Daily Camera WR article

[B1Buff]

You're right. Unless our offense gets a lot better, we are screwed. But it is not going to get better if we just run some vanilla scheme. We aren't going to just out-talent folks. In my mind, it's probably a good idea to try do some stuff that might help us win.

I see a 3 yard curl with a lateral (hook and ladder) in our future if the it becomes a scheme offense (a la OU vs BSU in the fiesta bowl). See those three yrd hooks are good for something!

 

[fatbuff]

Ok, a simplified defense was a big reason why we shut out Wyoming right?

So wouldn't a simplified offense help us to get the ball to our playmakers? And when playmakers have the ball, don't they do something called make plays? Isn't that what we want to do - make plays and score points??

Am I missing something? Is there a reason Juicebox does not subscribe to this idea? Does it have something to do with a player's GPA or how often they play Xbox with Cody & Dan or something?

Defense is a different deal altogether that depends on reaction more than action. When you are thinking too much you arent able to react as quickly.
With offense the plays are choreographed, for lack of a better word, and you need to be at a certain place at a certain time, or you lose the advantage of knowing what is going to happen ahead of time.
I dont think we can simplify the offense much more than it already is, but the main problem, as I see it, is the platooning of players. It causes more confusion for us than the opposing defense, and I think it tends to kill momentum and doesnt allow the players to get a feel for the game. I think platooning college players is about as effective as having two starting quarterbacks.

 

[dply]

I see a 3 yard curl with a lateral (hook and ladder) in our future if the it becomes a scheme offense (a la OU vs BSU in the fiesta bowl). See those three yrd hooks are good for something!

I think we did that play once on Saturday but it got blown up. I was wondering why B-Lock was waiting behind espy instead of blocking for him and on the replay it looked as if espy turned he body to pitch but wasn't able to.

*I might have the player involved wrong but it was a receiver to running back situation.

 

[TheRoyale90]

Defense is a different deal altogether that depends on reaction more than action. When you are thinking too much you arent able to react as quickly.
With offense the plays are choreographed, for lack of a better word, and you need to be at a certain place at a certain time, or you lose the advantage of knowing what is going to happen ahead of time.
I dont think we can simplify the offense much more than it already is, but the main problem, as I see it, is the platooning of players. It causes more confusion for us than the opposing defense, and I think it tends to kill momentum and doesnt allow the players to get a feel for the game. I think platooning college players is about as effective as having two starting quarterbacks.

Well, this is a surprising development but I agree with you. At least on the platooning bit. The old truism goes: "if you say you've got two quarterbacks what you're really saying is you've got none". I think it applies to the other skill positions as well. As for the offense not being able to be simplified any more than it is... it must still be wildly complicated if only 2 out of 7-8 guys are up to speed in it by the fourth game.

 

[Chilly]

I said it in another thread but hawk has made a Rube Goldberg machine out of the offense. Unnecessarily complex. Do we really need a thousand variations of the 3 yard curl route? I'd rather see them play sandlot football with their best athletes than continue to watch this putrid display of "sophistication". How well has his garbage system worked so far? I mean supposedly Espy and company are the ones who know how to execute it so why aren't they lighting people up? Could it be because they're built like pizza hut night managers rather than Big XII receivers? It couldn't be that simple could it?


"There are few secrets in football. So execute."
- Hank Stram

Could it be that the real answer is that we have a bunch of talented recievers who are new to the system this year, and if we have the patience to let them learn this system, good things will start to happen on the field. I could support your argument if this new groups of talented receivers had been in this system for a few years and it still wasn't working.

 

[sackman]

I was trying to think of rookie WRs that come in and make a difference right away. Colston was the only one that immediately popped into my head, but maybe there are more.

Eddie Royal came to mind immediately, and he supposedly came into a highly "sophisticated" offense.

In fact, WR is probably the easiest of all the positions to pick up. True, there are times when you have to read a blitz or specific coverage scheme, but for the most part, it's "go here, make a move, cut here, and I'll get you the ball".

The WR's we have aren't getting better by sitting on the sideline during games. They need to be in there. I have no issue with keeping Scotty in the game. He's earned it. But Simmons, Simas, Wright and Jefferson need to be seeing a lot more of the field than they are. I can't be convinced that them being on the sidelines is making the team any better.

 

[B1Buff]

Eddie Royal came to mind immediately, and he supposedly came into a highly "sophisticated" offense.

