Posted by mifrfi on June 29, 2008 at 12:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Thanks for the info Kyle. Great to see updates on the injured players.

Posted by mgmtgrad on June 29, 2008 at 9:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Congrats on the suites sell out, just shows that people believe in Hawkins and the program is going. Hear that talli-boy?

Regarding the AVP beach volleyball tour being held in Boulder with the Flatirons in the background can only be good for CU.

This year is going to Rock.

Keep the news coming Kyle.

Posted by mgmtgrad on June 29, 2008 at 9:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Should have read "the direction the program is going"

Sorry about that.

Posted by MinnesotaBuff on June 29, 2008 at 10:26 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Thanks for the updates Kyle. Keep 'em comin.

Posted by Ralphie2 on June 29, 2008 at 10:29 a.m. (Suggest removal)

CAN'T WAIT FOR THE SEASON TO START!!!!!!!!

Posted by cdj888 on June 29, 2008 at 11:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I, for one, am starting to grow tired of CU always touting the strength of their schedule in order to bring in fans. Although I appreciate being able to see these teams, I would rather be able to see CU rack up a few more victories, and I think that a lot of other fans would feel the same way. I'm not saying that we go out and schedule patsies, but how about some middle-tier teams, which at this point is what CU is (though we're getting much better).

Posted by 87toInfinity on June 29, 2008 at 6:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

cdj888, We have a pre-season rank of 34 by Rivals...Florida State is 37. There you go. We are playing a middle-tier team, along with two low tier teams (CSU, E. Wash) Happy?

Posted by NCBUFF on June 29, 2008 at 6:23 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Spoken like a true Nebraska fan cdj888!!

In order to be the best ya gotta play and beat the best! I say bring em on and GO BUFFS!!

Posted by mgmtgrad on June 29, 2008 at 10:34 p.m. (Suggest removal)

cdj888, sorry you feel that way and you have a right to your opinion.

However, playing a tough schedule has given additional TV coverage... additional monies... AND additional exposure... which helps recruiting and did I mention additional TV ;)

For example: while CU lost to FSU last year, it was a great game to watch. Watching a young team that battled so hard against (over the last few decades in college football) a major program was exciting.

Eastern Washington won't be on TV, That's one less game we and most of the nation won't be able to see. But, you can bet that I will be watching the game’s progress on the net.

I say let's see what our team is made of and bring on the big boys. I agree that wins are the most important thing, but what good are they if they come from gimmies. I understand a few tune up games can be a good thing, but…

As much as I hate to see CU lose, I'd rather see a hard fought game on TV, then read about a blow out that most of the nation didn't even get to see. The hard ones are the ones that make the headlines and have many more write ups then the easy ones that get a small amount of coverage.

For those of us that can't go to the games it's exciting to fill my calendar with games that I can watch on TV. AND please don't be judgmental because some of us support our team the best we can. Not all of us fans can afford to travel and etc to see games in person. That doesn't make us any less of fans.

I'm on this board daily and always support CU. If you only knew how much I would love to be at every game in person. Would you like to sponsor me? ;)

Marcus J

Posted by DCBuff on June 30, 2008 at 7:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree with keep scheduling big name schools on CU's schedule for all the same reasons posted above.

AIt's not clear from the article...but are they replacing the natural turf at Folsom with an artificial surface or just putting a new natural surface after the Vball tourney?

Posted by flabuff227 on June 30, 2008 at 8:22 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I read a while ago that if they were to replace the natural grass, it wouldn't be for a couple of years. I hope they dont replace it at all.

Posted by archalon on June 30, 2008 at 8:24 a.m. (Suggest removal)

take that, naysayers. I'm more sick of hearing erroneous complaints about 'cant sell out the stadium' then issues of scheduling.

You play the best to be the best and I for one dont want to wait all year to see CU play the EWU's of the world.

Posted by DCBuff on June 30, 2008 at 8:36 a.m. (Suggest removal)

flabuff...I heard the same thing and was just wondering if they decided to make the switch to artificial turf this year instead of waiting.

I also agree...let's keep the natural grass surface!!! That's the way football was meant to be played!

Posted by flabuff227 on June 30, 2008 at 8:50 a.m. (Suggest removal)

i agree. I dont see the logic in playing patsies or even mid tier taems all the time.Especiaaly now. We need exposure in this transition period. Its important tha kids across the country get to see colorado on nationally televised settings.

Posted by focobuff on June 30, 2008 at 9:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I completely agree that it is necessary this year to receive national exposure, but with that said, I also think that in 2009 or 2010, it makes sense to schedule mid tier teams. Personally, I believe that the Buffs have a legimate shot at challenging for the national title in one of these years. Why get beat up in non conference games against top five teams. Great if CU wins these games, but in this day and age, one loss is the difference between an appearance in the BCS National Title Game and the Cotton Bowl. Look at Missouri last year. I am not saying that CU should schedule "patsies" like Nebraska, but a few moderate tuneups before the rigors of an already brutal Big 12 schedule just make sense.

