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!

22-23 Transfer Portal and General Recruiting Catch-All Thread

leftybuff said:
I don't think anyone is saying the CU roster was devoid of talent....it wasn't. However, CU did not have P5 competitive players at all 22 positions. Add to that basically no position that did have a P5 caliber starter, was there anything approaching depth.

A simple rhetorical question to ask is: Would you rather see CU roll into this season with last season's roster, or the one CP has built today?

The answer is obvious.
Click to expand...
Bottom line is that last season's roster, as a whole, was one of the worst (if not the worst) in P5. This season's roster will be vastly improved. There are a few players that we wish would have stayed, but every team can say that.
 
HUFset said:
This statement is discounting the fact that CU lost guys to P5 schools:
ASU, UA, UO, FSU, Cal, UCLA, UU, WSU, BYU
and solid G5 programs:
Boise, Houston, SMU
I don't disagree that CU has upgraded the roster and I like the potential/pedigree of a lot of the guys they are bringing in. Simply hindsight, but it seems they could have kept a few more players instead of scrambling after the Spring Portal closure to fill 9 more schollys.
Click to expand...
People/players are not a list of facts about them. None of us were present to watch most of the interactions of these players during Spring practices. Clearly, the guys who worked hard and smart were rewarded—Woods being the perfect example. He’s not a high star guy, but he is the sort of rock of a person and player you want on a team.

This is as much a “culture of winning” issue as it is a “quality of player” issue. I watched the team do wind sprints on videos, and I saw the lethargy that was present in a ton of players. (Sure doing those sucks, but it’s a test of more than stamina. And you could see CP’s reaction.)

I don’t have a hard time believing that many of the “good players” on the team had learned some very bad work habits, not just technique but “acceptable effort.” I can easily see how that wouldn’t fit in with the new demands of the Prime staff coming in.

I have no problem losing players, regardless of their perceived “star level” of P5 offers, if the coaches felt like they didn’t get it, or wouldn’t buy in.

In computer programming, it used to be said that once you learn to program in Basic with line numbers, you’d have a hard time learning to properly be able to program in Pascal (without). It’s conceptual change. Sure Basic had some advantages as a language and it was hella-simple to start with, but the mode of Pascal programming is the basis for all modern languages.

Same here. You lose a few “good players”/options, but you shift into a new, better idiom for winning football.
 
Also, there's a usual mindset people come from that incumbents would be in a favorable situation and given an extra level of respect.

Coach Prime, like any winner, looked at a 1-11 record, a previous season that was almost as bad, and no NFL picks since a 6th rounder 3 years ago... and he rightly had the mindset that any incumbent in any role within the football building (players, coaches, staff) had extra to prove in order to be allowed to remain a part of the program.

For those who can't wrap their heads around some of the guys pushed out who weren't replaced with an upgrade on talent, this is why. Better to aggressively remove all the cancer and maybe cut too much than to leave any to fester.
 
Buffnik said:
Yep. He's focusing on lower level stars and elite program backups not having proven they can be plus players as P5 starters. While I think that's fair, I don't think he's ready to admit that the CU roster only had a handful of guys who would have been seeing the field at all for SEC teams or who would have been stars at lower levels.

In terms of Pac-12 roster talent, I think we'll be behind UW, USC, UO for sure and looking up a slight bit at Utah and UCLA in terms of future NFL players and blue chip recruits as a percentage of the 85. So I don't really disagree with him saying that we're probably 6th or 7th in talent. But it's a monumental improvement from last year's 13th.
Click to expand...
For him to say he isn't sure how improved we are (from a 1-11 team that wasn't competitive in 9 games) and then say we are 6th or 7th now in talent is twisting yourself in pretzels that I don't understand.

This is the guy that didn't believe in 2016 team until WAY late in the season and was driving me crazy with his negative takes.
 
Gary Indiana said:
This is what I stated before, and I believe this is a completely reasonable take. No one is saying the players we lost were P5 level or big losses, that’s a straw man. The point is simply that we have no way of knowing what we have at most positions right now. Good or bad. I’m not sure how that take is even controversial.

No one is asking for any of the others players back, aside from MLC, but we might look back a year from now and have a different idea of the caliber of players signed recently. We really have no way of knowing at this point.
Click to expand...
The players who couldn’t start at Alabama and FSU, etc are all still P5 caliber players with physical traits that most CU players over the last few years simply didn’t possess. As a whole, the talent level has been dramatically increased. There are many other factors that will determine just how far that increased talent level can take the team in 2023, but that’s more of a function on just how far down CU has been. A roster with a -23 point/game differential, when the next worst was Northwestern at -14, has SO far to go to get back to average.

