Coming off a bye week and a coaching change, Colorado will enter what might be its most anticipated game of the season, a Saturday matchup against Cal at Folsom Field.

How different, if at all, will the Buffs look from the utter futility that plagued them in their first five games? With Karl Dorrell gone and new coaches in new roles, can interim head coach Mike Sanford make a difference for a team that was in desperate need of change? Can they be competitive in all four quarters for the first time this season? Or at least three?

In the next 24 hours, those questions will be answered, but for now, CU Sports Report staff writers Nicolette Edwards and Craig Meyer take a look at some of the game’s key facets – along with a broad look at where things stand right now for the Colorado program. And, yes, a prediction.

What do you think can legitimately change for the better following the bye and takeover of the interim staff?

Nicolette: In the media’s last few meetings with interim head coach Mike Sanford, he emphasized “energy”, and just from the bye week, there’s a notable difference in the dynamics and energy of this team.

This bye week, the program experienced a legitimate shift in the energy from Sanford’s new structure and processes to produce successful Saturdays. Both Deion Smith and Trevor Woods attested to the change in energy.

“The biggest thing I think that I've noticed that's different in our practices is probably just, again, the energy but we're doing a lot more transition stuff,” Woods said.

Sanford really focused on the players this bye week listening to every single player to what they want to see and experience moving forward. Sanford’s attentiveness to the players and openness with the media has demonstrated his determination to advance the program. It’s a challenging time for the Buffs, but Sanford’s new approaches and new energy are Colorado’s catalysts toward progress.

“That's part of the reason that we've had an opportunity to allow you guys into see the process, because that really is the process that ultimately yields the results,” Sanford said. “If everything is a referendum on you solely what happens on Saturday, which ultimately, we all are evaluated on as coaches, then it really makes it solely about Saturday, not about what goes into the week of preparation.

“What I would say, even beyond that, is just for us practicing with real intentionality to make it as as game like as possible. That certainly is a change that we've instilled that the crowd noise, the music, the chaos, the competition, the not just good on good and running other people's plays, but good on good running our good plays offensively versus our good plays defensively.”

Everyone loves a quality comeback story, right?

Craig: I don’t really think it has anything to do with a particular position group or player, but I just think this team’s going to carry itself with more spirit and energy. I know I’ve cited the TCU postgame comments on a number of different occasions, but it’s for a reason. After the first game of the season, players were openly talking about how their teammates were morose at halftime of a game in which they trailed by just one (in hindsight, it’s remarkable Colorado only lost that game by 25 and was down just 7-6 at half given what TCU has done since then).

More than anything else, the feedback we’ve gotten since Karl Dorrell’s dismissal is about the energy around the program now with Mike Sanford overseeing things. Do I think Sanford is a great head coach? No. Failing at a program – Western Kentucky – where everyone else has done well the past 12 years will tell you as much. But the tone he sets now at the top of the program has given some life to a Buffs program that otherwise wouldn’t have it. It’s a fresh start for all parties involved. It’s not going to improve the talent, or lack thereof, on this roster, but it will at least rally this team and keep players engaged and motivated in a way they weren’t previously.

By all accounts, and based on my limited experiences speaking with him, Dorrell is a kind, respected decent man. But his reserved personality wasn’t well-suited for this team or, frankly, being the face of a modern-day college football program. There’s a TV show I love called What We Do in the Shadows, a comedy about a group of vampires who live in modern-day Staten Island. One of them is an energy vampire – that is, he doesn’t get life from sucking blood, but by draining others of their energy by boring or frustrating them. Dorrell was a bit like that and the sudden shift of going from that to a coach jumping up and down in practice could reinvigorate this group and lift them up in the moments of adversity that inevitably will come their way. It won’t be enough to salvage this season, but it should at least make the results more competitive and respectable than they would have been otherwise. Who knows? They might even win a game.

With a couple weeks to sink in, which coaching candidate do you think makes the most sense for Colorado?

Nicolette: I think there is still a lot of ambiguity as to who is the most sensible candidate. There’s quite a pool to choose from, but I think it ultimately comes down to who would be the most willing to take on such a formidable task. Whether it’s proximity, job security and/or contentment in their current role, there are a variety of factors that may deter options.

Former Panthers head coach Matt Rhule just got out of his Carolina relationship, but I think it’s difficult to bring an east coast coach out west. Colorado would have to provide any of their east coast candidates with an unrefusable offer.

