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!
Future of football series vs CSU
- Thread starter cmgoods
- Start date
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
I used Wazzu because they agreed to a one for one with Wyoming.....They're a bad example. No power five school in their right mind wants to play up there (Even Oregon rarely does-weren't they the opponent for the "home" game in Seattle that WSU used to play more often than not?) The MWC probably gets hurt more than anything by the discrepancy between the Power 5 and the group of 5-Sure, Boise can get good arrangements with the four northwest schools, and AFA has it easy because they have the two yearly games with Army and Navy, and can also get Notre Dame to go 1-1 with them on a fairly consistent basis. San Diego State can get Pac 12 teams to play them at home because they play in an NFL stadium. Fresno will take 2-1's with power teams because that's how they've always operated. Other than that, everybody else is screwed-Look at Wyoming agreeing to guarantees with Clemson and Iowa, and New Mexico as an example.
You are correct in this post.
The problem for a lot of MWC schools is that they provide risk with little reward. Boise has a known name, AFA is a service academy drawing the military crowd and bringing some national recognition. SDSU as you mentioned plays in an NFL stadium, it is also a "nice" road trip for teams from colder climates and gives some exposure in the southern California recruiting area.
Most of the rest don't travel well and don't provide a positive resume boost for beating them. That lack of national recognition along with them being a tougher win than playing some other non-P5 conferences or an FCS school means that ADs will avoid them.
It also exposes coaching weaknesses if we lose.
It's a business decision, nothing more.
:yeahthat:
This is is exactly why we need to end the series with CSU. The reality, I think, is that without playing us in sports, they lose even the tiny relevance they already have. It seems to me that they have created their fan base and their whole identity off of playing us. Their whole AD seems built on hatred of CU and any win over us defines their seasons. If we end the game, they really have no identity.
How many other Buffs out there have just grown tired of the anti-CU talk out of CSU? It's tiresome and they hate CU so very much that we need to say goodbye and enjoy our games against pac 12 opponents. We have a great conference. Fun in every sport we compete in. CSU is just an annoyance really. Anyone else feel the same??
How many other Buffs out there have just grown tired of the anti-CU talk out of CSU? It's tiresome and they hate CU so very much that we need to say goodbye and enjoy our games against pac 12 opponents. We have a great conference. Fun in every sport we compete in. CSU is just an annoyance really. Anyone else feel the same??
ahoelsken
Well-Known Member
Rick really needs to stick to his guns here.....I don't think the PR beating will be that bad-Nate Lundy on the fan this morning at least admitted that he gets that we have the hammer here. I don't care about playing them in other stuff.....If they beat us in tennis, I won't lose sleep.
Yep. Their entire existence revolves around the Colorado rivalry. Everything they do is based on CU. You said it best. It isn't fun, it is just tiresome.
ramfan
Well-Known Member
Warning: this might get long.
What's reasonable or fair comes down to what other options each side has. Can CU find another beatable team to come to Folsom 7 out of 10 years that will be a guaranteed sellout? Can CSU regularly schedule 1-1s with P5 programs that would provide at least one home game every other year and is sellout or close to it? The answers to those questions are probably not and try again later.
I've read every post in this thread and follow allbuffs semi-regularly, only really commenting on CSU-related discussion. I get that a good majority of CU fans on here are over this series and want it to end. I get not wanting to play "home" games in Denver. I get the headaches and frustration that come with dealing with an annoying opposing fan base. I think much of that is fixable.
I would propose moving CU's home games in the series back to Folsom while CSU plays theirs in Denver until the new stadium is ready. Guarantee that CU can be the home team in years where they have 4 Pac home games. Those are pretty easy changes IMO. The next one is not so easy.
Both fan bases contribute to the **** that gets spewed. I don't know who started it but both contribute to the cycle. CSU is little brother and is so irrelevant... CSU wins a game every 3rd year and then you never hear the end of it, at least in part because of the perceived arrogance/talk leading up the game and throughout the year... Wow I hate these CSU fans, I hate this series, go back to cowtown and be irrelevant for the year besides when we play you for charity... CU wins the next two years and it's I told you so CSU sucks, we are so much better, we play in the Pac 12 little brother and don't you forget it... CSU wins again and reminds CU that both squads have the same amount of Pac wins over the last 2 years... This series is stupid and if we stopped playing them it would completely ruin them... Good, if we stopped playing CU it would help our SOS... and on and on and on.
Both fan bases need to stfu. CU is in the dumps. CSU had one moderately good season, after being in the dumps, and who knows what future years will bring. There is absolutely no respect for the opposing program and fan base and it's ridiculous given the lack of success both programs have had lately. Neither program has anything to brag about. The arrogance on both sides is so undeserved it's astounding. Changing that starts with us as fans, and on both sides. In a way, that's what I'm trying to do here. We can talk football, be fans of our respective teams, and still realize that CU and CSU being good again is the best thing for everyone, both are decent schools, and both towns are different yet great places to live. When you strip away all the fan base bs there is little to dislike about the opposing school/program. We can (and should) still want our teams to win without demonizing the other one. It all comes down to respect.
I never really answered the initial question. I think both programs would benefit from being able to host a winnable guaranteed sellout every other year. I think both programs would benefit from working together to raise the profile of college football in Colorado. I think both programs would benefit from this series being continued (note: I did not say NEED, each would be ok without it too). Pushing for a 2-1 is likely to lead to the end of the series, with both programs taking their chances elsewhere. I don't think that's a risk worth taking.
I don't think Tony Frank has a firm grasp on just how much CSU needs this game to be played in some manner, shape or form. If, for instance, he agreed to a 2-1, he could continue to play the victim card of the little guy just struggling against the big, bad, well funded P5 school. It has been what has gotten their fans all riled up in the first place. Without that, what does he have to sell? A shiny new (half empty) stadium?
