Greg Brown Interview with Miller

[lawdogg]

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac10/post/_/id/20431/cus-brown-thinks-pac-12-play-will-be-eye-opening

Favorite quote from the article:

"Somebody's band is going to play, either their band or our band." Brown describing the high risk that will be involved with the kind of aggressiveness that our defense is going to have to use.

 

[Dark Bohner]

Saw that too. Thought it was pretty classic.

 

[Liver]

this reinforces what us west coasters have been saying... the p12 is going to be a lot tougher than some folks think.

 

[NashBuff]

this reinforces what us west coasters have been saying... the p12 is going to be a lot tougher than some folks think.

We used to beat those Pac-10 schools more than lose to them if you west coasters have forgotten about that. It seems like we had better defensive speed under Barnett as well and you can't rule out the ineptness of that Hawkins coaching staff as a factor for our defense looking the last few years. That can be taken care of during winter conditioning and Rippy is an example of that.

I will also concede that it will take more than one season for the Buffs to adjust to the new conference and the good news is that with last year's senior class and this year's senior class, that will mean a great chunk of the CU players recruited to play in the Big 12 will be replaced by CU players recruited to play in the Pac-12.

On the other hand, you west coasters fail to realize that the Pac-12 doesn't have Oklahoma and Texas. Oregon and Stanford are nice but they can't compare to Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas. I'd say the Pac-12 has more Mizzou and Oklahoma State type of teams...explosive teams but also beatable. The coaching of D2 Danny will probably be the main reason we got whipped by Mizzou. The Pac-12 only has U$C as that program that seems unbeatable over the long haul. CU is the #2 program within the Pac-12 when you look at the long haul and I'm talking more than 50 years back...only USC has more prestige than CU whereas in the Big 12, we were #4 behind OU, UT, and NU (#5 if you include A&M). The addition of CU and Utah did actually improve the Pac-10's football prestige.

There are still a lot of questions to ask about the Pac-12. Which South teams tend to finish the season strong besides CU? Utah, Arizona, Arizona State, and UCLA certainly didn't finish the sesaon strong last season. USC lost to Norte Dame late last season as well. Why am I bringing this up? Because the last five Pac-12 conference games will be against those South teams. By that time, we would be more used to playing that style of football in addition to what is usually our best football.

Let me also remind you that even if UCLA did beat Texas, that was one bad Texas team and UCLA lost to KSU plus Okie State made Mike Stoops lose his mind. Utah, despite blowing out ISU, was down 14-10 in the first qtr before they went crazy on special teams and interception returns in Ames. When those returns happen, blowouts do occur.

How are the Pac-12 teams built? More pro style or spread type of teams? What about the defenses?

It will be a difficult first season because we will be playing ten teams that we are not familar with plus Cal. We can adjust and play better as the season progresses and right now I have to say due to injuries and secondary issues, the South is wide open this coming season and not playing those schools until the final five games could be a blessing.

And you west coasters, haven't you forgotten that we are going from a conference that sent the champ to the BCS title game seven years out of a ten year span which is one more than even the SEC can claim?

A good goal for us is to go at least 3-2 against both the South and North plus win at Hawaii and against CSU in Denver and we have a good 8-5 season...I'm down for that.

 

[Duff Man]

this reinforces what us west coasters have been saying... the p12 is going to be a lot tougher than some folks think.

We need to upgrade our team speed big-time over the next few recruiting classes. I never understood why so many posters assumed the Pac-12 was automatically going to be easier than the Big 12. Both are plenty tough.

 

[White_Rabbit]

We used to beat those Pac-10 schools more than lose to them if you west coasters have forgotten about that. It seems like we had better defensive speed under Barnett as well and you can't rule out the ineptness of that Hawkins coaching staff as a factor for our defense looking the last few years. That can be taken care of during winter conditioning and Rippy is an example of that.

I will also concede that it will take more than one season for the Buffs to adjust to the new conference and the good news is that with last year's senior class and this year's senior class, that will mean a great chunk of the CU players recruited to play in the Big 12 will be replaced by CU players recruited to play in the Pac-12.

