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!

To the Haters: CU had the #7 Sched in the Nation

Funny, I posted this same thing somewhere else and got ripped apart. The CU "fans" said our SOS was 38th and Hawkins sucks. Of course, the site that had them at 38th was refering to opponent's record, not how good they are.
 
I think the real question is do we as fans, realize the size of the obstacles Hawk took over when he accepted the job? I don't think we do.
 
Colley ranks the schedules like this:
UT-#4
OU-#9
BU-#10
KU-#21
NU-#23
CU-#28

Massey ranks the schedules like this:
OU-#3
UT-#4
TT-#11
NU-#12
KU-#16
CU-#17

Anderson & Hester ranks the schedules like this:

BU-#3
OU-#5
UT-#6
CU-#9
NU-#13
MU-#21
 
Just trying to help keep it real.

The only stat that matters is wins and losses. When you look for stats to help prove why your losing record is really winning you are still losing.

Classify me as a hater.
 
Just trying to help keep it real.

The only stat that matters is wins and losses. When you look for stats to help prove why your losing record is really winning you are still losing.

Classify me as a hater.

Not a hater

That's just real talk

But folks need to understand that in this new age of college football, CU is one of the top 5 hardest jobs to win at.

Cold weather
No fertile recruiting within 1000 miles
Difficult conference
Difficult admission standards
Iffy fan base (average booster support)
True lack of institutional support
Not a "traditional" power
Today's recruit has seen 12 years of mediocrity out of this program

Any coach that comes to CU will inherit the same problems and have the same struggles.

I say give the guy his 5 years....I might even call for 7 and fully support the dude.
 
Not a hater

That's just real talk

But folks need to understand that in this new age of college football, CU is one of the top 5 hardest jobs to win at.

Cold weather
No fertile recruiting within 1000 miles
Difficult conference
Difficult admission standards
Iffy fan base (average booster support)
True lack of institutional support
Not a "traditional" power
Today's recruit has seen 12 years of mediocrity out of this program

Any coach that comes to CU will inherit the same problems and have the same struggles.

I say give the guy his 5 years....I might even call for 7 and fully support the dude.

That is an understatement. Too many of our fans are too inclined to throw people under the bus than support the program. I'm with DBT in supporting the program through thick and thin. Hawk is building something we should be proud of, and I'm willing to give him some time.

But I know, if we'd recruit like USC, never have injuries, never have a turnover, never miss a field goal, and never have a bad play call we'd win the national title every year. I too get frustrated, but this isn't your PS3 or XBox (it takes longer to build a winner).

Go ahead and blast away at me...
 
Not a hater

That's just real talk

But folks need to understand that in this new age of college football, CU is one of the top 5 hardest jobs to win at.

Cold weather
No fertile recruiting within 1000 miles
Difficult conference
Difficult admission standards
Iffy fan base (average booster support)
True lack of institutional support
Not a "traditional" power
Today's recruit has seen 12 years of mediocrity out of this program

Any coach that comes to CU will inherit the same problems and have the same struggles.

I say give the guy his 5 years....I might even call for 7 and fully support the dude.

2001 was not a bad year......
 
2001 was not a bad year......

Average it out.........

Plus 70-3, That first Baylor loss in 04 or 05 (can't remember), The Craig Ochs and Marcus Houston debacles, the recruiting scandal, the embarrassing defeats on national tv (USC, Oregon, FSU, Miami, Missouri, Texas, Michigan), Montana State and that pretty much makes 2001 nonexistent.

It's been a bad time since that Cotton Bowl victory over Oregon
 
I think the real question is do we as fans, realize the size of the obstacles Hawk took over when he accepted the job? I don't think we do.

As I mentioned in another thread, a winning season in Year 4 would go a long way in garnering support. That is not too much to ask, is it?
 
Just trying to help keep it real.

The only stat that matters is wins and losses. When you look for stats to help prove why your losing record is really winning you are still losing.

Classify me as a hater.

I guess we all read this stuff differently. I didn't take Snow's initial post as an excuse, just fact to consider.

I'm not interested in excuses for our program in any way. I am interested in getting a 'real' assessment of the program and the problems. This information CAN be helpful in assessing the programs progress if utilized in the context of other information. Is our 5-7 record significantly worse than CSU's 6-6 (I use them because I don't have time/energy to look up a comprable 5-7 squad)? I don't think so, and I think the fact that we had a hard schedule supports that belief. Does it mean we are better than CSU, maybe, maybe not. It all depends.

Posting all information is useful/helpful for fans to consider.

Self-righteous replies such as this from the top of the football world are self-serving at best.
 
Not a hater

That's just real talk

But folks need to understand that in this new age of college football, CU is one of the top 5 hardest jobs to win at.

Cold weather
No fertile recruiting within 1000 miles
Difficult conference
Difficult admission standards
Iffy fan base (average booster support)
True lack of institutional support
Not a "traditional" power
Today's recruit has seen 12 years of mediocrity out of this program

Any coach that comes to CU will inherit the same problems and have the same struggles.

I say give the guy his 5 years....I might even call for 7 and fully support the dude.

I call BS on that statement. Let me try a few out for you, and I will stick to BCS programs as I think that is what you intended. KU, KSU, ISU, Baylor, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Stanford, Washington State, Oregon State, Duke, Purdue, Indiana, Rutgers to name a few.

