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!

Living up north

They probably don't realize that they only won 3 games last year since they only care about the one.

I'm so sick of CSU. There is not one thing to gain from that game. We win, we were supposed to win cause we are a bigger program that has more money. We lose then we have to hear trash talk from a team that sucks for a year.

This is such a tired argument. Outside of the financials that equate to nearly $500,000 in additional revenue for CU, revenue that the atheletic dept. has desperately needed over the last 10 years. CU has "gained" many times with wins over CSU. In the BCS era - the following games have been a net positive for CU's program:

1997-1998: CU(#8) v. CSU (#24) was a great game and a good 31-21 win over a Top 25 program to start the year. (Fox)

1998-1999: CU(UR) v. CSU (#15) was a 42-14 win that propelled CU from the unranked to a #16 rating the following week. (Nationally televised on ESPN)

2001-2002: CU(UR) v. CSU (#24) was a 41-14 win that CU gained and helped right the ship after dropping a 22-24 game to Fresno State the week before in Boulder. (Nationally televised ABC)

2003-2004: CU(UR) v. CSU (#23) was a fantastic 42-35 game CU won over a Top 25 game that propelled CU from the unranked to a #24 ranking the following week. (Nationally televised ESPN)

Not only is this argument that CU has nothing to gain from this game tired...its also completely inaccurate. At the end of the day, this series has benefited both programs at different times, on the field and with exposure. It is easy to rag on this series right now - especially when CU and CSU are both down, but when this series is right and the programs are up - this game has proven to be meaninful for both programs.
 
I'm ok with the series, but it should be once every 3 years. The whole game is wildly tired at this point. Alternate between CSU, AFA, and Wyo. That way, every year a local team gets to play CU, but we don't have to deal with the assclowns from FoCo every season. Would also help the Buffs get up for the game every blue moon.
 
Piss on CSU. The games have been close and exciting (exciting score wise) the last 10 years but some of the csu fans make me more sick than fusker fans. The mantra is scoreboard and how terrible cu is over at ramnation. Um, hello? CSU has lost 9 straight games, and couldn't muster a conference win in the MWC.

Bohn signing a 10 year deal with csu makes me want to puke. CU doesn't need csu, the media honks pay attention to this one game and that's it. It doesn't bring more people to follow either school.

The arrogance of some of the fans at csu is mind boggling.
 
No more EXCUSES. I've heard the players and how bad they want a good season and bowl game. If losing on your home field to these sheep effers isn't motivation enough, I don't know what is.

CU has the advantage on the OL/DL's this year. They have the more experienced QB. Good teams exploit this and they win the damn game.

Fairchild is a sandbagger but cu has no excuse to lose this game NONE. With our db's, 2 nfl corners, there shouldn't be any missed coverages or guys getting burned. Enough pussy footing around. Go out, take advantage of your size and experience and kick their ass.
 
This is such a tired argument. Outside of the financials that equate to nearly $500,000 in additional revenue for CU, revenue that the atheletic dept. has desperately needed over the last 10 years. CU has "gained" many times with wins over CSU. In the BCS era - the following games have been a net positive for CU's program:

1997-1998: CU(#8) v. CSU (#24) was a great game and a good 31-21 win over a Top 25 program to start the year. (Fox)

1998-1999: CU(UR) v. CSU (#15) was a 42-14 win that propelled CU from the unranked to a #16 rating the following week. (Nationally televised on ESPN)

2001-2002: CU(UR) v. CSU (#24) was a 41-14 win that CU gained and helped right the ship after dropping a 22-24 game to Fresno State the week before in Boulder. (Nationally televised ABC)

2003-2004: CU(UR) v. CSU (#23) was a fantastic 42-35 game CU won over a Top 25 game that propelled CU from the unranked to a #24 ranking the following week. (Nationally televised ESPN)

Not only is this argument that CU has nothing to gain from this game tired...its also completely inaccurate. At the end of the day, this series has benefited both programs at different times, on the field and with exposure. It is easy to rag on this series right now - especially when CU and CSU are both down, but when this series is right and the programs are up - this game has proven to be meaninful for both programs.
Tired argument? Maybe from the CSU perspective, but to say that it is completely inaccurate is completely inaccurate.