Posted by archalon on June 30, 2008 at 10:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)

No one should be worried about CU in a BCS title game for awhile. They can compete against top competition, so let them. if they win, great. If not, they're building a program the right way.

Posted by baBUFF on June 30, 2008 at 11:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Kind of off topic, but did anyone else notice in the rivals piece previewing our season that they already have D Scott penciled in as a starter on the depth chart. I doubt he'll be starting day 1, but would be great to see him earn the starter's job part wat through the season a-la Ryan Miller. Shows how highly those recruiting guys think of him.

Great to see the suites sold out - Great job Bohn and crew!!

Posted by extrapoint on June 30, 2008 at 11:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)

just having Scott in practice will keep the D tuned up. Major practicing against Scott. The best vs the best....both will get even better. Cant wait.

Posted by rswright on June 30, 2008 at 1:57 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Arch: "take that, naysayers. I'm more sick of hearing erroneous complaints about 'cant sell out the stadium'..."
"
If you think it's erroneous that CU can't sell out the stadium listen to Hawk. "CU fans only come to the game when the better teams play"." Kyle says...a struggling economy and consecutive losing seasons will likely keep the athletic department from realizing any gain in season-ticket sales for the 2008 campaign...".

Now maybe Hawk and Kyle are wrong and you have information that they don't have. Maybe you have information that Folsom really does sell out and that there has been a gain in sales of season tickets. If so, don't keep it a secret. If not, well, maybe think again before spouting off.

Posted by extrapoint on June 30, 2008 at 2:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

whoa!
dont mess with rs
he knows all and sees all.
even if you dont say anything, he has your number
so do like this bad boy says and
quit spouting off.

CU football is going down and there is nothing you, Hawk or bohn can do about it.
you heard it from rs, so take it to the bank.

(I had to pick myself off the floor from laughing after I read rs' post)

Posted by flabuff227 on June 30, 2008 at 2:29 p.m. (Suggest removal)

rs- its hard to sellout games when you are not winning. Obviously things are changing.So maybe you should stop spouting off.

How often do you have suicidal thoughts. My guess would be once a day.You suck at life.You are absolutely miserable.

I have never heard from such a negative person.

Posted by baBUFF on June 30, 2008 at 2:33 p.m. (Suggest removal)

rs, why the ruffled feathers? Why is it that I only see you post on these sites when you have an opportunity to point out the negatives regarding the CU football program?

People are excited about the season and are glad the suites have sold out well in advance of the season. It appears that interest in the program is higher than it has been in years, so why drag it down with your negative 'tude?

Chill out bro, the world isn't out to get you.

Posted by flabuff227 on June 30, 2008 at 2:38 p.m. (Suggest removal)

It is our right to optimistic about the state of the program. You are constantly defend th people that got beat up by football playersand thats fine. But guess what, if everybody had your attitude their would be a lot more assaults and crime. Why are you so angry.You have some deep-rooted issues. Time for some therapy

Posted by extrapoint on June 30, 2008 at 3:53 p.m. (Suggest removal)

the disconnect here is
rs whining about season ticket sales, when, I'm willing to bet he has never bought one....let alone contribute to his poor abused tennis
yet we are all the hypocrits.

Posted by flabuff227 on June 30, 2008 at 3:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)

why would somebody that despises the football program buy tickets? Other than to root against them

Posted by archalon on July 1, 2008 at 7:01 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Back to the D Scott note above: disregard the preseason predictions, like Scott already starting. How would they know ? I think Steele's had him as second team all-conference already - and the guy hasnt even practiced yet.( that said, he also had CU 4th I think and NU 2nd in the North - WTH was he smoking ?)

I think the WVU game for Scott to start is probably the earliest you'll see, but who really knows.

As for RS, I wont address him. He has so many issues, it isnt worth getting into. We are all best to just ignore Eeyore and his selective musings

Posted by buffalo_flyer on July 1, 2008 at 8:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

whoa, rs is right, if a bit off base with his quotes,

Eastern Washington won't sellout, could be a tougher game than everyone thinks, especially with WVU looming

WVU will sellout, because they're top ten and it will be a rocking Thursday night atmosphere.

Until CU has sellout numbers renewing their season tickets, they have to continue to schedule the toughest teams possible. Keep the CSU series at Mile High. Win at home and get to the prestigious bowls and start winning those again.

Im done spouting off, go buy a season ticket

Posted by flabuff227 on July 1, 2008 at 9:08 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hopefully we can blow out e wash in the 1st half and play backups in the second half. Giving the starters valuable rest and giving the backups valuable experience.

