Based on your sarcasm and the six days of analysis you took before the reply, it is possible that both are in fact true. Deion and his high powered offense with "allegedly" two Heisman contenders putting up a zero 25 minutes into the game would not be considered "good." Rhule made it pretty clear that they didn't want to get into a shootout. Having hit the post on a field goal and a fumble on the first possession result in zero points given up, 0-0 seemed like a decent spot to be in for us. < It does helps that we were averaging 4-5 yards per rush at that point despite having nothing on the scoreboard.
In the end, yes Colorado won and their offense took advantage of our miscues. They have some talented players and to their credit, they did make some halftime coaching adjustments to help themselves get going in the second half. However, I still do believe that Rhule is the better coach for our program than Deion would have been and strongly believe that using the first two games as the barometer of whether we made the right or wrong choice between the two is foolish.