In fact, WR is probably the easiest of all the positions to pick up. True, there are times when you have to read a blitz or specific coverage scheme, but for the most part, it's "go here, make a move, cut here, and I'll get you the ball".

The WR's we have aren't getting better by sitting on the sideline during games. They need to be in there. I have no issue with keeping Scotty in the game. He's earned it. But Simmons, Simas, Wright and Jefferson need to be seeing a lot more of the field than they are. I can't be convinced that them being on the sidelines is making the team any better.

Didn't eddie royal get injured his first season (preseason) and sat out a year?

 

[sackman]

Didn't eddie royal get injured his first season (preseason) and sat out a year?

I thought he was a rookie last year. Now I'll have to go check.


edit:

OK, so I checked. According to this link, he was a rookie last year. This is his second year in the league.

http://www.nfl.com/players/eddieroyal/careerstats?id=ROY461040

 

[TheRoyale90]

Could it be that the real answer is that we have a bunch of talented recievers who are new to the system this year, and if we have the patience to let them learn this system, good things will start to happen on the field. I could support your argument if this new groups of talented receivers had been in this system for a few years and it still wasn't working.

Again let me reiterate that I was wrong to use the pizza hut metaphor. That said, this has been a four year process already. hawk has been unable to coach up anyone in that time period other than Scotty (who isn't a prototypical wideout anyway) and Espy. How is this possible? Remember Blake Mackey? He was our top receiver in 2004. 6'3" 200 pounds, good speed, he helped us beat cornbraska that year then missed 05 with an ACL. So... for whatever reason hawk didn't like him and unless I'm misremembering he didn't catch a single pass in his senior year of '06. What's that about? Maybe it's a coincidence but it's striking how similar the situations with Mackey, J-fly, and possibly Simas, Simmons and company look. I'm no D-1 coach but I think I'd have tried to get these guys on the field any way I could. If that means simplifying a game plan so be it.

 

[sackman]

At some point you need to put the best talent on the field and see what it can do. We're not doing that now. Not even close. I don't give a rip if Espy is tearing it up in practice and really knows the playbook. The fact of the matter is that he's not as good a receiver as Simmons or Simas. That's a fact. I'm sorry, but it's the truth. He's doing a great job returning punts. I'm fine with him in that capacity. In fact, I'm fine with him playing here and there on the line of scrimmage. But an every-down WR? Are you kidding me? C'mon, let's be realistic here.

Put the talent on the field.

 

[Canada_BUFF]

Probably help with the running game too, if theres recievers physically capable of leveling people downfield.

 

[Darth Snow]

Probably help with the running game too, if theres recievers physically capable of leveling people downfield.

:nod: watched the highlights of the WY game the other day, and Speedy was ALWAYS dealing with corners.

 

[BlackNGold]

I don't think it is going to make much difference who you play at wide receiver. The problem is the quarterback position. Right now the 3 teams we have played have pass defense efficiency ratings of 114, 121 and 123. Our quarterback efficiency rating is 105.7 which means to me that the CU passing game is operating below the level of the defense.

Scotty McKnight does a good job of getting open and catching the ball albeit mostly on short routes. The passing efficiency rating would probably be worse without him. I don't know if another QB would be the answer. Like Don Shula once said.."Bad luck is not having a quarterback."

 

[White_Rabbit]

McKnight is a good WR and just fine where he is, but you simply can't put him opposite Espy and expect anything but press coverage and both safeties cheating up into the box. For every Greg Camarillo and Wes Welker there's a Ted Ginn or a Randy Moss and that's why they work.

 

[DBT]

A nine iron? Ouch.:wow:

How about a wedgey?

 

[DBT]

I'm pretty impressed that so many of you know so much about football and what sorts of schemes the dumbassed coaches SHOULD be running. :thumbsup:

 

[Buffarino]

I'm pretty impressed that so many of you know so much about football and what sorts of schemes the dumbassed coaches SHOULD be running. :thumbsup:

With me it's not that at all. My point is that what they are doing clearly is not working, so why not try something else?

What do they say about the definition of insanity? That you keep doing the same thing but you expect a different result?

