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!

2018 Season Prediction Thread

How many wins this year?

  • 3

  • 4

  • 5

  • 6

  • 7

  • 8

  • 9

  • 10

  • 11

  • 12

Results are only viewable after voting.
ahoelsken said:
Bad Pac 12? Disagree-USC did win the Rose Bowl, and Washington did make the CFP.
Click to expand...

Lol. Washington took advantage of an incredibly weak PAC 12. Oregon was awful, Stanford was Injured, USC was absolutely obliterated by Alabama in their first game before they eventually overcame some of that and were gifted the rose bowl appearance for ratings. They beat Penn state and looked good doing it and followed that up by a dud, again, last year. Washington made us look stupid and then they were completely outclassed by Alabama and then they did the same last year. 4 teams took advantage of the ****ty PAC 12 slate. 6 teams finished with 5 or fewer wins (4 of them could only manage 4,4,4 and 3) and only accounted for 13 conference wins combined. 2016 was a completely **** conference primed for a few teams to take advantage. 2017 was an abomination in bowl season. Hell the bottom 6 teams last year at least had 15 conference wins and that’s with Oregon state managing 0! The conference was awful in 2016 and slightly more competitive last year leading to only 3 teams under .500 (UCLA finished .500 before the bowl game) and only a single team not winning at least 5 games.

Sorry but 2016 was a ****ing joke. Either we got slightly better last year or the whole conference got worse collectively.
 
Buffsrock85 said:
Lol. Washington took advantage of an incredibly weak PAC 12. Oregon was awful, Stanford was Injured, USC was absolutely obliterated by Alabama in their first game before they eventually overcame some of that and were gifted the rose bowl appearance for ratings. They beat Penn state and looked good doing it and followed that up by a dud, again, last year. Washington made us look stupid and then they were completely outclassed by Alabama and then they did the same last year. 4 teams took advantage of the ****ty PAC 12 slate. 6 teams finished with 5 or fewer wins (4 of them could only manage 4,4,4 and 3) and only accounted for 13 conference wins combined. 2016 was a completely **** conference primed for a few teams to take advantage. 2017 was an abomination in bowl season. Hell the bottom 6 teams last year at least had 15 conference wins and that’s with Oregon state managing 0! The conference was awful in 2016 and slightly more competitive last year leading to only 3 teams under .500 (UCLA finished .500 before the bowl game) and only a single team not winning at least 5 games.

Sorry but 2016 was a ****ing joke. Either we got slightly better last year or the whole conference got worse collectively.
Click to expand...

The Rose Bowl has to take a Pac 12 team in years where its not a playoff semifinal. We can debate USC deserving that spot over us all we want, and whether we'd have beaten that Penn State team (FWIW-Whatifsports gave me CU 33-26 on a neutral field). Utah was solid 2 years ago, WSU won eight games, and Stanford was still top 15.
 
ahoelsken said:
The Rose Bowl has to take a Pac 12 team in years where its not a playoff semifinal. We can debate USC deserving that spot over us all we want, and whether we'd have beaten that Penn State team (FWIW-Whatifsports gave me CU 33-26 on a neutral field). Utah was solid 2 years ago, WSU won eight games, and Stanford was still top 15.
Click to expand...

You can gloss over how bad the bottom of the PAC 12 was, but they were seriously awful. We can agree to disagree. You can believe that the teams were good based off record. I look at the fact the bottom of the conference was a laughingstock and while we went 3-3 in bowl games, Colorado and Washington looked like they didn’t even belong on the field with those teams. CU used discipline and senior leadership to beat bad, young, undisciplined teams.
 
Buffsrock85 said:
You can gloss over how bad the bottom of the PAC 12 was, but they were seriously awful. We can agree to disagree. You can believe that the teams were good based off record. I look at the fact the bottom of the conference was a laughingstock and while we went 3-3 in bowl games, Colorado and Washington looked like they didn’t even belong on the field with those teams. CU used discipline and senior leadership to beat bad, young, undisciplined teams.
Click to expand...

Oh I think the bottom of the conference was bad. I don't think you gave the top of the conference enough credit.
 
ahoelsken said:
Oh I think the bottom of the conference was bad. I don't think you gave the top of the conference enough credit.
Click to expand...

It’s not that I don’t give them credit, I’ve just got a different perspective of the situation. I felt like the top feasted on the bottom inflating their stock a little bit. In the end you saw the top 2 teams from the conference didn’t belong with the big boys. I could be wrong, it’s just an opinion. Maybe those 5 teams were really just good and made everyone look worse. Maybe the 6 were bad and made the top look better than they were. I believe the latter. Don’t forget the original comment was that an experienced CU team was able to take advantage of the perfect storm in 2016, we lost to Washington, USC and Michigan and beat Stanford without Mccaffery if I remember correctly. Everyone else on our schedule was very weak or a home game win, WSU and Utah. I still think the 2016 team was really good but in hindsight maybe not as good as we thought at the time. In 2017 you saw a more talented, less veteran laden team take a step back.
 
