“To Be the Best, You Have to Play the Best”

—

“To Be the Best, You Have to Play the Best”

—

When Colorado was at its zenith as a college football program, in the late 80s and early 90s, CU’s head football coach Bill McCartney was often quoted as saying, “To be the best, you have to play the best”.

And McCartney backed up his talk with his actions. In 1989, when the Buffs went 11-0 and rose to No. 1 in the nation for the first time in program history, Colorado’s non-conference schedule looked like this:

• Texas
• Colorado State
• No. 10 Illinois
• No. 21 Washington

The following season, the Buffs went 11-1-1, winning the national championship. In doing so, CU played the most difficult schedule in the nation (becoming just the second team in NCAA history to do so), with the following non-conference schedule:

• No. 8 Tennessee (added as an extra game, with the teams playing in the Disneyland Pigskin Classic in Anaheim)
• Stanford
• No. 21 Illinois
• No. 22 Texas
• No. 12 Washington

Over the next few seasons, CU’s non-conference schedule included:

• No. 23 Baylor (1991);
• No. 24 Baylor; No. 20 Stanford; and No. 3 Miami (1993);
• No. 10 Wisconsin; No. 4 Michigan; and No. 16 Texas (1994);
• No. 21 Wisconsin; No. 3 Texas A&M (1995);
• No. 11 Michigan (1996); and
• No. 24 Colorado State; No. 14 Michigan; and No. 21 Texas A&M (1997)

“The pride and tradition of the Colorado Buffaloes will not be entrusted to the timid or the weak”

Indeed.

Now, compare that to what we have happening in college football today.

The Big Ten and the SEC, who have been in lockstep in steamrolling the rest of college football, with their television contracts and bloated payouts to coaches and players, can’t get together on how to select College Football Playoff teams starting with the 2026 season.

The playoff will likely go to 16 teams in 2026 and beyond, but how those teams are to be selected is a matter of contention. The Big Ten wants four automatic qualifiers for the Big Two, but only if the SEC agrees to go to nine conference games. The SEC feels like their conference schedule is difficult enough, so they deserve to only play eight games, with layup games this November against the likes of Mercer (Auburn), Eastern Illinois (Alabama), and Samford (Texas A&M).

As the Big Two conferences fiddle while Rome burns, their members are taking things into their own hands to lighten their loads.

In February, Nebraska cancelled its home-and-home series with Tennessee, scheduled for the 2026 and 2027 seasons.

Tennessee made it clear that the wimp out wasn’t their fault. “Tennessee is not canceling this series. Nebraska did. We are very disappointed that they didn’t want to play these games, especially this close to 2026,” Tennessee athletic director Danny White said on social media.

Nebraska replaced Tennessee on its schedule with home games against Bowling Green in 2026 and Miami (Ohio) in 2027. The Huskers also scheduled an additional matchup with Northern Iowa in 2027, giving them eight home games that season for the first time since 2013.

“The best scenario for us is to have eight home games in 2027 to offset any potential revenue loss from a reduced capacity,” athletic director Troy Dannen said. “The additional home games will also have a tremendous economic benefit on the Lincoln community.”

So, Nebraska “selling out” every home game (the record sellout streak, dating back to 1962, continues, though there was manipulation of sales for some games during the lean years), and all of the Big Ten television revenue … and Nebraska will go broke if the Cornhuskers play only seven home games? (CU will play seven home games in 2026 … for the first time since 1982).

Meanwhile, USC is doing its best to squirm out of future games against rival Notre Dame. The stated reason is that the Trojans are okay with continuing the series, but don’t want to play games in mid-season, preferring instead to play Notre Dame in September, when other programs are playing their non-conference games.

Notre Dame’s reaction? “It’s pretty black and white for me,” Notre Dame head coach Marcus Freeman told reporters, according to the South Bend Tribune. “You want my opinion? I want to play them every single year. When? I don’t care. I don’t care when we play them: Start of the season, middle of the season, end of the season. I don’t care.”

So, someone’s not telling the truth here (My guess? Marcus Freeman wouldn’t be so blunt if he didn’t have the backing of his administration. This sounds like USC wants to get out of a tough non-conference game, and is looking for an excuse not to continue the series).

Nebraska v. Bowling Green and Northern Iowa instead of Tennessee?

USC v. Missouri State and Georgia Southern instead of Notre Dame?

Apparently, being the best by playing the best is not what Nebraska, USC … or the SEC … has in mind.

Now, truth be told, I’ve spent the last two decades or so wishing my team played a softer non-conference schedule every September.

When your team is posting losing records season after season … you’re not interested in marquee non-conference matchups.

When your team is consistently finishing at or near the bottom of the conference standings year-in and year-out … you’re looking for a path to six wins, not a series of games against ranked teams.

It was a tough run during the Pac-12 years. When you looked at the upcoming schedule each off-season, trying to squint at it long enough to find six wins, it was no fun knowing CU’s record against conference foes. With the Buffs’ record against the likes of USC (0-13 against the Trojans as conference foes), Oregon (1-9), and Utah (2-10), you were often penciling in at least three Pac-12 losses each summer, meaning that the Buffs had to go 6-3 against the rest of the schedule just to get to bowl eligibility.

Which left me wondering each off-season what CU was doing scheduling non-conference games against the likes of Ohio State, Michigan, Nebraska and Texas A&M, not to mention the annual grudge match against Colorado State.

Now, with CU coming off of a 9-4 season, with a number of quality players on the 2025 roster, it may be time to readjust my thinking.

Don’t get me wrong. I have no issue with the Buffs in Year Three of the Coach Prime era playing Delaware and Wyoming in non-conference play. It’s nice to be penciling clear wins instead of clear losses during the off-season for a change.

The rest of the schedule?

No USC’s. No Oregon’s. And Utah is not the same Utah of a few years ago.

There are many difficult games on the 2025 schedule. BYU, Arizona State, Kansas State and Iowa State will all likely be ranked in the Top 25 in the preseason. Georgia Tech will be a stiff opening challenge, and you never know which Big 12 team will rise up and surprise (like Arizona State did last year).

But, while there are difficult games on the schedule, there are no obvious losses … and that’s a win for the Buff Nation.

Colorado football, 2025, may not be ready for “to be the best, you have to play – and beat – the best”.

But a “to have a successful season, you have to face – and beat – teams of equal talent” isn’t a bad restart to the program’s legacy.

It’s not a catchy phrase, but perhaps is one which will prove to be a recipe for a successful 2025 campaign.

–

—–

This post, about the Spring Practices game, from the 2025 Season, is filed under Article.
You can follow any comments to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a comment.