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!

why do people think...

jrod212

Member
I was wondering why people think the rocky mountain showdown should be discontinued. Last year's game was decided in OT, we lost the year before that, and the 2005 and 2004 games looked like they were exciting from what i could see on the replays on TV last week.

It seems like these games have been close in the last couple of years, why discontinue an exciting game?
 
I was wondering why people think the rocky mountain showdown should be discontinued. Last year's game was decided in OT, we lost the year before that, and the 2005 and 2004 games looked like they were exciting from what i could see on the replays on TV last week.

It seems like these games have been close in the last couple of years, why discontinue an exciting game?

because it is a no win game for CU. also gives the lambs more exposure than they deserve
 
I'm not one of the people who thinks it should be discontinued. Honestly it doesn't matter to me one way or the other.

But, as 66 points out, it is a no win situation for the Buffs. If the Buffs win, they are simply doing that they are supposed to. If they lose, it really hurts their credibility.
 
I wouldn't mind a break - take a few years off from the series
 
66 is correct. No win situation for the Buffs. If they keep playing the game I wish they would move the CU home games back to Boulder. I hate watching games at Invesco.
 
Even if we do end the series it's still a no win situation. We would have to listen to all of the lamb fans bitch about how we are afraid to play them. :sad2:
 
Yeah, I'm for the Buffs maybe alternating between the Air Force Academy & CSU each year.


I like this idea, play CSU and AFA every year as the first game at Mile High.

As for it being a no win situation each year, that is only said because we lost a few which shouldn't happen if we are where we should be. Like it or not it does bring a ton of interest to football in the state. It sure beats the heck out of playing the Eastern Washington and Montana State types and if there ever was a no win situation it was that Montana State game.
 
Here is my solution. Annihilate the Rams for 8 years in a row then drop the series. We won't have to listen to them whine then.
 
Here is my solution. Annihilate the Rams for 8 years in a row then drop the series. We won't have to listen to them whine then.
I'm with BlackNGold. The only thing is, if they stay within, say, 3 touchdowns of us by scoring 2 TD's against our third team in the 4th quarter, they will call that a "moral" victory. There are no moral victories, only whiney pussies who can't stand a beat-down.
 
Because i'm sick of the crying and whining. We don't need them and they say they don't need us so END IT.
 
CU's B12 schedule has the Buffs playing the same 5 North teams every season, and then we face the same 6 south opponents on a rotating schedule. The CSU game at Invesco further limits variety. Then CU picks up Fresno three years in a row.

CSU has had some great drama over the years, but at this point, the matchup is a case of "been there, done that." Like the macarena, this matchup has lost it's charm. It's boring to see the same old schedule with the same old opponents at the same old stadium year after year. Sorry, but the Invesco parking lot is not in the same league as the CU campus in a "charming location" competition.

The RMS or Mile High Beatdown or whatever it's called is tired and needs a rest. If CSU wants to come to Boulder in 2009, great. I've enjoyed going to Ft Collins to play CSU in that cow pasture of a stadium, too. But that hasn't happened since before the Clinton administration.

As a fan who likes to experience different college venues, Invesco disappoints after the third or fourth or eighth trip. Anyone who has ever taken a tour of the AFA campus has seen the gorgeous setting. Throw the dog a bone, and give the CU fans an occasion to sit in the zoomie stadium every once or twice a decade.
 
I don't care if they keep playing the game or not (although I'd prefer not - at least for a few years), but I HATE HATE HATE Invesco.
 
I don't care if they keep playing the game or not (although I'd prefer not - at least for a few years), but I HATE HATE HATE Invesco.

:yeahthat:

I cannot stand going to that game at Invesco. Besides the drunk college students and the bands, there is absolutely no college football atmosphere when the game is held there.
 
I don't care if they keep playing the game or not (although I'd prefer not - at least for a few years), but I HATE HATE HATE Invesco.

Invesco as a venue sucks. It sucks for Broncos games and it sucks for that game. I really don't like that stadium. At all.
 
I think that extra $500,000 is the main reason the series doesn't end....you need money to succeed in college football, and it's difficult to turn down chunks of cash like that
 
I think that extra $500,000 is the main reason the series doesn't end....you need money to succeed in college football, and it's difficult to turn down chunks of cash like that

Nowainaminit. How come CU outsells CSU 5 to 3 at the box office, but both programs come home with the same payday? CU is subsidizing little bro'. Shouldn't CU be pulling $625K? If it's about the money, let's make this about the money!
 