Posted by OutToPasture on July 1, 2008 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

At least tallisall is honest and open about his bug eater roots, so I can imagine him cracking himself up every time he posts on here, knowing that he is stirring things up (and that we'll all bite!).

rs, on the other hand, is just so bitter and hateful. Are there any therapists on here? If rs really is a Buff, shouldn't we take care of our own - particularly those most in need?

Posted by extrapoint on July 1, 2008 at 11:38 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Little doubt we will beat Eastern Washington. Could be a blowout as we will have opening day shake out behind us.

This is also the reason I will take Western Michigan and the points for the huksters opening day. For the huksters this will also be opening day with a new coach. Geting players used to a new system is always a struggle. Any weakness Bo may have in putting together a D probably lies with the spread. Witness LSU's loss to Kentucky last year. Western Michigan runs the spread.

Posted by flabuff227 on July 1, 2008 at 11:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)

western michigan is a experienced team as well.

Posted by rswright on July 1, 2008 at 7:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"As for RS, I wont address him."

For the same reason the meat avoids the meatgrinder.

Posted by extrapoint on July 1, 2008 at 9:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)

hey!
unbelieveable!
rs does have a sense of humor!

Posted by flabuff227 on July 2, 2008 at 7:16 a.m. (Suggest removal)

rs- for the same reason your pee pee avoids hoohas.

Posted by rswright on July 2, 2008 at 8:31 a.m. (Suggest removal)

brilliant. Can always count on flatbuff.

Posted by flabuff227 on July 2, 2008 at 8:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

thanx wrong

Posted by archalon on July 3, 2008 at 8:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Meatgrinder comment is humorous. As RS has shown in the Jax|Harris arrest thread, he cant even compare apples to apples regarding criminal stats, going so far as to point out that the FBI is "obviously wrong".

The hatred blinds his ability to reason.

Posted by rswright on July 3, 2008 at 9:48 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Another unsupported statement to go along with
1. it is erroneous to claim CU doesn't sell out.
2. The criminal stats of the general student population mirror that of football players.

Wrong on both.
Making statements which are not true or are unsupported doesn't help the program.
Try sending in more money rather than wasting your time.

Posted by archalon on July 3, 2008 at 12:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Blah, Blah, blah - it wouldnt matter what anyone here said, RS would object to it. And he still has yet to support his claims of, well, anything.

Anyone here care to do his home work for him ? Find the stats for football players arrested and charged in year 2005 to compare to the gen. pop. stats posted in the Jax\Harris thread. Apples to apples is all Im asking from RS and he avoids it. Next year, when the 2008 numbers are posted, Ill list them to compare to the current situation with the team.

And he did cite the FBI stats I provided as "obviously wrong" - anyone can read the thread

I have sent more money to that school in the last decade than RS will in his lifetime, so I guess I am left to wonder why I actually read his biased musings anyhow.

Posted by rswright on July 3, 2008 at 12:51 p.m. (Suggest removal)

More meat for the meatgrinder.

To defend the recent arrests, Arch stated the number of crimes committed by the general student population mirrors that of the football team.
Arch quoted stats that the general student population had 1392 crimes for 2005. CU has 30,000 students. Given the same number of crimes in 2008 as 2005 by the general student population there are 1392 crimes or 21.5 crimes per student. Now so far this year we have had 5 arrests of current football players. With 100 football players that is 1 for every 20 players. Doubling that for the entire year is 10 crimes for 100 players or one crime for every 10 players. That is double the amount of crimes for the general student population.
Now he asks someone to "Find the stats for football players arrested and charged in year 2005". The one who makes the statement has the burden of proof. Failure to meet that burden indicates that the statement is unsupported. If unsupported it shoudn't have been made in the first place.

But whether his point is correct or not, it does no good to defend guys who put three plates in another's head with a possible life long brain injury just because he plays football. That only lends support to those who want to abolish football at a University and that doesn't help the program. Again, instead of wasting your time send more money.

Posted by baBUFF on July 3, 2008 at 1:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

rs, you blow it again. First of all "21.5 crimes per student" sounds like an awful lot, but I'll assume you are typing faster than you think and let you re-think that one.

Please clarify your "1392 crimes" statement - are those arrests or convictions?

Your "5 arrests of current football players" so far this year statement is inaccurate. I'll give you 3 - Geer, Katoa, and Duren (who was subsequently booted, but was on the team at the time). Jackson and Harris were NO LONGER ON THE TEAM.

Now re-do your math:
1,392 out of 30,000 is 4.64%
3 out of 100 is 3%

Looks like the general population is the real problem - get rid of those thugs.

