I wasn’t suggesting otherwise, just pointing out that FSU was widely considered to have the best defensive front seven in the country and they looked really bad yesterday. And their LBs were bad all day not just those 4-6 plays.
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!
2024 Fall Camp Thread
- Thread starter TDforTD
- Start date
I hope one or two of them surprise a little bit, but yeah, them being solid should be good enough.
Fair enough. I was at a memorial golf tournament so I wasn’t able to watch. I also thought that it was just the defensive line that was supposed to be considered the best in the country, not the LB’s. But that’s interesting.
GTs OL was blowing up that DL all day
Ah ****. Best Sunday practice ever?
I would also add, the dude learned to tackle OUTSIDE of the US. Made a ton of difference in his game.
Similar to shirtless wild boar hunting in Hawaii...we've had some real diamond in the rough urban legends at LB
He moved from Zimbabwe to California when he was 3.......
and he was putting toddlers faces in the dirt when he was 2
Thinking Shane Cokes will be in for a big year. Mat Smith did a podcast this weekend with Adam and mentioned that on film review, Cokes was getting double teamed all year last year. The sentiment around the program is that it will be hard to double Cokes this year with the added help on the DL. Have heard from irl people as well as read multiple posts saying Cokes looked the part at the Friday practice in Denver.
GRM
I'm a ****ty troll
@Da Lama @The Alabaster Yak @TDforTD, all the comments are good.
As I sort of look at the lack of quality TEs and LBs, not just for the Buffs but many other teams as well, I think a bunch of it is attributed to changes in High School and College Football overall. Today, TE/LB seem like hybrid positions of sorts at the HS level, and maybe college level too. LBs are hard to develop in both HS and college. Especially, tough because your prospects grow/don't grow in spurts, and as they put on pounds who knows where the speed, pursuit, and agility aspects develop. Then the whole mental/instinctual has to develop too, as well. I just kind of list the factors:
1. A bunch of states/HS conferences severely limit contact, which makes sense to protect bodies, but maybe players do not get enough of the rigors or get the live hitting etc... Perhaps, not even enough live padded practices and games to build good instincts. For LB, I just don't know that they get enough quality reps anymore.
2. A bunch of good HS football teams have gone to spreads or multiple offenses, some guys that could be good/great LBs but may play S, Edge or even Dline (if they have with tons of agility, nose for contact), without the rigors of playing 5-7 yards off the ball with smash up derby. Also, why not play the best position for the glamour plays (sacks, interceptions, S coming up to with great open field tackle before the 1st down stripe), which limits the toll on a growing body?
3. There are the very few "Super-Conference" HS Football Academies that play everyone and it comes closer to big-boy football--actually where LB's have to call the defense, shed blocks, hold gaps, set the edge, bring the wood, move and tackle etc... against a quality opponents week in and week out. Unfortunately, these factories are the very few.
4. No doubt there is an advantage for those Top-8/12 (Bama, Georgia, Clemson...) schools, that can actually redshirt blue-chip LBs, and work them in over 2 years to be built for awesome in years 3&4. A bunch of those recruits still wash out, and not sure that is what today's recruits want + transfer portal in terms of NIL and immediate playing time.
5. The Buff I'm hoping the breakout this year is Sa'vell Smalls. He is our back-up TE. Although I think he will see the field, being a solid contributor is probably an outside shot. I was really impressed with his HS film, speed, power and sheer athleticism. Knowing his story as highly touted Blue-Chip goes to UW, but maybe projected to wrong position--initially trying to play outside a couple years; then bulking massively up to play inside another; now slimming back down. Shuffled is how I would describe it. IMO, a guy like that maybe mis-projected, perhaps should have just stayed with a normal college body build sitting two seasons perhaps learning the intricacies of ILB. That might have been a ticket. I'm not a college coach, so I won't second guess what anyone at UW did; but I think LB is a position of growth, and patience for growth from both players and coaches is needed.
6. The only reason that I mentioned TE is so many come as converted receivers these days, with relatively fewer TE's skilled in blocking/hand in the dirt. Seems like a hybrid approach with them too. Very few have anything close to both out of HS.
That was an awesome reminder on Nate Landman. Nate always had a great nose and instincts for the ball/play, and really saw the game differently on certain levels at a younger age. He sort of had some built-in instincts from his Rugby days; and skill to go right along with it. I always think of Ray Lewis as the prototype ILB, but I think he built his game through the rigors of the hard-hitting old era football--I'm not sure he would be built in the new HS football era.
Although it can be argued that CU struck out in LB department, I'm going to just take a 1/2 full approach, expecting some highlights and low-lights for the whole D. I like the experience/depth of the team much better and am intrigued by a few LB's we brought in. I hope we can dominate/win a bunch of 1on1 battles across the entire D (more physical at each position) and make most of the assignments, adjustments and just balling out. Hopefully, a better Dline with a healthy & stout back end of the defense could help the LB position out immensely
Also, we have to be patient as this is Year 1 of Livingston's D install. D install is always a work in progress and there will be missed assignments on certain plays. No matter who is out there, Livingston/D coaches + the box above, they have a huge job to do. With D, it does not always have to be pretty, but functional and physical can make this a special team/season. If the physical D intensity is on display for the home games, we can will all of them and play with practically anybody.