 

[Chilly]

I was thinking about our WRs and I was going to post something today. I think it's easy for us to immediately blame coaches for these guys not being up to speed, but WR is a more complex position than we usually think. Look at the NFL, I was trying to think of rookie WRs that come in and make a difference right away. Colston was the only one that immediately popped into my head, but maybe there are more. The point is, most NFL WRs (the fastest and most talented you will find) don't start showing up until their second or sometimes third season.

A WR has a lot more to think about on every play than say a RB. Beyond knowing what route you are supposed to run out of the huddle, you also have to be able to spot blitzes and coverages and know when you should adjust the route. On running plays you have to know where the play is supposed to go, know who you should block, what direction you should try to block, and most importantly, they have to get in a rhythm with the QB (where will he throw it, when, how fast, etc.). It's not as simple as some of you guys want it to be with the calls to just put them on the field and throw jump balls to them. A RB can come in and really only has to know which direction the play is going and what gap he should try to hit first. To be on the field all three downs, a RB needs to know more, but you can put them out there and they can start to contribute more when they know less. This isn't the case for WRs.

Now, with that said, at some point you hope the coaches can coach the WRs up. Simas looking a little bit lost on Saturday was a warning sign for me since he's had two+ years in the program now. But, that could have been rust as well. Simmons is new to our system, but not new to the position on the college level, so you would hope it wouldn't take him as long to figure things out as Wright or one of the frosh WRs. The coaches don't get a pass from me for these guys not knowing everything yet, but I am willing to take a little bit more of a wait and see. Not a season's worth of wait and see...if the coaches are doing their jobs, these guys will start to be more and more involved because (a) good coaching will help them learn the offense, and (b) good scheming will find ways to get them in the game more even if they aren't perfect yet.

The key with Simmons to me is that he didn't have the chance to go through fall camp. Had he been with the team through that camp I believe you would be seeing him on the field alot more right now.

 

[Chilly]

Ok, a simplified defense was a big reason why we shut out Wyoming right?

So wouldn't a simplified offense help us to get the ball to our playmakers? And when playmakers have the ball, don't they do something called make plays? Isn't that what we want to do - make plays and score points??

Am I missing something? Is there a reason Juicebox does not subscribe to this idea? Does it have something to do with a player's GPA or how often they play Xbox with Cody & Dan or something?

These posts are old and tiresome and to honest are nothing but BS.

 

[BuffFan]

I don't think it takes a genius to figure out that what they are doing is not working. If your best WR’s are confused, then your complicated scheme is only hurting yourself. Seems like a no brainer but I am happy to hear more about how this scheme is so great right. All I ask is that you point out why because I don’t see it on the field.

 

[Chilly]

Eddie Royal came to mind immediately, and he supposedly came into a highly "sophisticated" offense.

In fact, WR is probably the easiest of all the positions to pick up. True, there are times when you have to read a blitz or specific coverage scheme, but for the most part, it's "go here, make a move, cut here, and I'll get you the ball".

The WR's we have aren't getting better by sitting on the sideline during games. They need to be in there. I have no issue with keeping Scotty in the game. He's earned it. But Simmons, Simas, Wright and Jefferson need to be seeing a lot more of the field than they are. I can't be convinced that them being on the sidelines is making the team any better.

How many WR were drafted last year along with Eddie Royal. Of that WR draft class, how many were able to contribute at the same level Eddie did?

 

[BuffFan]

The key with Simmons to me is that he didn't have the chance to go through fall camp. Had he been with the team through that camp I believe you would be seeing him on the field alot more right now.

Just like we are seeing alot more of Wright and Jefferson.

 

[BuffFan]

How many WR were drafted last year along with Eddie Royal. Of that WR draft class, how many were able to contribute at the same level Eddie did?

The Pros and Collage are apples and oranges. Look at how many big Collage programs have true freshman playing. Michigan and Missouri are playing several true freshmen and are undefeated.

 

[sackman]

How many WR were drafted last year along with Eddie Royal. Of that WR draft class, how many were able to contribute at the same level Eddie did?

How many WR were drafted last year on to teams that had serious talent issues at that position?

 

[Chilly]

How many WR were drafted last year on to teams that had serious talent issues at that position?

I count 21 give or take 3 depending on your opinions of the current WR on that team at the time of the draft.

