"I hope they pick me..." Ron Chenoy-US PRESSWIRE
The Weekly Ralphie Report Roundtable asks the blog contributors about the issues that matter to you: football! The format is the same, but the message is geared for the coming election: Go Buffs!
Be sure to share your opinions in the comments below!
1) Christian Powell had an awesome game, has plenty of room to grow, and is now the starter. Which Buffalo besides Christian Powell would you most like to see on the field when CU travels to play the Fresnel State Bulldogs?
Jon: Connor Wood! Not just a series or two here or there either, I want to see him get a real shot to succeed. I don't know that he's the guy. I don't know if he's any better than Jordan Webb. Hell, he may be significantly worse. But at least we would know.
Ash: More than anyone else, I want to see Eric Bieniemy on the field. We need our firebrand where the players can actually hear him--and not through a sideline telephone. If anyone can get this team in the right mindset and keep them there for all four quarters, it's him. Don't worry that other OC's aren't doing it, Eric. Kliff Kingsbury was on A&M's sideline OC-ing the whole way,
and it didn't hurt them at allhe has a beard.
Parker: I'd like Connor Wood to play the entire game instead of Jordan Webb. Interchanging quarterbacks throughout the game with a team that isn't headed anywhere makes no sense. It's clear Jordan Webb isn't the answer; start Connor Wood.
David: Normally I try to go against the grain with these questions, but at 0-2, I just want us to get things fixed. So I want to see Connor Wood out there. I want to see something different out of our Offense, and maybe he can provide that.
Follow along to learn everyone's favorite reality TV show...
2) In Week 1, Texas State beat the University of Houston so badly that UofH's OC resigned. In Week 2, Oregon St. pushed and shoved Wisconsin into firing their Offensive Line coach. At what point in Colorado's football season to you foresee assistant coaches receiving the axe, if at all?
Ash: I actually don't think that Embree will let go of anyone during the season. Since the whole point of this coaching platter was the 'Coalition of NFL' thing, and their lingering (visible) strength is their continuity from last season. I don't think Embree will undercut himself like that.
Jon: I think it would take a significant breakdown for Embree to let anyone go at this point. This season was (and is) clearly a rebuilding (building?) year and as long as he feels that all of the positional units make progress during the season, I think I lean towards continuity. That being said, I'd love a new o-line coach.
Parker: I agree with Ash. I don't see anyone receiving the axe. This team has too many problems and a long ways to go that firing anyone is nonsensical
David: I'm against mid-season changes, especially in a Staff that is still pretty new and on a team that's so young. But, Coach Marshall is pushing my patience here. He got terrible marks at Cal before he came here, and we were hoping that was an aberration. So far, it doesn't look like it. This is a group that has shown us at times (though not often enough) they can play well together, but it's been frustrating to see how often at least one of them is not on the same page. But my biggest problem with a change midseason is that there isn't anyone who can really handle that role currently on the Staff. Otherwise, I might be for it down the stretch if we don't see improvement.
1) Notre Dame worked out a deal where they "almost" join the ACC, but not quite; almost like they're putting their helmets into the ACC, but nothing else. SBNation says that it's ND getting to have their cake an eat it too. Who do these jerks think they are?
Ash: I've never really understood how Notre Dame can be the de facto College Football team for the entire Eastern Seaboard, while being actually located in Gary, Indiana. It's as nonsensical as how they've maintained their NBC deal while scheduling weaker opposition and fielding a weaker team. Did nobody look at Notre Dame's actual play? Did nobody take a geography class? This new ACC deal tells me the answer is 'no.' And maybe they don't have to.
Jon: I wanted them to join the Big 12! I'm not happy about this. It will be interesting to see how the next NBC deal (which is up for renewal in 2-3 years) plays out. With the extreme rise in televised games and the watering down of the ND's schedule due to the crapiness of the ACC, will NBC be able to afford to renew that contract, or will Notre Dame be first to dive all the way into the ACC.
David: I've always disliked something about the way Notre Dame operates. I don't like the fact the way they claim all Catholics as their fanbase (I feel the same way about Baylor). I want to make sure people know that I have nothing against Catholicism and Catholic people, just the way that Notre Dame positions itself. Also, their national TV deal that forces us to watch them almost every week, even when they're terrible and playing teams that we don't care about. Nearly every time they're on tv, there's a game I'd rather get on that channel that I'm bitter I'm unable to watch. Yeah, they won this deal with the ACC, and it pisses me off.
