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!

For those of you defending the offense

SDB said:
Let's face it….The Buffs have not really stopped anyone...the turnovers have been the only savior. The Buffs are in the top 5 in the nation in turnover margin and were a +8 going into the game. If the Buffs don't get turnovers, their defense gets exposed. I think we have given up some of the easiest touchdowns in FBS this year.....Wide open wide receivers....scheme or talent....?
Click to expand...
That's not a coincidence. I haven't seen any practices, but I'd bet they put extra emphasis on forcing turnovers. They do that anyway, I'd think even more so with what they have. There isn't really a choice without a pass rush.
 
CU offense is averaging 34.6 ppg, good for 35th nationally, which includes the CSU game where they put up 52 (7 of which were from the defensive TD). If you take away that game, they are averaging 30.25 ppg, which would be good enough for 65th nationally. Yards per game, they rank 40th, passing yards they are 23rd, rushing yards they are 81st. Point being, we keep talking about how awesome this offense is, but in reality, it's very much an average unit.

For this team to go bowling, they are going to have to start scoring more than 34 points/game.
 
Medford M. said:
He's missed 2 games this year with undisclosed injuries, hasn't he?
Click to expand...
I thought I saw somewhere that through the first 4 games, it was the first time in years that the same 5 had started on the o-line for CU.. I don't think he's missed another game but I could be wrong.
 
TSchekler said:
CU offense is averaging 34.6 ppg, good for 35th nationally, which includes the CSU game where they put up 52 (7 of which were from the defensive TD). If you take away that game, they are averaging 30.25 ppg, which would be good enough for 65th nationally. Yards per game, they rank 40th, passing yards they are 23rd, rushing yards they are 81st. Point being, we keep talking about how awesome this offense is, but in reality, it's very much an average unit.

For this team to go bowling, they are going to have to start scoring more than 34 points/game.
Click to expand...
This. No idea how S&P rankings have them as the #8 offense in the country. That's just straight up wrong.
 
TSchekler said:
CU offense is averaging 34.6 ppg, good for 35th nationally, which includes the CSU game where they put up 52 (7 of which were from the defensive TD). If you take away that game, they are averaging 30.25 ppg, which would be good enough for 65th nationally. Yards per game, they rank 40th, passing yards they are 23rd, rushing yards they are 81st. Point being, we keep talking about how awesome this offense is, but in reality, it's very much an average unit.

For this team to go bowling, they are going to have to start scoring more than 34 points/game.
Click to expand...
Bread said:
This. No idea how S&P rankings have them as the #8 offense in the country. That's just straight up wrong.
Click to expand...

the offense is very efficient, but it's not all that explosive. Which is better than explosive but not efficient, especially when you have our defense. The metrics think explosiveness isn't reproduceable in any sort of regular way, so discount it. Efficiency is key to the computers liking you. That said, when your efficient offense struggles in the red zone for a game, bad things.
 
I read that KD was injured during the game so I assume he was out during that last drive. Thinking about our 3rd and 4th down plays that last drive, he would’ve been an important piece to have available there.
 
DBT said:
I read that KD was injured during the game so I assume he was out during that last drive. Thinking about our 3rd and 4th down plays that last drive, he would’ve been an important piece to have available there.
Click to expand...
Dimitri Stanley is an amazing receiver of the ball. I nearly broke my TV after he got an unreal 10 freaking yard cushion in the slot on 3rd & 4 and got nary a look from the QB. Bad Montez instead jacked up a well covered go route to Arias.
 
DBT said:
I read that KD was injured during the game so I assume he was out during that last drive. Thinking about our 3rd and 4th down plays that last drive, he would’ve been an important piece to have available there.
Click to expand...

Stanley was wide open all game long, Montez didn't find him very often. That 3rd and 4, Stanley has a ten yard cushion, but we throw a fade to Arias. Ouch.
 
manhattanbuf said:
Dimitri Stanley is an amazing receiver of the ball. I nearly broke my TV after he got an unreal 10 freaking yard cushion in the slot on 3rd & 4 and got nary a look from the QB. Bad Montez instead jacked up a well covered go route to Arias.
Click to expand...
Yep.
 
Not only was the fade to Arias an awful decision, but it wasn't even in the same zip code. If you're going to essentially throw a predetermined 50/50 ball, you can't air mail it 5 yards long and 15 ft over the dude's head.
 
wsp4820 said:
Stanley was wide open all game long, Montez didn't find him very often. That 3rd and 4, Stanley has a ten yard cushion, but we throw a fade to Arias. Ouch.
Click to expand...
I couldn’t bear watching the replay when I got home. But Montez, as we’ve said time and time again, has very poor awareness out there.
 
Buffnik said:
That's exactly what we're doing.

Be nice if the defense improved and started giving up scores in the 20s, but that seems a hell of a lot less likely than asking our offense to score mid-30s or more based on what we've got on each side of the ball.
Click to expand...
Sorry, must've misinterpreted your OP.
 
Bread said:
I thought I saw somewhere that through the first 4 games, it was the first time in years that the same 5 had started on the o-line for CU.. I don't think he's missed another game but I could be wrong.
Click to expand...
I had that wrong. I wanna say the AFA game, Pursell started, but Roddick replaced him after injury.
 
TSchekler said:
Not only was the fade to Arias an awful decision, but it wasn't even in the same zip code. If you're going to essentially throw a predetermined 50/50 ball, you can't air mail it 5 yards long and 15 ft over the dude's head.
Click to expand...
The complete lack of situational awareness is why that play bothered me more than any other. 3rd and 4, we were trying to use up the remaining clock, and Montez decides he's going for 6, and he throws a deep ball 5 yards out of bounds.
 
Medford M. said:
The complete lack of situational awareness is why that play bothered me more than any other. 3rd and 4, we were trying to use up the remaining clock, and Montez decides he's going for 6, and he throws a deep ball 5 yards out of bounds.
Click to expand...
Situational awareness dictates an under thrown ball, NOT an overthrown one, in that circumstance !
 
14er said:
Here it is. Ugh.
Click to expand...

My phone is very expensive.
I will not click this highlight and break my phone.
I will not click this highlight and break my phone.
I will not click this highlight and break my phone.
I will not click this highlight and break my phone.
I will not click this highlight and break my phone.
I will not click this highlight and break my phone.
I will not click this highlight and break my phone.
I will not click this highlight and break my phone.
I will not click this highlight and break my phone.
I will not click this highlight and break my phone.
I will not click this highlight and break my phone.
I will not click this highlight and break my phone.
 
This oregon game didnt help. The OL played decent and Fontenot had a good game. Receivers not getting open and badly timed drops and interceptions did us in
 
Oh... once again our receivers and Montez have to get better at situational awareness on the field. Down and distance. Way to many short passes and tackles 1 or 2 yards from the 1st down and once or twice the endzone.
 
Sometime during the second half last night (I was only semi-paying attention at that point) Huard broke down exactly what frustrates us with how Montez locks onto a receiver. Basically saying he doesn’t do a presnap read on what the D is doing.
 
TSchekler said:
There was one where I turned to my buddy and wondered exactly why the coaches thought Oregons CB wasn’t just going to come up and make the tackle for loss. The design was literally just to throw it and hope we make a guy miss.
Click to expand...
That play can work if there's enough space to catch it. If the defender is too close, the WR has no shot. Montez has no ability to make that read.
 
We aren’t winning any games with our defense this year. When our offense sucks, like it did against Oregon, we will lose - badly. The defense is a total reclamation project at this point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top