On the other hand, you west coasters fail to realize that the Pac-12 doesn't have Oklahoma and Texas. Oregon and Stanford are nice but they can't compare to Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas. I'd say the Pac-12 has more Mizzou and Oklahoma State type of teams...explosive teams but also beatable. The coaching of D2 Danny will probably be the main reason we got whipped by Mizzou. The Pac-12 only has U$C as that program that seems unbeatable over the long haul. CU is the #2 program within the Pac-12 when you look at the long haul and I'm talking more than 50 years back...only USC has more prestige than CU whereas in the Big 12, we were #4 behind OU, UT, and NU (#5 if you include A&M). The addition of CU and Utah did actually improve the Pac-10's football prestige.

There are still a lot of questions to ask about the Pac-12. Which South teams tend to finish the season strong besides CU? Utah, Arizona, Arizona State, and UCLA certainly didn't finish the sesaon strong last season. USC lost to Norte Dame late last season as well. Why am I bringing this up? Because the last five Pac-12 conference games will be against those South teams. By that time, we would be more used to playing that style of football in addition to what is usually our best football.

Let me also remind you that even if UCLA did beat Texas, that was one bad Texas team and UCLA lost to KSU plus Okie State made Mike Stoops lose his mind. Utah, despite blowing out ISU, was down 14-10 in the first qtr before they went crazy on special teams and interception returns in Ames. When those returns happen, blowouts do occur.

How are the Pac-12 teams built? More pro style or spread type of teams? What about the defenses?

It will be a difficult first season because we will be playing ten teams that we are not familar with plus Cal. We can adjust and play better as the season progresses and right now I have to say due to injuries and secondary issues, the South is wide open this coming season and not playing those schools until the final five games could be a blessing.

And you west coasters, haven't you forgotten that we are going from a conference that sent the champ to the BCS title game seven years out of a ten year span which is one more than even the SEC can claim?

A good goal for us is to go at least 3-2 against both the South and North plus win at Hawaii and against CSU in Denver and we have a good 8-5 season...I'm down for that.

And your entire post is exactly what Liver is talking about. There is only 1 Baylor/Kansas/Iowa State in the P12 and that is Washington State. Every single other team in the P12 is probably at a better spot than we are right now. So you can talk about history all you want, but the reality is there are a lot of pretty good teams in the P12 right now. Over time we might overcome a lot of these programs, but you expecting 8 wins just because the P12 doesn't have as much history is pretty poor thinking. The only team I'd say we are clearly better than is Washington State, every other P12 game is going to be a tough win.

 

[NW Buff]

On the other hand, you west coasters fail to realize that the Pac-12 doesn't have Oklahoma and Texas. Oregon and Stanford are nice but they can't compare to Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas. I'd say the Pac-12 has more Mizzou and Oklahoma State type of teams...explosive teams but also beatable. The coaching of D2 Danny will probably be the main reason we got whipped by Mizzou. The Pac-12 only has U$C as that program that seems unbeatable over the long haul. CU is the #2 program within the Pac-12 when you look at the long haul and I'm talking more than 50 years back...only USC has more prestige than CU whereas in the Big 12, we were #4 behind OU, UT, and NU (#5 if you include A&M). The addition of CU and Utah did actually improve the Pac-10's football prestige.

I think you're forgetting UW. I would argue that they have at least the same prestige as CU in the last 50 years. I suspect that UCLA does as well. Each of those schools has had their day. If this discussion had been during the down years for UT and OU (mid 90's), then this discussion would be very different.

 

[Hugegroove]

I read a comment in that ee spee in blog thread from a Duck fan who said that the Buffs might knock off Oregon. He sounded like he was pretty worried about that game.

 

[Darth Snow]

I read a comment in that ee spee in blog thread from a Duck fan who said that the Buffs might knock off Oregon. He sounded like he was pretty worried about that game.

hurry up + oxygen deprivation != success. However, they will still roll us with all that speed.

 

[HRBuff]

I read a comment in that ee spee in blog thread from a Duck fan who said that the Buffs might knock off Oregon. He sounded like he was pretty worried about that game.

I saw that too but it was actually a Beavers fan that said we could possibly beat Oregon

 

[Daaah]

Oregon and Stanford can't compare to OU, Texas, and Nebraska? Why not? And i think you are forgetting USC.

 

[supahphish]

A good goal for us is to go at least 3-2 against both the South and North plus win at Hawaii and against CSU in Denver and we have a good 8-5 season...I'm down for that.

