Posted by fortbuff95 on August 19, 2008 at 12:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Speaking as a season ticket holder for the past 15+ years I would prefer to see the 2009 game moved back to Boulder especially in light of the fact that there are currently only 5 home games scheduled. Plus, I believe that CSU would probably opt to have the game in 2010 at Invesco anyway based on the additional money it would generate for their program. The 2009 season will be year number four under Hawkins and we need every possible advantage that we can get in order to move the program to the next level in that year more than any other.

Posted by ilikeseeyou on August 19, 2008 at 2:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I thought I had read previously that CU makes about the same having the game in Boulder but CSU makes way more having it at Invesco. Maybe I'm wrong though... I have been to 2 or 3 of the games at Invesco and frankly I do not enjoy it as a college football venue. Even though I now live really close to Invesco I would much rather make the drive to Boulder for the game (or even Ft. Collins for that matter). Invesco is a nice stadium but it just seems really sterile and the games always seem to lack that college football "vibe" which is why I greatly perfer the college game to the NFL. It has to be in Boulder next year with only 5 home games, no doubt about that.

Posted by montanabuff on August 19, 2008 at 5:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The 2009 game will definitely be in Boulder. The reason for the delay in the announcement is that both parties hope to unveil a long term deal so that the CSU administration has something to take back to its fans.

I don't mind having the game in Denver. It attracts regional attention to the Buffs, and we clearly bring more fans to the game. My gripe - why does it have to be the first game of the season? Why have a rivalry game in the opener? Move the game to the second or third game, giving each team a chance to get wrinkles ironed out before taking each other on (see: Iowa v. Iowa State).

Perhaps the real reason for delaying an announcement as to future games is that the Rams can see the writing on the wall: The Buffs are back, and it will be a few years before the Rams are contenders again. Mile High blowouts, anyone?

GO BUFFS!

http://www.cuatthegame.com

Posted by DrTom on August 19, 2008 at 6:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Get used to disappointment puffy.

Posted by CaliBuff on August 19, 2008 at 7:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I like the game being in Denver if we can make it a yearly tradition. Other rivalries have games at neutral stadiums and it works great. Otherwise I don't think we should make it a yearly tradition, no reason for us to go to Ft. Collins

Posted by archalon on August 19, 2008 at 7:54 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Drop the 2009 game and schedule a real opponent from a real conference. CU cant return to national prominence with a weak schedule and all we are doing is keeping step-brother U solvent by letting them think they can play with the big boys.

Posted by kimolukela on August 19, 2008 at 8:11 a.m. (Suggest removal)

It would be great to have the teams play at their respective home fields, but CSU's field is a joke. It's really sad when High School stadiums are nicer than University ones. Maybe the lambs could start playing in Cherry Creek?

Posted by smokey on August 19, 2008 at 8:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree with arch. No reason to keep the hams (not a typo) on the schedule. Under the old CU AD it was a gimmicky shot at "trying to make the pie bigger" in terms of football fan base in Colorado. But CU has absolutely nothing to gain out of this and CSU never overcame their inferiority complex. It's an awkward, forced matchup from the buffs perspctive and if we're going to spend money to bring in an early road team stay somewhat regional but beef up the conference: Arizona, Oregon State, Minnesota (done), etc.

Posted by DrTom on August 19, 2008 at 8:37 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Coming soon outside of Boulder.

A reality check, CSU is running wild on the puffs, what are you gonna do??

Posted by bufffan8 on August 19, 2008 at 8:47 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If we are going to keep playing CSU we should push the Denver sports commission to up the payment we receive. Tell them it's another $1MM or it's over. No reason to play the lambs except for the money. I'd much rather see a team from a major conference in Boulder than the lambs. The people who benefit the most from the game are CSU first, Denver sports commission 2nd and CU 3rd. We need to move on and strengthen the schedule a bit.

Posted by buffballaz on August 19, 2008 at 8:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)

why are you at our site. Is the program up their too poor to create their own website to talk football. Anyway this game is going to be a joke this year. I know its been relatively close the past years, but not this one. CU is a good team on the rise and the rams are going to be in the dumps for years to come.

