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 in trouble

Mark Wetmore said:
when you say that you've seen "too many teams", does that include CU? If so would you give me a recent example?
Click to expand...

Salt in the wound, but a good recent example is last year's CSU team. They were beaten pretty soundly in week 1 by a bad Buffs team and then came back to win a bowl game.
 
I suggest to not put their head in the sand when **** goes wrong cause it will. They bust you in the mouth, bust them back, let their balls drop. Tired of hearing about the young stuff, albeit true, step the **** up.
 
Yep. Anyone know or remember the reason Embree was hired rather than McElwain? Was it a legacy kind of thing?
 
InTheBuff said:
um ... last time I checked 2nd or 3rd in conference isn't a champion of a conference..

[T]he MWC sucks.
Click to expand...

Maybe. Well, okay, not 'maybe', it's definitely a lower-caliber funfest than it was 4-5 years ago. I don't give a crap about any of the WAC teams that arrived -- even boise. Pffft...whatever. I still enjoy football-ing Wyo, AFA, and NM to an extent. Love roundball-ing UNLV, SDSU, UNM.

Compared to Stanford, USC, Oregon, Washington...yeah the MWC is football-ly pretty weak. Compared to Oregon State, Arizona, Wazzu, and (not a flame) current Colorado, it's comparable or better. The PAC's upper-echelon teams are in the stratosphere; MWC's upper-echelon teams are middle-PAC (4-5-6). Each conference's lower-echelon squads are comparable. Well, except for Hawai'i -- they're in their own class.

Hope the Buffs right the ship and become bowl-eligible -- maybe it won't happen this year, but in the next couple of years. The state of Colorado can use some get-up for college football.
 
Only reason I want to play UNM is, it's close to me and I think we'd have a great party. We better win that one, we might be so drunk we wouldn't care though. We would but maybe riot after the game if we lost lol.
 
I'm generally a Pollyannaish kind of guy. If my wife and I drove off a cliff, I'd say, "Nice view, eh, honey." I believe Mac is a very good coach but, I have to say, the trend in recruiting is at least somewhat troubling if not very troubling. We are not going to recruit well until we give recruits a vision that we are turning the corner and the future is bright. To do that we have to win some games and/or at least compete. But at our current talent level and being in the PAC 12, I don't see that happening. I just am not seeing the light at the end of the tunnel.
 
DBT said:
I'm generally a Pollyannaish kind of guy. If my wife and I drove off a cliff, I'd say, "Nice view, eh, honey." I believe Mac is a very good coach but, I have to say, the trend in recruiting is at least somewhat troubling if not very troubling. We are not going to recruit well until we give recruits a vision that we are turning the corner and the future is bright. To do that we have to win some games and/or at least compete. But at our current talent level and being in the PAC 12, I don't see that happening. I just am not seeing the light at the end of the tunnel.
Click to expand...

Maybe you and your wife should drive through a tunnel instead.:lol:
 
I think so, as well.
No adjustments made at the half.

In the last 3 minutes of the half, CSU found their bread and butter...running the ball.
The Buffs did not adjust and slam the door and force CSU to pass. That doomed them.

If you look at the stats, CU SHOULD have won the game. They won in nearly every stat:


Team Totals CS COLO
FIRST DOWNS 27 22
Rushing 14 8
Passing 10 11
Penalty 3 3
NET YARDS RUSHING 266 134
Rushing Attempts 45 34
Average Per Rush 5.9 3.9
Rushing Touchdowns 3 0
Yards Gained Rushing 279 134
Yards Lost Rushing 13 0
NET YARDS PASSING 134 241
Completions-Attempts-Int 13-23-0 24-39-0
Average Per Attempt 5.8 6.2
Average Per Completion 10.3 10.0
Passing Touchdowns 1 2
TOTAL OFFENSE YARDS 400 375
Total offense plays 68 73
Average Gain Per Play 5.9 5.1
Fumbles: Number-Lost 1-1 1-0
Penalties: Number-Yards 6-63 6-65
PUNTS-YARDS 4-218 6-273
Average Yards Per Punt 54.5 45.5
Net Yards Per Punt 45.8 42.2
Inside 20 1 4
50+ Yards 3 2
Touchbacks 0 1
Fair catch 0 3
KICKOFFS-YARDS 6-389 4-259
Average Yards Per Kickoff 64.8 64.8
Net Yards Per Kickoff 41.2 36.8
Touchbacks 4 1
Punt returns: Number-Yards-TD 0-0-0 4-35-0
Average Per Return 0.0 8.8
Kickoff returns: Number-Yds-TD 3-87-0 2-42-0
Average Per Return 29.0 21.0
Interceptions: Number-Yds-TD 0-0-0 0-0-0
Fumble Returns: Number-Yds-TD 0-0-0 0-0-0
Miscellaneous Yards 0 0
Possession Time 30:30 29:30
1st Quarter 4:25 10:35
2nd Quarter 8:10 6:50
3rd Quarter 8:56 6:04
4th Quarter 8:59 6:01
Third-Down Conversions 5 of 11 5 of 15
Fourth-Down Conversions 1 of 1 1 of 2
Red-Zone Scores-Chances 4-4 2-2
Touchdowns 4-4 1-2
Field goals 0-4 1-2
Sacks By: Number-Yards 0-0 1-4
PAT Kicks 4-4 2-2
Field Goals 1-1 1-2
Points off turnovers 0 7
 
darth-horax said:
I think so, as well.
No adjustments made at the half.