Think you need to be a little more realistic, nothing wrong with being an optimist but with those kind of expectations you are just setting yourself up for disappointment. 8-5 would be our best season since 2004, and while it may be possible if all the stars align, that is a ton to ask for from a new coach, new staff, new offense, etc. I see a 6-7 type season as much more reasonable and would not be at all surprised if we end up with only 5 or 4 wins.

You can't say that Oregon and Stanford aren't on the same level as Texas & co. and then a paragraph later dismiss UCLA's win vs Texas because "Texas sucked last year." As others have pointed out, Washington State is the only seriously weak team in the Pac-12 while the Big-12 had Baylor, Iowa State, and Kansas - and we couldn't even win those games the last few years. You also forgot to mention Utah in the Pac-12's top echelon, there's no reason to think they won't continue to be a top-25 team.

 

[Shldr2Shldr]

I can see us easily going 3-1 in non conference. Can we win 4 games through the rest of the season? Yes. WSU, UCLA, probably ASU(they are having big time injury issues), Probably UofA. If we then get up for one more game against USC, Stanford, or Oregon. We are 8-5. Not out of reach at all.

 

[Darth Snow]

I can see us easily going 3-1 in non conference. Can we win 4 games through the rest of the season? Yes. WSU, UCLA, probably ASU(they are having big time injury issues), Probably UofA. If we then get up for one more game against USC, Stanford, or Oregon. We are 8-5. Not out of reach at all.

Best case scenarios don't often pan out. I can also see us missing a bowl game by 2 or 3 games with 5 or 6 late/close losses due to secondary melt downs :huh:.

 

[Shldr2Shldr]

Best case scenarios don't often pan out. I can also see us missing a bowl game by 2 or 3 games with 5 or 6 late/close losses due to secondary melt downs :huh:.

Thats not best case lol. Best case we win every game that we should. Meaning we are at least at a similar level talent wise. That would be UU, ASU, UofA, WSU, UW(without locker they arent going to do well), Cal, and Hawaii. Beat CSU like we should and winning one of the big 4 on our schedule puts us at 10-3. That is best case.

 

[Duff Man]

If we get to 8 regular season wins this year, I will be pretty floored.

 

[Duff Man]

Thats not best case lol. Best case we win every game that we should. Meaning we are at least at a similar level talent wise. That would be UU, ASU, UofA, WSU, UW(without locker they arent going to do well), Cal, and Hawaii. Beat CSU like we should and winning one of the big 4 on our schedule puts us at 10-3. That is best case.

Wow...

 

[Darth Snow]

Thats not best case lol. Best case we win every game that we should. Meaning we are at least at a similar level talent wise. That would be UU, ASU, UofA, WSU, UW(without locker they arent going to do well), Cal, and Hawaii. Beat CSU like we should and winning one of the big 4 on our schedule puts us at 10-3. That is best case.

Your evaluation of our talent level is flawed.

 

[Shldr2Shldr]

Your evaluation of our talent level is flawed.

minus our secondary I dont think so. On offense there is no reason we shouldn't be lighting it up every week. 4 experience OL come back. Our top 2 receivers (potentially adding UGA talent) are returning, one 1300 yard rusher and a back up who apparently is just like him, a QB that has serious potential (if he stopped running everywhere and planted his feet more I think we would all have a very different vibe on TH), and TE is looking to be at least decent if not good. On D we have some issues on the Dline but with the talent coming in I expect by the opening for this group to be decent as well. LB play will improve given who their coach is because we do have talent there. CB and S are the only spots I am truly worried about. People focus so much on the first 9 games of last season and forget the last 3. Once under a coach that actually coached with some passion and didn't except mediocrity they improved drastically. I expect the same thing if not better to happen with Embree at the helm. Sure 10-3 is extremely optimistic but 5 wins is not reasonable either. 7-8 wins is where I expect this team. If no other reason than that we should absolutely be able to go 3-1 in non conference. 4 or 5 more wins in conference should not be unexpected.

 

[Duff Man]

We went 2-1 over those last three games, beating two mediocre teams in KSU and ISU while getting dominated by NU. You think you might be reading just a bit too much into those three games?

