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!

Jermaine Clark Move to Will

Great that there's a new article on this. Clark was at weak side ILB all spring. Supposedly did pretty well, but needs to get bigger.
 
Just FYI, his first name is spelled 'Jermane' - confusing since it's spelled differently all over the place.

Anyway, I approve of the move.
 
Our Safety depth chart will certainly look interesting the next couple years. Besides the incoming DB's, Harlos is the only underclassman Safety we have on the roster, and he could move to LB down the road. Also, Mosley, Walker, Wright, Crawley, and Hall don't appear to be prototypical Safeties. I'm sure it will work out tho...
 
With the trends in college football, especially with the talent in the PAC, towards more wide open offenses with multiple recievers it just makes sense to have LBs and safeties who can cover. The days of putting as many LB types on the field as possible to stop the run are gone. Now you have TE's with the skills that WRs used to have and RBs who catch more balls than they get carries on some teams.
 
MtnBuff said:
With the trends in college football, especially with the talent in the PAC, towards more wide open offenses with multiple recievers it just makes sense to have LBs and safeties who can cover. The days of putting as many LB types on the field as possible to stop the run are gone. Now you have TE's with the skills that WRs used to have and RBs who catch more balls than they get carries on some teams.
Click to expand...
Great analysis.
 
MtnBuff said:
With the trends in college football, especially with the talent in the PAC, towards more wide open offenses with multiple recievers it just makes sense to have LBs and safeties who can cover. The days of putting as many LB types on the field as possible to stop the run are gone. Now you have TE's with the skills that WRs used to have and RBs who catch more balls than they get carries on some teams.
Click to expand...

There is also an old recruiting maxim about taking players with the speed (or marginal speed) for one position, get them bigger and move them to have highly competitive speed at the next position. Make DB's into LB's, make LB's into DE's, make DE's into DL.

The problem we have right now is we can't afford to wait for guys to grow in to new positions - we need talent on the field now.
 
scotth92 said:
There is also an old recruiting maxim about taking players with the speed (or marginal speed) for one position, get them bigger and move them to have highly competitive speed at the next position. Make DB's into LB's, make LB's into DE's, make DE's into DL.

The problem we have right now is we can't afford to wait for guys to grow in to new positions - we need talent on the field now.
Click to expand...

Yeah. Great position to be in, huh? Do we want to be big, slow and have guys playing positions they know well... or small, fast and learning on the job? Thanks, HaLkins.
 
Buffnik said:
Yeah. Great position to be in, huh? Do we want to be big, slow and have guys playing positions they know well... or small, fast and learning on the job? Thanks, HaLkins.
Click to expand...

It is bordering on unbelievable the amount of holes we have on the depth chart and the number of freshman who are going to have to play in 2012. I'm hoping for "an exciting brand of football" and preparing myself for the worst.
 
scotth92 said:
It is bordering on unbelievable the amount of holes we have on the depth chart and the number of freshman who are going to have to play in 2012. I'm hoping for "an exciting brand of football" and preparing myself for the worst.
Click to expand...

What really blows my mind was I believe we had a record number of freshman play last year too.
 
As long as ive been watching, I dont remember this many holes in the depth chart. I damn sure dont remember depending on a ton of true freshmen going into a season. Its definitely not an ideal position.
 
BuffLuKe said:
As long as ive been watching, I dont remember this many holes in the depth chart. I damn sure dont remember depending on a ton of true freshmen going into a season. Its definitely not an ideal position.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It's a red flag when your #1 receiver is a redshirt freshman.
 
I am much more concerned about the fact that we are going to be relying on true freshman for significant playing time on the DL than RS freshmen at WR.

When you have inexperienced guys at WR you can game plan around that. You can limit your play calls to the things you know they can do, you can take pressure off them using the running game and using RBs and TEs as recievers.

On the other hand the offense gets to dictate what the DL has to handle, if they show that there is a part of the game they aren't ready to handle you can guarantee that the offense will give them a steady dose of it until you figure out how to stop it. Try to cover the weaknesses of the rookie DL with the LBs and/or DBs and you just create another weakness to exploit.

Just thinking about it gets me frustrated waiting for us to actually have a roster with some depth that means we aren't forcing guys to play key rolls they aren't ready for. Hopefully a year from now we are closer to actually having a roster ready to compete at a major conference level. It is amazing the damage keeping the wrong coach around an extra year did to this program.
 