I would agree to get rid of the game in 09' if we can get a stellar opponent to take its place. I hope ralphie tramples their whole team before the game even starts.

Posted by BuffTime on August 19, 2008 at 8:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree with montanabuff. I think the series should stay, but be moved to the 3rd game of the season. How can you bill it as a "rivalry" game when neither team has worked out their kinks yet? By having a true cream puff (one you are not trying to build a yearly game around) then place the sheep in either the second or third slot.

As for switching out CSU for a bigger school to strengthen our schedule... Are you completely nuts? Our schedule is already one of the toughest out there. If anything we should lighten it up a pinch.

I honestly think we should keep the series, but just move it back a few games so that there is some chance at it being a quality game.

Posted by bufffan8 on August 19, 2008 at 8:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Didn't CSU recently have a 13 game losing streak? Maybe the lambs should consider adding Univ Northern Colorado to thier sched.

Posted by BuffTime on August 19, 2008 at 9:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Who's talking football here from CSU? I've only seen a little annoying gnat post some nonsense. Completely ignore the fool.

If he isn't even capable to engage in an actual football debate then he/she isn't worth wasting the electrons to reply to.

I like to register a "--" in response. I haven't missed the post. It just isn't worth a reply.

Posted by BuffNut99 on August 19, 2008 at 9:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The series needs to stay.

Archalon, are you serious? CU's schedule is already difficult enough for years to come - you want to replace CSU with a BCS team?

Posted by bufffan8 on August 19, 2008 at 9:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

If we move the game back a few weeks it will be even a bigger blow out. Let's bring a lower level big 10/big east team to Boulder (a la Northwestern/Syracuse). We rail on KU and NU for their pathetic schedule and then you guys turn around and want to do the same thing. How cool is the opening week Missouri/Illinois game or the 2nd or 3rd week USC/Ohio St game. I'd rather go 7-5 playing top tier teams than 3 crap teams. You know how hard it is to win the NC. A good record against quality teams and a top tier bowl (not necessarily a BCS bowl) is a great year for most schools.

Posted by DrTom on August 19, 2008 at 9:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)

That's a laugh, the puffs lost in 2006 and barely escaped in overtime last year due to luck.

This year we dominate!

NC's have to win their conference puff, something everyone knows they're not going to even come close.

Posted by buffalo_flyer on August 19, 2008 at 9:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Keep it at Mile High! more money, more exposure, and AWESOME games, you people don't even look at our future schedules, why else would you want ANOTHER powerhouse?!?!? give me freegin break and quit try to kill one of the best things to happen to football in this state.

Come on, who really gives a crud about a NC game thats fixed to allow the flavor of the weak to play. Until the BCS dies, this game should stay right where it belongs, AT INVESCO!!!

Posted by bufffan8 on August 19, 2008 at 9:33 a.m. (Suggest removal)

As a season ticket holder with 45yd line seats in Folson why are my seats at Invesco in the corner of the end-zone? Give me comparable seats and I can live with Invesco. Otherwise alternate between Invesco and Folsom.

Posted by bufffan8 on August 19, 2008 at 9:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I'd also rather buy a ticket to see a BCS conf opponent than CSU.

Posted by bouldabuff on August 19, 2008 at 10:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The CSU game is consistently a no-win situation for CU. I like that CSU thinks this is a rivalry game but let's face it - it's not. CU is expected to win every year, that is not a rivalry.

I like bufffan8's idea - schedule a "soft" BCS opponent instead. I was thinking more along the lines of a Vanderbilt, Stanford, Northwestern. Let's play some schools with similar admission standards.

Invesco lacks atmosphere - and season ticket holders always get screwed with seating. This series has been great but I think it may be time to move on.

I would rather play Air Force as an in-state rival - there is more history there anyway. CSU v. CSU-Pueblo could be a possibility in the future.