Parker: They're Notre Dame; they can do whatever they want (or that's at least how they act). I think geography classes go out the window when Boise State and SMU sign up to join the Big East. From a football perspective, I don't mind them joining the ACC due to the fact that they are still going to keep their games with USC, Stanford, Michigan State, and the other opponents they have year after year.
2) Nobody's going to argue that playing 9 conference games when everyone else all the parallel universes plays 8 conference games (or less!). Nobody's going to argue that a conference championship game makes things tough, too. The Pac-12 has both. What's your opinion on conference championship games? Keep 'em? Ditch 'em? Necessary evil?
David: I like Conference Championship games, as long as they mean something come playoff time. They're fun, and I actually like the homefield thing that the Pac 12 has going on. I wish all Conferences were on even footing with the number of Conference games (and I kind of hope the Pac 12 eventually decides to move to 8 games to even the playing field).
Jon: As a fan, I want em. As a fan, I also want everyone to give me what I want. So I vote "YES!" on conference championship games.
Ash: Maybe I'm a whiner at heart, but I really think that the setups should be even; at least when it comes to number of conference games. I actually also think that I-A teams shouldn't be allowed to play a I-AA team and have it count for bowl eligibility, but that's something else entirely. As for the conference championship games, they're a necessary evil to me. Sure it makes money and excitement, but it hurts the loser disproportionately than it helps the winner. But I like what the Pac-12 has done where it's at least on the college campuses. Playing a championship game in a city that doesn't host a member team is dumb (every Big-12 Conference Championship game ever)
Parker: Keep em'. It's most likely going to come down to Oregon and USC in the Pac-12. They will have played once already in the regular season, however, the second game will show who's the better team because both teams will have to make adjustments and play under more pressure. I just don't see enough negatives with conference championship games to get rid of them when you have 12 teams in a conference.
3) Pick the Winners!
#2 USC (2-0) @ #21 Stanford (2-0)
#20 Notre Dame (2-0) @ #10 Michigan St. (2-0)
Idaho (0-2) @ #3 LSU (2-0)
#25 BYU (2-0) @ Utah (1-1)
Cal (1-1) @ #12 Ohio St. (2-0)
USC 31 - Stanford 20
Michigan St. 24 - Notre Dame 10
LSU 37 - Idaho 3
BYU 24 - Utah 14
OSU 35 - Cal 14
USC 35 - Stanford 24
Michigan State 24 - Notre Dame 21
LSU 45 - Idaho 3
BYU 17 - Utah 10
Ohio State 31 - Cal 13
USC 43 - Stanford 17
Michigan St. 41 - Notre Dame 25
LSU 29 - Idaho 6
Utah 17 - BYU 16
Ohio St. 28 - Cal 22
USC 49 - Stanford 30
Michigan St. 54 - Notre Dame 37
LSU 33 - Idaho 0
Utah 20 - BYU 15
Ohio St. 42 - Cal 10
1) As you're walking into the grocery store, there's a table of Girl Scouts selling girl scout cookies. "Didn't they just finish selling cookies? Is this a year-round thing now? Does this violate child labor laws?" you think to yourself as you steer around their table. You avoid eye-contact not because you're callous, but because you have seventeen boxes of thin mints in your freezer. They get your attention anyways. They always do. Inexorably you're drawn to the table... what flavor of Girl Scout cookies do you buy?
David: It's thin mints or bust for me. There are few things in the world that satisfy me like frozen thin mints
Jon: People are going to judge me for this, but I hate Girl Scout cookies. They are awful. Don't come back to my house until you have something worth buying. Bring me artisanal bacon by the box and I'll make you a Scout superstar.
Parker: Thin Mints again.
Ash: When I went to CU my freshman year, I was feeling homesick and I thought buying some GS cookies might do the trick. (Our house was always the distribution house, and there were always f'n leftovers). I tried to buy my favorite flavor, Caramel deLites, and the 8 year old informed me there was no such flavor by that name. I was crushed...until I saw the box on the table. "But it's right there, the purple box" I said, and she picked up the box I was pointing at and said, "Oh... those are Samoas!" Turns out the cookies used to be named differently in different regions. I think they've done away with the different names, but I'll have a dozen of whatever you call the purple ones with chocolate and coconuts on top.
The Ralphie Report, bringing you serious football blogging! Go Buffs!