Make A Prediction

[3option]

Post weakened considerably by the bolded portion. Why rely upon what happened under the worst coach to ever wear a CU visor? That's like trying to predict where the bear will go, by looking at the tracks showing where he came from!

Systems last year were destined to fail from the get-go: O was too complex for the timing to develop, creating doubts and slowing down the players to reactive level of play. Wood even stated the play-calling was so lengthy and complicated, he wasn't certain he ever was correct. That kind of doubt is a play killer in FB at any level and it showed. Webb was elevated because he got the system's intricacies down and could at least call a play. Then there was Brown running defensive schemes dating from the '70's, all the while not bothering to coach the DB's and allowing the DL's to stay fat and out-of-shape. Cabral mailed in LB coaching, in a snit he did not get the HC job.

Combine those FUBARS with the team's division---fostered by JE playing favorites and practicing only the "1"s---and his inability to plan and motivate ( Alternately sulking and screaming obscenities is not "motivation.") and its no wonder LAST year's team was a laughingstock of the worst team evah in Boulder.

So, if you want to look backward, do so at the peril of your own credibility.

I agree with Duff. You all put too much weight on coaching (even though the last staff was admittedly in way over their heads.) Here are some of the coaches who we've blamed for our poor play in the past and where they ended up:

Kiesau --> OC Washington
Helfrich --> HC Oregon
Brown --> SC Alabama

This whole thread is one giant rationalization; our baby is ugly.

 

[boydbuff]

I just don't understand how some of the same people criticizing our current recruiting efforts, that use the recruiting services to justify their arguments, are some of the same people unwilling to accept that team recruiting rankings should be a reasonable reflection of overall talent on a team. I am pretty sure this argument has played over numerous times in recent years on AB and the evidence has indeed shown that team recruiting rankings is a very strong predictor (i.e. highly correlated) with W/Ls.

FYI, Attrition and injuries happen to all teams and if there is an abnormally high amount of either one, the coaching and training staff have to assume some of the blame anyway, so I think that argument is not strong.

We all have used the anecdotal coaches who through their system or their style are able to get a lot more out of their players than their team recruiting rankings suggest. I would argue that Embree, and Hawk were the opposite and the evidence bares that out. On the other hand, looking at what HCMM did at SJSU the evidence suggests that he very well may be in the group of coaches that are able to get more out of their team than their talent (i.e. team recruiting rankings) suggests.

Evidence you ask:
SJSU Recruiting Rankings
2009: #87
2010: #100
2011: #99

I am not including 2012 b/c Duff doesn't think I should. Ok, so based on team rankings, SJSU's team would be expected to finish around 95th place in 2012 (if you are like me and believe the statistics that suggest there is a strong correlation b/w team rankings and team performance).

In 2012, with an average recruiting class for the 3 target years of 95, SJSU finished the season #21 in AP and USA Today.
In 2012, with an average recruiting class for the 3 target years of 63, CU finished the season #124

I rest my case until someone can make a stronger one that coaching can't make a huge difference. This is why some of us believe that HCMM can pull this thing around. Not expecting miracles in season 1, but that we will be much improved across the board with much of the same players.

 

[SINKRATZ]

Boyd, I don't disagree that coaching is important, but you left out an important statistic that makes your argument pretty worthless; strength of schedule. For example, it's not hard to see a scenario where a school that recruits in the 90s and has a schedule in the 90s might have a better record than a school recruiting in the 60s but has a schedule in the 20s. It's not as simple an equation as you are portraying.

 

[boydbuff]

Boyd, I don't disagree that coaching is important, but you left out an important statistic that makes your argument pretty worthless; strength of schedule. For example, it's not hard to see a scenario where a school that recruits in the 90s and has a schedule in the 90s might have a better record than a school recruiting in the 60s but has a schedule in the 20s. It's not as simple an equation as you are portraying.

I was waiting for someone to bring that one up. And I agree that is certainly relevant to the discussion. The end of year SOS for Colorado was 35 and SJSU was 86. So it is obviously easier to get wins at SJSU if you are a decent coach and recruit OK than it is at CU.

Yet factoring in SOS, margin of defeat, W/Ls Colorado last year looks like dog**** and SJSU looks pretty damn good.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/sagarin/fbt12.htm?loc=interstitialskip

BCS is going to use the ELO_Chess as input going forward in ranking teams. SJSU at the end of last year, factoring all that in, was 23rd in the country and CU was 148th (i.e. behind FCS schools).

I don't care how you slice this our coaching staff sucked, our talent was mediocre and our performance sucked dog-sh*t. As opposed HCMM who turned very below average talent into a top 25 team.

