Sorry, I added in some on recruiting or transfer busts. I think some coaches have upside in recruiting, others not so much. Also, the coaches have to evaluate who is brought into their group and know how good/bad their group is.
HC Deion Sanders: B+: he turned over roster making it better, packed stands, and made CU relevant again. Prime has some learning to do in the P65. He brings great passion, love with some discipline. Needs to be better at coordinating his staff to ensure they play complementary football. I know some guys will transfer, but as of last night there was not a mass exodus. That says something about the overall respect that he has in the locker-room. I give him props on handling Hunter and McCaskill's injuries. SS may have stayed in games too much, but he held him out of the final game. They were shorthanded, but competitive at UU, that says a ton about his motivation/impact--even with UU's banged up, that was still an aweful matchup for them.
DC/Safeties Charles Kelly: D upto B+, 1st 5 the D was awful, but it gradually improved. 1/2 half Stanford, and WSU were debacles in the 2nd half--much of that was offense. Not great statistically, but jumps in sacks, turnovers, tackles for a loss, and just played more physically. Need to cut out untimely penalties and tackle better--however they play on the edge with intensity, which is a good thing. CK played a ton of kids. Seemed like he found the better rotation at S; that position was a B+. . I see potential to be better next year--this was a year of finding what worked. Ore was a trap. They found some ways to win games without Hunter. Year 1 D install is pretty tough for any DC, much more so with an inexperienced team. However, a bunch of guys shined at different times. For the D, it is a matter of upward progression and filling in some new talent, but IMO we will be much better next year.
Co-OC/QBs Sean Lewis: A- to a D. If he is QB, he did great, but he was OC. 1st games his offense looked dynamic (A-). Once enough CU film got out, not enough adjustments to offset the scouting. There seemed to be a disconnect from the booth to the OC, could be a SL thing. As the defense improved, they could not play complementary football. If you ask me, Stanford second half is on the OC desiring to shine, not just win the game. CU should have ate clock if we were playing new guys on D. Also, in going back through articles on the O-Line, I believe he and SL/OB grossly overestimated what they had. The real transfer misses were Margabill, Traore, and perhaps showing Wiley the door. If he threw a fit about Shurmer as analyst, he does not play well with others. Many teams have older analysts, and they need to work together. I think SL really wanted to be his own show on O, tuning out everyone (including other assistants), except perhaps Prime. The game-week prep/game plan did not seem to help or be useful. His other HC opportunties did not help.
Co-OC/O Analyst Pat Shurmur: C to a D. Not sure when he arrived and was truly active. Do not think he was in on talent evals. He did not do much as a play-caller. He did not get the Oline re-motivated. Expect a new guy here, or lesser role.
RB Gary Harrell: hard to say B1. The kids like him, the RB room was hampered by McCaskill's injury and the Oline. Not playing Smoke was a surprise. Not many runs called by the OC. I think that he kept it together. Teams figured out Dylan Edwards as the season but he broke trough. Hank played well. Wilkerson was serviceable.
WR Brett Bartolone: as to WR's it was an A; however overall it could fall to a C. His Wr's balled out. To the extent he was in the box sending down information from above before Shurmer arrived or did the weekly video prep/game-plan, that was a failure. They need to coordinate their O from the box above, to the field, and vice-versa. I was surprised not to see SS on the telephone above after some series finding out what the coach in the box was seeing from above.
TE Tim Brewster: INC--Doesn't really matter since he quit today. Harrison had a good year catching balls, but he really had no TE group to work with. Moving Shurmer down to the field (to help the Oline) seemed to make sense. I do not think it was a reflection on Brewster as again he had no group to really coach. Too bad Passarello never played, but he might have got injured during the season too. Fauria as well, but it seemed that he checked out or was just injured again. If he was in on Traore, Antonio or Yleveron, then those guys were busts as TE's. We need some new TE's in a bad way, and a new TE coach may have helped with this. I guess that I am not too surprised at Brewster resigning, but maybe this was in part due to SL's inability to play well with others in the sandbox. Perhaps, Brewster wanted some players moved into his group, and was rebuffed. Over Shurmer, I would have thought BL would have leaned on Brewster's experience during the middle part of the season.