In the last 3 minutes of the half, CSU found their bread and butter...running the ball.
The Buffs did not adjust and slam the door and force CSU to pass. That doomed them.

If you look at the stats, CU SHOULD have won the game. They won in nearly every stat:


Team Totals CS COLO
FIRST DOWNS 27 22
Rushing 14 8
Passing 10 11
Penalty 3 3
NET YARDS RUSHING 266 134
Rushing Attempts 45 34
Average Per Rush 5.9 3.9
Rushing Touchdowns 3 0
Yards Gained Rushing 279 134
Yards Lost Rushing 13 0
NET YARDS PASSING 134 241
Completions-Attempts-Int 13-23-0 24-39-0
Average Per Attempt 5.8 6.2
Average Per Completion 10.3 10.0
Passing Touchdowns 1 2
TOTAL OFFENSE YARDS 400 375
Total offense plays 68 73
Average Gain Per Play 5.9 5.1
Fumbles: Number-Lost 1-1 1-0
Penalties: Number-Yards 6-63 6-65
PUNTS-YARDS 4-218 6-273
Average Yards Per Punt 54.5 45.5
Net Yards Per Punt 45.8 42.2
Inside 20 1 4
50+ Yards 3 2
Touchbacks 0 1
Fair catch 0 3
KICKOFFS-YARDS 6-389 4-259
Average Yards Per Kickoff 64.8 64.8
Net Yards Per Kickoff 41.2 36.8
Touchbacks 4 1
Punt returns: Number-Yards-TD 0-0-0 4-35-0
Average Per Return 0.0 8.8
Kickoff returns: Number-Yds-TD 3-87-0 2-42-0
Average Per Return 29.0 21.0
Interceptions: Number-Yds-TD 0-0-0 0-0-0
Fumble Returns: Number-Yds-TD 0-0-0 0-0-0
Miscellaneous Yards 0 0
Possession Time 30:30 29:30
1st Quarter 4:25 10:35
2nd Quarter 8:10 6:50
3rd Quarter 8:56 6:04
4th Quarter 8:59 6:01
Third-Down Conversions 5 of 11 5 of 15
Fourth-Down Conversions 1 of 1 1 of 2
Red-Zone Scores-Chances 4-4 2-2
Touchdowns 4-4 1-2
Field goals 0-4 1-2
Sacks By: Number-Yards 0-0 1-4
PAT Kicks 4-4 2-2
Field Goals 1-1 1-2
Points off turnovers 0 7
Click to expand...

are you sure you looked at those stats?
 
Shldr2Shldr said:
McElwain's interview was not as good as JE's. Apparently.
Click to expand...

Think Sparkles has a chip on his shoulder when it comes to CU? I mean.....CU picked JE over Sparkles. If that wasn't a slap on the face I don't know what is. Sparkles is a much much much better coach and he knew it. I do wonder if it didn't come down to CU wouldn't pay him enough.
 
FlatironsBuff said:
Think Sparkles has a chip on his shoulder when it comes to CU? I mean.....CU picked JE over Sparkles. If that wasn't a slap on the face I don't know what is. Sparkles is a much much much better coach and he knew it. I do wonder if it didn't come down to CU wouldn't pay him enough.
Click to expand...

I think that Dr. Phil had no expectations other than a crap team on a low budget.

He thought that with JE (and EB) being CU legends and them being black that he could get away with running a low rent, low priority program and the masses would glady accept it.

Sparkles would have demanded to treat the program like a real major conference program, Dr. Phil didn't want to deal with that headache.
 
I still bet the conversation stopped when Sparkles said what his price and coaching budget had to be. I like MMac but you have to wonder where we would be if Sparkles had been hired. I still think MM has a higher upside but could be wrong. Time will tell.
 
MtnBuff said:
I think that Dr. Phil had no expectations other than a crap team on a low budget.

He thought that with JE (and EB) being CU legends and them being black that he could get away with running a low rent, low priority program and the masses would glady accept it.

Sparkles would have demanded to treat the program like a real major conference program, Dr. Phil didn't want to deal with that headache.
Click to expand...
DiStefano is a convenient whipping boy.
 
DBT said:
DiStefano is a convenient whipping boy.
Click to expand...

Buck stops at the top.

The one constant in all of our years of problems has been one man.

Who sets the standards and expectations, who sets priorities?

When I see proof that DiStefano is competent then I will lay off him, until then he has to take his share of the blame.
 
FlatironsBuff said:
I still bet the conversation stopped when Sparkles said what his price and coaching budget had to be. I like MMac but you have to wonder where we would be if Sparkles had been hired. I still think MM has a higher upside but could be wrong. Time will tell.
Click to expand...

the hardcore bama people i talked with don't think sparkles has much upside. they think this is about his peak. we'll see. he worked mm like a plough horse on friday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top