Arrington, Adrian New Orleans Saints
Avery, Donnie St. Louis Rams
Bennett, Earl Chicago Bears - 1
Burton, Keenan St. Louis Rams
Caldwell, Andre Cincinnati Bengals
Doucet, Early Arizona Cardinals
Douglas, Harry Atlanta Falcons
Franklin, Will Kansas City Chiefs - 2
Garcon, Pierre Indianapolis Colts
Hardy, James Buffalo Bills - 3
Harper, Justin Baltimore Ravens - 4
Hawkins, Lavelle Tennessee Titans - 5
Henry, Marcus New York Jets
Hubbard, Paul Cleveland Browns - 6
Jackson, DeSean Philadelphia Eagles - 7
Jackson, Dexter Tampa Bay Buccaneers - 8
Johnson, Jaymar Minnesota Vikings - 9
Johnson, Steve Buffalo Bills - 10
Kelly, Malcolm Washington Redskins - 11
Manningham, Mario New York Giants
Monk, Marcus Chicago Bears - 12
Moore, Kenneth Detroit Lions - 13
Morgan, Josh San Francisco 49ers - 14
Nelson, Jordy Green Bay Packers
Robinson, Kevin Kansas City Chiefs - 15
Royal, Eddie Denver Broncos - 16
Schilens, Chaz Oakland Raiders - 17
Shields, Arman Oakland Raiders - 18
Simpson, Jerome Cincinnati Bengals
Slater, Matt New England Patriots - 19
Smith, Marcus Baltimore Ravens - 20
Swain, Brett Green Bay Packers
Sweed, Limas Pittsburgh Steelers
Thomas, Devin Washington Redskins - 21
Urrutia, Mario Cincinnati Bengals

 

[BuffFan]

I count 21 give or take 3 depending on your opinions of the current WR on that team at the time of the draft.

Arrington, Adrian New Orleans Saints
Avery, Donnie St. Louis Rams
Bennett, Earl Chicago Bears - 1
Burton, Keenan St. Louis Rams
Caldwell, Andre Cincinnati Bengals
Doucet, Early Arizona Cardinals
Douglas, Harry Atlanta Falcons
Franklin, Will Kansas City Chiefs - 2
Garcon, Pierre Indianapolis Colts
Hardy, James Buffalo Bills - 3
Harper, Justin Baltimore Ravens - 4
Hawkins, Lavelle Tennessee Titans - 5
Henry, Marcus New York Jets
Hubbard, Paul Cleveland Browns - 6
Jackson, DeSean Philadelphia Eagles - 7
Jackson, Dexter Tampa Bay Buccaneers - 8
Johnson, Jaymar Minnesota Vikings - 9
Johnson, Steve Buffalo Bills - 10
Kelly, Malcolm Washington Redskins - 11
Manningham, Mario New York Giants
Monk, Marcus Chicago Bears - 12
Moore, Kenneth Detroit Lions - 13
Morgan, Josh San Francisco 49ers - 14
Nelson, Jordy Green Bay Packers
Robinson, Kevin Kansas City Chiefs - 15
Royal, Eddie Denver Broncos - 16
Schilens, Chaz Oakland Raiders - 17
Shields, Arman Oakland Raiders - 18
Simpson, Jerome Cincinnati Bengals
Slater, Matt New England Patriots - 19
Smith, Marcus Baltimore Ravens - 20
Swain, Brett Green Bay Packers
Sweed, Limas Pittsburgh Steelers
Thomas, Devin Washington Redskins - 21
Urrutia, Mario Cincinnati Bengals

Eddie Royal was not drafted last year he was drafted in 08. Denver had a good WR group it was defense that sucked, and he contributed a lot his rookie year. All those things go against your argument.

 

[Junction]

Eddie Royal was not drafted last year he was drafted in 08. Denver had a good WR group it was defense that sucked, and he contributed a lot his rookie year. All those things go against your argument.

Wasn't last year 2008????????

 

[Chilly]

Eddie Royal was not drafted last year he was drafted in 08. Denver had a good WR group it was defense that sucked, and he contributed a lot his rookie year. All those things go against your argument.

Not against my argument. I never said Denver had a bad WR group the year he was drafted. I was asked how many WR were drafted on to teams with poor WR's. I just answered the question.

My argument was that Eddie Royal is the exception to a rookie WR being a major contributor in their first year, not the rule.

 

[west coast]

Please, go fuc yourself with a nine iron. Those guys are still Buffs and deserve your respect.

speaking of respect, nice post! did something in that post touch a nerve

 

[BuffFan]

Wasn't last year 2008????????

he playd last year this year is not his rookie year.