First, you are correct. CU probably does make a little more money by playing the game in Denver. I don't know where your $500,000. number came from, and I don't know if it is accurate or not. Let's just agree that, yes, there is some financial benefit to the game. I think we can also agree that the financial benefit is much greater for CSU than it is for CU. CSU loses this game being in Denver, it probably is a huge dent in the budget. CU loses the $500,000 or whatever, and it hurts a bit, but isn't the end of the world. This is one of the reasons why CU fans don't like the game in Denver. We don't think we should be a participant in financing a huge chunk of CSU's athletic budget.

As far as what CU "gains" from this series, you have 4 recent examples (out of 81 total games played in the series). The first one, a ranked CU win over a ranked CSU team was "an exciting game", but what, exactly, was the gain, other than a win on the W-L record? Two of the other three examples were unranked CU teams beating ranked CSU teams, and receiving a bump in the rankings as a result (UR to 16, and UR to 24). We would have received the same bump from beating any higher ranked team. The last example, UR CU beat a ranked CSU team and "righted the ship" from a loss the week before - really? That's all you got? We have a slight bump in the rankings exactly twice ... wow!

Series Record:
Overall: 59-20-2 CU
Since 1983 when the series resumed after a long layoff: 16-6 CU
Last 10 Years: 6-4 CU
In Denver: 5-4 CU

The truth is, in the grand scheme of things, CU has little to gain, or lose for that matter, from playing CSU. It is not a conference game, so even in the years that CSU wins, it does not affect CU's ability to achieve the majority of their goals (Divison Title, League Title, Bowl Game). There are certainly in-state bragging rights, but do they really change anything? Has one Colorado prep player ever chosen to play at CSU because the Rams won the game the previous year? The bottom line is that the series has been extremely one-sided. Even in the past 10 years - the most even period of the series - CU has won 60% of the games. And let's be honest. If the numbers were turned around in CSU's favor, you would feel the same way as we do now.
 
Tired argument? Maybe from the CSU perspective, but to say that it is completely inaccurate is completely inaccurate.

First, you are correct. CU probably does make a little more money by playing the game in Denver. I don't know where your $500,000. number came from, and I don't know if it is accurate or not. Let's just agree that, yes, there is some financial benefit to the game. I think we can also agree that the financial benefit is much greater for CSU than it is for CU. CSU loses this game being in Denver, it probably is a huge dent in the budget. CU loses the $500,000 or whatever, and it hurts a bit, but isn't the end of the world. This is one of the reasons why CU fans don't like the game in Denver. We don't think we should be a participant in financing a huge chunk of CSU's athletic budget.

As far as what CU "gains" from this series, you have 4 recent examples (out of 81 total games played in the series). The first one, a ranked CU win over a ranked CSU team was "an exciting game", but what, exactly, was the gain, other than a win on the W-L record? Two of the other three examples were unranked CU teams beating ranked CSU teams, and receiving a bump in the rankings as a result (UR to 16, and UR to 24). We would have received the same bump from beating any higher ranked team. The last example, UR CU beat a ranked CSU team and "righted the ship" from a loss the week before - really? That's all you got? We have a slight bump in the rankings exactly twice ... wow!

Series Record:
Overall: 59-20-2 CU
Since 1983 when the series resumed after a long layoff: 16-6 CU
Last 10 Years: 6-4 CU
In Denver: 5-4 CU

The truth is, in the grand scheme of things, CU has little to gain, or lose for that matter, from playing CSU. It is not a conference game, so even in the years that CSU wins, it does not affect CU's ability to achieve the majority of their goals (Divison Title, League Title, Bowl Game). There are certainly in-state bragging rights, but do they really change anything? Has one Colorado prep player ever chosen to play at CSU because the Rams won the game the previous year? The bottom line is that the series has been extremely one-sided. Even in the past 10 years - the most even period of the series - CU has won 60% of the games. And let's be honest. If the numbers were turned around in CSU's favor, you would feel the same way as we do now.

Actually, the series is 61-20-2 CU.
 
