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!

Anxious....Buffs Near-term Future

Funny thing is if Nebraska doesn't make the LONGEST field goal in school history(I still fume about that). We probably aren't having this discussion. What I am trying to say is that sometimes you just can't get a break, and this year with the injuries/academics etc. to start things off, it has been a snake-bitten year. I don't think we are as far away from good things as so many here seem to believe. We were within a mousefart of bowling even with the combination of schedule toughness/most injured CU team in history/3rd youngest team in div 1-A. Some people seem to conveniently forget the factors that made up this season and just look at the overall record.

Anxious? Yeah I'm always anxious, even if CU is ranked #1, but I still have a lot of faith in Hawk.
 
Last edited:
We lost to Nebraska by 9 points, not 2 or 3. The field goal certainly mattered but to say we probably win without it is discounting the incredibly poor quarter of football CU posted in the 4th quarter. Yes, losing to Nebraska sucks, yes, the opponent landing a 60 yard field-goal sucks even more, but to say that's the only reason we lost is ignoring the bigger issue - the team didn't really come to play in the 4th quarter, and, after being in the driver's seat ALL game, that made the difference.

EDIT: Regarding the above post, is "almost going bowling" some sort of an accomplishment for this program? That's something that can be taken as a positive at a FB program like Duke, Baylor (who, btw, will be good for the next 3 years) Florida International, directional schools, Iowa State, Temple, etc.

I don't know about you but my hopes for this team are a LOT higher than "almost going bowling". A 6 win season and a berth to the Independence Bowl is an insult to this program if you would care to refer to a season like that as a success. CU is capable of much more than that.
 
Last edited:
buffedup said:
....Some people seem to conveniently forget the factors that made up this season and just look at the overall record.
Click to expand...

Some people, like the poster right after you!

Ignore everything and somehow put Hawk on a 2009 or else ultimatum. Not me. I'm looking for progress. I see an offense that will potentially start one Junior and zero Seniors next year (maybe one senior if Geer holds off Deehan). An offense that loses only 2 senior starters this year and then returns zero senior starters next year? Who are these people who think the coach is on thin ice? Find me one team in the country that is close to this type of youth. Just one, even if they didn't win a single game.

Sure 2009 should be better. 2010 we will be much better. 2011 we will be better again. I sure hope Bohn gets this.
 
buffaholic said:
Some people, like the poster right after you!

Ignore everything and somehow put Hawk on a 2009 or else ultimatum. Not me. I'm looking for progress. I see an offense that will potentially start one Junior and zero Seniors next year (maybe one senior if Geer holds off Deehan). An offense that loses only 2 senior starters this year and then returns zero senior starters next year? Who are these people who think the coach is on thin ice? Find me one team in the country that is close to this type of youth. Just one, even if they didn't win a single game.

Sure 2009 should be better. 2010 we will be much better. 2011 we will be better again. I sure hope Bohn gets this.
Click to expand...

not to discredit your point because i basically have the same take as you but, i believe 'bama was stoopid young this year too. i seem to remember hearing that texas was also one of the youngest teams out there this year too but i may be mistaken on this. anyway, there are several teams out there that have comparable youth to Colorado's but had better seasons.
 
4DemBuffs said:
not to discredit your point because i basically have the same take as you but, i believe 'bama was stoopid young this year too. i seem to remember hearing that texas was also one of the youngest teams out there this year too but i may be mistaken on this. anyway, there are several teams out there that have comparable youth to Colorado's but had better seasons.
Click to expand...

I don't think you are doing research here. You're just echoing what others are saying and it's all very, very relative:

http://alabama.rivals.com/cdepthtext.asp

Bama's starters on offense include 9 upper classmen.

http://texas.rivals.com/cdepthtext.asp

UT's starters on offense include 7 upper classmen. Based on the two deep, it will be 10 upper-class starters next year (projected).

When other program say they are young, they are not talking THIS YOUNG!
 
buffaholic said:
I don't think you are doing research here. You're just echoing what others are saying and it's all very, very relative:

http://alabama.rivals.com/cdepthtext.asp

Bama's starters on offense include 9 upper classmen.

http://texas.rivals.com/cdepthtext.asp

UT's starters on offense include 7 upper classmen. Based on the two deep, it will be 10 upper-class starters next year (projected).

When other program say they are young, they are not talking THIS YOUNG!
Click to expand...
:yeahthat: rep sent. Oh ya, and remember that both of those programs also have more talent in one class then the buffs probably had in the 04 through 06 classes.
 
buffaholic said:
I don't think you are doing research here. You're just echoing what others are saying and it's all very, very relative:

http://alabama.rivals.com/cdepthtext.asp

Bama's starters on offense include 9 upper classmen.

http://texas.rivals.com/cdepthtext.asp

UT's starters on offense include 7 upper classmen. Based on the two deep, it will be 10 upper-class starters next year (projected).

