T1B

Nice opening drive by the Buffs to prevent the shutout. I've never seen a team that looks bad even when they're playing well.

Buffs lookin' pretty good so far, Mike. Damn, Rodney Stewart just about busted one up the middle after that blocked FG.

Woah

Papa Willie wrote:Colorado looked like they had improved last game I saw them (WVU). Texas has played nobody. I took CU in this one. Altitude and a better team = no way there should be a 32.5 fucking point spread.

Altitude? The game's in Austin.

Papa Willie wrote:

Van wrote:

Papa Willie wrote:Colorado looked like they had improved last game I saw them (WVU). Texas has played nobody. I took CU in this one. Altitude and a better team = no way there should be a 32.5 fucking point spread.

Altitude? The game's in Austin.

Fuck. Oh well. That destroys that theory.

Let's just say that UT is overrated as per usual, then.

One thing I'm maybe just about to say, though. Alabama is the best team in this fucking country.

not so fast, spray.


me thinks Tejas will score 30ish in the 2nd half and wins by 20+.

tho, if they DO lose, i'll gladly eat that crow.

'Spray, I may be inclined to agree with you about Bama, but just keep something in mind: Ole Miss sucks. So do Kentucky, North Texas and Florida International. Arkansas looked good against you, but they looked awful at home against Georgia.

Va Tech is Bama's only good opponent so far.

This is going to be the second week in a row where CU's opponent has given them every opportunity to win and they still lose by at least two scores.

CU is kind of giving this away. terrible int from Cody for the last UT TD.

some nice drooling footage of Bevo. stoned, ball-less beast.

nice block by the ref on that Shipley punt return.

game over.

'Spray wrote:Ole Miss ain't that bad, bro.

Ole Miss ain't that good, either. They haven't shown anything this year.

Speaking of your conference, I'd have no trouble in sticking Oregon in the top 5. You fuckers better be ready for them. Today was the perfect time for them to lay down and die - and they didn't.

Before the season started I had USC losing in conference either to Cal or Oregon. Now that the Cal game is out of the way, well, Oregon's still sitting there. Thing is, I had USC being undefeated in their trip to Eugene, which meant they could afford to lose that one and probably still win the Pac 10. Now, because of the Washington game, they're in sudden death mode. They can't afford any more conference losses, and certainly they can't afford a loss to Oregon. USC may end up being the only team in conference to beat Oregon, so USC has to have the same record as them.

That game will now likely be for the conference, so that changes everything.

Problem there is Oregon is just such a Jekyll & Hyde team, and with that offense they run their QB is always getting hurt. If Masoli plays, yeah, Oregon will be a bitch to beat in their place.

Oregon State is pretty fucking good, too. So much for Stanford....

Dunno if you saw that game, but I don't think I've ever seen a game so completely turn on the first play from scrimmage, the way that one did.

On Stanford's very first play Luck hit the most incredibly wide open Stanford receiver for the easiest 80 yard TD bomb you'll ever see. The receiver was ten yards behind the nearest defender, and the throw hit him perfectly in stride.

The douche just dropped it. No reason, either. He just dropped it.

After that play Stanford ended up going three and out, then they went completely flat. It was just the damndest thing. They already looked mentally done in, after only one play.

CU's staff burns Tyler Hanson's RS. staff is a total joke.

nothing they do makes any sense. CU has more penalty yards than O yards in the 4th Q.

Papa Willie wrote:

King Crimson wrote:CU's staff burns Tyler Hanson's RS. staff is a total joke.

nothing they do makes any sense. CU has more penalty yards than O yards in the 4th Q.

Your boys are going to beat Tejas.

i don't think UT is all that, but OU is pretty average. D is pretty salty, but O makes a lot of mistakes and a lot of drops from the WR's. Bradford will take some hits next week. losing Gresham is a big loss. now, we act like the TE position never existed. though, today brought it back some. Wilson calls the same plays he did today and OU beats Miami by two scores.

Papa Willie wrote:

King Crimson wrote:CU's staff burns Tyler Hanson's RS. staff is a total joke.

nothing they do makes any sense. CU has more penalty yards than O yards in the 4th Q.

Your boys are going to beat Tejas.

little willie, you need to let the hate go, Texas gave nothing away today in preparation for Oklahoma and still won by 24 pts.

Colt hit 82% of his passes
Shipley with 2 scores
defense with 2 scores
Special team with 2 scores

Give Colorado a little credit they were playing defense trying to keep everything in front of them so we couldn't really go deep.

I will admit our oline has been completely overrated this year, so that has become a bit of a concern.

And you are correct in saying Texas hasn't played anyone this year, but of the no bodies we have played none have stayed on the field with us. Here is the thing papa, when Texas beats a 3-3 Oklahoma team are you still going to say Texas hasn't played anyone?