Posted by CaliBuff on August 19, 2008 at 10:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Yea, it wouldn't be a bad idea to get regional teams. CSU can be that team once every 5 years, but let's play Air Force, Wyoming (done), Arizona, Utah, Utah State, Idaho, New Mexico etc. Either a weak BCS school or a smaller conference school

Posted by clbuff on August 19, 2008 at 10:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I consider Bohn to be a great AD, but we are getting screwed on this deal. CU does NOT need this game on our schedule and csu does. The fact that we cannot negotiate a better deal is ridiculous. This game absolutely needs to be played in Boulder next year and any future negotiations need to have this game in Boulder every other year. As our schedule stands now for next year, we will have one true home game through the first month and a half of the season. That is unacceptable! It is time to take a stance of power in these negotiations and stop accommodating csu. If they want to play us, then agree to our terms or we walk. Pick up a team that would be a good tune up and move on to the national powers we have on future schedules.

Posted by DrTom on August 19, 2008 at 10:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Even more laughable, a team that loses all the time referring to themselves as some kind of top program.

CSU dominates!

Posted by bouldabuff on August 19, 2008 at 10:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Sorry to get off topic but thought this would be a great post about our linebacker depth courtesy of the denver post.

The cast of linebackers set to anchor CU's 2008 defense:

Jeff Smart: The Buffs expect the junior to emerge as "quarterback" of the defense. He is slotted as the starting "Mike" (inside) linebacker.

Marcus Burton: Junior entered camp as the starter at "Will" (inside) linebacker after missing the 2007 season because he was academically ineligible.

Brad Jones: Quick to the ball and energetic, the senior envisions himself as a playmaker from the "Sam" (outside) linebacker spot. He had 72 tackles last season.

Shaun Mohler: Transfer from California Orange Coast College, where he was the Pirates' MVP both seasons and a first-team juco All-American, is pushing for playing time.

Michael Sipili: Fired-up sophomore returns from a suspension for fighting. In 2006, he played 10 games as a freshman, including starts against Missouri and Nebraska.

B.J. Beatty: The sophomore is pushing Jones at outside linebacker. Beatty had a terrific spring camp, with 10 tackles (eight solo, three for losses with a sack) in the three main spring scrimmages.

Posted by BuffSteve on August 19, 2008 at 11:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

bufffan8 - I agree totally. Those of us with good seats at Folsom kind of get the shaft at Invesco. I'm kind of torn on this one. I much prefer to watch the game in Boulder on the college campus but I want the Athletic Department to continue to climb out of debt so it's difficult to turn away the additional revenue. I do trust that Mike Bohn will do what is right for CU so I'm OK just letting him do his job. He's done very well up to this point IMO.

By the way, why are we even paying attention to someone from CSU on this board? Every time the Lambs try to step up and play with the big boys they get taken out behind the woodshed. Sure, they will periodically beat CU because they play well above themselves during that game and treat it like the national championship. Their fans have the notion that they are just a few years or a few players away from big-time but it never really happens, does it? Until they play in a real conference and/or start CONSISTENTLY beating top 20 teams then all they will ever be is a cute little football program that nobody outside of Fort Collins will ever care about.

Posted by william.nicholas on August 19, 2008 at 11:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I'd like to see a survey of CU season ticket holders as to whether.....

A..never play in Denver ever again..horrible venue
B. never play CSU ever again .. a joke of a rival..

prediction..overwhelming majority for both..come on Bohn, just cancel the stupid series and let's play a real team from the Big-10 or the SEC....

Posted by wagsbuffs17 on August 19, 2008 at 11:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Lets face it the only one that benefits from CU playing CSU is the sheep. Its the same thing that Youngstown State tries to pull by opening its season vs. Ohio State...they schedule a game against a team from a BCS conference to bolster their strength of schedule but never really have any hope of actually winning. CSU can’t afford to drop the CU game from their schedule every year because of the money on the table and the fact that it’s their only credible game outside BYU.

The game has to stay in Invesco because there is no bigger group of collective cry babies than those in the lamb pen. Every year the game is played in Boulder they cry that the Buffs had an unfair advantage by playing at home...alternating between Boulder and Foco isn’t a possibility because CSU’s facilities are embarrassing…so to hush the collective whine of the lamb chop faithful (like our little fly ramsrule) the game is played at Invesco. Keep the series alive only to keep CSWHO fans quiet year after year and to keep our own strength of schedule where it is.