And to add to this, we played some common opponents and that analysis doesn't look good either. And when you talk about, well the excuse there is our schedule is tougher so by the time we play stanford we are beat up. So then explain why HCMM is able to beat CSU later in the season and we played CSU early in the season so we were not beat up yet.

 

[FlatironsBuff]

You are absolutely right. The point I am making for tini is that he is projecting MM's greatness into his very first game as HC at Colorado. I'm trying to point out that past results is no guarantee of future success and to expect it in game 1 is absolutely ludicrous.

I dont think anyone truly "expects" CU to be instantly better. But a win against CSU is certainly not out of the rhealm of possibility either. Yes, our ckasses have been too low to think about winning the PAC 12 even with the best coaches on the planet. But I think the talent we have with good coaching and solid fundamentals means we are not out of the CSU game already. I think we have a solid chance to win if we complete passes to PRich and open up the field. If Wood has huge pressure and no time to throw, then we wont win.

I would throw everything plus the kitchen sink at Wood if I were CSU........and the CU coaches (OL especially) should know they will do everything to shake his confidence early. I think that is the key to who wins this game.

Sent from my SCH-I545 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Duff Man]

Sigh... Boyd, I have never argued recruiting rankings are an exact correlation of how the final ranking should be for that team. Who would? I have suggested that expecting the Buffs to climb the ranks of the PAC-12 while consistently finishing at the bottom of the PAC-12 is pretty foolish.

In case I have not been clear, I think the Buffs have had above average attrition without the benefit of plugging in JUCO transfers over the last several seasons. And some of that is the fault of Hawkins and some is Embree's fault, but it still is relevant either way. If you want to ignore that fact (and it is a fact), go ahead, but stop acting like I am being inconsistent on this issue.

 

[boydbuff]

Duff I am also not making an argument that it is a 100% correlation b/w recruiting rankings and W/Ls but rather there is a very strong correlation.

I don't have all the data to run a correlation analysis but I think it would be difficult to find anyone on AB who is prepared to argue that there is no meaningful correlation b/w team recruiting rankings and W/Ls.

I do believe that we had a debate on this in the past year and someone posted an article which had done such an analysis and the results were beyond compelling.

Use any excuse you want-our WR group is worse than others-our attrition is worse than others-whatever, point is under Embree we WAAAAAAAAAY underperformed in the context of objective criteria whereas HCMM WAAAAAY overperformed at SJSU in the context of objective criteria.

I believe that if you put HCMM and his crew in Embree's place last year, in light of injuries, attrition, etc. you would see a margin of defeat reduction of at least 10 points, and you would see most likely 4 victories instead of 1.

This is not because I think HCMM is some miracle worker. I think he is beyond competent, in comparison to beyond incompetent.

 

[boydbuff]

I have done some quick research to find out what other scholars and researchers have discovered on this topic on the relationship between team recruiting rankings and winning percentage/success on the field:
No team with a 4-year average Rivals star rating below 3.43 has played in the national championship game in the last 5 yrs
No team with a 4-year average Rivals star rating below 3.61 has won the national championship in the last 5 yrs
Of course the guy's model suggests other factors such as player development (i.e. the role of coaches)



http://www.clashmoremike.com/2010/08/a-theory-on-college-football-performance-part-1-the-players/#

 

[Wyo Buff]

Something noone has mentioned yet-HCMM knows how to coach and has beaten CSU with-what I hope we could say-with a team with worse talent (SJSU). Last year they beat the rammies 40-20 (@SJSU) and the year before beat them 38-31 at the Fort.

This is where I see a major mispercention on the part of the unwashed masses. HCMM looks to be a dyed-in-the-wool (no CSU pun intended) football coach whose recruiting method is to find overlooked projected 17-18 year old recruits and develop them into ass-kickers. To say that SJSU had "worse talent" than CU really is not true. They may have had worse high school talent, however, the hopeful aspect of this is that 17-18 year olds many times are only beginning to develop into "men." Remember, HCMM only won one game his first year out. The second year was a step-change because his "boys" were becoming "men." Realistically, unless the talent we currently have in the upper classes is a lot better than I suspect, we should be looking at a pretty rough 3-4 win season coming up with a "step-change" year following.

 

[Quattro]

Something noone has mentioned yet-HCMM knows how to coach and has beaten CSU with-what I hope we could say-with a team with worse talent (SJSU). Last year they beat the rammies 40-20 (@SJSU) and the year before beat them 38-31 at the Fort.