I'm probably one of the few on this board who likes the game, and doesn't mind it being in Denver. Here's my reasoning:

The game is a showcase for college football in Colorado. True, both teams stink on ice right now. But it's not always like that, and it won't always be that way in the future. At some point, we all agree that CU will be better. CSU has potential, if they'll take it. This game has great potential as a marquee beginning of the season matchup.

It adds a seventh game to CU's home schedule. While not technically a home game, it is for all intents and purposes. This puts money in our coffers that wouldn't be there otherwise. The argument about having the game in Boulder is lame, because we wouldn't get seven home games in a year, so we should just forget that.

It serves as a barometer for the overall strength of the team. If we can't beat CSU, we're probably in for a miserable season. CSU gives us everything they've got. It helps prepare us for when we play teams that have as much or better talent than we have.

All in all, the game has it's drawbacks. The game is an afterthought to the folks who run the stadium. They don't open up all the entry gates, which creates massive bottlenecks trying to get into the stadium. They open up the parking lots four hours before game time and close them two hours after the game ends. I seriously doubt they have the same set of rules for Bronco games. Traffic is a disaster, both coming and going. The stadium itself is entirely average. No character to it at all. Hey, it's an NFL stadium, what would we expect?

In my opinion, the good outweighs the bad. I don't think we could replace CSU with another game that would provide as much revenue or exposure.
 
Border wars are much better. We need an annual CU/NU tilt. Dump little brother. There is no argument. The game means nothing to CU and everything to CSU. Let them fight with Wyoming every year. I want to beat Nebraska every year. I want to beat CSU because I want a win, but it is no more important to me than beating Toledo (oh wait we couldn't do that either).
 
Tired argument? Maybe from the CSU perspective, but to say that it is completely inaccurate is completely inaccurate.

First, you are correct. CU probably does make a little more money by playing the game in Denver. I don't know where your $500,000. number came from, and I don't know if it is accurate or not. Let's just agree that, yes, there is some financial benefit to the game. I think we can also agree that the financial benefit is much greater for CSU than it is for CU. CSU loses this game being in Denver, it probably is a huge dent in the budget. CU loses the $500,000 or whatever, and it hurts a bit, but isn't the end of the world. This is one of the reasons why CU fans don't like the game in Denver. We don't think we should be a participant in financing a huge chunk of CSU's athletic budget.

As far as what CU "gains" from this series, you have 4 recent examples (out of 81 total games played in the series). The first one, a ranked CU win over a ranked CSU team was "an exciting game", but what, exactly, was the gain, other than a win on the W-L record? Two of the other three examples were unranked CU teams beating ranked CSU teams, and receiving a bump in the rankings as a result (UR to 16, and UR to 24). We would have received the same bump from beating any higher ranked team. The last example, UR CU beat a ranked CSU team and "righted the ship" from a loss the week before - really? That's all you got? We have a slight bump in the rankings exactly twice ... wow!

Series Record:
Overall: 59-20-2 CU
Since 1983 when the series resumed after a long layoff: 16-6 CU
Last 10 Years: 6-4 CU
In Denver: 5-4 CU

The truth is, in the grand scheme of things, CU has little to gain, or lose for that matter, from playing CSU. It is not a conference game, so even in the years that CSU wins, it does not affect CU's ability to achieve the majority of their goals (Divison Title, League Title, Bowl Game). There are certainly in-state bragging rights, but do they really change anything? Has one Colorado prep player ever chosen to play at CSU because the Rams won the game the previous year? The bottom line is that the series has been extremely one-sided. Even in the past 10 years - the most even period of the series - CU has won 60% of the games. And let's be honest. If the numbers were turned around in CSU's favor, you would feel the same way as we do now.

I don't beleive their is much debate about the financials. I believe this Denver Post article talks about it: http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_10293477. I understand it is easy for CU fans on message boards to simply throw away a half million dollars as if it were nothing. But over the course of the current 10 year contract that equates to roughly $5million dollars in CU's budget. Money administrators are not willing to walk away from. Also, even with the coming Pac-12 t.v. contracts that will ease some of CU's financial woes, there is still a $9 Million dollar payout to the Big-12 to be paid and CU will still be competing in a conference where it will still rank 10th out of 12 teams in terms of revenue generation from its athletic departments (http://www.bbstate.com/info/schools-revenue.) CU has and still needs every dime it can get and that includes the roughly $500,000 dollars it recieves from the RMS.