We have depth issues all over the place and special teams are still a major question mark. Not going to say it will never happen, but eight regular season wins is pretty damn ambitious.

 

[Shldr2Shldr]

We went 2-1 over those last three games, beating two mediocre teams in KSU and ISU while getting dominated by NU. You think you might be reading just a bit too much into those three games?

We have depth issues all over the place and special teams are still a major question mark. Not going to say it will never happen, but eight regular season wins is pretty damn ambitious.

The overall play of the team increased drastically in those 3 games. NU should have beat us they had a good team. We beat teams that we should have or at least matched up well against. There are about 8 of those on our schedule. Granted we will lose some we shouldnt and win some we have no business winning. 8 is a high number however it is not out of reach. Sorry I just get frustrated when people are saying we will maybe win 3 games next year. Thats selling this team extremely short. I wouldnt be the least bit surprised to be in a bowl next season. If that is 7 wins fine.

We do have questions all over the place. So does everyone except for U$C and Oregon. The injury bug has hit a lot of the Pac-12 hard this offseason. A lot of teams that were good last year lost a lot of hard to replace talent. The spring the D doesn't look so good, but give them time to study and figure this out. We don't have too many left that played under Brown before he left. The secondary will come around whether it be the guys here now or the freshman step up and make some noise. Special teams is a huge question but I think the appropriate amount of attention is being paid to that area. Castor sounds like he is starting to find his groove which will be a huge relief in close games. I am not nearly as worried about this season as I have been in the past. Buffs are going to surprise a lot of people, even on this board.

 

[Duff Man]

The overall play of the team increased drastically in those 3 games. NU should have beat us they had a good team. We beat teams that we should have or at least matched up well against. There are about 8 of those on our schedule. Granted we will lose some we shouldnt and win some we have no business winning. 8 is a high number however it is not out of reach. Sorry I just get frustrated when people are saying we will maybe win 3 games next year. Thats selling this team extremely short. I wouldnt be the least bit surprised to be in a bowl next season. If that is 7 wins fine.

We do have questions all over the place. So does everyone except for U$C and Oregon. The injury bug has hit a lot of the Pac-12 hard this offseason. A lot of teams that were good last year lost a lot of hard to replace talent. The spring the D doesn't look so good, but give them time to study and figure this out. We don't have too many left that played under Brown before he left. The secondary will come around whether it be the guys here now or the freshman step up and make some noise. Special teams is a huge question but I think the appropriate amount of attention is being paid to that area. Castor sounds like he is starting to find his groove which will be a huge relief in close games. I am not nearly as worried about this season as I have been in the past. Buffs are going to surprise a lot of people, even on this board.

I think the Buffs can win at least five. The problem is finding those extra couple victories to get to 7 wins and a bowl game. Let's not get carried away though and say the ceiling for the team is 10 wins. If that happens, it is one of the best coaching jobs in the history of the program, bar none.

I would normally be on board with the "give the defense some time to figure this out" mantra, but we were bad there last season and lost our two best players (arguably). The overall depth and athleticism on defense has to be a major concern right now. As far as Castor, he got a real ringing endorsement from the coaching staff-he will be ready to compete for the kicking job in the fall. There is nothing to suggest that the kicking woes have changed until we actually see these guys in pressure-filled moments.

 

[SINKRATZ]

minus our secondary I dont think so. On offense there is no reason we shouldn't be lighting it up every week. 4 experience OL come back. Our top 2 receivers (potentially adding UGA talent) are returning, one 1300 yard rusher and a back up who apparently is just like him, a QB that has serious potential (if he stopped running everywhere and planted his feet more I think we would all have a very different vibe on TH), and TE is looking to be at least decent if not good. On D we have some issues on the Dline but with the talent coming in I expect by the opening for this group to be decent as well. LB play will improve given who their coach is because we do have talent there. CB and S are the only spots I am truly worried about. People focus so much on the first 9 games of last season and forget the last 3. Once under a coach that actually coached with some passion and didn't except mediocrity they improved drastically. I expect the same thing if not better to happen with Embree at the helm. Sure 10-3 is extremely optimistic but 5 wins is not reasonable either. 7-8 wins is where I expect this team. If no other reason than that we should absolutely be able to go 3-1 in non conference. 4 or 5 more wins in conference should not be unexpected.