Posted by GoBuffs05 on August 19, 2008 at 12:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Personally, I like the series at Invesco, and I like playing (and beating) the Rams every year. It brings in some more exposure to the Denver area, which is a benefit considering the percentage of people in Denver who are not from Colorado originally and may not have much knowledge of the Buffs. It would be nice if CSU more resembled their 90s selves, but maybe the money this game brings in can help out the little guys up in Ft Fun.

Posted by johnson_michaelr on August 19, 2008 at 12:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ramsrule,

I commend your ability to get under the skin of a bunch of Buff fans. Enjoy your flaming, because I guarantee you will vanish like a fart in the wind come Sept 1st.

Posted by smokey on August 19, 2008 at 12:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

CaliBuff, I like some of the schools you list. The fact is, all we're doing is letting our little brother tag along with us. The posts about stepping up an negotiating a real deal are dead on. We need to make our demands and be prepared to walk. Hopefully the delay in announcing any kind of extension is a good sign of that.

Fact is, in every aspect: CU = Alphas, Winners; CSU = Betas, Whiners. The schools didn't make them that way either - it was determined when you were born. Sure I know a lot of CU alum that are arrogant jerks - but they're winners. And there's a lot of really nice cats from CSU/FoCo - but they're losers - and this is a business.

Posted by BuffulanceMan on August 19, 2008 at 12:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I'd love to round-robin Air Force, Wyoming and CSU every three years. Why not do a deal w/ the Mountian Worst where we play each of these teams at Invesco (so long as we still have 6 Boulder games) every three years? Then, we get the $$$ each year and CSU only gets it once every 3 years.

Posted by DrTom on August 19, 2008 at 1:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)

What's all this buzz about a high school boy?

Kyle Bell will make America forget about him.

210 yards on the puffs

Gartrell will probably get over a 100

See ya!!!!!!!

Posted by extrapoint on August 19, 2008 at 1:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If we cant get any better smack going than this ramsrule twit....then by all means end the series.

There is something to be said for the pussker method....that is use the eclairs to give the second and third stringers PT in mop and having better depth for later in the season. Supposedly the BCS computor strength of schedule formula threw a monkey wrench into that idea but the jaysquawks didnt seem to suffer last year until they lost

Barring that, the schedule should chronologically get gradually tougher. Not that I ever want to see E Wash again but they should have been first, followed by CSU then FSU with WV finishing up the noncon schedule

Posted by buffalo_flyer on August 19, 2008 at 1:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

State must be pumped that so many Buffs are scared of this game

Posted by Saheeb on August 19, 2008 at 1:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Extrapoint: Yes, eWash should be the tune up, not a CSU rivalry game where anything can happen. If you're going to schedule a cupcake to get your team in gear before you play D-I teams then you should play them first.

Posted by OutToPasture on August 19, 2008 at 2:18 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I think it's great to play the lambs every year. It's good for both schools and it shows the local talent that there really is no reason to head to ft. collins unless you really want to learn a lot about fertilizer and raising farm animals (or to pick up a case of fat tire).

As for Invesco v. Folsom, it would be great to have the game at Folsom, but 500 grrrrr is a lot of scratch to leave on the table. Plus, at Invesco way more people can watch that glorified juco from the north take their beating live and in person.

Posted by BuffTime on August 19, 2008 at 2:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Everyone seems to also forget about a big recruiting plus the game at Invesco is.

Face it, kids like the idea of playing at least one game every year at an NFL venue. They get to use the team locker rooms and they get to experience the large crowd (ok when people actually show). The other alternatives that people have mentioned regionally (Air Force, Wyoming, etc.) would not bring in any where near as many spectators to Mile High as CSU does. Like it or not, I don't think the series is going anywhere. Too much money and the uniqueness of the venue are too important. I think they need to fix the seating issues for the season ticket holders and move the game to the second or third game of the year, but moving away from Mile High or stopping the series just doesn't make sense to me.