This is where I see a major mispercention on the part of the unwashed masses. HCMM looks to be a dyed-in-the-wool (no CSU pun intended) football coach whose recruiting method is to find overlooked projected 17-18 year old recruits and develop them into ass-kickers. To say that SJSU had "worse talent" than CU really is not true. They may have had worse high school talent, however, the hopeful aspect of this is that 17-18 year olds many times are only beginning to develop into "men." Remember, HCMM only won one game his first year out. The second year was a step-change because his "boys" were becoming "men." Realistically, unless the talent we currently have in the upper classes is a lot better than I suspect, we should be looking at a pretty rough 3-4 win season coming up with a "step-change" year following.

Having less than 85 scholarships due to APR sanctions probably had a big part in his first year record, along with playing at Alabama and at Wisconsin in the OOC. I read somewhere that he had about the same amount of freshman playing in his first year as we did last year so I see his second year as a better comparison.

 

[Quattro]

You are using what we call Hawkins logic. Some of your points have merit, but you are basing some them on wishful thinking.

1 and 2 I can live with, but to point 3 again, you have to start somewhere as a new coaching staff at a bottom level program. Jim McElwain and CSU did exactly what a building program has to do in the beginning, which is win the games you should win and continue improving throughout that first year. They did that to close the season and now have a very real thing called momentum. If I was a lamb fan, I would absolutely have reason to be cautiously optimistic. The question now is if they can take the next step.

As for stopping Powell and PRich. They aren't All Americans, although they are very promising. Good coaches can gameplan to minimize their impact. CSU won't likely be standing their with their thumbs up their asses while PRich and Powell run by. (1)

Where your Hawk logic comes in, is when you try to parallel us with SJSU. We all fell into that exact same trap with Hawk and Boise State. We projected Boise's success onto what would happen with Colorado. We all know how that turned out. MM may very well be a great coach and mentored under Bill Parcells, but improvement doesn't just happen overnight, and while we all love to poke fun at McElwain, he does come from an exceptional college coaching tree himself. (2)

1. You can gameplan all you want, but Paul Richardson is a top 4 WR talent in the Pac 12 when he is healthy. We've all seen what he can do when he's healthy as seen in the California, Hawai'i, Kansas, Texas Tech, and Iowa State games. Every single coach gameplans for every game but that doesn't mean it's going to be effective in stopping the players.

2. When Hawkins was hired here, he had to rebuild our program but when he was at Boise he took over a already well-polished machine, there's a difference between coming from a well-oiled machine and having to rebuild with no experience versus rebuilding a team from the ground up into a top 25 team in three years. MM has been talked up as a coaching superstar by Tom Osbourne (who I value his opinion on football coaching matters, **** him though), won at a place people don't, and has mentored under some great coaches (Parcells and Cutcliffe). I also don't get the McElwain love, he's not that impressive. Did he win a couple national titles at Alabama? Yes but he is not the brains behind the operation, as evidence by the fact that Alabama continues to win and wins big. He had access to the best talent in the country, he has no recruiting advantages in Fort Collins.

If improvement doesn't happen overnight then when does it? If you're not getting better everyday you're getting worse.

 

[Dark Bohner]

1. You can gameplan all you want, but Paul Richardson is a top 4 WR talent in the Pac 12 when he is healthy. We've all seen what he can do when he's healthy as seen in the California, Hawai'i, Kansas, Texas Tech, and Iowa State games. Every single coach gameplans for every game but that doesn't mean it's going to be effective in stopping the players.

2. When Hawkins was hired here, he had to rebuild our program but when he was at Boise he took over a already well-polished machine, there's a difference between coming from a well-oiled machine and having to rebuild with no experience versus rebuilding a team from the ground up into a top 25 team in three years. MM has been talked up as a coaching superstar by Tom Osbourne (who I value his opinion on football coaching matters, **** him though), won at a place people don't, and has mentored under some great coaches (Parcells and Cutcliffe). I also don't get the McElwain love, he's not that impressive. Did he win a couple national titles at Alabama? Yes but he is not the brains behind the operation, as evidence by the fact that Alabama continues to win and wins big. He had access to the best talent in the country, he has no recruiting advantages in Fort Collins.

If improvement doesn't happen overnight then when does it? If you're not getting better everyday you're getting worse.

1.You are assuming our O-line and QB are going to be good enough that we can maximize Richardson's potential immediately.

2. People said the same thing about Hawkins. He took over some DII program that was in the dumps prior to Boise State and guided them to the National Title. He had done rebuilding before.

3. Of course you are always improving, but your expectations coming off of the worst season ever...let me say that again: Worst. Season. Ever. seem unrealisitic. You are assuming that all of the moving parts of this team will be vastly improved and in sync enough to make immediate use of our playmakers. Trust me, it rarely happens this way.

 

[Quattro]

1.You are assuming our O-line and QB are going to be good enough that we can maximize Richardson's potential immediately.

2. People said the same thing about Hawkins. He took over some DII program that was in the dumps prior to Boise State and guided them to the National Title. He had done rebuilding before.