Buffsrock85 said:
It’s not that I don’t give them credit, I’ve just got a different perspective of the situation. I felt like the top feasted on the bottom inflating their stock a little bit. In the end you saw the top 2 teams from the conference didn’t belong with the big boys. I could be wrong, it’s just an opinion. Maybe those 5 teams were really just good and made everyone look worse. Maybe the 6 were bad and made the top look better than they were. I believe the latter. Don’t forget the original comment was that an experienced CU team was able to take advantage of the perfect storm in 2016, we lost to Washington, USC and Michigan and beat Stanford without Mccaffery if I remember correctly. Everyone else on our schedule was very weak or a home game win, WSU and Utah. I still think the 2016 team was really good but in hindsight maybe not as good as we thought at the time. In 2017 you saw a more talented, less veteran laden team take a step back.
Click to expand...
Uhh, 2017 was not more talented than 2016. We lost a lot of guys that went to the NFL . Plus, the senior class last year was atrocious.
 
Darth Snow said:
Uhh, 2017 was not more talented than 2016. We lost a lot of guys that went to the NFL . Plus, the senior class last year was atrocious.
Click to expand...

I’ll give you that. I’m alluding more to the fact we’ve recruited better since the 12/13/14 classes that made up the bulk of that 2016 team, that’s all. I won’t debate the talent level, merely saying CU today has more highly rated recruits than the ones we signed back than.
 
Buffsrock85 said:
It’s not that I don’t give them credit, I’ve just got a different perspective of the situation. I felt like the top feasted on the bottom inflating their stock a little bit. In the end you saw the top 2 teams from the conference didn’t belong with the big boys. I could be wrong, it’s just an opinion. Maybe those 5 teams were really just good and made everyone look worse. Maybe the 6 were bad and made the top look better than they were. I believe the latter. Don’t forget the original comment was that an experienced CU team was able to take advantage of the perfect storm in 2016, we lost to Washington, USC and Michigan and beat Stanford without Mccaffery if I remember correctly. Everyone else on our schedule was very weak or a home game win, WSU and Utah. I still think the 2016 team was really good but in hindsight maybe not as good as we thought at the time. In 2017 you saw a more talented, less veteran laden team take a step back.
Click to expand...

Lots of people can't hang with Alabama. Saban has had an all time great run down there (No, it wouldn't shock me if it leaked they were cheating). Solomon Thomas (who went 3rd in the 2016 draft) did play in that game, even though McCaffrey didn't. That was still a DAMN good football team we beat on the road. Its debatable how good this league was 2 yearrs ago, but I think last year's Pac 12 was trash.
 
2016 CU took advantage of a “down” Pac 12 in order to make it to the CCG, but they got to 10 wins without fluke. Had SC not started out so poorly, they would have played UW in the CCG and CU still would have been 10-2 and playing in the Alamo Bowl, finishing 10-3, rather than 10-4.
 
Buffsrock85 said:
I’ll give you that. I’m alluding more to the fact we’ve recruited better since the 12/13/14 classes that made up the bulk of that 2016 team, that’s all. I won’t debate the talent level, merely saying CU today has more highly rated recruits than the ones we signed back than.
Click to expand...
Relying on one talented class to make up for 3 classes of mostly misses is a recipe for disaster. Add in the other issues we had last year and it's a good thing we had the easiest schedule in history or we wouldn't have sniffed a bowl.
 
ahoelsken said:
Lots of people can't hang with Alabama. Saban has had an all time great run down there (No, it wouldn't shock me if it leaked they were cheating). Solomon Thomas (who went 3rd in the 2016 draft) did play in that game, even though McCaffrey didn't. That was still a DAMN good football team we beat on the road. Its debatable how good this league was 2 yearrs ago, but I think last year's Pac 12 was trash.
Click to expand...

McCaffrey played.
 
TSchekler said:
2016 CU took advantage of a “down” Pac 12 in order to make it to the CCG, but they got to 10 wins without fluke. Had SC not started out so poorly, they would have played UW in the CCG and CU still would have been 10-2 and playing in the Alamo Bowl, finishing 10-3, rather than 10-4.
Click to expand...
Might have been in the Rose Bowl if USC would have been obliterated by UW in the Pac-12 CG.
 
Darth Snow said:
Relying on one talented class to make up for 3 classes of mostly misses is a recipe for disaster. Add in the other issues we had last year and it's a good thing we had the easiest schedule in history or we wouldn't have sniffed a bowl.
Click to expand...
Sagarin Strength of Schedule – CFP Top 25...and this was BEFORE the Pac-12 Championship Game
*SOS ranking in parentheses.
1. Alabama (7)
2. Ohio State (15)
3. Clemson (47)
4. Washington (60)
5. Michigan (33)
6. Wisconsin (20)
7. Penn State (39)
8. Colorado (23)
9. Oklahoma (18)
10. Oklahoma State (59)
11. USC (5)
12. Florida State (13)
13. Louisville (66)
14. Auburn (17)
15. Florida (50)

I would argue that CU (and probably some other teams) throughout history have had a more difficult schedule than 23rd toughest in the nation (according to USAToday, CU had the #20 schedule).