RG is proving to be a very smart guy. He knows whatever bad press comes out of this will blow over pretty quick. He's responding to his customer base, which has told him that we no longer desire this game on the schedule. Frank, OTOH, is not responding to his customer base, which desperately needs this game.
Things might be different if CSU had an actual athletic director. But Tony appears to be of the opinion that he can handle this himself.
RG is proving to be a very smart guy. He knows whatever bad press comes out of this will blow over pretty quick. He's responding to his customer base, which has told him that we no longer desire this game on the schedule. Frank, OTOH, is not responding to his customer base, which desperately needs this game.
Things might be different if CSU had an actual athletic director. But Tony appears to be of the opinion that he can handle this himself.
ramfan,
The difference here is that CSU fans desperately don't want the series to end, CU fans would much prefer it. Playing it at Folsom would be an improvement, not playing it at all would be best.
It is true that playing CSU in Boulder would likely result in sell-outs, that doesn't mean that it is financially better. If the cost is giving CSU even a home game every 3 years and/or a "rivals" split then CU can make much more money bringing in a cupcake every year even if the stadium isn't full.
With the schedule CU plays and the coming scheduling requirement of the PAC (OOC P5 opponent each year) CU doesn't need to be playing a team that looks at CU at their make or break game each season in the OOC, we have enough to deal with playing our PAC opponents.
Again, it is significantly in the best interest of CSU to play CU every year. Frankly even giving a 2-1 is much better for them than not having the game. Other than Boise no other MWC team is going to get CSU much local or national mention even if CSU is having a good season like last year.
The same can't be said for CU. Yes there is some associated publicity with the game but CU can more than exceed that simply by starting to win some games. Nationally nobody cares if CU beats CSU, they do pay attention if we beat Arizona State or Utah and pay much more if we beat USC or UCLA.
If CSU chooses to stick their nose up and refuse what CU is offering it is their choice, it is also their loss. CU moves on.
The difference here is that CSU fans desperately don't want the series to end, CU fans would much prefer it. Playing it at Folsom would be an improvement, not playing it at all would be best.
It is true that playing CSU in Boulder would likely result in sell-outs, that doesn't mean that it is financially better. If the cost is giving CSU even a home game every 3 years and/or a "rivals" split then CU can make much more money bringing in a cupcake every year even if the stadium isn't full.
With the schedule CU plays and the coming scheduling requirement of the PAC (OOC P5 opponent each year) CU doesn't need to be playing a team that looks at CU at their make or break game each season in the OOC, we have enough to deal with playing our PAC opponents.
Again, it is significantly in the best interest of CSU to play CU every year. Frankly even giving a 2-1 is much better for them than not having the game. Other than Boise no other MWC team is going to get CSU much local or national mention even if CSU is having a good season like last year.
The same can't be said for CU. Yes there is some associated publicity with the game but CU can more than exceed that simply by starting to win some games. Nationally nobody cares if CU beats CSU, they do pay attention if we beat Arizona State or Utah and pay much more if we beat USC or UCLA.
If CSU chooses to stick their nose up and refuse what CU is offering it is their choice, it is also their loss. CU moves on.
I think it also means increased attendance at the actual home games. If ST holders are allowed to "exchange" RMS tickets for more tickets to another home game, just ups the attendance and money coming into Folsom.
RG is a wizard!
ok, ok ...
Say you are trying to convince Rick George to continue the RMS ... how would you do so ? Give examples why COLORADO should continue playing this game.
Think it boils down to 1 fact.
No matter how putrid CU has been the past decade, no matter how many times CSU has won this game recently, CU is a P5 School with a P5 schedule every year. Playing a G5 school is fine for 1 OOC game, however when that team views the game as their superbowl there is added risk and difficulty in playing that game that CU does not need on the schedule. CSU adds no national exposure. Adds no recruiting assistance. The game gives CU nothing other than in state bragging rights which we already own for being the lone P5 school in Colorado.
No matter how putrid CU has been the past decade, no matter how many times CSU has won this game recently, CU is a P5 School with a P5 schedule every year. Playing a G5 school is fine for 1 OOC game, however when that team views the game as their superbowl there is added risk and difficulty in playing that game that CU does not need on the schedule. CSU adds no national exposure. Adds no recruiting assistance. The game gives CU nothing other than in state bragging rights which we already own for being the lone P5 school in Colorado.
The series went on an extended hiatus once before. The two teams stopped playing sometime in the 60's, and then didn't play again until 1983. I suspect the reason for the initial hiatus was due to the fact that CU moved into the Big 8 (big 7 at the time), and was having difficulty scheduling. By the time 1983 rolled around, we were playing 11 games (soon to be 12), and it was seen as a fun diversion. Fast forward to 2015, and we're in the same boat we were in back in the 60's, with too many conference games and too few OOC opportunities. The landscape has changed a lot since 1983. It's time to put this game on the shelf.
Don't forget the foodcart debacle
I get this and agree, for the most part. Have to remember, though, all 4 of our OOC games next season are against G5 schools and 1 FCS school. I know we have Nebraska scheduled in the future and a one off against UM, but I don't think it's as much about upgrading our OOC games to P5 teams, as it is about making a better financial impact for the program. After all, RG was hired because he was a proven commodity when it comes to fund raising and money management and he's trying to get this AD's financial situation turned around.
I remember that with Butch Jones, but please remind me about exactly what happened, again.
We will be required to schedule 1 P5 opponent in OOC very soon by the Pac-12. So our schedule goes from 9 P5 opponents to 10. Leaving us 2 (in most years) opponents to schedule for winnable games. IF those games are to be MUST wins because of our already difficult schedule, putting the rams on the slate does not help us, because of the nature of the game.