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!

College Football News, Rumor & Humor

The Alabaster Yak said:
Ok? It’s just weird that your mind immediately went to DV speculation in the Gilbert situation instead of an actual burglary like the charge stated (and ended up being).
Click to expand...
I could be wrong, but didn't Cu3x also bring up DV in a very weird context in another thread a few months ago?
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
I’d like to see from a larger sample size now that everyone has played, but after week zero, the new clock rules reduced game time by 3 total minutes and 5 total plays. It’s having an irrelevant effect on the game
Click to expand...
Just from an anecdotal perspective, I felt like it shortened the game for us yesterday which I think helped a lot. I have no proof, but some of those huge chunk plays we got but the clock kept rolling meant a) our team wasn't on the field in the heat for extra minutes, 2) Hunter didn't have to play as many snaps (which may or may not have helped), and d) I felt like with the clock stoppage on every first down, TCU maaayyy have had one more possession which maaaayyy have hurt. Again, but my perspective.
I general...I don't like it though.
 
CUAviator said:
Just from an anecdotal perspective, I felt like it shortened the game for us yesterday which I think helped a lot. I have no proof, but some of those huge chunk plays we got but the clock kept rolling meant a) our team wasn't on the field in the heat for extra minutes, 2) Hunter didn't have to play as many snaps (which may or may not have helped), and d) I felt like with the clock stoppage on every first down, TCU maaayyy have had one more possession which maaaayyy have hurt. Again, but my perspective.
I general...I don't like it though.
Click to expand...
There was only about 5-7 seconds of clock stoppage after every first down in the old rules. If a team pick up 4 first downs on a given drive, that’s maybe 20-30 seconds of clock that runs off under the new rules. That’s probably on the extreme end. It’s just not a significant difference
 
The Alabaster Yak said:
CFB automatic reviews are ridiculous. Coaches should have to challenge a call just like the NFL.
Click to expand...
Yep. The NBA even went to that. And the challenge should burn a timeout so it doesn't add a commercial break.

Watching at home, the commercial breaks aren't as awful as when you're at the game. But when you're at the game, between halftime and all the stoppages for tv advertisers you end up with teams standing around or in the locker room for 50% of the time you're in the stadium. It is not fan-friendly.
 
Big Jim said:
UCLA fans on their 247 site were pissed that CU beat TCU yesterday. Not pissed at CU or Coach Prime but pissed at Chip Kelly. They were pissed that Kelly sold them a bill of goods with the idea that a new coach needs 3-4 years to win.
Click to expand...
Just about every coach says that. It's not true, but it is a narrative that works so well for them. CYA if the results are bad. Under promise / over deliver if the results are what they should be with a good coaching hire. Fans are right to call bullsh!t on it. Exception would be if your program is like CU's was when MacIntyre was hired - a dumpster fire with no administrative or booster support which had the expectation of being within a budget and not taking any risks in recruiting or staff hires that could result in a bad press incident. (I.e., what a Mendenhall hire would have represented - a 3 year build to consistent respectability with occasional breakout and breakdown seasons.)
 
Buffnik said:
Just about every coach says that. It's not true, but it is a narrative that works so well for them. CYA if the results are bad. Under promise / over deliver if the results are what they should be with a good coaching hire. Fans are right to call bullsh!t on it. Exception would be if your program is like CU's was when MacIntyre was hired - a dumpster fire with no administrative or booster support which had the expectation of being within a budget and not taking any risks in recruiting or staff hires that could result in a bad press incident. (I.e., what a Mendenhall hire would have represented - a 3 year build to consistent respectability with occasional breakout and breakdown seasons.)
Click to expand...
Aren’t the current portal rules changing?
 
manhattanbuff said:
Aren’t the current portal rules changing?
Click to expand...
Still get the 1 free transfer while an undergrad.

The difference is that those will count against the 25 total new additions per year rule, which is back in play. Grad transfers won't count toward that.

So, not as ideal for a new coach as what CP had and the extent of what he changed won't be repeated. But I think that was an absolute outlier from what any other coach would do or could do. But no reason why a new HC couldn't have 35-40 new scholarship players in his 1st year and over 70 new faces going into his 2nd season. There is absolutely no reason any more to suck in year 1, show improvement in years 2 & 3, and then start winning in year 4 when it's all your guys. In fact, I think that model has been broken because of the number of guys who will transfer out & the lack of interest in transferring in if your team sucks in year 1.
 
Buffnik said:
Still get the 1 free transfer while an undergrad.

The difference is that those will count against the 25 total new additions per year rule, which is back in play. Grad transfers won't count toward that.

So, not as ideal for a new coach as what CP had and the extent of what he changed won't be repeated. But I think that was an absolute outlier from what any other coach would do or could do. But no reason why a new HC couldn't have 35-40 new scholarship players in his 1st year and over 70 new faces going into his 2nd season. There is absolutely no reason any more to suck in year 1, show improvement in years 2 & 3, and then start winning in year 4 when it's all your guys. In fact, I think that model has been broken because of the number of guys who will transfer out & the lack of interest in transferring in if your team sucks in year 1.
Click to expand...
Who is another coach that has the combination of personality and credibility that Coach Prime has with these kids? Who is another coach who can come into a losing program and say 'I ain't hard to find" and have kids from all over the country including top programs pick the phone up and call him? Who is another coach who already has relationships with the top recruit in the country, with a 5* RB and by the way has 2 sons who are P5 level players including a QB who potentially could be a top 10 pick in the draft?

Rules will be changed to limit the numbers in any given year but even if the rules stayed the same this would be a one of a kind program transformation because Prime is an absolutely one of a kind.

This kind of like saying "I can win multiple super bowl championships, just give me my Tom Brady, Joe Montana, or now Pat Mahomes." It's easy to identify it and say it but a whole different issue actually finding it and doing it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top