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!

Future Series - Texas A&M/CU 2020/2021

'Tini said:
Why in the world would RG use recruiting rankings to evaluate? The only thing that matters is what happens on the field and if stuff is controlled off.



It's been his narrative for a while now despite opposing evidence.

Awaiting my next infraction
Click to expand...
Not rankings per say, but quality. So, you don't think an AD pays attention to recruiting? Ask Frank Solich about that. In concert with record, recruiting quality is a factor. I believe, in part, Bill Mac kept his job after 1-10 because he was beginning to recruit really well.
 
Duff Man said:
Where is this theoretical pressure on MacIntyre going to come from? Not the fanbase.
Click to expand...

Have you been to the games?! Attendance is in the mid 30k. Lowest attendance in twenty years. People aren't going to watch a no name coach with miserable recruiting lose games for much longer. In fact, they aren't watching him now.

RG just spent 160 mil on facilities. Firing some guy from Sacramento for a few mil is NOTHING. Move on. Find a name coach.
 
Leavitt bought MM at least 2016.

BTW according to ramnation we're now pussies for scheduling a&m and TCU over CSU. :lol:
 
Anyways, back to the OP topic. Love me some RG. Underhanded **** you to CSU, essentially. Brilliant PR move. "We gave CSU a chance and they didn't want to sign on the dotted line. Now we are playing A&M."
 
Frustrating to hear the local media continue to chime in on the subject of dropping the RMS. Even after acknowledging the scheduling of TCU and aTm, the narrative has shifted to, "Well, OK, but why drop CSU but continue to schedule the likes of UMass?" Some of them understand, but there is a loud minority that still cling to the idea that CU are "cowards" for "running away" from CSU. SMH
 
TSchekler said:
Frustrating to hear the local media continue to chime in on the subject of dropping the RMS. Even after acknowledging the scheduling of TCU and aTm, the narrative has shifted to, "Well, OK, but why drop CSU but continue to schedule the likes of UMass?" Some of them understand, but there is a loud minority that still cling to the idea that CU are "cowards" for "running away" from CSU. SMH
Click to expand...
Mike Evans and Nate Lundy supported CU's decision, BTW. So, kudos to them. Basically, they said "If CU is doing this for revenue and to aid recruiting, I see nothing wrong with it."
 
CSU fans were saying we would not schedule any good teams about two months ago. They are going to have a lot of bodybag games in the future.
 
DBT said:
Mike Evans and Nate Lundy supported CU's decision, BTW. So, kudos to them. Basically, they said "If CU is doing this for revenue and to aid recruiting, I see nothing wrong with it."
Click to expand...

Lundy was supportive because he's an Oregon State fan and understands the business side of P5 scheduling. Maybe Evans was just playing devil's advocate, but he was the one specifically questioning dropping CSU and keeping UMass on the schedule (as if we really replaced CSU with UMass).

The best perspective I've heard on the subject was from Brandon Spano yesterday. He said that nobody wants the RMS to continue except the local media, yet the same local media who are pounding the table for it to stay, are the same ones who don't even attend the game.
 
Duff Man said:
CSU fans were saying we would not schedule any good teams about two months ago. They are going to have a lot of bodybag games in the future.
Click to expand...

They HONESTLY think they are going to get 1-1's with P5 programs. I just don't get it.
 
10 bucks says CSU tries to replace the RMS with a "Home and Home" with NU, where the CSU home games are in SAF with a 50/50 revenue split.
 
sliderNcider said:
Leavitt bought MM at least 2016.

BTW according to ramnation we're now pussies for scheduling a&m and TCU over CSU. :lol:
Click to expand...

If Mac has a ****ty season I could see RG axing him and slipping Leavitt into his spot. Keeps a semblance of continuity and gets a proven coach in place.


Mahalo
 
TSchekler said:
Lundy was supportive because he's an Oregon State fan and understands the business side of P5 scheduling. Maybe Evans was just playing devil's advocate, but he was the one specifically questioning dropping CSU and keeping UMass on the schedule (as if we really replaced CSU with UMass).

The best perspective I've heard on the subject was from Brandon Spano yesterday. He said that nobody wants the RMS to continue except the local media, yet the same local media who are pounding the table for it to stay, are the same ones who don't even attend the game.
Click to expand...

The funny thing to me is that the other day Sandy and Scott were saying it was good that CSU was acting as a peer instead of a little brother to Colorado but then when CU acts the way they should and tells CSU if they don't agree to a 2-1 then it is unfair to CSU. It just doesn't make sense. They want CSU to act high and mighty but not CU.
 
onealcd said:
The funny thing to me is that the other day Sandy and Scott were saying it was good that CSU was acting as a peer instead of a little brother to Colorado but then when CU acts the way they should and tells CSU if they don't agree to a 2-1 then it is unfair to CSU. It just doesn't make sense. They want CSU to act high and mighty but not CU.
Click to expand...

It's because the local media view these moves by CU as saying they are too good to play "little brother" CSU, when CSU just won 10 games and CU just lost 10 and went winless in P12. In their minds, CU shouldn't have any sort of dictation over the series due to our relatively recent lack of success. That mentality stems from years of playing the game at a neutral field and the illusion that it's been a fairly even series throughout recent history (when it has clearly not been). Brandon Spano was the only guy who actually brought up the fact that CU is 62-22 all time against the lambs and stated that it is definitely not a rivalry game.
 