Or this one.
Season: 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016 2016-2017 2017-2018 2018-2019
Date:
RankTeamRatingHiLowLast
1Alabama (14-1)14.21403
2Ohio State (11-2)13.91561
3Clemson (14-1)13.71177
4LSU (8-4)10.74266
5Michigan (10-3)10.72752
6Florida St (10-3)10.712210
7Auburn (8-5)9.67308
8USC (10-3)9.31205
9Wisconsin (11-3)9.21444
10Washington (12-2)9.0810315
11Oklahoma (11-2)8.611812
12Penn State (11-3)7.8117011
13Colorado (10-4)7.391159
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
[TBODY] [/TBODY]
https://www.teamrankings.com/college-football/ranking/schedule-strength-by-other?date=2017-01-10
 
Stampeder said:
McCaffrey played.
Click to expand...

Hmm. They were missing a few guys I thought. Maybe McCaffrey was coming off an injury, I know he was talked about a bunch that week. They weren’t 100% and we’re floundering after getting smoked by Washington. Feels so long ago I just remember it was an ugly ass game and we missed like 3-4 field goals or some ****. What was it 10-3? Something like that lol.
 
Buffsrock85 said:
Hmm. They were missing a few guys I thought. Maybe McCaffrey was coming off an injury, I know he was talked about a bunch that week. They weren’t 100% and we’re floundering after getting smoked by Washington. Feels so long ago I just remember it was an ugly ass game and we missed like 3-4 field goals or some ****. What was it 10-3? Something like that lol.
Click to expand...
McCaffery came back a couple weeks before and was rolling right when we played him. That was the most impressive win of the Mike Mac era.
 
TSchekler said:
I believe they were missing their top 2 CBs when we played them.
Click to expand...
Weren't they missing two starting CB's and McCaffery for that Washington game they got blasted in but then ended up getting CMac and one of those guys back for our game?
 
onealcd said:
Weren't they missing two starting CB's and McCaffery for that Washington game they got blasted in but then ended up getting CMac and one of those guys back for our game?
Click to expand...

Correct. They were missing guys earlier in the season but were mostly healthy for CU. It was a great win. There's enough negative in the program's recent history that we don't need to make stuff up to talk down a high point.
 
onealcd said:
McCaffery came back a couple weeks before and was rolling right when we played him. That was the most impressive win of the Mike Mac era.
Click to expand...

We played very well defensively that game, incredible even. Offense ran the ball well but we left points all over the field with missed field goals. Was a game I definitely was incredibly excited to win.
 
Buffsrock85 said:
Hmm. They were missing a few guys I thought. Maybe McCaffrey was coming off an injury, I know he was talked about a bunch that week. They weren’t 100% and we’re floundering after getting smoked by Washington. Feels so long ago I just remember it was an ugly ass game and we missed like 3-4 field goals or some ****. What was it 10-3? Something like that lol.
Click to expand...
If I recall, it was 10-5. ****ing baseball score but got the W.
 
Buffsrock85 said:
Lol. Washington took advantage of an incredibly weak PAC 12. Oregon was awful, Stanford was Injured, USC was absolutely obliterated by Alabama in their first game before they eventually overcame some of that and were gifted the rose bowl appearance for ratings. They beat Penn state and looked good doing it and followed that up by a dud, again, last year. Washington made us look stupid and then they were completely outclassed by Alabama and then they did the same last year. 4 teams took advantage of the ****ty PAC 12 slate. 6 teams finished with 5 or fewer wins (4 of them could only manage 4,4,4 and 3) and only accounted for 13 conference wins combined. 2016 was a completely **** conference primed for a few teams to take advantage. 2017 was an abomination in bowl season. Hell the bottom 6 teams last year at least had 15 conference wins and that’s with Oregon state managing 0! The conference was awful in 2016 and slightly more competitive last year leading to only 3 teams under .500 (UCLA finished .500 before the bowl game) and only a single team not winning at least 5 games.

Sorry but 2016 was a ****ing joke. Either we got slightly better last year or the whole conference got worse collectively.
Click to expand...

Teams that were awful in 2016- Oregon, ASU and Arizona all improved to 7-5 records.

You don't think we can do the same and improve by two wins this year?
 
B_Walk said:
Teams that were awful in 2016- Oregon, ASU and Arizona all improved to 7-5 records.

You don't think we can do the same and improve by two wins this year?
Click to expand...

Where did you get that from? lol. I was just saying that 2016 was a pretty prime year to be a good team as most of the conference kind of sucked. I’ve long maintained this team is a 7 win team and with the right breaks could be 8 and maybe 9.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top