What's new
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Darrin Chiaverini relieved of his duties as Offensive Coordinator

But CU is not Utah. CU has had poor recruriting and early departures. Utah has had good recruiting and they have a good class balance. While the upperclasmen are playing, the younger guys can take their time to develop. The situation is reverse at CU. That is why I said the depth is young and inexperienced at CU. I think the difference is you are looking at game day playing depth. I look at the overall class balance.
Exactly. Hence NO DEPTH.
 
CU overall OL depth is not poor. The program is recovering from bad recuriting classes and early departures and injuries. One or two more years will correct the class inbalance. In the meantime use the transfer portal to add 2 Seniors that can start and bridge the gap.
 
CU overall OL depth is not poor. The program is recovering from bad recuriting classes and early departures and injuries. One or two more years will correct the class inbalance. In the meantime use the transfer portal to add 2 Seniors that can start and bridge the gap.
Lol. Oline depth is not poor, but we need 2 senior transfers to start immediately at tackle.
 
Physically a 250 pound High school OL is not ready to handle the College game anyways.
Using this to help define: during his true frosh redshirt year, David Bahktiari was "talent in the pipeline" but was not depth.
 
Bad GameDay depth? That is the definition of lack of depth. C'mon dude
College roster also includes the 250 pound OL that is not physically ready to play OL at the College level. That player is also part of the depth. Part of the long term planning. The player exist, he maybe talent in the pipeline, but he is still part of the overall roster depth.
 
Bad game day depth.

Class balance heavily skewed to underclassmen.

I will say it again, We have talent at OL, the depth is young and inexperienced
What makes you say it's talented?

Wishful thinking? Because it's not like they were more highly rated or heavily offered than the guys playing were. And they're not forcing their way on to the field.
 
What makes you say it's talented?

Wishful thinking? Because it's not like they were more highly rated or heavily offered than the guys playing were. And they're not forcing their way on to the field.


I look at high school tape. Against HS competition, the player played well and then I project what the player will look like in 2 or 3 years. It can go either way.
 
He is still part of the depth which the coach use to determine what areas need additions. If they project the talent in the pipeline can play some special teams. He exists, and he will be part of the depth to help deterine future long term moves.
If someone on the roster is not projected to compete to start during his career, the coaches need to help him transfer out.
 
If someone on the roster is not projected to compete to start during his career, the coaches need to help him transfer out.

I agree, but most OL that CU recurit or were recruiting were not physically ready to compete for a starting spot for atleast 2 to 3 years after they arrive on campus.
 
I look at high school tape. Against HS competition, the player played well and then I project what the player will look like in 2 or 3 years. It can go either way.
I can tell you with 100% confidence that teammates and coaches can tell after 2 weeks of practice if a guy has potential to be good. They can also tell if a guy doesn't have it. The idea that we're looking at raw clay that can be built up over 3 years to be good players at this level with the right training and coaching is a myth that fans of bad programs with bad recruiting like to tell themselves.
 
I agree, but most OL that CU recurit or were recruiting were not physically ready to compete for a starting spot for atleast 2 to 3 years after they arrive on campus.
No. If talented, given CU's talent level, a guy would break through in year 2.
 
Back
Top