MtnBuff said:
I am much more concerned about the fact that we are going to be relying on true freshman for significant playing time on the DL than RS freshmen at WR.

When you have inexperienced guys at WR you can game plan around that. You can limit your play calls to the things you know they can do, you can take pressure off them using the running game and using RBs and TEs as recievers.

On the other hand the offense gets to dictate what the DL has to handle, if they show that there is a part of the game they aren't ready to handle you can guarantee that the offense will give them a steady dose of it until you figure out how to stop it. Try to cover the weaknesses of the rookie DL with the LBs and/or DBs and you just create another weakness to exploit.

Just thinking about it gets me frustrated waiting for us to actually have a roster with some depth that means we aren't forcing guys to play key rolls they aren't ready for. Hopefully a year from now we are closer to actually having a roster ready to compete at a major conference level. It is amazing the damage keeping the wrong coach around an extra year did to this program.
Click to expand...

Enough that I think we are two years away from any semblance to having the ability really sit the freshmen for a year.
 
I agree with Mtn. and FIB above, keeping DII was a catastrophically bad decision which hamstrung the program for a period of time that will extend much longer than the extra year the Boise idot was kept around....
 
Look on the bright side... By 2014, we'll have THE MOST experienced team in the country!

images
 
Good point about how keeping Pigeon that extra year really hurt this team. I feel for Embree...he left a proud program and came back to this. I know he's the right guy, I'm sure he didn't think the rebuilding task would be this Herculean.
 
BuffClass90 said:
Good point about how keeping Pigeon that extra year really hurt this team. I feel for Embree...he left a proud program and came back to this. I know he's the right guy, I'm sure he didn't think the rebuilding task would be this Herculean.
Click to expand...

The cost of keeping Hawkins an extra year was sadly apparent at the time, this isn't new news. People just like to think that it magically went away after he was finally fired. I honestly think Embree knew what he was getting into, although it doesn't mean he hasn't been frustrated as hell at times.
 
buffedup said:
The cost of keeping Hawkins an extra year was sadly apparent at the time, this isn't new news. People just like to think that it magically went away after he was finally fired. I honestly think Embree knew what he was getting into, although it doesn't mean he hasn't been frustrated as hell at times.
Click to expand...

Wouldn't surprise me at all if Embree packed on aother 20 lbs this season.
 
buffedup said:
The cost of keeping Hawkins an extra year was sadly apparent at the time, this isn't new news. People just like to think that it magically went away after he was finally fired. I honestly think Embree knew what he was getting into, although it doesn't mean he hasn't been frustrated as hell at times.
Click to expand...
I was in the kitchem preparing some goodies for the game and listening to Big Al on the radio when they announced DII was going to get another year. As you might recall, there was quite a buzz that he was going to get the axe after the cornchub game, and just before the game they announced the bowl would not beflushed, and the metaphoric turd was going to float for another year. That was completely demoralizing.
 
buffedup said:
The cost of keeping Hawkins an extra year was sadly apparent at the time, this isn't new news. People just like to think that it magically went away after he was finally fired. I honestly think Embree knew what he was getting into, although it doesn't mean he hasn't been frustrated as hell at times.
Click to expand...

The thing that makes his job harder than it would be at most places is that he can't fill in with JUCOs at CU. At this point, he hardly even looks at them. For example, I'm sure that if he was able he would have loved to have been able to sign a couple stop-gap CBs in his 2011 class and some stop-gap DTs in his 2012 class. These wouldn't necessarily be all-conference type players, but it would have made it much easier last year and this year if we'd been able to plug in some game experienced, physically mature players at those positions to help the rebuilding process.
 
Buffnik said:
The thing that makes his job harder than it would be at most places is that he can't fill in with JUCOs at CU. At this point, he hardly even looks at them. For example, I'm sure that if he was able he would have loved to have been able to sign a couple stop-gap CBs in his 2011 class and some stop-gap DTs in his 2012 class. These wouldn't necessarily be all-conference type players, but it would have made it much easier last year and this year if we'd been able to plug in some game experienced, physically mature players at those positions to help the rebuilding process.
Click to expand...

I could not agree more. The Juco rules at CU really limit the program during rebuilding years.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top