When other program say they are young, they are not talking THIS YOUNG!
Click to expand...

yea, i was definitly not aware of that. i suppose what i heard was a percentage of the roster being underclassmen take. eitherway, thanks for the info. :thumbsup:

and snowbuff makes a good point. neither of those teams had the recruiting problems CU did a few years ago.
 
buffs04 said:
We lost to Nebraska by 9 points, not 2 or 3. The field goal certainly mattered but to say we probably win without it is discounting the incredibly poor quarter of football CU posted in the 4th quarter. Yes, losing to Nebraska sucks, yes, the opponent landing a 60 yard field-goal sucks even more, but to say that's the only reason we lost is ignoring the bigger issue - the team didn't really come to play in the 4th quarter, and, after being in the driver's seat ALL game, that made the difference.

EDIT: Regarding the above post, is "almost going bowling" some sort of an accomplishment for this program? That's something that can be taken as a positive at a FB program like Duke, Baylor (who, btw, will be good for the next 3 years) Florida International, directional schools, Iowa State, Temple, etc.

I don't know about you but my hopes for this team are a LOT higher than "almost going bowling". A 6 win season and a berth to the Independence Bowl is an insult to this program if you would care to refer to a season like that as a success. CU is capable of much more than that.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are the greatest CU fan ever.... :rolleyes:

I think it is fairly safe to say that if the fuskers don't make that FG, Cody isn't trying that pass play that resulted in the last 7 UNL points. But I'm sure that's just another excuse in your superfan playbook... :lol:
 
buffs04 said:
We lost to Nebraska by 9 points, not 2 or 3. The field goal certainly mattered but to say we probably win without it is discounting the incredibly poor quarter of football CU posted in the 4th quarter. Yes, losing to Nebraska sucks, yes, the opponent landing a 60 yard field-goal sucks even more, but to say that's the only reason we lost is ignoring the bigger issue - the team didn't really come to play in the 4th quarter, and, after being in the driver's seat ALL game, that made the difference.


Being doubled up in almost every category DOES NOT indicate a team was in the "Driver's Seat". You might want to go back a watch that one again. NU controlled that game and continued to shoot themselves in the foot.

Some posters on here have it correct. Lots of unproven young players, but a long ways from BCS in '11. Hawk needs to get some sort of consistent run attack and better shore up the D-Line in a hurry or '09 is gonna be painful.

Out of curiosity, what QB is BCS level to make up for any weaknesses elsewhere?
Click to expand...
 
TheEvilBeak said:
buffs04 said:
We lost to Nebraska by 9 points, not 2 or 3. The field goal certainly mattered but to say we probably win without it is discounting the incredibly poor quarter of football CU posted in the 4th quarter. Yes, losing to Nebraska sucks, yes, the opponent landing a 60 yard field-goal sucks even more, but to say that's the only reason we lost is ignoring the bigger issue - the team didn't really come to play in the 4th quarter, and, after being in the driver's seat ALL game, that made the difference.


Being doubled up in almost every category DOES NOT indicate a team was in the "Driver's Seat". You might want to go back a watch that one again. NU controlled that game and continued to shoot themselves in the foot.

Some posters on here have it correct. Lots of unproven young players, but a long ways from BCS in '11. Hawk needs to get some sort of consistent run attack and better shore up the D-Line in a hurry or '09 is gonna be painful.

Out of curiosity, what QB is BCS level to make up for any weaknesses elsewhere?
Click to expand...
wait, so being behind for a majority of the 2d half and needing a miracle FG to win the game (along with a lucky deflection to seal it) puts NU in control of the entire game? WTF?


Nowledge!
Click to expand...
 
buffaholic said:
Some people, like the poster right after you!

Ignore everything and somehow put Hawk on a 2009 or else ultimatum. Not me. I'm looking for progress. I see an offense that will potentially start one Junior and zero Seniors next year (maybe one senior if Geer holds off Deehan). An offense that loses only 2 senior starters this year and then returns zero senior starters next year? Who are these people who think the coach is on thin ice? Find me one team in the country that is close to this type of youth. Just one, even if they didn't win a single game.

Sure 2009 should be better. 2010 we will be much better. 2011 we will be better again. I sure hope Bohn gets this.
Click to expand...

Listen, there are plenty of fans that understand the situation right now. We were young and we had a LOT of injuries. But Hawk absolutely needs to show something next year. This "well, we'll be really good in two years" crap doesn't fly anymore. In year four, if we're still struggling, forgive people for starting to question the hire.