Nowainaminit. How come CU outsells CSU 5 to 3 at the box office, but both programs come home with the same payday? CU is subsidizing little bro'. Shouldn't CU be pulling $625K? If it's about the money, let's make this about the money!

hmmmmm 6 words come to mind -- bowl revenue sharing among conference schools :smile2:
 
hmmmmm 6 words come to mind -- bowl revenue sharing among conference schools :smile2:

ISU and Baylor would agree. Since the inception of revenue sharing in the B12, my guess is that CU FB contributes as much as it benefits. If you've seen anything to the contrary, please share. There's no doubt OU is a net donator, thank you very much.

But what about the RRS? Does CU get any of that action? If not, STFU? This is a CU-CSU thread.
 
Nowainaminit. How come CU outsells CSU 5 to 3 at the box office, but both programs come home with the same payday? CU is subsidizing little bro'. Shouldn't CU be pulling $625K? If it's about the money, let's make this about the money!

ISU and Baylor would agree. Since the inception of revenue sharing in the B12, my guess is that CU FB contributes as much as it benefits. If you've seen anything to the contrary, please share. There's no doubt OU is a net donator, thank you very much.

But what about the RRS? Does CU get any of that action? If not, STFU? This is a CU-CSU thread.

just making it about the money......:smile2:
 
just making it about the money......:smile2:

I fail to see how OU's contribution to the B12 revenue sharing arrangement has anything to do with CU's decision to extend the Mile High Massacre against CSU.

You keep your nose out of CU's OOC schedule, and I won't get into your matchups against Chattanooga or Cincinnati. Damn Okie Threadjackers!:smile2:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Nowainaminit. How come CU outsells CSU 5 to 3 at the box office, but both programs come home with the same payday? CU is subsidizing little bro'. Shouldn't CU be pulling $625K? If it's about the money, let's make this about the money!

It doesn't make sense to me either....i don't get how we don't make as much money at Folsom either since wouldn't we essentially be selling more tickets, especially since either the '04 or '05 game set a record for attendance at Folsom?? Couldn't we get the same sponsorship deals too? Could still be the stupid "Qwest Rocky Mountain Showdown", just at a REAL college campus
 
Nowainaminit. How come CU outsells CSU 5 to 3 at the box office, but both programs come home with the same payday? CU is subsidizing little bro'. Shouldn't CU be pulling $625K? If it's about the money, let's make this about the money!

From the article: CU athletic director Mike Bohn estimates his department makes an extra $500,000 at Invesco Field versus playing in Boulder. Kowalczyk said his department makes between $400,000 and $500,000 in additional revenue compared with a standard non-conference home game.

CU makes a lot more on a home game than CSU, since the CSU stadium seats about 30,000 is all, so CU is indeed getting a much larger part of the payday for Invesco.

Now everyone quit crying about Invesco. And quit whimpering about the change to the uniforms also. What a bunch of whiners. :cry:
 
Now everyone quit crying about Invesco. And quit whimpering about the change to the uniforms also. What a bunch of whiners. :cry:

Okay, schoolmarm. Step up. Finish your argument. This is the part where tell us how much you love the Invesco experience. Then blow some smoke up our skirts about how beautiful the new bastardized Nike uniforms are. Then tell us how cash strapped the program is, and how much $500K means to the program.

:popcorn:
 
If we continue to schedule 6 home / folsom games every season, the Invesco game becomes a defacto home game. Adds interest in the program, TV audience.. lots of positives. I do like the idea of bringing in Air Force to the idea of the rocky mountain showdown, maybe a roundrobin thing, playing CSU one year, Air Force one year, and off the third year (a CSU / AFA matchup year maybe).

I am withholding judgement on the uniforms until i see them with at a game. I am not blowing smoke, I'm just not going to agonize over this. isn't it a bit trivial? It's not like we are going back to powder blue or something.
 
If we continue to schedule 6 home / folsom games every season, the Invesco game becomes a defacto home game. Adds interest in the program, TV audience.. lots of positives. I do like the idea of bringing in Air Force to the idea of the rocky mountain showdown, maybe a roundrobin thing, playing CSU one year, Air Force one year, and off the third year (a CSU / AFA matchup year maybe).

I am withholding judgement on the uniforms until i see them with at a game. I am not blowing smoke, I'm just not going to agonize over this. isn't it a bit trivial? It's not like we are going back to powder blue or something.

Whew! I mostly agree with you. The whining comment is about the trivality.
There's been 8 pages on tacos. Trivial is elevated to an artform around here.
 
Back
Top