Texas has an average offense. Our defense is really good. CU played a safety deep and cheated the LB's to line to run blitz. It worked. They also played a 10 yard zone. When all you throw is 5-8 yard passes and do not adjust your game plan, your offense looks shitty. This has been the biggest knock on Greg Davis. He will never adjust to what the defense is giving him.

CU had a nice opening drive. It was aided by a 15 yard penalty and the Safety falling asleep. After that, they did nothing. Their second score, they took over on the 7 yard line after a fumble.

Question: Was Houston overrated? Everyone was pumping them up after they beat Tech and OSU. They did lose to a team that could only manage 57 yards of offense against Texas.

If our offense stays the same against OU we win by 3-7. If we go back to what I know they can do, we win by 14-20. I do not think that OU will score much against our defense. I think that Bradford is pretty immobile and WM will blitz the shit our of him and make him move.

Cannot wait until Saturday.

Here is the thing papa, when Texas beats a 3-3 Oklahoma team are you still going to say Texas hasn't played anyone?

Yep, pretty much. OU was always going to be Texas's only tough game this year, and now OU isn't OU, so there goes Texas's only tough game.

Okie St and Taco aren't tough this year, and A&M is horrible. You don't even play Nebraska. What else is there? Your OCC schedule this season is a total joke.

You're going to go to the BCS title game with a win over meh Nebraska in the CCG being your best win of the season, along with a win over a shell of their former selves OU team. There, you'll face a Florida team who's lone win of the year came in the CCG against Bama, plus a meh win over a meh LSU team.

Wonderful stuff. Just wonderful.

Question: Was Houston overrated?

Of course they were. A truly good team doesn't give up 900 yards and 87 points to anybody, much less to impotent UTEP. Then they scabdicked against horrible MSU.

Yep. A popgun offense and no D = Very overrated.

Dunno if you saw that game, but I don't think I've ever seen a game so completely turn on the first play from scrimmage, the way that one did.

On Stanford's very first play Luck hit the most incredibly wide open Stanford receiver for the easiest 80 yard TD bomb you'll ever see. The receiver was ten yards behind the nearest defender, and the throw hit him perfectly in stride.

The douche just dropped it. No reason, either. He just dropped it.

After that play Stanford ended up going three and out, then they went completely flat. It was just the damndest thing. They already looked mentally done in, after only one play.

Uhh, Quizz Rodgers had something to do with that. 2 first quarter TDs and 134 yards in the first quarter. 61 yards on one run and after that Stanford was done.

I'm saying they were already mentally done by that point. They just went completely flat after that play, including defensively. They played with zero passion on both sides of the ball, as if all the air went completely out of their balloon.

Of course we'll never know, but I have a strong suspicion that game looks completely different if that Stanford receiver simply catches that ball.

No fucking way Mizzou beats Texas.



Also, if you're going to dog Texas for their weak schedule - and rightfully so - then how can you not dog Kansas even worse for the same thing?

D1-AA Northern Colorado
UTEP
Duke
Southern Miss

Kansas is trying to pull a 2007 all over again, except this time they at least have to play OU and Texas.

Won't matter. Kansas isn't going into Austin and beating Texas.

The Big XII is shaping up to give us the biggest farce of all: another CCG pitting undefeated or one loss Texas against a two or three loss Kansas, Mizzou or Nebraska, including losses head to head with Texas by Mizzou and Kansas.

Hell, for that matter if OU beats Texas then OU may still end up going undefeated in conference, and they may end up having to play a stupid CCG against a two or three loss team they already beat head to head this season.

One way or the other the South winner should not have to play a CCG this season. They're going to have a better record - including a head to head win - than the North winner. This year's Big XII CCG will again be a complete farce.

'Spray, purely hypothetical then...

Let's say Texas runs the table. They go 8-0 in conference, 12-0 on the season. So, they beat both Kansas and Mizzou head to head.

Meanwhile, Kansas goes 10-2 to win the North, and both their losses came in conference, and one of them was to Texas.

Should there be a Big XII CCG? Even if KU wins it they'll still be a game behind Texas in the conference standings, and they'll have only gained a split in the season series.

So, yeah, should there be a Big XII CCG?

"ANSWER THE QUESTION!!"

:john mcenroe:

Yes,' Spray, I know that's how it works out. That wasn't my question. My question is whether such a game should even be played? Exactly what is the competitive purpose - not the $$ motivated purpose - of subjecting Texas to such a game under that scenario?

Texas has already won the Big XII under that scenario, fair and square. No ifs, ands or buts. There is no competitive reason whatseover to play such a game.

