Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
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!

'20 LA RB Ashaad Clayton (SIGNED to COLORADO)

I do not think it is a controversial take to say the jury is still out on both Fontenot and Mangham. There are question marks with both. Actual production is an issue.

Remember Clayton was not even offered until after the season started. Some of that undoubtedly due to him showing recovery from injury, but some also had to be due to questions the coaches had at RB.
 
Duff Man said:
I do not think it is a controversial take to say the jury is still out on both Fontenot and Mangham. There are question marks with both. Actual production is an issue.

Remember Clayton was not even offered until after the season started. Some of that undoubtedly due to him showing recovery from injury, but some also had to be due to questions the coaches had at RB.
Click to expand...
It’s still mostly about OLine play. Vegas would have Fontenot -130 getting most rushing yards and/or yards from scrimmage.
 
I think the jury is still out on Mangham, but Fontenot is a proven option. Outside of Mangham’s blocking woes, I don’t recall him consistently portraying good vision. I still think he needs more reps though. Fontenot has solid vision, and he spins out of tackles for extra yardage almost as much as Phillip Lindsay falls forward for extra yardage. The dude’s body control is outstanding. BUT...

Clayton should still be starting next year. The size and speed upgrade over Fontenot is apparent.
 
TSchekler said:
I don’t see a bolded, but I assume you’re talking about Fontenot transferring at some point because this staff was more interested in Mangham? It’s clear they want 2-3 RBs rotating in this offense. There’s a place for a veteran guy like Fontenot, but Clayton is a clear upgrade and I think Mangham will eventually prove to be as well. I could see him leaving after the 2020 season though.

I think Broussard is likely gone after Spring.
Click to expand...
Sorry I forgot the bold, but no, I was referring to Mangham. I don't understand your point that Mangham wouldn't leave now after all they did last year to keep his commitment. What does "pulling out all stops to keep him" when he was in high school have to do with his situation next fall if Clayton and/or Fontenot lock him out from many carries, or just keep him from being the feature back? Seems might irrelevant to me.
 
We talk about these recruits as though their rating certifies their ability to start here. The Athletic did a nice revisit of the 2016 class and reranked a bunch. There's complete misses of top 100 guys all the time (not just with CU). After the bizarre careers of Houston and Scott here at Colorado, I'm never going to suggest a RB "should start" based on his high school reputation. Certainly RBs have a better shot to do that, than any position in my opinion. And of course ratings matter in aggregate. But this kid will have to earn his starts and that's no certainty by any stretch that he can beat out any of our guys. I don't think any of us know how well schooled he is on the fundamentals of ball security, reading his blocks, and pass blocking.

One thing we've seen from Hagen is that if you don't have the fundamentals down, including the play book, you ain't playing.
 
buffaholic said:
Not that I think he would transfer, but would the bold above have anything to do with him seeking a transfer in the future?

Isn't that like saying, my girlfriend doesn't seem interested in me anymore and seems really interested in this other guy, but I'm just going to ignore that because, hey, she really was deeply interested in me last year?
Click to expand...
I guess I would need to see a picture of your girlfriend to really answer your question.
 
tenor.gif
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top