I don't deny that CSU benefits to a greater extent than CU in terms of percentage of dollars to its overall budget. However, I don't see how this is even a relevant argument. What is the rational for this argument? CU should hurt its own bottom line just to spite CSU? That makes absolutely no sense to me.

As far as the series as a whole goes. This is where the "nothing gained" crowd's argument starts to fall apart. First, there is the argument that CU would recieve the same benefit if not more by going out and scheduling a "higher ranked" team or a BCS power. However, it is an absloute pie in the sky argument as it completly ignores the realities of modern day scheduling in college football. Outside of one-possibly two non-conference games a year, most of the schools from the "power" conferences don't schedule other BCS programs. That leaves CU will few options for a replacement to the CSU game that is going to generate the same kind of fan interest and revenue. AFA would be a possibility, but they have their own scheduling issues with Army and Navy already penciled in every year. The reality is that CU would likely be replacing CSU with the Montana States, Utah States, etc. of the world. I don't see what, if anything, that does for CU.

The second area where the "nothing gained" crowds argument is flawed is the idea that CU has dominated the series and because the two schools don't play in the same conference CU gains nothing. Frankly, you only get one of those arguments. Historically, CU and CSU have played in the same conference for a large portion (47%) of the series. 1909-1938 CU and CSU were both members and played their games as a part of the Rocky Mountain Athletic Conference. Then from 1938-1948 the two played annual games in the Mountain States Conference. So of the 83 games in the series, 39 of them have been in-conference tilts and by your own logic would have been meaningful games regardless of the out come (i.e. Divison Title, League Title, etc.). Historically, CU has certainly gained from this series.

If you want to simply focus on the BCS era and conference affiliation, I have already show four examples where the RMS has been a net benefit to CU on the field, outside of the financials, and outside of conference affiliation. Secondly, by the "nothing gained" crowds own logic you would be arguing against, for instance, the Iowa-Iowa State series. If what you say is to be believed, what does Iowa have to gain by playing its' Big 12 North counterpart? Iowa's athletic budget nearly doubles ISU and it does nothing for them in conference. In the "grand scheme of things", Iowa is by far and away the more successful program therefore it should simply not play ISU? I don't think many would argue for that position. Furthermore, outside of ISU being in a BCS affiliated conference, I think you can make a strong argument that CSU has in fact been more "relevant" than ISU since the BCS became a part of the college football landscape in the mid-1990's. So how exactly does this series hurt CU?
 
Last edited:
Border wars are much better. We need an annual CU/NU tilt. Dump little brother. There is no argument. The game means nothing to CU and everything to CSU. Let them fight with Wyoming every year. I want to beat Nebraska every year. I want to beat CSU because I want a win, but it is no more important to me than beating Toledo (oh wait we couldn't do that either).

I'd rather play CSU than NU. Let them go their way, and we'll go ours. It was fun while it lasted, but I'd just assume re-claim my state. The longer the CU/NU series goes on hiatus, the happier I'll be. The corn transplants who have moved here over the years won't have their team coming to town every other year. They won't be on TV as much, and we won't have to deal with their obnoxiousness anymore.
 
I'd rather play CSU than NU. Let them go their way, and we'll go ours. It was fun while it lasted, but I'd just assume re-claim my state. The longer the CU/NU series goes on hiatus, the happier I'll be. The corn transplants who have moved here over the years won't have their team coming to town every other year. They won't be on TV as much, and we won't have to deal with their obnoxiousness anymore.

I don't know Sacky. I just don't get fired up for CSU. It is the same as playing any other out of conference team in a given year. I get fired up when we play Nebraska. I think it is for the very reasons you wrote. I don't like that Nebraskans infect our state and airwaves. What's to hate about CSU? They are never on TV, never talked about by the Denver media and most of the people are pretty nice. The CSU game is just another blah out of conference game to me.
 
If we are going to schedule games at invesco then why not Nebraska? It would be a sell out and draw a lot more interest than CSU.
 