3. Of course you are always improving, but your expectations coming off of the worst season ever...let me say that again: Worst. Season. Ever. seem unrealisitic. You are assuming that all of the moving parts of this team will be vastly improved and in sync enough to make immediate use of our playmakers. Trust me, it rarely happens this way.

1. I don't see why the OL couldn't hold their blocks for 2-3 seconds while PRich makes a move over the middle. I'm not worried about the OL unless injuries happen, which we should be fine there for the first few games. PRich doesn't need much room to make a play, either. Lindgren's offense also prides itself on getting the ball out of the QBs hands quick and allows the WRs to make plays in space, which takes pressure off the QB and the OL and if you watch videos of the offense last year Fales rarely holds the ball longer than 3.5 seconds and most of the time the ball is out of Fales' hand within 2 seconds. Refer to this video for evidence of PRich not needing much space:

[video=youtube;WhaL8vLU1AE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhaL8vLU1AE[/video]

And this video for the quick passes that Lindgren's offense is based around:

[video=youtube;kNLcqfKDjvM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNLcqfKDjvM[/video]

And this one against CSU:
[video=youtube;UKafeMUV8WA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKafeMUV8WA[/video]

2. I fail to see how rebuilding a D2 school is relevant here

3. Well, Athlon, an unbiased source, has CU going 3-9 this year with a 1-8 Pac 12 record which means they believe we take 2 of 3 in the OOC. They picked Fresno to win the MWC and I doubt they are predicting we will beat them, so that leaves the first two games. So umm yeah.

And here's what they say about CSU:

Colorado State couldn’t stop the run in 2012 and could not get off the field on third down

....Unless the Rams can shore up the line, however, it won’t matter how good the linebackers and secondary play. Opponents converted 48.4 percent of their third downs last year, mostly because the line offered little resistance, allowing other teams to average 4.7 yards per rush.

....On closer inspection, however, you realize that the Rams’ victories came over teams that went a combined 10–40, while they lost eight games by an average of 19.4 points.

http://www.athlonsports.com/college-football/top-25/colorado-state-2013-preview-predictions

They have CSU as the #95 team in the country next year, they have CU as the #85 so they also disagree with you.

 

[J.R. Ewing]

McElwain maybe goofy looking, but he isn't stupid. I expect Richardson to be double teamed on most passing downs. His stat line during the first half of the season will probably disappoint most fans until someone else steps up.

 

[Dark Bohner]

News flash. We aren't SJSU. You are comparing a top 25 program to the worst program in D-1. You make all of these assumptions about our ability to execute as if Colorado is in a vacuum when playing. They aren't. The opponent is scheming and adjusting based on attacking our weaknesses, and most of our opponents (CSU included) are light years ahead of Colorado in their implementation of offensive and defensive schemes, thanks to coaching continuity.

You and I are going in circles at this point. Is it absolutely far fetched that we win against CSU? No, but I you are doing the perpetual hope springs eternal kool-aid drinking just a little early. This program is a mess. I hope you are right and that the Buffs beat the Rams, but I think we will see the improvement you are expecting later in the year, and I've been following college football very closely since before you were born and have seen this many times before. Sadly, I'll be telling you I told you so on the evening of September 1st.

 

[Quattro]

News flash. We aren't SJSU. You are comparing a top 25 program to the worst program in D-1. You make all of these assumptions about our ability to execute as if Colorado is in a vacuum when playing. They aren't. The opponent is scheming and adjusting based on attacking our weaknesses, and most of our opponents (CSU included) are light years ahead of Colorado in their implementation of offensive and defensive schemes, thanks to coaching continuity.

You and I are going in circles at this point. Is it absolutely far fetched that we win against CSU? No, but I you are doing the perpetual hope springs eternal kool-aid drinking just a little early. This program is a mess. I hope you are right and that the Buffs beat the Rams, but I think we will see the improvement you are expecting later in the year, and I've been following college football very closely since before you were born and have seen this many times before. Sadly, I'll be telling you I told you so on the evening of September 1st.

Thanks, I didn't know that. Very helpful information. I do wonder who SJSU's OC was last year though because that offense in the video looked a lot like the one I saw in the Spring, must be a coincidence.

 

[Dark Bohner]

Thanks, I didn't know that. Very helpful information. I do wonder who SJSU's OC was last year though because that offense in the video looked a lot like the one I saw in the Spring, must be a coincidence.

No problem. Glad to help.

 

[Scotch]

To the OP: With as ****** as the Buffs played last year, the Rams were still all but dead before that damned muffed punt, and it proved to be the difference. Talent wise the Rams won't be any better, but the Buffs get P-Rich back. Buffs win 24-20.