Posted by extrapoint on July 3, 2008 at 2:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

once again
that dyslexia is a reel beeech

maybe we should change his nickname to "the fecal grinder"

Posted by rswright on July 3, 2008 at 9 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"I'll give you 3 - Geer, Katoa, and Duren "

Thanks but what you give has little relevance. The Camera listed all five on 6/26. Kai Maivava, Nate Vaiomounga, Lynn Katoa, Riar Geer and Jake Duren.

Ba: whether they were crimes or arrests makes little difference since not every crime results in an arrest. Besides they are Arch's stats, ask him if they were arrests or crimes.

But don't you guys get it? There are a sizeable part of the University who would be very happy if there was no football at CU. Stop hurting the program by defending guys who put three plates in another student's head. By defending guys who commit violent acts, you only lend support to those that would like to close down football at CU.

Posted by bufffan8 on July 4, 2008 at 9:23 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The "sizeable" part of CU that wants to shut down football should start working on something else. Football isn't going away. I know you don't want to believe this, but there is a correlation betwen the number of times CU football plays on TV and the interest in studens attending. Especially the high paying out of staters. Football goes away, student body drops, businesses arond CU go under etc etc. Won't happen.

Keep dreaming that Folsom will become the state's largest tennis center though.

Posted by rswright on July 4, 2008 at 12:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)

CU will provide football for fans and alums in hopes that football revenues will pay for itself and the non revenue sports. When football doesn't that will be the end of football. Every effort should be made to attract more fans to Folsom and making excuses for criminals doesn't attract more fans to Folsom. To think CU provides football because it attracts students to come here or for local business is nuts.

Posted by flabuff227 on July 4, 2008 at 1:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Rather than defending them, "i guess we should throw them under the bus". Hypocrit.

What do you propose cu needs to do when incidents like thes arise?

Have they not been punished?

Are they allowed to move on, or should they dwell in the past?

Your claim that we only "lend support to those that would like to close down football at cu" is ridiculous. You don, see us supporting or defending you. Why? Because you are the one taht is guilty of the above quote.

Posted by flabuff227 on July 4, 2008 at 1:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

ie: constant negativity. Never once have i seen apositive post from you. These are the subject that you are focused on.

Do you chase ambulances for a living?

Posted by bufffan8 on July 4, 2008 at 1:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

rs - why do local businesses get up in arms when there may be one less home game in a given year? Loss of business. It is important for places like the Millenium Hotel for example to have 50k people come to Boulder. It is naive to think football doesn't bring business to Boulder. Nothing else brings this amount of people to town 6 or 7 times a year. It is also naive to think the TV exposure doesn't correlate to a higher number of applicants. Like it or not college football is BIG business and BIG business means money. No one is going to walk away from the money. If football not making a profit was going to be the end, then it would have already happened. The school lent football $8MM to get out of debt not too long ago. Keep hoping though. Enjoy the Wimbledon finals.

Posted by bufffan8 on July 4, 2008 at 1:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

By the way - the average fan is not going to stop coming to football games because a few players get in trouble.

Posted by rswright on July 5, 2008 at 11:02 a.m. (Suggest removal)

flabuff: "What do you propose "...cu needs to do when incidents like these arise?"

The answer is right in front of you. Hawk's comments tell you what "... CU needs to do when incidents like these arise?". You don't see Hawk saying "innocent until proven guilty", "kids will be kids" and the best of all, crimes by football players only mirror those of the general student population." Why not? Because he knows these comments don't do any good for the program.

Re negative comments, there has never been a negative comment about the program. About posters who say things that aren't true or don't help the program yes. Nor has there ever been a comment that football should not get all the money it needs to succeed. (not all the money our posters or Bohn want to give it,i.e. Flatscreen tv's,Hawk's new potty, luxury box seats, all the money it needs).

Buffan: That the average fan will still come is not the issue. We need to atract more fans.Read Kyle's comments that season ticket sales have not increased this year. That violent acts don't attract more fans is the issue.

Posted by bufffan8 on July 5, 2008 at 12:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

take a look at ESPN.com's college football page. There are 9 news stories listed. 4 of them involve a player being arrested/in trouble. It's happening everywhere. Doesn't make it right, just noting that Boulder and CU aren't any different than other universities.

Posted by flabuff227 on July 5, 2008 at 2:19 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Two Georgia players were charged with misdemeanor battery for rubbing a pregnant womans belly. Are arrests necessary in this case?

Posted by flabuff227 on July 5, 2008 at 2:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Rs- The problem i have is that only sipili and geer were arrested. According to reports these were fightsnot attacks. When ive witnessed fights where police were involved, both parties were arrested.No matter who won or was beat up. Fighting is illegal, I know that. If fighting is illegal, why werent the kids involved arrested?

Posted by rswright on July 7, 2008 at 11:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Not enough info to tell.