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!
Scrimmage Stats
- Thread starter Sexton Hardcastle
- Start date
Sexton Hardcastle
Club Member
Not too great on the O. So Hansen better have a phenomenal week to take over the starting job.
MrFrumpylane
Well-Known Member
Or the D was just more than awesome.
Sexton Hardcastle
Club Member
True. I just hoped Tyler would step up and take the starting job from Cody this spring.
2HellNback
Well-Known Member
17 sacks?
Let's be honest... The D-Line isn't filled with future #1's, so the o-line didn't show up too well today.
Sexton Hardcastle
Club Member
I think it's 3 sacks for 17yds.
MrFrumpylane
Well-Known Member
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
Rushing Att. Yards Avg. TD Long
Darrell Scott 11 43 3.9 0 13
Brian Lockridge 7 22 3.1 0 8
Jason Espinoza 1 17 17.0 0 17
Tyler Hansen 5 14 2.8 1 7
Demetrius Sumler 1 5 5.0 0 5
Kevin Moyd 1 2 2.0 0 2
Rodney Stewart 3 - 1 - 1.0 0 2
Totals 29 102 3.5 1 17
Goodman, 4-6 FG: 0-1, PAT
16 possessions, 312 total offensive yards.
Darrell Scott 11 43 3.9 0 13
Brian Lockridge 7 22 3.1 0 8
Jason Espinoza 1 17 17.0 0 17
Tyler Hansen 5 14 2.8 1 7
Demetrius Sumler 1 5 5.0 0 5
Kevin Moyd 1 2 2.0 0 2
Rodney Stewart 3 - 1 - 1.0 0 2
Totals 29 102 3.5 1 17
Goodman, 4-6 FG: 0-1, PAT
16 possessions, 312 total offensive yards.
Am I missing something? Do those stats really show Cody being that much better than Hansen?
If anything, I think they show Hansen ahead of Cody. I'm biased, though.
Plus we don't know what kind of situations they were in that produced those numbers. From what I gather, the scrimage was all about situational stuff.
supahphish
Member
That is sure what it seems like. On the bright side, they were very comparable in # of first downs, 3rd down efficiency, red zone efficiency, and neither threw any int's. It is troubling though that they both ran 8 drives and Cody threw for over twice the yardage. 9 completions (and only 11 attempts) for 64 yards on Hansen's part is not good. If he has such a stronger arm, shouldn't he be using it? I have to hope that the staff was calling dink-and-dunk plays for a specific reason.Am I missing something? Do those stats really show Cody being that much better than Hansen?
It was situational stuff, mostly red zone work so it was not really stretching the field. 64 yards on 11 attempts is not great, but either is 146 yards on 23 attempts.
see below....
Notice that Cody also got the offense to 90 more yards...
the low attempt rate for hansen speaks to me of pulling it down and running it, a bad thing when hes not getting any yardage on those runs...
however, all of these stats should be taken with a grain of salt... there was ONE scholly WR playing, and one of the best walkons (apparently) maxwell was also out.
Clemons was watching... HOPE HE NOTICED THAT!
The coaches are saying they probably will not be ready to name a QB at the end of Spring practices. I'm biased as well, but that has to bode well for Hansen IMO.
Deleted member 807
Guest
No mention of espinoza.
yup it does. any extra time he gets to improve will lessen the difference between him and cody.
supahphish
Member
4 receptions for 21 yards (long 12), and 2 punt returns for 29 (long 27). Also 1 rush for 17 yards which I'm guessing was an end-around.No mention of espinoza.
Simas and Luke Walters had the TDs.
87Buffster
Member
Darell Scott had kickoff returns of 32 yards and 36 yards. That is interesting. Must run in the family.
Rraalph 3000
Well-Known Member
:lol: at the speculating from a stat sheet.....you guys have some solid ESP skills or something
its the offseason :asshole: :thumbsup:
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
with the newish kickoff rules, that's not really out of the ordinary IMO. most teams return out to about the 25-35 to start drives, seems.
SINKRATZ
PhD in Analogy
As long as the QB competition is close, that's a benefit to Hansen. If they are more or less equal heading into fall, I think you go with the guy that gives you more upside which is Hansen. You would expect the guy with 21 more starts to run away with the job, and that's not happening - leading me to believe he mave have reached his ceiling. With Cody's experience, if he doesn't lock the job down in spring, I think you have to go with the more athletic QB and expect that he will only get better.