I think North Dakota State head coach Matt Entz seems to be a sensible option with his 41-5 record, and maybe after his fourth year leading a successful program, he’s seeking a new challenge in the FBS realm.

With all things considered extrinsically and intrinsically, I think Bronco Mendenhall would be the most sensible choice at Colorado. As Craig mentioned, he checks many boxes that Colorado has.

Mendenhall resettled on an 80-acre ranch in Montana to take some time away from football. In an interview with ESPN he said, “There are so many ways to look at this [coaching] in terms of challenges and reasons to get out. But with that, there's new opportunities to really make a difference in terms of stability and emphasis and purpose. There might be people leaving the profession, and I might be one of the people running back in."

After being gone from football for almost a year, he could be ready to take on Colorado as his next coaching opportunity.

Craig: I really think it’s Bronco Mendenhall. In the weeks leading up to Dorrell’s firing, I was thinking of candidates who would make sense in the increasingly likely event a move was made and once Mendenhall came to mind, he made almost too much sense.

The Colorado program is in a delicate and precarious position at this point. I’m not sure they can go with a risky, relatively unproven coach. The longer a program stays irrelevant, the harder it is to get out of that rut. Memories of a day when the program was respectable become a more distant memory with each passing year, not only for fans, alums, donors and prospective coaches, but the most important constituency out there – recruits. With two winning seasons in the past 16 years, the Buffs are there right now. I really don’t think they can afford another lackluster hire. We’ve seen Kansas emerge from an even deeper hole, but it did so by hiring a proven winner in Lance Leipold, who won six Division III titles and made Buffalo a consistent winner in a way it hadn’t previously been. I’m stunned it took him that long for a Power Five program to hire him (not to pour salt in wounds, but he’s the type of guy Colorado could have hired in 2020 when it went with Dorrell; remember that Kansas hired this guy in April, an even more awkward time on the calendar than when Rick George picked Dorrell in February).

Mendenhall can be that guy for Colorado. He’s from this general region of the country and has coached in it before. He’s a proven winner. Perhaps most importantly, he understands – and even enjoys – how to win at a program with inherent limitations. Look at what he did at Virginia. That’s a program that deals with similar academic and administrative restrictions as Colorado. That was reflected in the years before Mendenhall was hired. The Cavaliers had just two winning seasons in the 10 years before Mendenhall was brought aboard, but following a 2-10 finish in his first year, they went 34-28 over a five-year stretch, a run that included a New Year’s Six bowl appearance. I covered the ACC for most of his tenure and they were a program who opposing coaches always viewed as a threat.

Would he be interested in Colorado? That remains to be seen. But he checks every box there is to succeed in that job.

If not Mendenhall, I think Bryan Harsin could excel at a school where he’s a much better fit than his current employer. Willie Fritz is a fantastic fall-back option who I think would do well in Boulder. If you’re going with someone without head-coaching experience, I’m really intrigued by the idea of Ryan Walters. If you want to avoid someone with Colorado ties, there’s a name I didn’t include on my initial list that I’m really into the thought of – Garrett Riley, TCU’s offensive coordinator and the younger brother of Lincoln Riley.

Will this team win a game the rest of the season and why/why not?

Nicolette: The offense has made their strides with freshman QB Owen McCown. Now, the defense must answer. Between missed tackles, open gaps and bad reads, the defense is the reason this losing streak persists.

Every week the defense allowed more yards than the week prior. They reached a season high allowing Arizona 673 yards, but I don’t think they’ll surpass that against Cal – which is a positive.

Interim defensive coordinator Gerald Chatman appears to be installing some new approaches according to Sanford. As he said “they're vetting everything that they're doing, we put in a new call or we put in a new front structure, or we put into new pressure, we're gonna vet every single thing about it.”

Woods added that “We're doing a few things differently. I'm not gonna get into what we're doing, but there's a couple changes.”

Colorado may have a chance against Arizona State, but that could be the Buffs’ only win – even that is a tall task for CU. Change and growth are always good, but I don’t think either side of the ball is equipped to withstand the rest of their schedule.

The win-loss likelihood comes down to the defense. Tomorrow’s game is one of Colorado’s last reasonable opportunities to win and the defense simply needs to play better to capitalize.

