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!
Completely overmatched today
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
He was the best high school player I've ever seen in person. He effortlessly ran for 200+ and 6 TDs against us his senior year, and we were a pretty solid team.
Stanford footballs very hard. They sportsed way better than us.
Bufffan68
Club Member
I agree. MMac is staying which is fine.
The Trees struggled against WSU who can make big plays, which seems the way to beat them. We aren't a big play offense.
pcbuff
Well-Known Member
. Yes! Size, speed and physicality on both lines!
this
i was disappointed by the effort...not surprised we got beat up on both lines....im getting to the point of the season where im just numb again....what is frustrating is i watch other games where even middling teams just look so much bigger, faster , smarter, and better than us....its hard to believe that we cant get a bunch of those kids to boulder
Yep. The youth excuse is bogus.
The only place I can see it being somewhat valid is that many of our vets played too early instead of redshirting. A guy like KO, for example, should be a RS-Soph right now. That's important and it takes time to get where you want to be in terms of the roster management. But even that's not an excuse, it's more just an upside that's being built toward on the depth chart where the team has room to be better in future years even with similar talent. And that upside has much less incremental improvement margin to it than what could be gained by recruiting better talent. (i.e., the gap between CU and Furd is much more to do with talent recruited than it is about a more established roster from longer-term stability.)
SerenityBuff
Well-Known Member
Shouldn't we try to do both? Why would getting a McCaffrey mean we shouldn't try to get 5 OL who can block?
Is CU that hard of a place to sell now or is the staff missing that ace recruiter ?It's so obvious that The Buffs are just lacking talent from Seniors down through the freshman. MM needs a difference maker at QB. That will be His undoing more so than missing out on a McCaffrey kid. On the Buffs best day they can hang with an up and down more talented team like UCLA but yesterday is a true indicator of where we really stand . There are some ballers out there for the Buffs but enough to matter , it seems .
Id like to see the staff go after impact lineman for the rest of the cycle because I've had enough of the grey shirt/ development guys . These lineman that don't see the field for 2+ years don't seem to ever really do much. I understand red shirting as a freshman but it seems that the staff is taking too cautious of an approach to our recruiting. yesterday was the perfect example of why Boulder SHOULD be an easy sell for these coaches.
Id like to see the staff go after impact lineman for the rest of the cycle because I've had enough of the grey shirt/ development guys . These lineman that don't see the field for 2+ years don't seem to ever really do much. I understand red shirting as a freshman but it seems that the staff is taking too cautious of an approach to our recruiting. yesterday was the perfect example of why Boulder SHOULD be an easy sell for these coaches.
Let's hope its because he's currently wearing a redshirt.
On the 3rd and 18 in the 2nd that went for a touchdown, not trying to make excuses for KC, but have to wonder why Leavitt called for press coverage? Would have thought putting 6 db's in the backfield, give some cushion, and make sure the receivers stay in front of you would have been the way to go. KC got burned before his man hit the 1st down marker. Bad play call in imo.
I'd rather chew aluminum foil, thanks.
bigskybuff
Well-Known Member
That play sticks out. The announcers were wondering if we would take the yardage instead of the down. We declined and it was a 18 yard TD instead of a 28 yarder. For me it was when they converted a third down to their TE, I think on the first series of the game. Chido had great coverage and the guy still made the catch. I think Chido is a all PAC performer and the leader of the D and when this guy made the catch, despite incredible coverage, I knew it was going to be a long day. The size difference between the two teams was very noticeable.