Just my two cents.
Just my two cents.
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
i think like most internet scummers Hanson appears to have more "upside" and I think there's almost no way we don't see the #2 come off the bench at some point in the season. Cody is a great guy for that. he's got experience, moxie, all that. i'd love to see them give Hanson the chance to make plays and reach his potential (one of my complaints with Helfrich is we don't see to put our guys in position to make plays....and on big down/distances we try and "coach" a first down).
however, if the staff and Hawk are truly feeling some heat to "win now" then Cody is the safe play early on against the OOC schedule because you can't afford to have Hanson wet the bed against someone of lesser talent or wearing green and gold (speaking from the staff's perspective, speculative).
Hawk has to absolutely win 6 games and maybe a 7th to get the fans back in his "be the bow" corner 100%. 7-5 looks a heckuva lot better than 6-6. back to the point, they can't afford to drop one OOC they shouldn't because there's not a lot wiggle room once conference play starts as far as getting bowl eligible. at Texas and at OSU are not gonna be "W's" for most teams this year. I can see the logic for Cody as the "safer play" with those minimum goals in mind.
i think we win 7 this year reg season and go to Indy or Insight.com bowl--depending on how the conference shakes out and which South team the Alamo Bowl chooses. 8 is mos def doable, I'd put the over/under at 7.5.
however, if the staff and Hawk are truly feeling some heat to "win now" then Cody is the safe play early on against the OOC schedule because you can't afford to have Hanson wet the bed against someone of lesser talent or wearing green and gold (speaking from the staff's perspective, speculative).
Hawk has to absolutely win 6 games and maybe a 7th to get the fans back in his "be the bow" corner 100%. 7-5 looks a heckuva lot better than 6-6. back to the point, they can't afford to drop one OOC they shouldn't because there's not a lot wiggle room once conference play starts as far as getting bowl eligible. at Texas and at OSU are not gonna be "W's" for most teams this year. I can see the logic for Cody as the "safer play" with those minimum goals in mind.
i think we win 7 this year reg season and go to Indy or Insight.com bowl--depending on how the conference shakes out and which South team the Alamo Bowl chooses. 8 is mos def doable, I'd put the over/under at 7.5.
Last edited:
Early prediction: this comp is going into the season. The buffs have three games to figure this out and if it really is this close the coaches will let what the guys do under the lights decide the outcome.. I hope to he'll it is over by game 4 tho!!
AlferdJasper
Well-Known Member
Trying to mind-read the coaches here, but would you ever alternate starters, depending on who we were going up against, since the QB styles and abilities are fairly different? Keep changing it up every game or two?
I think I could see these coaches doing that... Man, I hope that doesn't come to pass... Don't see how you do that unless both QB's aren't doing very well.... I mean, has that ever happened where two QB's were both so badass (equally so, yet in differentw ays) that it wasn't a BAD sign that they alternated starters?
Woelk picks his QB:
http://www.buffzone.com/news/2009/ap...e/?partner=RSS
The best QB in the BTN is a midget from KU and he's a hell of a playmaker. His feet and overall athleticism is a big factor and Hansen has the potential to be ALL that and more. Cody is what he is.
But you don't win with potential. It will be interesting to see what Hansen can be come fall.
http://www.buffzone.com/news/2009/ap...e/?partner=RSS
The best QB in the BTN is a midget from KU and he's a hell of a playmaker. His feet and overall athleticism is a big factor and Hansen has the potential to be ALL that and more. Cody is what he is.
But you don't win with potential. It will be interesting to see what Hansen can be come fall.
sorry hansen and the midget from KU both had their RS burned in the middle of their frosh seasons and can scramble... the comparisons end there. On the field, Reesing turned into one of the best QB's KU has ever had almost immediately. Hansen... not yet anyways.
Very doubtful. But then this staff has a habit of trying to out-smart itself at times, so who knows.
Pretty much.
Not yet... Reesing is small, but makes up with it by having some athletic ability and quicks. That's what seperated him from Cody. Cody has his size and at least his IQ/maturity and ARM. But Reesing is mobile and makes plays, which is a HUGE differentiator.
Hansen has a lot of football maturing to do before we compare him to Reesing, but I think those same athletic skills are there (with more size and arm) and I think what seperates Reesing from Cody is what will ultimately seperate Hansen from Cody (assuming he matures in decision making).
Certainly a big assumption, but you have to like his upside given the improvement that the staff is reporting in such a short time.