A lot of what you say is true, but Colorado historically recruits pretty well relative to the entire conference. We may be a cold weather state, but we are also known as a destination state with great quality of life. Almost everybody I talk to who lives out of state considers Colorado a power program that just happens to be in hibernation.

With that being said, I think Colorado can climb to power a lot faster than many of the other "have nots" and stay there( how many times have you seen a Kansas school pull in top 15 classes, how many times have you seen CU), but we can fall a lot faster than a traditional power, and no argument that this job is FAR more difficult than at a traditional, warm weather school.

I would still put CU at the top of the non-traditional power jobs.
 
As I mentioned in another thread, a winning season in Year 4 would go a long way in garnering support. That is not too much to ask, is it?

No it isn't. I guess I don't understand all the doom & gloom going on around here. I still believe Hawkins is the right coach for the job.

...But that is definitely subject to change this time next year.
 
No it isn't. I guess I don't understand all the doom & gloom going on around here. I still believe Hawkins is the right coach for the job.

...But that is definitely subject to change this time next year.

If we don't go to a bowl game next year, I'll jump off my front porch.
 
No it isn't. I guess I don't understand all the doom & gloom going on around here. I still believe Hawkins is the right coach for the job.

...But that is definitely subject to change this time next year.

I think the doom and gloom has gone a little overboard at times as well, but I understand some of the frustrations as well. Hawk can put a lot of it to rest with a solid 2009 season.
 
our schedule seperates us from CSU ! CSU was on the front page of the Gazzette this morning for winning their bowl. And i could be happy for them... but i'm not. If the toughest team of the year that we played was utah than we BETTER be in the bowl games every year. We are a team that is either going to be extremely good, or looking bad, because of our schedule there won't be much grey. We play the best which puts us in a position where being mediocre (CSU) is not really an option.
 
I think the doom and gloom has gone a little overboard at times as well, but I understand some of the frustrations as well. Hawk can put a lot of it to rest with a solid 2009 season.

Way over board. I think any "Fan" wants to see progress. I don't want to see these inane statements like "Hawk better go 8-4 next year and blah-blah-blah". It's assinine to make statements like that without considering everything about the program.

Next year's schedule is softer. We lose a couple key guys on the DL, but we should be stronger in every other area next year due to having another year to get older and get some injured/redshirted/ineligible bodies back. If we get a couple kids who can contribute quick (like WR)....

So yeah, we obviously should win some more games next year. Should it be 10? Who knows? Let's measure success with all the tools we have. It ultimately comes down to W/L only, but I'm not ready to judge the progress YET on W/L only. When you are building the foundation, you can't be worried about the exterior paint.

We got a QB position to settle. I saw some good things in Hansen, but he was far from the "best guy to get us wins" at the conclusion of the season. Can he be?

This question is the #1 question we face next year (as I'm reasonable confident our O-Line will benefit greatly by a year of healing and maturing). The foundation we are setting looks solid to me and I really hope we find a QB who can run this thing. Cody has so many limitations that I fear we can be just so-so with him at the helm. That may be the best we got, but if Hansen can learn to stand in the pocket under pressure AND make good decisions, then we got a QB who can take us to another level a whole lot quicker. The difference between so-so and REALLY good is the difference between the Alamo Bowl and playing for the conference championship in 2010.

Patient fans are hoping for the best long-term solution to get the experience in 2009. Inpatient fans want it all in 2009 and that might mean living with Cody rather than risk turnovers and mistakes from a less experienced alternative.

And let's not forget that we were a few points from 3 wins in both of the last two seasons. We are on really shaky ground when you consider those home blowouts we had vs. EWU, ISU, and KSU. We have not yet been a good football team.
 
I guess we all read this stuff differently. I didn't take Snow's initial post as an excuse, just fact to consider.

I'm not interested in excuses for our program in any way. I am interested in getting a 'real' assessment of the program and the problems. This information CAN be helpful in assessing the programs progress if utilized in the context of other information. Is our 5-7 record significantly worse than CSU's 6-6 (I use them because I don't have time/energy to look up a comprable 5-7 squad)? I don't think so, and I think the fact that we had a hard schedule supports that belief. Does it mean we are better than CSU, maybe, maybe not. It all depends.

Posting all information is useful/helpful for fans to consider.

Self-righteous replies such as this from the top of the football world are self-serving at best.

If you are comparing yourself to little brother you have already taken a step back.

I know more about kool-aid drinking than being at the top of the football world.
 
I'm not joining the Haters bandwagon just yet. Now if we go 5-7 next year.......
 
Tough schedules are the most overrated statistic in the NCAA...the NCAA rewards teams based off of wins and wins only...to be honest (as much as it pains me to say this) I think teams like Nebraska & Kansas are smart to understand this and schedule 4 patsies in the non conference games knowing that if they win in the Big 12 as well they then have a shot at a BCS bowl.

As much as it's fun to see the buffs play good teams like FSU, UGA, WVU etc. etc. it really doesn't do us much favors...any loss in OOC play and you're behind the rest of the big 12, so why take the gamble?
 
I call BS on that statement. Let me try a few out for you, and I will stick to BCS programs as I think that is what you intended. KU, KSU, ISU, Baylor, Vanderbilt, Northwestern, Stanford, Washington State, Oregon State, Duke, Purdue, Indiana, Rutgers to name a few.

I would still put CU at the top of the non-traditional power jobs.

:yeahthat:
 
Back
Top