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!

'23 TNFR SDE Marshawn Kneeland (Withdrawn from Portal)

cnbuff410 said:
He is a tweener for our system. Bad fit. Nothing to do with his own capability.
Click to expand...
He's a pass rushing defensive end with above average athleticism. You don't cut a guy loose because he's an athletic 275 lber. Also, he's not a rotate between DT an DE guy. He's an end.

Believe it or not, this staff hasn't earned any kind of benefit of the doubt 🤷.
 
Formerly_Medford said:
He's a pass rushing defensive end with above average athleticism. You don't cut a guy loose because he's an athletic 275 lber. Also, he's not a rotate between DT an DE guy. He's an end.

Believe it or not, this staff hasn't earned any kind of benefit of the doubt 🤷.
Click to expand...
He only wants to play end, but he has DT body. If the rumor of us playing 4-2-5 (or 2-4-5) is true, I don't see issue with this decision. He is a bad fit for 2-4-5.
 
Better have someone from Georgia or Bama teed up if this move is being made. Upshaw has a similar build and role, yes?
 
Formerly_Medford said:
6'4" 275 is a DE...not a tackle...unless you want a G5 defense at CU?
Click to expand...
You need different "end" in different systems. With traditional 4 man front, the two ends will be like Kneeland. In the modern 2-4-5 scheme, you will need two stand-up edge rushers (besides the two DTs). Kneeland is not a good fit for that.

I have no idea if they are actually going to run the 2-4-5, but the two guys they brings in this weekend fits this scheme better. They probably want DE/OLB hybrid in that case.
 
Formerly_Medford said:
@Big Jim Alston and Cokes aren't near this guy's level, yet they remain in the commit list. This was our second best defensive transfer by a mile.
Click to expand...

That's a bit of a stretch.

You take Hunter, who we all agree is the most talented defensive player we got in. Best defensive transfer, using your words, by a mile. Hunter is a 99, at worst, 98. So, for arguments sake, let's put Kneeland at a 90 (which imo is a bit of a stretch). Are you saying the rest coming in are at a minimum of an 81 or below? Slusher, Bentley, Beasley, Craig, Alston....?

Formerly_Medford said:
He's a pass rushing defensive end with above average athleticism. You don't cut a guy loose because he's an athletic 275 lber. Also, he's not a rotate between DT an DE guy. He's an end.
Click to expand...

In certain systems, yes. Obviously, in the one we want to run, he isn't. I'm pretty sure they can decipher what they need in a edge rusher. You see athletic end, they see a bit slower, bigger end more suited for DL.

Formerly_Medford said:
Believe it or not, this staff hasn't earned any kind of benefit of the doubt 🤷.
Click to expand...

The staff obviously aren't good judges of talent or what type of player fits the scheme they are wanting to run. I mean, hell, everyone here can rate talent and schemes much better than they can. I'm surprised we all are not on payroll.
 
It’s disconcerting that we discover after the fact that this kid isn’t a fit, if that’s truly what happened. That would be a FAIL no matter how you slice it.
I’d guess there’s something else.
 
Is there a chance this is bc he didn’t qualify academically? Something got held up with the paperwork side of things and not the player himself
 
Big Jim said:
You are clearly not used to, or comfortable with, a coaching staff that is always working to improve the roster.
Click to expand...
I suspect that could be a reason and one I believe (& quite comfortable with) over the narrative that his style doesn’t fit.
 
buffaholic said:
I suspect that could be a reason and one I believe (& quite comfortable with) over the narrative that his style doesn’t fit.
Click to expand...
Not sure when Kelly officially joined the staff and/or was able to give input on the recruits to this point and how they fit the scheme he wants to run. Seems we saw something similar when Lewis joined and OL targets changing, to some extent.
 
This is weird but I’ll reserve judgement until the class complete. And I believe Charles Kelly recruited Will Anderson (who might be the #1 overall pick in the draft this year), so he clearly has some talent when it comes to talent evaluation/recruiting.
 
buffaholic said:
I suspect that could be a reason and one I believe (& quite comfortable with) over the narrative that his style doesn’t fit.
Click to expand...
In terms of style on defense, I had thought we were going to play a 3-3-5 based on Kneeland. That was a bit of a surprise based on CP liking the 46 at JSU and Kelly having been base 4-3 & 4-2-5 at FSU.

Nearest I can tell with cutting Kneeland, the emphasis on safeties, and the 2 DEs they're bringing in this weekend is that our base is going to be a 2-4-5. For that, we need DE/OLB hybrid types to bring edge pressure but can play from a 2 point stance and sometimes drop into coverage.

Kneeland doesn't fit that.
 
All I have to say is, Chance Main better be gone when all is said and done.
 
So I guess I am confused. If a player is "signed" as a transfer, he can still back out? Or did he not sign? Or am I missing something?
 
NuggNinja said:
This is weird but I’ll reserve judgement until the class complete. And I believe Charles Kelly recruited Will Anderson (who might be the #1 overall pick in the draft this year), so he clearly has some talent when it comes to talent evaluation/recruiting.
Click to expand...
Kelly was on board well before this kid went into the portal (unofficially, but he was certainly having input).
This is not a scheme change it's a change in something else. Kelly's known what scheme he's going to run well before he interviewed here. He's going to tailor it perhaps but he's not going to throw away the Alabama years of knowledge. I don't even consider the FSU years relevant at this point. He's been working with Saban for several years and defenses have evolved a lot just in the last 5 years.

Either
1. he was recruited over
2. there's something else such as a failed physical exam, a grade transfer issue etc, refusal to take a drug test, girl-friend is pregnant.....etc
 
Big Jim said:
Both the school and the player can back out until enrolled and in classes.
Click to expand...
I’m pretty sure the school is locked in with a transfer as soon as they sign the financial aid agreement, but the player can back out at any time (Davis Webb situation).

To me, this feels like CU told him they are pursuing other guys and that he wasn’t going to have a spot, so he needed to decommit and look elsewhere and/or remove his name from the portal and return to WMU.
 
buffaholic said:
Kelly was on board well before this kid went into the portal (unofficially, but he was certainly having input).
This is not a scheme change it's a change in something else. Kelly's known what scheme he's going to run well before he interviewed here. He's going to tailor it perhaps but he's not going to throw away the Alabama years of knowledge. I don't even consider the FSU years relevant at this point. He's been working with Saban for several years and defenses have evolved a lot just in the last 5 years.

Either
1. he was recruited over
2. there's something else such as a failed physical exam, a grade transfer issue etc, refusal to take a drug test, girl-friend is pregnant.....etc
Click to expand...
#1's far likelier than #2 is IMO
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top