Posted by phibuffa on August 19, 2008 at 2:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Just my opinion, but I would like to see the Buffs rotate CSU and Air Force (and maybe even Wyoming) each year and play just one of them in the Mile High Showdown. I get tired of playing a juco team like the lambs every year and giving them the illusion that they are a grown up, Division I team, and I would like to see Air Force and Wyoming in the mix. Regardless, I will be there. Looking forward to the first game in 12 days!

Posted by InTheBuff on August 19, 2008 at 3:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I don't mind CU playing CSWho every now and then, but it really is a no win situation from a football only stand-point. If they had the facilities to actually make a home/home series viable it would be different, but they don't. Mix them up with AFA or BYU so it's not the same every year.

Posted by smokey on August 19, 2008 at 3:28 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Did Tall's mom finally kick him out of the house??

Posted by reallifeshocker on August 19, 2008 at 4:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

kansas and missouri hate each other, i mean hate. this is the oldest continually played rivalry west of the mississippi. they moved it to a "neutral" site last year,(arrowhead)and because the stars were aligned, it was a sellout......76k. colorado should play the rams, and it should be early(this gives the fellers from the country a chance). and yes,probably best played in denver. kansas has always played a second-tier rival, silo-tech; similiarly, colorado plays another natural rival, the bug-eaters. these emotion-packed games are the spice of college football.

Posted by BuffNut99 on August 19, 2008 at 4:55 p.m. (Suggest removal)

BuffTime - good point about recruiting. Also, the game is always nationally televised (can't have enough of those), and is gaining a national reputation for being a rivalry (which, if you listen to Nebraska fans, doesn't exist with them).

Again, keep CSU on the schedule - do not make the already brutal future schedule even harder.

Posted by buff4life on August 19, 2008 at 5:11 p.m. (Suggest removal)

if you look up "meth" induced psychosis in the DSM-IV you see a picture of 'ramsrule'. dude you gotta stop pleze.....coach hawk and the buff coaching staff could "suit" up and beat the lams..i guess playing your bowl game week one makes you say silly stuff...i'd stop worrying about the buffs and get ready for the mighty unlv rebels and san diego state.....lets go rammin!!!!

Posted by keepfolsomfolsom on August 19, 2008 at 6:39 p.m. (Suggest removal)

i dislike csu, as much as the next person with any soul and taste, and therefore love playing them (strange as it may seem, most all of the real meatheads from my prep school ended up going there). so what if it may gain us nothing on the national stage(hey-if we really want national attention play any SEC team and BEAT them-they greatly make other areas of the country look pale as far as the general citizenry's interest in a team- win or lose- is concerned... it is crazy down there. take nebraska/oky fans X 100) it brings so much personal satisfaction rubbing csu fans heads in their own mediocrity each year when we thump them (even when we have, occasionally, been rather mediocre too--slick neuweasel era on).

having said the above i think a yearly game against air force academy is a great idea also, in that, facing the type of offense they run is a tremendous challenge but not too much-hopefully-(just wait for paul johnson's version of it to take hold with georgia tech in a couple of years as an inevitable example) and it might give us further ideas on how to tweak our offense along similar lines--particularly with all the speed we have begun to recruit under hawk.

colorado and (at least elements of) the triple option? could it possibly work?hmmmm...clearly, the more sleight of hand and hawklove the better. of course, it takes a better intellect of player to work the angles of this offense but then again cu has traditionally been known for its academically gifted student-athletes.
enough said

Posted by PRBcitizen12 on August 19, 2008 at 10:02 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If you've ever been to a CU-CSU game, you know it matters little where the game is played. Games like this make college football so special. As long as the game cant be played in Ft. Collins, playing in Boulder will only give CSU fans ground to stand and whine upon after a loss. Keep it in Denver and let them have their bowl game early. It gives us an emotional start against a physically inferior opponent. If we are as good as our improvement makes it seem we soon should be, we wont need any extra national exposure from our first game opponent...

