgot to mention that we might have lost one or two games too.

Basically, every single game except The zona games become winnable with Spencer. That's a lot of games.
 
@UW: We lost because the team had to adjust to two key players going down within 90secs of eachother.
UCLA: We lost because it was our first game without SD and I think it was expected to lose, but we were in a position to win at the end. SD would have been the difference
@Utah: I think we could have won this one with SD. We were tied at half, and I don't think there is anyway he lets the team come out and **** the bed the way they did in the 2nd half.
@Cal: I think we absolutely win. One more shot. One more FT anything from SD and we win that game.

We still Probably lose @UA @ASU @UCLA UA UA. Would likely have been a 4 or 5 seed. Now we may have still gotten trounced in the Tournament. Who knows. But I like our odds against a 12 or a 13 (yes I know about the upsets) more than I liked them against Pitt.
 
Darth Snow said:
You forgot to mention that we might have lost one or two games too.

Basically, every single game except The zona games become winnable with Spencer. That's a lot of games.
Click to expand...

Arizona St. on the road may be an exception there, but yeah.
 
Shldr2Shldr said:
@UW: We lost because the team had to adjust to two key players going down within 90secs of eachother.
UCLA: We lost because it was our first game without SD and I think it was expected to lose, but we were in a position to win at the end. SD would have been the difference
@Utah: I think we could have won this one with SD. We were tied at half, and I don't think there is anyway he lets the team come out and **** the bed the way they did in the 2nd half.
@Cal: I think we absolutely win. One more shot. One more FT anything from SD and we win that game.

We still Probably lose @UA @ASU @UCLA UA UA. Would likely have been a 4 or 5 seed. Now we may have still gotten trounced in the Tournament. Who knows. But I like our odds against a 12 or a 13 (yes I know about the upsets) more than I liked them against Pitt.
Click to expand...

I think your mistake comes from making all 4 winnables wins. Winnables are never all wins. It's like when people continuously find 7 "winnables" on CU's football schedule, predict them all as wins, and then get disappointed when we only win 3 or 4.
 
CVilleBuff said:
I think your mistake comes from making all 4 winnables wins. Winnables are never all wins. It's like when people continuously find 7 "winnables" on CU's football schedule, predict them all as wins, and then get disappointed when we only win 3 or 4.
Click to expand...

There's a pretty big difference between picking games as "winnables" before the season and expecting to win them all and looking at games in hindsight, seeing how they actually unfolded, and projecting what the addition of Dinwiddie would have meant to what unfolded, though.
 
Junction said:
There's a pretty big difference between picking games as "winnables" before the season and expecting to win them all and looking at games in hindsight, seeing how they actually unfolded, and projecting what the addition of Dinwiddie would have meant to what unfolded, though.
Click to expand...

True. But we're making 3 double digit losses into wins. It's a stretch.
 
CVilleBuff said:
True. But we're making 3 double digit losses into wins. It's a stretch.
Click to expand...

While looking at the score alone you would be correct. But looking at the score breakdown as you head towards the end you have to realize that some look like blowouts because we had to foul because we were down by 5 or 6 with under a minute to play. UW got out of hand and there was really nothing anyone could do about that after the injuries. That one is what it is.
 
Buffenuf said:
ROTFLMAO! :rofl:

You credentialed, but unedjamacted, doofuses are all alike: "They made me read Sun Zu in a B-school seminar and it sucked!"

Guess that's why that 3,000 year old wisdom is taught in every major military academy on the planet, eh? Because its douchey?

Figure out who Burnside is, yet, there, Plato?
Click to expand...


Keep thinking you're smart buddy. I'm sure it's gotten you far in life.
 
Shldr2Shldr said:
While looking at the score alone you would be correct. But looking at the score breakdown as you head towards the end you have to realize that some look like blowouts because we had to foul because we were down by 5 or 6 with under a minute to play. UW got out of hand and there was really nothing anyone could do about that after the injuries. That one is what it is.
Click to expand...

That's the case with UCLA, but Utah was firmly in control by the 15 minute mark of the second half.
 
Scotch said:
Yes. I was referring to every game being winnable outside of the UofA games.
Click to expand...
eh, we beat ASU at home. pretty easy to think that away game is a lot different if we weren't still recovering from the mayor's knee disaster.
 
Darth Snow said:
eh, we beat ASU at home. pretty easy to think that away game is a lot different if we weren't still recovering from the mayor's knee disaster.
Click to expand...

Don't remember the game 2 years ago, but it just seems like Tempe has been the toughest place for us in conference.
 
CVilleBuff said:
That's the case with UCLA, but Utah was firmly in control by the 15 minute mark of the second half.
Click to expand...

We did have a good lead in the 1st half. This team didn't have the type of long scoring droughts when Spencer was still playing. We played Utah even after that scoring drought I believe.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top