Papa Willie wrote:

Van wrote:'Spray, purely hypothetical then...

Let's say Texas runs the table. They go 8-0 in conference, 12-0 on the season. So, they beat both Kansas and Mizzou head to head.

Meanwhile, Kansas goes 10-2 to win the North, and both their losses came in conference, and one of them was to Texas.

Should there be a Big XII CCG? Even if KU wins it they'll still be a game behind Texas in the conference standings, and they'll have only gained a split in the season series.

So, yeah, should there be a Big XII CCG?

That's just how it works out, mang. That's how the Big 12, SEC & the ACC do it. Maybe the other conferences need to get up to date. :P :P :P

Or maybe, just maybe, those three conferences need to kick out a couple bottom feeders and play a round-robin like the Pac 10. But, of course, there's way to much money to be made on CCGs, regardless of whether they're a rematch, a mismatch, or, more frequently, both. At least it's better than the Big 1(1), where you can have two teams go 8-0 in conference and not play each other...

CU has become Baylor.

Maybe even worse.

Dan Hawkins has run out of not only excuses, but answers and credibility too.

What's the point in benching Cody Hawkins now? It's not like the Hansen kid is going to turn the season around. The best chance of a second win they have left on the schedule is K-State, and Hansen isn't going to be a diference maker there. And Daddy Hawk was just as clueless about it after the game as he was during the game.

The best thing that could happen for CU football right now would be for Dan Hawkins to have a fucking massive stroke

Van wrote:"ANSWER THE QUESTION!!"

:john mcenroe:

Yes,' Spray, I know that's how it works out. That wasn't my question. My question is whether such a game should even be played? Exactly what is the competitive purpose - not the $$ motivated purpose - of subjecting Texas to such a game under that scenario?

Texas has already won the Big XII under that scenario, fair and square. No ifs, ands or buts. There is no competitive reason whatseover to play such a game.

You do realize that without the CCG, last year Texas not Oklahoma wins the Big 12, we were the #2 ranked team. Even after Oklahoma took over the top spot the only reason they held on was the CCG win over Missouri.

Not sure why you would think this, in 99 Texas beat Nebraska in the regular season only to lose to them in the CCG. In 2002, Texas beat Colorado only to lose to them in the CCG. There is no given with the CCG except that it gives the conference winner the edge over the other conference winners without a CCG.

Yeah, and what sort of edge will it give the Big XII if a three loss Mizzou or Kansas beats an undefeated Texas in this year's championship game, and Texas falls out of the title game as a result?

Tell me again what Texas was playing for in the '05 CCG?

So who should get the BCS title game? Certainly not U$C with wins over a meh Kal team, a meh Oregon team, a meh OSU team and a meh Notre Dame team with a loss to a very meh team in Washington.

Van wrote:

Question: Was Houston overrated?

Of course they were. A truly good team doesn't give up 900 yards and 87 points to anybody, much less to impotent UTEP. Then they scabdicked against horrible MSU.

Yep. A popgun offense and no D = Very overrated.

I was certain that UH was no top 10 juggernaut, but they are a young team on defense and were going to get exposed sooner or later. They still manged to go into Ok State and MSU and win convincingly. That IS top 25 worthy IMO.

Of course you are going to be overrated when everybody else is losing in front of you and the writers have no choice but to move you up after beating two MC schools. It just worked out that UH was #12 in the nation. It's not their fault.

UH can still run the table the rest of the way as long as the defense doesn't perform like they did in El Paso. Like I said at the beginning of the season, 10-2 or 11-1 is fine by me. It probably means a top 25 ranking to end the season.

Coogs, Houston didn't win convincingly against either Okie St or a horrible MSU team. It took the flukey play of all time for them to beat Okie St, and they scabdicked to a meh win against perennial bottom feeder MSU. That game isn't worth mentioning on their resume. Beating MSU means nothing, especially when it wasn't in convincing fashion.

Indy, should Texas lose a game and should USC run the table there won't be any comparison between their resumes. Who could Texas even point to as a genuine quality win?

Ohio St, Oregon and maybe even ND will all be better wins than anything Texas gets this year, and all of USC's big wins will be true road game wins.

No comparison, not this year. A one loss USC definitely gets in over a one loss Texas.

The team to look out for is Cincy. They could run the table, and an undefeated BCS conference team probably gets in above a one loss USC or Texas. I don't know though that they get in over a one loss SEC CCG loser.

If Florida and Bama are both undefeated come the SEC CCG - and they play a good, close game - I think this could be the year when we see a rematch for the title game. Those two teams will be so far ahead of everybody else in the BCS standings that they may still end up being #'s 1 and 2 following their CCG. The loser of that game could certainly get in over any other one loss team out there.