Posted by houston_buff on August 19, 2008 at 10:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Buff fans-just sniff (never quaff) the kool aid for a minute. The history of CU as a school was to associate and promote the other state schools. Originally the state school was to be placed in many places, including Pueblo. Much as the season ticket holders hate the trip to Denver, the very existence of the University is based on the fact that other cities conjoined to keep the school from forming in the Mile High City. It is one game! Right now we are on a roll. The ability to enable our little brothers keeps them fresh-if they lose the game, we are no longer are a foe but only an ugly and arrogant adversary. Keep the game in Denver. Promote state awareness. Schedule a big name concert the night before, have a top notch high school game (Mullen v Creek or pick your team v top out of state school that morning) and make it a really great event. This is the schools choice to let this become a laughable issue. Who cares if CSU sucks? They kicked us in the package many times. Many of us had a choice between the two. I had a scholarship offer to both and picked CU just because my dad was a grad from CSU. Keep that contentious aura and we all win. Few kids play football and CSU needs alumni that hate CU. Let's go think globally on this. If you are one that pays for CU season tickets than you are surely smart enough to know that one more game at Folsom against East Carolina is not a better way to spend a hot Saturday in September than talking sh** to your buddies in the parking lot that went to Ft Collins. That said-if we can do a home and home with Air Force than screw CSU.

Posted by houston_buff on August 19, 2008 at 10:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Buff fans-just sniff (never quaff) the kool aid for a minute. The history of CU as a school was to associate and promote the other state schools. Originally the state school was to be placed in many places, including Pueblo. Much as the season ticket holders hate the trip to Denver, the very existence of the University is based on the fact that other cities conjoined to keep the school from forming in the Mile High City. It is one game! Right now we are on a roll. The ability to enable our little brothers keeps them fresh-if they lose the game, we are no longer are a foe but only an ugly and arrogant adversary. Keep the game in Denver. Promote state awareness. Schedule a big name concert the night before, have a top notch high school game (Mullen v Creek or pick your team v top out of state school that morning) and make it a really great event. This is the schools choice to let this become a laughable issue. Who cares if CSU sucks? They kicked our rears many times. Many of us had a choice between the two. I had a scholarship offer to both and picked CU just because my dad was a grad from CSU. Keep that contentious aura and we all win. Few kids play football and CSU needs alumni that hate CU. Let's go think globally on this. If you are one that pays for CU season tickets than you are surely smart enough to know that one more game at Folsom against East Carolina is not a better way to spend a hot Saturday in September than talking sh** to your buddies in the parking lot that went to Ft Collins. That said-if we can do a home and home with Air Force than screw CSU.

Posted by houston_buff on August 19, 2008 at 10:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)

sorry for the double-I usually drink them and dont post them.

Posted by skibuff on August 20, 2008 at 6:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

You Buff fans totally dismissing the Rams must not remember Barnettt's first 2 years , when ranked 14th and 23rd respectively, got blown out by the Rams. Anytime you continue to play a team that has everything to win and nothing to lose, you're going to get beat every now and then. Having said that I don't think Hawkins will let them get in that kind of mindset. We need this win and the next week against the Eagles, because I hate to say it, those 2 wins may represent 33% of the much needed 6 games to get a Bowl nod. I hope I'm wrong and we can surprise some folks on the road and play tough at home against WVU and the Horns. Now, regarding the series.....I absolutely feel we should move 2009 to Boulder and put this series on the shelf. I also agree it doesn't have to be the first game + we could create a great series such as "Borderland Shootout" not only playing the Rams and Falcons, but also teams like Arizona, ASU, Utah, BYU, New Mexico and NMSU. With the exception of the Aggies down South, every team on that schedule could present a compelling challenge and would garner national recognition, promoted the right way.

Go Buffs!!

Posted by DrTom on August 20, 2008 at 6:53 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I hear the constant clucking of chickens.

Posted by mtnboykev35 on August 20, 2008 at 7:07 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Ramstool...then come in from the pasture!
I would like to see some other regional games like UTEP, UNM, Utah but we could keep CSWho cause they need the attention....like a little bro.