You're constantly calling everyone else out, so I'm curious what your expectations are for next year.
 
SnowBuff said:
TheEvilBeak said:
wait, so being behind for a majority of the 2d half and needing a miracle FG to win the game (along with a lucky deflection to seal it) puts NU in control of the entire game? WTF?


Nowledge!
Click to expand...

NU lived inside your 20 the 2nd half. If you think that game was between evenly matched teams, you're crazy.

Score was close but that's about it. By your logic, ISU dominated you and you were luckyto beat them.

Which is it?

I'm certainly not the only poster in theis thread to call a spade a spade.
Click to expand...
 
buffs04 said:
We lost to Nebraska by 9 points, not 2 or 3.
Click to expand...

Hmm...Let's see, Nebraska misses kick. CU leads by one with 1:43 to play and NU has 1 timeout, and CU has ball at midfield. Gameover. Period. CU wins. Do some homework next time about the impact of a play that is mentioned before blabbing nonsense about the final score. You sound like some pollster who only looks at scores and doesn't really know the true story about the game. Woulda Coulda Shoulda is all nice about the 4th quarter, but I'm dealing with the facts.
 
Last edited:
TheEvilBeak said:
NU lived inside your 20 the 2nd half. If you think that game was between evenly matched teams, you're crazy.

Score was close but that's about it. By your logic, ISU dominated you and you were luckyto beat them.

Which is it?

I'm certainly not the only poster in theis thread to call a spade a spade.
Click to expand...
jesus man you do realize you were 1 miracle kick away from losing right? and that you trailed for a large portion of the game? I don't give a rats ass where on the field NU spent the game. What counts is the scoreboard. You guys won in the end, but to say you were "in control" is full of ****.

"In control" teams don't need miracle FG's to win games. They dominate. To claim NU was "in control" based on some cherry picked stats is full of it.
 
Last edited:
4DemBuffs said:
can you two idots fix your posts to get the quotes right? :lol:
Click to expand...
I don't get it, I didn't touch the ****ing quote and its all messed up. I have been seeing that a lot lately...

MAAAT!!!!

hmmm, just checked, and for some reason it included the "quote: snowbuff" stuff from his post... wtf?
 
SnowBuff said:
I don't get it, I didn't touch the ****ing quote and its all messed up. I have been seeing that a lot lately...

MAAAT!!!!

hmmm, just checked, and for some reason it included the "quote: snowbuff" stuff from his post... wtf?
Click to expand...

its not matt, idot. its you. when you respond to the guy, look at what is there. the broken quote stuff is f'ing everything up!
 
CU has 107 kids on the team. Of 107, 50 ARE FRESHMEN!! 22 ARE SOPHOMORES!!! I am so sick and tired of these ****ing pricks that revel in seeing CU fail so that they can bitch about Dan Hawkins with the hope that, one day, they can come on this board and say, "Told ya so you idots, I told you Hawkins can't coach!!" F U C K all of you idots!! Get the hell off this board and go over to the rammie board. At least over there you can bitch for the rest of your miserable lives! :wink2:
 
DBT said:
CU has 107 kids on the team. Of 107, 50 ARE FRESHMEN!! 22 ARE SOPHOMORES!!! I am so sick and tired of these ****ing pricks that revel in seeing CU fail so that they can bitch about Dan Hawkins with the hope that, one day, they can come on this board and say, "Told ya so you idots, I told you Hawkins can't coach!!" F U C K all of you idots!! Get the hell off this board and go over to the rammie board. At least over there you can bitch for the rest of your miserable lives! :wink2:
Click to expand...
Dude...you should have been here last night...you would have had a blast!
 
"In control" teams don't need miracle FG's to win games. They dominate. To claim NU was "in control" based on some cherry picked stats is full of it.[/QUOTE]

I forgot. It's a miracle kick unless Mason Crosby kicks it. My bad.

The first step to solving the problem is admitting there is one. Many on here have figured out there may be one.

I know some are fairly certain. If you can't run the ball when it counts, you won't win. If you don't have the players up front on both sides, you probably won't win..and if you allow teams to double the TOP on you, you probably won't win..regardless of the circumstances.
 
buffedup said:
I'm sorry. My measly 110 whatever posts must go to show I don't spend every waking moment upping my posts into the multi-thousands why don't you "veterans" enlighten us people who like to check in from time to time.
Click to expand...

Is that a life relevance post?
 
buffedup said:
I'm sorry. My measly 110 whatever posts must go to show I don't spend every waking moment upping my posts into the multi-thousands why don't you "veterans" enlighten us people who like to check in from time to time.
Click to expand...

Way to endear yourself to us "verterans." :huh: Idot. :smile2:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top