Future Series - Texas A&M/CU 2020/2021

Duff Man said:
CSU fans were saying we would not schedule any good teams about two months ago. They are going to have a lot of bodybag games in the future.
Click to expand...

In the end then it may be better for them too. They'll probably make more in those games than they did playing CU.

But don't tell them that, because they can't see the Forrest for the trees.

I just like that this game is going away. 2 for 1s on campus would have been tolerable to me. But I hated SAF. I hate off campus games, except for a few like RRR and WLOCP between well established rivals on the same level (of which CSU is not).

If they want to play the Nubs at SFA let them. Doesn't really change my feelings about the game or CSU.
 
EscapeFromNMBuff said:
In the end then it may be better for them too. They'll probably make more in those games than they did playing CU.

But don't tell them that, because they can't see the Forrest for the trees.

I just like that this game is going away. Either 2 for 1s on campus would have been tolerable to me, I hated SAF.

If they want to play the Nubs at SFA let them. Doesn't really change my feelings about the game or CSU.
Click to expand...

That MIGHT be true, but let's be honest: the chances that they make more off some random non-conference game than they do off the CU game are slim at best. To get a premier team on their schedule, they're going to have to either agree to do a 2 for 1 or an away game or series. For reference, CSU just got paid $750K per game for a two game series at Alabama. I don't know the numbers, but I strongly suspect they bring in more than $750K from the RMS. The other option is to do 2 for 1 series, which CSU hasn't wanted to do with CU, so why should they with another P5 school. Even if they do that, do you think they'll get more to Hughes or the new stadium than they get to Mile High for the CU game? I doubt it.
 
Denver_sc said:
That MIGHT be true, but let's be honest: the chances that they make more off some random non-conference game than they do off the CU game are slim at best. To get a premier team on their schedule, they're going to have to either agree to do a 2 for 1 or an away game or series. For reference, CSU just got paid $750K per game for a two game series at Alabama. I don't know the numbers, but I strongly suspect they bring in more than $750K from the RMS. The other option is to do 2 for 1 series, which CSU hasn't wanted to do with CU, so why should they with another P5 school. Even if they do that, do you think they'll get more to Hughes or the new stadium than they get to Mile High for the CU game? I doubt it.
Click to expand...

I think they made $1.5 million for the first game and are supposed to make another $1.5 million for the second.
 
TSchekler said:
It's because the local media view these moves by CU as saying they are too good to play "little brother" CSU, when CSU just won 10 games and CU just lost 10 and went winless in P12. In their minds, CU shouldn't have any sort of dictation over the series due to our relatively recent lack of success. That mentality stems from years of playing the game at a neutral field and the illusion that it's been a fairly even series throughout recent history (when it has clearly not been). Brandon Spano was the only guy who actually brought up the fact that CU is 62-22 all time against the lambs and stated that it is definitely not a rivalry game.
Click to expand...

This is why I appreciate RG that much more. He tunes out the noise and makes decisions based in reality.
 
TSchekler said:
It's because the local media view these moves by CU as saying they are too good to play "little brother" CSU, when CSU just won 10 games and CU just lost 10 and went winless in P12. In their minds, CU shouldn't have any sort of dictation over the series due to our relatively recent lack of success. That mentality stems from years of playing the game at a neutral field and the illusion that it's been a fairly even series throughout recent history (when it has clearly not been). Brandon Spano was the only guy who actually brought up the fact that CU is 62-22 all time against the lambs and stated that it is definitely not a rivalry game.
Click to expand...

I saw more of that when RG went public with his desire to kill this game after 2020 than this week. Its hard to accuse us (unless you're a Ram honk) of being too good for anybody when we are upgrading our schedule. If we're replacing them with more cupcakes, sure.......but we arent.
 
Here's What TexAgs has to say on the subject.

Mixed reaction. Pot. Revenge. Irrelevance. Like the road trip. Hate the road trip. etc.
Nobody mentions Sports Authority.
 
Duff Man said:
CSU fans were saying we would not schedule any good teams about two months ago. They are going to have a lot of bodybag games in the future.
Click to expand...

It's been a while since I read RamNation, where [surprise] the topic of CU's scheduling is taking up a lot of real estate. Those Rammies message board geniuses have a pretty good schtick and a few approaches to smack I didn't know about until recently.

U of Q (University of Quit)
Bowlda (the name of our fair city)
Chesty (too boastful…chest out with pride)
tables are turned now that CSU has scoreboard. Apparently some claim the RMS is OUR Super Bowl now.
They are the Flagship of the CSU system and we are the flagship of the CU system.
We're afraid to play them.
Some debate taking this to the State House to force the series to continue.

Of course there still is lots of the standard drivel.
exCUse
Puffaloes
ucb
Rather see my son in hell then in Boulder
 
They thought RG was bluffing about the RMS ending after 2020. Now they are unsure how to take the latest news.
 
Duff Man said:
They thought RG was bluffing about the RMS ending after 2020. Now they are unsure how to take the latest news.
Click to expand...

Rick George is da man. It's fun watching him shift back and forth from the construction project to scheduling the non-con games.

High marks from RMS ticket exchange and getting Texas schools back on the schedule.
 
espnw_Ketcham_d1_300.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top