Posted by LBCBuff on August 20, 2008 at 9:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Kyle/DC Editors - it's 10 days before the season starts for chrissakes, we can't go a day without new Buff news! What's going on over there?

Posted by buffalo_flyer on August 20, 2008 at 9:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I hate the constant clucking of chickens

Posted by DrTom on August 20, 2008 at 10:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

This game is for bragging rights puffos.

Regardless of how "mighty" you think your program is.

We will have the rights to brag about it into the fall of 2009.

Posted by theultimateCUfan on August 20, 2008 at 11:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

As a Boulder native and now a 3rd year CU student, I would be devastated if CU and CSU decided to discontinue the annual Rocky Mountain Showdown. (NOT the Mile High Showdown Kyle Ringo.)

I think there is a good solution that not many people are talking about:

In each four year span, play the game in Denver twice, once in Boulder, and once in Ft. Collins. This would give players and fans the opportunity to visit both campuses and still play at a neutral site every other year. (Or for two years in a row, then at the campuses for two years.)

Strictly speaking from a fan's standpoint I think that would be the most fun and maybe the most reasonable scenerio.

Posted by Black_Rob on August 20, 2008 at 12:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Ramsrule Kenny, what's your screen name gonna be after CU crushes the Lams?

MountaineerMomma?

Posted by DrTom on August 20, 2008 at 1:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

They're about get the stuffins beat out in a week.

Posted by MDBuff on August 20, 2008 at 2:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

11 days, Lambs!

Posted by clbuff on August 20, 2008 at 2:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Rammie. According to your earlier statement bragging rights go to the winner. csu lost last year. The all time recored goes to CU and we have won 3 of the last 4 games. Why are you even talking? Why don't you prove that you are an educated individual and explain why you are so confident and why csu is going to beat us into the turf? You brought up your running backs, but CU's strength on D is up the middle. Your team has more question marks going into this game than last year. CU is a better team than last year, where have you improved? Is BVP coming back with one more year of eligibility? Come with something, please!!!

Posted by Black_Rob on August 20, 2008 at 4:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It's just Kenny the Klown. He never makes sense.

Posted by mntbyker on August 20, 2008 at 5:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I suspect the same that this is Kenny. He's a bit schizophrenic anyway.

Posted by buffman30 on August 20, 2008 at 6:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

6 home games should be the minimum every year when you consider that some teams are playing 7 or more home games. The 2009 game should be played in Boulder for that reason. After that, move the game to a Thursday night at Invesco during the third or fourth week following a bye week. This could improve the atmosphere at Invesco and furthermore allow for better television exposure.

Posted by feardaram on August 21, 2008 at 9:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

some real talk from a csu alum...

i certainly hope they keep the series going. it's good for the schools in terms of money, and let's be honest, it's a fun game.

i can understand how CU fans believe there is nothing in it for them. CU is supposed to win, so winning gets them nothing but losing obviously looks bad on the win-loss record. i totally get that. but without scheduling a tougher opponent (who you may be more likely to lose to), won't it be like that anyway? might as well keep the money in state.

next, this game is definitely a rivalry. no, csu isn't on the football level as CU, but that doesn't matter. i've been to the last 7 rocky mountain showdowns, including all of the boulder games. i've walked through boulder on gameday with my CSU gear on, do not tell me the entire school thinks this is some ordinary game. this game gets people on both sides pumped up, no ifs ands or buts about it.

i would agree with moving the game back a few weeks. that might not really help CSU at all, but i would like to see some more seasoned teams playing. still, this is a heck of a way to start of the season.

finally, i'd prefer the game be kept in denver. the money is better for both schools simply because of the money. however, i understand CU wanting to bring the game to boulder. your stadium is gorgeous.

nonetheless, if 2009 is in boulder, i pray CSU says screw the money and holds the game in fort collins. the games in boulder, as a CSU fan, are no where near as fun as the games in denver. the environment in boulder is much more hostile, as expected. i would love for CU fans to see what it feels like and have to come to our city. fair is fair. CSU will probably take the money though, because it's not like we will sell a whole lot of tickets this year! :)

anyway, just my perspective. looking forward to 8/31.