There is zero doubt the roster talent is significantly better than last year across the board. Anyone questioning that is either a troll or doesn’t get it.
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
The players who couldn’t start at Alabama and FSU, etc are all still P5 caliber players with physical traits that most CU players over the last few years simply didn’t possess. As a whole, the talent level has been dramatically increased. There are many other factors that will determine just how far that increased talent level can take the team in 2023, but that’s more of a function on just how far down CU has been. A roster with a -23 point/game differential, when the next worst was Northwestern at -14, has SO far to go to get back to average.

There is zero doubt the roster talent is significantly better than last year across the board. Anyone questioning that is either a troll or doesn’t get it.
Click to expand...
Also, there's the consideration that any transfer we bring in is at least used to lifting weights at a level representative of a scholarship football athlete.
 
Buffnik said:
I don't think that Brian is fully appreciating how valuable elite athletes are. He hasn't seen many at CU and those he's seen weren't pushed and pressured to excel. I see a roster that matches the 2016 group with a future NFL quarterback and depth at every position.
Click to expand...
A lot of people aren't taking that into account. As far as they are concerned, Travis Hunter ain't real. Shedeur Sanders ain't real. Trevor Woods is real but most people don't know him. I keep saying this, special players give you chances to win a lot of games. A lot of people don't realize this team has special players.
 
Buffnik said:
Yep. He's focusing on lower level stars and elite program backups not having proven they can be plus players as P5 starters. While I think that's fair, I don't think he's ready to admit that the CU roster only had a handful of guys who would have been seeing the field at all for SEC teams or who would have been stars at lower levels.

In terms of Pac-12 roster talent, I think we'll be behind UW, USC, UO for sure and looking up a slight bit at Utah and UCLA in terms of future NFL players and blue chip recruits as a percentage of the 85. So I don't really disagree with him saying that we're probably 6th or 7th in talent. But it's a monumental improvement from last year's 13th.
Click to expand...
I think CU is a lot more talented than people think. They just are far more on the unproven side and that's what gets people. Makes sense honestly.

I am not sold on USC defense. Utah and Washington have better rosters for sure. USC gets a lot more credit for their recruiting than CU and it's odd because via PFF, a lot of their transfers weren't exactly productive last year. Some were just very talented but CU doesn't get that same credit when it brings in talented guys who didn't play much at FSU
 
#1 pick said:
A lot of people aren't taking that into account. As far as they are concerned, Travis Hunter ain't real. Shedeur Sanders ain't real. Trevor Woods is real but most people don't know him. I keep saying this, special players give you chances to win a lot of games. A lot of people don't realize this team has special players.
Click to expand...
Agreed - Brian is being ridiculously cautious. I bet we brought in a half dozen or more future NFL draft picks this off-season and there were 1-2 maximum on the roster before.
Team speed, upside and pedigree is through the roof. Coaching and mindset are night and day.
 
Last edited:
hokiehead said:
I think the FORTRAN/COBAL analogy comes up a bit more.
Click to expand...
Well sure… if you are discussing the differences between the triple option and a 1990’s pro-style attack, not sure you can do that without referencing the Fortran/Cobal formulaic, function-based essentials versus professional business needs analogy.
 
Last edited:
GawainBuff said:
Well sure… if you are discussing the differences between the triple option and a 1990’s pro-style attack, not sure you can do that without referencing the Fortran/Cobal formulaic, function-based essentials versus professional business needs analogy.
Click to expand...
I'd be tempted to go with assembly / Java on that one
 
Buffnik said:
I don't think that Brian is fully appreciating how valuable elite athletes are. He hasn't seen many at CU and those he's seen weren't pushed and pressured to excel. I see a roster that matches the 2016 group with a future NFL quarterback and depth at every position.
Click to expand...


Brian is and always will be a poor reporter. He is what a 1-11 team wanted as a reporter covering them. He has no juice with the new crowd and really does not deserve nor has he earned it. He needs to go follow the guys leaving at their new non power 5 destinations
 
Buffalo Brad said:
Brian is and always will be a poor reporter. He is what a 1-11 team wanted as a reporter covering them. He has no juice with the new crowd and really does not deserve nor has he earned it. He needs to go follow the guys leaving at their new non power 5 destinations
Click to expand...
I've always seen him as more of a U-Haul assistant manager kind of guy. (Not that there's anything wrong with that. 🤷🏽‍♂️😂)
 
Last edited:
I've never really been that impressed with Brian's reporting. It's never been insightful as far as I'm concerned.

The vast majority of those that know the program think the team is significantly better than last year. After all, last year's team was historically bad. I'm very excited about this upcoming season, but am more excited about the trajectory (hoping we get several years from CP). To me the biggest question for 2023 is that how much better will we be? Is this team 29 points per game (or whatever the delta was) better than last year? It's hard to even comprehend being able to overcome that kind of deficit. I expect us to be competitive in just about every game we play, but damn we were bad.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top