Border wars are much better. We need an annual CU/NU tilt. Dump little brother. There is no argument. The game means nothing to CU and everything to CSU. Let them fight with Wyoming every year. I want to beat Nebraska every year. I want to beat CSU because I want a win, but it is no more important to me than beating Toledo (oh wait we couldn't do that either).

Again...the "lets just replace CSU with Nebraska or the insert [BCS school here]" crowd. Really? Nebraska is just going to magically change its entire scheduling practice to get a series with Colorado annually at Invesco?!?!? Sorry to break it to you, but Nebraska has it's "Boarder War" game with what will become its new rival. I would not be suprised to see its annual tilt with the Hawkeyes being moved to the day after Thanksgiving.
 
Last edited:
I don't know Sacky. I just don't get fired up for CSU. It is the same as playing any other out of conference team in a given year. I get fired up when we play Nebraska. I think it is for the very reasons you wrote. I don't like that Nebraskans infect our state and airwaves. What's to hate about CSU? They are never on TV, never talked about by the Denver media and most of the people are pretty nice. The CSU game is just another blah out of conference game to me.

Chances are that CU and NU won't be playing each other any time soon after this year anyway. Both schools have a solid 3-4 years of OOC scheduling already in place that will need some juggling. After that, who knows? CU is contractually obligated to play CSU every year for the next ten years. That leaves just two OOC games per year. If I were Mike Bohn, I'd want exposure in other parts of the country. Playing Nebraska doesn't really do much for us, recruiting wise. If we are looking to play a strong OOC opponent, we'd be better off scheduling UT or OU or an SEC team than Nebraska. At least then we'd have exposure to a deeper talent pool of potential recruits.
 
If we are going to schedule games at invesco then why not Nebraska? It would be a sell out and draw a lot more interest than CSU.

Because I can handle roughly half that stadium being CSU fans. I'd avoid the game completely if it were half corn fans.
 
And here's another thing: Why grant NU that kind of access to local recruits? Terrible idea.
 
Because I can handle roughly half that stadium being CSU fans. I'd avoid the game completely if it were half corn fans.

I agree. I was just saying of it was a money thing then we might as well try to get Nebraska after the series with CSU is over.

I guess I have to come around to the fact that CSU is our new rival. That sucks, that really sucks.
 
Because I can handle roughly half that stadium being CSU fans. I'd avoid the game completely if it were half corn fans.

Outside of the fact that Nebraska would NEVER agree to a series taking place only at Invesco. No chance. Zero.
 
Outside of the fact that Nebraska would NEVER agree to a series taking place only at Invesco. No chance. Zero.

I was thinking more of an invesco and Lincoln rotating. I think Memorial holds 10,000 more fans anyway.
 
Again...the "lets just replace CSU with Nebraska or the insert [BCS school here] crowd. Really? Nebraska is just going to magically change its entire scheduling practice to get a series with Colorado annually at Invesco?!?!? Sorry to break it to you, but Nebraska has it's "Boarder War" game with what will become its new rival. I would not be suprised to see its annual tilt with the Hawkeyes being moved to the day before Thanksgiving.

Okay so I guess it is better for us to play an annual game that is not televised due to no national interest in the game and the freaking Mountain Network. I am sorry if I am looking out for my own program and not yours. Are you also pissed we didn't fight for you to be included in the PAC? I am sorry most CU fans could care less about this game, but it is just a fact.
 
Chances are that CU and NU won't be playing each other any time soon after this year anyway. Both schools have a solid 3-4 years of OOC scheduling already in place that will need some juggling. After that, who knows? CU is contractually obligated to play CSU every year for the next ten years. That leaves just two OOC games per year. If I were Mike Bohn, I'd want exposure in other parts of the country. Playing Nebraska doesn't really do much for us, recruiting wise. If we are looking to play a strong OOC opponent, we'd be better off scheduling UT or OU or an SEC team than Nebraska. At least then we'd have exposure to a deeper talent pool of potential recruits.

I understand the exposure argument, but why wouldn't you want Nebraska then now that they are Big 10? Gives us increased access to Midwest recruiting. I think now that we are in the PAC we have a better chance of getting Midwest kids to play for us than Texas kids. I don't really base this on fact just sort of a gut feeling.
 