I love the optimism, but I don't see how we "absolutely" go 3-1 in non-conference. We would have to beat either Cal or OSU, which one of those games is an absolute win in your mind?

I'm also not sure how you say our talent is on par with all those teams you mentioned...I was at the Cal game last year and you'll never convince me this team has talent remotely close to Cal.

 

[White_Rabbit]

I don't want to be overly negative here, but I just don't see how 8 wins isn't the absolute best case scenario.

Out of our first 4 games, we play Ohio State and Cal. Ohio State is clearly better than us even without their starters and HC. Cal beat us 52-7 last year. Granted, they are a different team on the road, but I still have trouble seeing a W there. Best case scenario here is 3 wins, more likely 2 wins. Hawaii isn't exactly a pushover either.

We then have to go to Stanford, Washington, Arizona State, UCLA, and Utah. There are some winnable games there imo, but we have been so terrible on the road the last few years, I feel like expecting numerous wins on the road at this time is just wishful thinking. We're not beating Stanford. The next 4, we'd be pretty lucky to win 2 of those. UCLA and ASU are on the ropes, but again, they're on the road. At best I see 3 wins here, probably 2.

At home we get Washington State, Oregon, USC, and Arizona. I'm hoping we win 2 of those games. USC still has USC talent. Oregon.. no. Arizona is more on our level, but even at that they've done a whole lot better than we have lately. Best case scenario here is 2 wins.

So best case scenario is 8 wins, more likely is 5 or 6. If we were to reverse our away games and home games, I'd be a little more optimistic. At home I'd feel a lot more comfortable calling games like ASU and UCLA wins. We also play 13 weeks in a row and don't exactly have great depth. If we got some breaks in there I'd feel a little more optimistic as well. I think we're going to be a better team than our record suggests by the end of the year because of all of these hurdles.

 

[slider]

We could easily go 0-4 in non-conf. We all know about Cal and Ohio St. But Hawaii is a talented team and we are a terrible road team. And CSU always shows up for the CU game and they are an improved team. I wouldn't be surprised with that outcome.

Also those 13 straight weeks are gonna take a toll on the team. We have little depth as is

 

[Duff Man]

We could easily go 0-4 in non-conf. We all know about Cal and Ohio St. But Hawaii is a talented team and we are a terrible road team. And CSU always shows up for the CU game and they are an improved team. I wouldn't be surprised with that outcome.

Also those 13 straight weeks are gonna take a toll on the team. We have little depth as is

I wouldn't go that far. Going 0-4 in non-conference would be pretty bad and is very unlikely IMO.

 

[wablty]

edit: ASU fan wandering through. Checking out the new guys, so to speak.

ASU lost a starting corner and a WR. The corner was very good, probably the best in the conference. The receiver was a likely starter, but not exactly the offense's bell cow. Losing Bolden really hurts ASU, but it doesn't sink the season. It makes depth a bit of a concern. There are 2 other corners on the Sun Devil roster who have started and played well before. They're still probably the Pac 12 South favorite. Just some *****s in the armor of what most people thought was going to be a team without a significant weakness.

In regards to Pac 12 talent level, I recall reading in a few articles over the last few years that the Pac 10 has put out more players per team to the NFL than any conference not named the SEC, and it's not all USC. Washington, Oregon, UCLA and ASU have all put an awful lot of players into the league over the years.

Texas and Oklahoma are obviously monsters, but I think you will find the overall caliber of this conference to be on par or of a slightly higher, faster talent level than the one you've just left. Your LB Major said it recently- There are no cupcakes. No one is a free win except maybe WSU.

 

[slider]

I wouldn't go that far. Going 0-4 in non-conference would be pretty bad and is very unlikely IMO.

I don't think it will happen but I wouldn't be terribly surprised.

 

[Duff Man]

I don't think it will happen but I wouldn't be terribly surprised.

Dang. 0-4 would honestly shock me.

 

[sackman]

Thats not best case lol. Best case we win every game that we should. Meaning we are at least at a similar level talent wise. That would be UU, ASU, UofA, WSU, UW(without locker they arent going to do well), Cal, and Hawaii. Beat CSU like we should and winning one of the big 4 on our schedule puts us at 10-3. That is best case.

That's not best case. That's delusional homerism. I like it, though.