Craig: If they do, I think it might have to be this weekend. This is a group that has been uplifted by new energy brought to the program and the promise of a fresh start. There’s reason to believe that could happen. If you look at Power Five programs that have made in-season changes this year – Nebraska, Georgia Tech, Arizona State, Wisconsin – they’ve looked better under interim coaches. That doesn’t mean the Buffs will automatically conform to that trend, but it’s at least a sign that the positive public messages coming out of practices aren’t totally empty.

Cal’s a solid team, but they’re one of the weaker opponents remaining on Colorado’s schedule. It’s also at home, which is important, especially should the Buffs keep the game competitive. The fans who have stuck with this team this season and continue to show up deserved to be commended and if Colorado is able to be within striking distance in the second half, it should make for a great, uplifting environment.

Should the Buffs not win this one, the rest of the schedule doesn’t provide a lot of possibilities to claim victory. USC, Utah and Oregon will be almost certain losses. Washington was at one point a top-25 team that has a significant home-field advantage. Oregon State is a strong opponent and Corvallis is a really, really tough place to play. That leaves Arizona State as the most likely win, but even it has looked improved since canning Herm Edwards. If it’s not Cal, the Sun Devils stand as the only feasible shot at a victory.

Jaydn Ott ran for 274 yards and three touchdowns against Arizona. What do you expect Colorado to be able to do against him?

Nicolette: As stated above, Chatman and the defense are installing some new magic to address issues, so there’s that. But watching the defense this season, Ott definitely has an opportunity to put up similar numbers. Maybe not that many yards, but a 100-plus game for sure.

Colorado remains the worst run defense in the country and Saturday will be Chatman's first time calling a game, as well. The Buffs’ defense will once again have to find their footing.

Craig: As much as I’m tempted to channel Clubber Lang and say my prediction is pain, I think it’s a little more nuanced than that.

Ott did go off against Arizona, but his other rushing totals aren’t that overwhelming. In some matchups, they’ve been downright pedestrian. In three other games against FBS opponents this season, Ott has rushed for 155 yards on 37 carries (4.2 yards per rush). He’s an incredibly talented back, but it’s not as if he’s destined to go off.

Still, he’s going to be going against a Colorado run defense that, as so many know all too well, isn’t very good, to put it kindly. That’s reflected not only in the rushing totals for each of the Buffs’ first five opponents, but their leading rushers, as well. Let’s take a game-by-game look at the leader in rushing yards from each of those contests.

TCU: 52 yards, 6.5 yards per carry, one touchdown

Air Force: 174 yards, 7.3 yards per carry, three touchdowns

Minnesota: 202 yards, 8.8 yards per carry, three touchdowns

UCLA: 104 yards, 11.6 yards per carry, three touchdowns

Arizona: 77 yards, 4.8 yards per carry

The Arizona figure is slightly encouraging, especially since it was Colorado’s most recent game, but that had just as much to do with how inept it was at defending the pass. Those numbers were surrendered against some excellent running backs, but Ott may well be in that class, too. I’d be surprised if he doesn’t average at least five yards per carry and score a touchdown.

Score prediction and why?

Nicolette: Cal 38, Colorado 27

The Buffs’ offense is incrementally getting better and I think they can muster up another score in the second half, not in garbage time.

With a new coaching staff, it feels like Week One again, when there are a lot of unknowns until the Buffs take the field. Against UCLA, Colorado’s pass game improved with McCown and he had many effective receptions against Arizona. I am unsure how effectively Colorado can run the ball this time around because Arizona’s run defense is far less effective (228.8 ypg) than Cal’s 38th ranked run defense.

We know what the players are capable of, but how will it shake down with interim offensive coordinator Clay Patterson, Sanford and Chatman calling the plays? Tomorrow’s drives will consist of many similar plays to weeks prior. If anything, I hope they go for it on 4th and 5…cue the end of the third against TCU.

Cal’s QB Jack Plummer is back in the mix and he threw for 245 yards and three touchdowns against Arizona. Jaydn Ott and wide receiver Jeremiah Hunter will pose a threat. The circumstances that face the defense makes me give this game to the Golden Bears.

Craig: Cal 26, Colorado 17

I’m still not at the point where I’m ready to predict this team to win a game, but I do think we’re going to see an improved product on the field. This team still isn’t good by any stretch, but I think they’ll keep it relatively close against an opponent who doesn’t have as significant of a talent or schematic advantage as other teams on the Buffs’ roster have possessed.

But, hey, I could end up being hilariously wrong.