OL Bill O'Boyle: F. I think he will be gone. They had talent deficiencies and those guys regressed as the season went on. Might have been somewhat different with a healthy Connor or eligible Brown, but there will always be injuries. OB really overestimated what he had, and found/did little to make them better or cover up his mistakes. Could not find 2 guys to motivate and play consistent for one side of the line to be just somewhat decent/consistent. Did not have many answers. Perhaps could have moved someone from D to play so TE or go large. Not sure after Stanford, that he had the respect of his unit or the team/SL could be there too. He came as a package deal with SL. I think Sav Washington will improve and be good, the other Kent State guy was a bust.
DT Sal Sunseri: D to a B-. Not great for the tackles, but better than past years, The Dline was more productive since 2nd half of USC. They just made more plays. I saw more talent here than past years and some progression, but not sure he is a recruiter. Sapp should help being on staff next year. Also, I really wonder how much the bad Oline, hurt the entire Dline in terms of practice and early year preparation. They seemed to progress as a result of playing games, not practice. Also, have no clue how he would allow Sami or Rodham to walk. Sending Upshaw away, looked bad based on what he did at AZ--maybe he did not play well with others or get along with the coaches.
DE Nick Williams: B. After the early games, I think he found the right guys and Dominick balled out. Others popped up too. They got better/made more plays as the season wore on. I see talent at this position and it appears that he can recruit. Well liked by the players.
LB Andre' Hart: I started as C+; but now I'm thinking C-. The reason that I dropped his grade is that for whatever reason, the LB's did not have awesome communication with the rest of the defense. Generally, it is a LB who counts the players and directs the run defense. We were not good against the run. I our defense, I think the S's make the call, but the LB's have to adjust and do their thing. In a new D install, LB is perhaps the most difficult position to learn, or be totally exposed. I do not give him a D or F, as sort of same as Williams, he is well liked by the players. This group had more difficulties, but he tried a bunch of combos. Mitchell had problems of his own--probably the best and most experienced MLB on the team. Gant was hurt, never played. The TW experiment did not work out as hoped. I give Hart props for trying different things, but for whatever reason he could not get the right combo and the run defense was not good. I hope to see an upgrade of talent here as it appears he can recruit. We really need to recruit a special very physical LB, or two. That could vault this defense to another level.
CB Kevin Mathis: B+. Seems like the guys enjoy playing with him. Hunter was great. O. Cooper, Breedlove (although injured), Robinson played decent during Hunter's injury. In hindsight, I'm glad they challenged Cormarti McClain and he seemed to have turned it around and progressed. Being a True Frosh, he was not going to play physical bump coverage this year (he should get bigger), however he showed that he could cover a ton of ground. He was picked on at times, but for next year, barring injuries--I see Hunter, O. Cooper, Shlusher (I think he redshirted due to injures), and McClain making this the 3rd best position group behind WR and S. QB is tops, if SS is protected and stays upright. The S's will need another pick-up, as Ward played great over the 2nd half.
Looking back, 4-8 and less blowouts is better than 1-11. The true breakout season was really lost in the 1st half of USC, and definitely Stanford. I put the Stanford loss squarely on the coaches, not the kids--sorry Prime. IMO, Prime/OC/DC needed to come out with a set plan after halftime and just play some complementary football. Those guys should have talked, and even in playing an ugly 2nd half, should have won my 10. If they win either of those two games, I think they at least beat AZ, and perhaps OSU. OSU was on the offense. Even UCLA was on the offense, and CU's D created some turnovers.
In most all respects, this looked like an inexperienced 1st staff in terms of working together with an inexperienced team.
Next year, I look for another talent infusion, with emphasis on the trenches and LB. A new OC/Oline coach will go along way here, and maybe bring talent with them. I don't think Shurmer is the answer either, so he will probably move on. I felt as the year wore on, Prime recognized BL's offense was not a fit with what he was trying to accomplish long-term, even if SS put up huge numbers. I think that we will have a running-game specialist, and Prime's staff will have to learn to work well with others across the board.
