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!

2020 CU football season POSTPONED until Nov 6th?

cu2x said:
I'm sure it was covered and I missed it, but how are they approaching bowl eligibility?
Click to expand...

From my understanding, per the NCAA the W-L records do not matter as much (they can take a team under .500); but I have heard something to the effect that APR could come into the equation. There will be less bowls this year, so I imagine that it is doubtful for a team 2 games under .500 would be considered. A team one game under, might even be a stretch--but the bowls are driven by $$. I have not heard whether the PAC-12 would allow a team with a losing record to play in a bowl, which I believe is still the conference rule.
 
GuySmiley said:
From my understanding, per the NCAA the W-L records do not matter as much (they can take a team under .500); but I have heard something to the effect that APR could come into the equation. There will be less bowls this year, so I imagine that it is doubtful for a team 2 games under .500 would be considered. A team one game under, might even be a stretch--but the bowls are driven by $$. I have not heard whether the PAC-12 would allow a team with a losing record to play in a bowl, which I believe is still the conference rule.
Click to expand...
*fewer
 
I always wondered if Miller fit better at TE. It's pretty obvious to me that the TE is going to be a focal point of the offense. Miller in that slot TE role could give some mismatch problems.
 
Last edited:
TSchekler said:
Tells me they want athleticism at the position. Tells me WR is loaded and they want him on the field. Tells me they are planning on using the TE position, and probably in far more than just a traditional in-line TE. That’s the glass half full
Click to expand...

Glass Half Full ftw! In all seriousness, we knew we'd be loaded at WR....even with no Viska. TSchek's right here.
 
goalline said:
Vocal like Shannon Sharpe?
Click to expand...
giphy.gif
 
ahoelsken said:
Glass Half Full ftw! In all seriousness, we knew we'd be loaded at WR....even with no Viska. TSchek's right here.
Click to expand...
I'm also looking at the TE group, and while there's nothing special, there's plenty there that this isn't a numbers game by any means.

Russell, Stillwell, Fauria, Poplawski, Peters (Arizona Transfer), Matt Lynch (UCLA Transfer), and the young kid Passarello.

JMBuffs said:
Does Miller have the frame to get up to 230lbs?
Click to expand...
He's listed at 6'5" 210 lbs right now, so definitely
 
They have added 5 bodies to that position in one offseason? Like Duff Man said, I don't think any of them are anything too crazy, but that definitely is a way to show that you care about that position
 
Duff Man said:
I don't think it signals that we're loaded at WR as much as it says we are really thin at TE. Not a single proven TE on the roster.
Click to expand...
I guess what I'm saying is that the WR position is the deepest, most talented position on the team, by far, and will inevitably keep some of our best athletes off the field. By moving the biggest WR, who is extremely athletic, to TE (at least part time) creates personnel groupings where the best athletes can be on the field at once.
 
TSchekler said:
I guess what I'm saying is that the WR position is the deepest, most talented position on the team, by far, and will inevitably keep some of our best athletes off the field. By moving the biggest WR, who is extremely athletic, to TE (at least part time) creates personnel groupings where the best athletes can be on the field at once.
Click to expand...

I just think it has more to do with the TE group than it does the WR group. You do not move a freshman WR to TE with two freshman TEs already in the same class if you are happy with that group.
 
My guess is you see a lot of two TE sets as the base O. That first TE is someone you see in the traditional role and used more as a blocker and potentially in the flats on passing downs. The second TE will probably be used in the slot and as an h-back role we saw Viska in. That second TE you can do a lot with on motion, potentially screen game, maybe even run with, etc. They want to recreate the Patriots O when they had Gronk and Hernandez (obviously knowing they are no where near that talent level at this time).

Right now, that second TE is an issue as that seems like a guy who has to be very athletic, versatile, and probably a little undersized. It makes sense to move Miller there, but who else can that be this year? Fauria and Stilwell are the only two I can think of who could fit in that role, possibly. That is still a massive unknown though.

Edit: We may not see the full offense this year based off of just not having the correct personnel at the TE position. Just spitballing as it obvious to me the position is going to be highly involved in all areas of the O.
 
Miller moving to TE isn't a surprise or an indictment of the TE position. One could watch his film and tell he's slow for a WR and not that shifty.

Also, Duff, Russell is proven. Above average blocker, easily the best athlete in the TE room, and he has reliable hands. Would rather see him at H-back rather than a traditional TE.
 
Medford M. said:
Miller moving to TE isn't a surprise or an indictment of the TE position. One could watch his film and tell he's slow for a WR and not that shifty.

Also, Duff, Russell is proven. Above average blocker, easily the best athlete in the TE room, and he has reliable hands. Would rather see him at H-back rather than a traditional TE.
Click to expand...

You are damning Russell with faint praise here.
 
To call Russell the best athlete TE in most programs is a little much, IMO. He could be in store for a breakout season, but his size and athleticism seem both average to me. He’s not going to grow any bigger or taller. Hope I’m wrong and he proves to be a big playmaker for the team but not sure I see it at this time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top