Okay so I guess it is better for us to play an annual game that is not televised due to no national interest in the game and the freaking Mountain Network. I am sorry if I am looking out for my own program and not yours. Are you also pissed we didn't fight for you to be included in the PAC? I am sorry most CU fans could care less about this game, but it is just a fact.

I think you're overreacting. The majority of CU fans do care about this game. There's no program that would provide the same kind of exposure and payout that the CSU game in Denver will provide. This isn't such a bad deal. Honestly. I know the venue sucks, but that's something we'll just have to deal with.
 
I think you're overreacting. The majority of CU fans do care about this game. There's no program that would provide the same kind of exposure and payout that the CSU game in Denver will provide. This isn't such a bad deal. Honestly. I know the venue sucks, but that's something we'll just have to deal with.

Sackman...I don't know how this keeps happening, but we tend to agree on many things.
 
I understand the exposure argument, but why wouldn't you want Nebraska then now that they are Big 10? Gives us increased access to Midwest recruiting. I think now that we are in the PAC we have a better chance of getting Midwest kids to play for us than Texas kids. I don't really base this on fact just sort of a gut feeling.

Why Nebraska? Why not Indiana, or Michigan State, or Purdue, or Minnesota? All are in places that would provide us better exposure. The idea of a series with NU alternating between Lincoln and Denver is appalling to me. Why give up the home date? That's just nuts. With CSU, we're gaining a home date, not giving one up.
 
I think you're overreacting. The majority of CU fans do care about this game. There's no program that would provide the same kind of exposure and payout that the CSU game in Denver will provide. This isn't such a bad deal. Honestly. I know the venue sucks, but that's something we'll just have to deal with.

Overreacting or not, I am more with dply. I have always cared about the Nebraska game. I don't care about the CSU game (other than I want a W). Maybe that is my own irrational behavior, but it is how I feel.

I guess I just need to be excited about Utah now. Whoo hoo!
 
Why Nebraska? Why not Indiana, or Michigan State, or Purdue, or Minnesota? All are in places that would provide us better exposure. The idea of a series with NU alternating between Lincoln and Denver is appalling to me. Why give up the home date? That's just nuts. With CSU, we're gaining a home date, not giving one up.

Precisely, Nebraska rotates an annual home game in front of 80,000 of its fans and then plays an "away" game in front of 35,000 of its fans? Bad for CU.
 
Last edited:
Sackman...I don't know how this keeps happening, but we tend to agree on many things.

I'm able to see the CSU game for what it is and what it could be. Right now, the game is meaningless on a national level because both teams suck. It doesn't have to always be that way.
 
I don't beleive their is much debate about the financials. I believe this Denver Post article talks about it: http://www.denverpost.com/sports/ci_10293477. I understand it is easy for CU fans on message boards to simply throw away a half million dollars as if it were nothing. But over the course of the current 10 year contract that equates to roughly $5million dollars in CU's budget. Money administrators are not willing to walk away from. Also, even with the coming Pac-12 t.v. contracts that will ease some of CU's financial woes, there is still a $9 Million dollar payout to the Big-12 to be paid and CU will still be competing in a conference where it will still rank 10th out of 12 teams in terms of revenue generation from its athletic departments (http://www.bbstate.com/info/schools-revenue.) CU has and still needs every dime it can get and that includes the roughly $500,000 dollars it recieves from the RMS.

CU will get $2 million for playing at Ohio State if it happens. That's double what CU makes at Invesco. According to your reasoning, CU can't afford not to play games like that. Perhaps CU should replace the CSU game with one shot away deals at big stadiums. Don't kid yourself, those programs are dying to get home games against beatable BCS conference teams, especially if they don't have to travel to Boulder in exchange.

The fact of the matter is that CU, by being locked into the CSU game every year, loses some opportunities. This will be even more bothersome if there are 9 conference games in the PAC 12, leaving only 3 non-conference games. Every game against CSU means one less chance to play in the Eastern or Central time zones (games I could attend), every game where CSU is the home team will be on the mtn. and unseen nationally. None of that is worth the $$, especially when opportunities exist to make more money and gain more recognition by playing at a top 20 program.
 
Back
Top