Great minds think alike.
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!
Awini to LB
- Thread starter BuffUp
- Start date
DrunkRalphie
Well-Known Member
The source of that rumor being?
Agree, but a surprise at LB; Iwas thinking more at safety, where he played in HS. Nice to have a Chancellor-type safety.
I'm also guessing this might make way for some more 3-3-5?
Why is that a red flag? I projected thatmiddle of last fall. Shaver is no longer required at DE as there are what? 8 other guys, most of whom are bigger, stacked at that position.
Shaver's got experience and the size for a solid MLB. The change just simply makes sense and is in no way an emergency-type manuever as you suggest.
TDbuff
Club Member
I'm not saying Shaver's going to suck at MLB, he might be great. But he was a tweener DE/OLB as a recruit, and he played that role last year. They wouldn't move him out of that progression unless they thought they needed him, and the fact that they realize that now, means their depth at LB is not going the way they'd like, imo. I really don't see how anybody can look at the 2 deep at LB and say this is all going according to plan. The position was a liability last year and they didn't address the issue with year's recruiting class. There's a reason we have a new LB coach, not just a new DC.
DiggerBuffs
Well-Known Member
We have recruited very poorly at LB. We were lucky Addison was as good as he was as a frosh. He regressed last year and it hurt our defense. Either Gamboa and Watanbe has to step up since Severson is a Special Teams guy and not a Pac 12 quality guy. KO was a very good player but he's a SS playing LB. He gets caught up in traffic since he can't shed blocks. Kind of like what happened to our 200 lb MLB in Gillam. Moving Shaver and Awini to a position that needs depth is a good move. Shaver was a solid frosh and is an everyday run of the mill DE but could be a stud with that frame at MLB. It's a good move. Awini is not a Pac 12 QB. He is an ATH and with two years left, they needed to find his best spot. We are deep enough at WR and he's a little big to be a Safety. OLB is a good place for him.
BeBe
Club Member
Make it so.
BuffNut99
Club Member
Shaver actually played quite a bit of LB last season, probably the last 4-5 games. But that was a midseason desperation move after some injuries.
bigbang2
blindslighted
Our weakness is still OL and DB. With 9 scholarships, the coaches will be extremely selective.
I will like the staff to focus on DB, LB and OL in 2016.
LB- Domann and Kemp in 2016
OL- two OL(tackles that can also play Guard).
DB- four DBs( 2 safeties and 2 corners.
Long Snapper - 1 Juco transfer
I will like the staff to focus on DB, LB and OL in 2016.
LB- Domann and Kemp in 2016
OL- two OL(tackles that can also play Guard).
DB- four DBs( 2 safeties and 2 corners.
Long Snapper - 1 Juco transfer
DavisBuff
Club Member
And Dymon Lee at WR
9? I'll bet it's WAY more.
DiggerBuffs
Well-Known Member
I like your list, but OL is no longer a weakness and not a position we need to address in 2016 class. We will have 11 guys for 2017. We only graduate Nembot this year.
For 2017!!! we have...
Kough, Lynott, Huckins, Sutton, Kronshage, Lisella, Kaiser, Middlemiss, Haigler, Miller, Darby-WO
Back when our team had to have guys play both ways in spring games in order to field a team, we don't have to worry. With a small class, I would only take a STUD OL.
The coaching staff will take multiple OL prospects in this class, as they should. Focusing on just Nembot is missing the bigger picture that we potentially graduate four players in 2017. You do not want to chase numbers.
DiggerBuffs
Well-Known Member
That's what we have. My guess is a few Soph and Jrs that want PT or have got sick of football and are graduating hang it up. Not going to speculate who since I do not know, but you are right, there is always attrition. Unfortunately I don't see a class much bigger than what CSU had, a dozen maybe.
Yes.
Let's not encourage the mistakes of the past to be repeated.
CU must recruit every position group every year.
Once that is satisfied, additional spots are filled based on numbers lost to graduation/other attrition, talent gap in position group, and "best player available".
No more of the old nonsense of signing 8 freshman OLs while leaving LB & RB empty that year because the roster was too light at OL. That's short-term, panic-based roster management that borrows problems for the future.
DiggerBuffs
Well-Known Member
It is not a requirement though is what I was trying to make a point of. They signed 3, what may end up 4, OL for 2015; signed another 2 in 2014 (not counting the one that left); 4 in 2013. I agree they need one, but unlike years they have had to reach, they have depth and could wait until 2017 class since they need 2-LBs, 1/2-WRs, QB, 3-DBs, LS this class. Additionally, Moeller is a scholarship level player.
I don't agree unless you have a greyshirt coming in at OL with that one new player. 2 OL minimum. As nik said above, going light on OL is asking for disaster down the road.
I think it is a requirement. Class balance is about important at OL as any position group on the team.
Duff is right on this. Attrition can hit the OL very hard. If it hits at the wrong time, it's devastating. You never want to take just one OL in a class. 2 is a minimum, and I still think 3-4 is ideal. Figure this - if you believe that the optimal number of OL on a team is 18, then you need to recruit 4 OL for three out of every five years, and 3 OL for the remaining two.
Its projected we will have 14-16 spots open for recruiting next cycle
If 16:
3OL
2DL
3LB
1QB
2DB
2WR
1RB
2TE
If 16:
3OL
2DL
3LB
1QB
2DB
2WR
1RB
2TE
Killed Barnett; didn't he lose about 8 underclass OL in two years? The numbers never really recovered from that, as I recall.
And if you assume that you lose 2 to attrition every 5 years (graduate early, declare early, academic issues, off-field "incidents," or injuries), that means you need 4 every single year.
89BUFF89
Well-Known Member
Only 9 scholarship seniors....are you expecting 7 others to leave the program?
You can always count on turn over.
sounds like a lot, but it's only 8% of the roster.
89BUFF89
Well-Known Member
Turnover has been pretty low so far under HCMM. For guys he recruited I think we've only lost Graham (2013 class) and Holland (2014 class) so far? Mustoe and Crowder left after last season. Hopefully it stays this way so guys who have developed through the system are ready to play as upper classmen.