Posted by clarkebb on August 21, 2008 at 10:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey, did anyone else see that story over on the coloradoan.com?

CSU might be starting freshmen at both corners because of injuries and suspensions. They are getting so desparate they are moving RB's over to corner for depth.

Patrick, Scotty, and Josh are going to make those kids look silly.

GO BUFFS!

Posted by feardaram on August 21, 2008 at 10:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Indeed. Their top 3 CBs are currently sitting out. One is suspended, the other 2 injured. One of the injured players will be ready for opening day (the other won't), supposedly. No word on the suspended player. Our safties and Dline are going to need to have a big game. Our Dline has pressured a QB in years.

Posted by feardaram on August 21, 2008 at 10:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Edit..

Our Dline hasn't pressured a QB in years

Posted by skibumm on August 21, 2008 at 1:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Feardaram-
I am glad you posted a rational opinion and I completely agree with you! This game is more then just a game for local Coloradoans’. As someone who started going to Rams’ games when he was 2, and is a CU Alum; there isn’t a game I look more forward to then this one. It is for state bragging rights. For all the CU people who say it is just a game it’s because your afraid CU could loss, or you are some outsider that doesn’t understand the true meaning of the game. A true program doesn’t overlook any games. CU is suppose to win this game every year, and the only reason they have lost some of them is because Barnett was too stupid to think it mattered and it blew up in his face. I think they should do the following, over a 4 year period, have two games in Invesco, one game in Boulder, and one game in Foco. Hell it would give CSU the opportunity to actually sell out a game, something that never happens. I will be a Buffalo till the day I die, but if CU cancels the game all it shows is CU cares more about money then the do about a true college rivalry. College football is all about rivalries and the love for you team, who gives a **** about how many home games there are! The state needs this game, don’t run away from it CU.

GO BUFFS! Going to eat some lamb soup on 8/31!

Posted by BuffNut99 on August 21, 2008 at 2:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Feardaram - Thanks for that very good post. This game is important because it is a true in-state rivalry, which is actually quite rare in sports.

I would like to see the game in Fort Collins as well, maybe once or twice a decade.

Posted by bufffan8 on August 21, 2008 at 3:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

My only problem with Invesco is my season ticket is a total crap seat compared to my Folsom seat. If they fix that problem then keep the game at Invesco. CU and CSU should also demand a bigger payday from the Denver Sports Commission.

Posted by skibumm on August 21, 2008 at 3:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

bufffan8-
Your right CU seems to screw there season ticket people over which is ridiculous. Not the case on the CSU side. My dad is a prof at CSU and season ticket holder for 23 years. Our seats are generally very good, 10 rows up between the 10-30 yard line. No question they could work on seating. If you are a season ticket holder you should be getting the best possible seats.

Posted by keepfolsomfolsom on August 21, 2008 at 8:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

as stated before i don't even think it should be considered dropping the csu game. good for the state.

however, cu should definitely stop playing teams like miami(oh), montana st{ARGH}--talk about having nothing to gain.

it is a fact that historically,on the recruiting stage,the best athletes (not necessarily student athletes)can be listed in this order:
1)deep south: louisiana, mississippi, florida, texas and alabama--bigger/stronger/faster athletes
2)california and/or texas
3)the rest of the states and territories' players on a case by case basis

and if this is indeed the case, it seems obvious that we should be playing teams like tulane,florida central, southern mississippi,south alabama (when they start playing football next? year) and perhaps smu (before june jones builds them up) where we can thrash them mightily and then recruit within easy distances. our presence perceived by the local populace as consummate victors in that area of the country is an obvious win-win for cu in the future.

hey-we should even think of playing overrated alabama again. hawkins clearly outcoached saban in the second half...can't believe cu lost that game.

Posted by walto_clown on August 24, 2008 at 8:03 p.m. (Suggest removal)

skersrise(eventually, maybe)

What's this bit on strippers and escorts?