As I sort of look at the lack of quality TEs and LBs, not just for the Buffs but many other teams as well, I think a bunch of it is attributed to changes in High School and College Football overall. Today, TE/LB seem like hybrid positions of sorts at the HS level, and maybe college level too. LBs are hard to develop in both HS and college. Especially, tough because your prospects grow/don't grow in spurts, and as they put on pounds who knows where the speed, pursuit, and agility aspects develop. Then the whole mental/instinctual has to develop too, as well. I just kind of list the factors:
1. A bunch of states/HS conferences severely limit contact, which makes sense to protect bodies, but maybe players do not get enough of the rigors or get the live hitting etc... Perhaps, not even enough live padded practices and games to build good instincts. For LB, I just don't know that they get enough quality reps anymore.
2. A bunch of good HS football teams have gone to spreads or multiple offenses, some guys that could be good/great LBs but may play S, Edge or even Dline (if they have with tons of agility, nose for contact), without the rigors of playing 5-7 yards off the ball with smash up derby. Also, why not play the best position for the glamour plays (sacks, interceptions, S coming up to with great open field tackle before the 1st down stripe), which limits the toll on a growing body?
3. There are the very few "Super-Conference" HS Football Academies that play everyone and it comes closer to big-boy football--actually where LB's have to call the defense, shed blocks, hold gaps, set the edge, bring the wood, move and tackle etc... against a quality opponents week in and week out. Unfortunately, these factories are the very few.
4. No doubt there is an advantage for those Top-8/12 (Bama, Georgia, Clemson...) schools, that can actually redshirt blue-chip LBs, and work them in over 2 years to be built for awesome in years 3&4. A bunch of those recruits still wash out, and not sure that is what today's recruits want + transfer portal in terms of NIL and immediate playing time.
5. The Buff I'm hoping the breakout this year is Sa'vell Smalls. He is our back-up TE. Although I think he will see the field, being a solid contributor is probably an outside shot. I was really impressed with his HS film, speed, power and sheer athleticism. Knowing his story as highly touted Blue-Chip goes to UW, but maybe projected to wrong position--initially trying to play outside a couple years; then bulking massively up to play inside another; now slimming back down. Shuffled is how I would describe it. IMO, a guy like that maybe mis-projected, perhaps should have just stayed with a normal college body build sitting two seasons perhaps learning the intricacies of ILB. That might have been a ticket. I'm not a college coach, so I won't second guess what anyone at UW did; but I think LB is a position of growth, and patience for growth from both players and coaches is needed.
6. The only reason that I mentioned TE is so many come as converted receivers these days, with relatively fewer TE's skilled in blocking/hand in the dirt. Seems like a hybrid approach with them too. Very few have anything close to both out of HS.
That was an awesome reminder on Nate Landman. Nate always had a great nose and instincts for the ball/play, and really saw the game differently on certain levels at a younger age. He sort of had some built-in instincts from his Rugby days; and skill to go right along with it. I always think of Ray Lewis as the prototype ILB, but I think he built his game through the rigors of the hard-hitting old era football--I'm not sure he would be built in the new HS football era.
Although it can be argued that CU struck out in LB department, I'm going to just take a 1/2 full approach, expecting some highlights and low-lights for the whole D. I like the experience/depth of the team much better and am intrigued by a few LB's we brought in. I hope we can dominate/win a bunch of 1on1 battles across the entire D (more physical at each position) and make most of the assignments, adjustments and just balling out. Hopefully, a better Dline with a healthy & stout back end of the defense could help the LB position out immensely
Also, we have to be patient as this is Year 1 of Livingston's D install. D install is always a work in progress and there will be missed assignments on certain plays. No matter who is out there, Livingston/D coaches + the box above, they have a huge job to do. With D, it does not always have to be pretty, but functional and physical can make this a special team/season. If the physical D intensity is on display for the home games, we can will all of them and play with practically anybody.
Last edited:
Medford M.
Well-Known Member
Owens sighting
hawg1
Well-Known Member
TTTTLDR.
PrimeTimeBuffs
Well-Known Member
here's a chatgpt summary:
The lack of quality tight ends (TEs) and linebackers (LBs) in teams, including the Buffaloes, is attributed to changes in high school and college football. These positions are now seen as hybrid roles, making them harder to develop due to limited contact in high school practices, the rise of spread offenses, and fewer traditional football academies. Additionally, top programs can afford to redshirt blue-chip recruits and develop them over time, but this isn’t always appealing to today’s athletes. The author highlights the example of Sa'vell Smalls, a player who may have been misprojected in his college career. The author remains optimistic about the Buffaloes’ defense, emphasizing the need for patience with the new defensive system and the importance of physicality and functionality over perfection.
you're welcome.
Still too long, explain it to me like I’m wearing a Limp Bizkit tee.
Developing TE & LB in high school is hard
There's the kid rock tank summary
We like pictures.
tl:dr
Maybe a Miami, but dgaf…
Last edited:
Awesome. But I have no idea what you’re talking about.