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!

Observations from a 6 year old

ParkerBuff98

New Member
Alright, took my 6 year old to his 1st CU game. He was very excited with Ralphie, Chip and the whole atmosphere until ...... the game started. Throughout the game, he kept on asking me how much we scored and how much they scored. After a few scores, he started squinching his face after I said we still haven't scored. After it was 35 - 0, my son just couldn't stand it anymore and said disgustingly "CU runs as slow as me!!".

My son diagnosed one of the many problems we face and that is team speed. So my question is, why are we trying to run a pro set when we have so few horses in the barn? Become like Stanford? Uh, the have an all world QB so they may revert back to irrelevance once Luck leaves. If Embree doesn't knock it out of the park with recruiting, he may not be around in few years.

On the "other board", when Barnett was fired, I suggested 2 coaches (NB cleared out the old posts, but trust me, I wrote it). Number 1, Jon Embree and number 2, Paul Johnson. Johnson is a former coach of Navy and is the current coach of GT. GT runs the triple option. GT has had success with that offense. So why are we trying to put a square peg in a round hole and insist on a pro set offense? I'm slightly more than a casual fan but if BM can run it, why wouldn't me? Enlighten me, please.

http://www.playbookexchange.net/playbooks/Offense/01080201-1992Colorado.pdf
 
A big part of the pro style offense is that they will be able to recruit good players, because the players will want to play in an offense and for coaches who know the NFL well. Barnett basically ran a similar offense predicated on run first. Colorado has a built in advantage(altitude) that most schools don't that makes running a smash mouth pro style offense even more appealing.
 
How appealing is it for recruits to see the Buffs get killed on TV whenever they're on? To see a completely inept offense, one that is supposed to be playing smashmouth, run it down your throat offense? The square peg and round hole right now is not impressing any recruits, and each year this staff doesn't get an upper division finish in recruiting it just sets the program back even more. It's happened for the last three and we're seeing the results. 11th in the PAC 12 right now means there's a lot of ground to make up for the 2012 class.
 
84Buff said:
How appealing is it recruits to see the Buffs get killed on TV whenever they're on? The square peg and round hole right now is not impressing any recruits, and each year this staff doesn't get an upper division finish in recruiting it just sets the program back even more. 11th in the PAC 12 right now means there's a lot of ground to make up for the 2012 class.
Click to expand...

"Our fans have been tremendous. We had some big time recruits in, and the fact that they stayed here when things weren't going our way, the way they reacted, the way they cheered on and tried to help our team, the way they were down on Pearl Street afterwards when our recruits were down there, it helps a lot because those kids are talking that. Obviously we're not where we'd like to be this year ...from a record standpoint and one of the ways for us to continue to improve is obviously recruiting. That's the number one way, and our fans have a tremendous impact on that. So the fact they did what they did at the Oregon game and how they were down there at the Stampede and how they are down there on Pearl Street after the game goes a long ways." - Coach Jon Embree

Stanford and Washington didn't get recruits by being good with those 1 and 0 win seasons

AND we're #4 in the Pac in recruting according to 247 sports
 
We don't have the personnel to fit any scheme and make it look good right now. But we do have a stud pro-style QB transfer, a stud pro-style QB commit and a future All American WR, all of whom would be completely useless in the offense you suggest. In fact, switching to the triple option with the current personnel would be awful. Who would be the QB? Moten?
 
84Buff said:
How appealing is it for recruits to see the Buffs get killed on TV whenever they're on? To see a completely inept offense, one that is supposed to be playing smashmouth, run it down your throat offense? The square peg and round hole right now is not impressing any recruits, and each year this staff doesn't get an upper division finish in recruiting it just sets the program back even more. It's happened for the last three and we're seeing the results. 11th in the PAC 12 right now means there's a lot of ground to make up for the 2012 class.
Click to expand...

Then I hope you brought your unicorn.
 
A lot of kids will be turned on by the idea of being on national TV next season, when they're playing a lot of the time.
 
tante said:
what kind of scheme works for slow players?
Click to expand...

Well, if you don't have the power and if you don't have the speed, you'll need trickeration and team discipline (bone, veer, wing t). What we're doing is not working and even if we had a stud defense, these fast 3 and outs are just wearing us down. Oregon could of put 70 on us if they wanted to but didn't.
 
ParkerBuff98 said:
Well, if you don't have the power and if you don't have the speed, you'll need trickeration and team discipline (bone, veer, wing t). What we're doing is not working and even if we had a stud defense, these fast 3 and outs are just wearing us down. Oregon could of put 70 on us if they wanted to but didn't.
Click to expand...

You need exceptional discipline to successfully run the option, and that typically comes from drill and repitition. I believe the thought is that with more drill and repitition, a pro-style offense can also be effective. The bottom line though, is the players must compete each and every snap and execute their assignments, whether you are running a pro set, spread or option.
 
ParkerBuff98 said:
Well, if you don't have the power and if you don't have the speed, you'll need trickeration and team discipline (bone, veer, wing t). What we're doing is not working and even if we had a stud defense, these fast 3 and outs are just wearing us down. Oregon could of put 100+ on us if they wanted to but didn't.
Click to expand...

Fify...just keepin it real
 
Nor Cal Buff said:
We don't have the personnel to fit any scheme and make it look good right now. But we do have a stud pro-style QB transfer, a stud pro-style QB commit and a future All American WR, all of whom would be completely useless in the offense you suggest. In fact, switching to the triple option with the current personnel would be awful. Who would be the QB? Moten?
Click to expand...

I love our commits but without the hogs on the line, our stud QBs are going to be enjoying the Boulder skyline on their backs. That's why I suggest something option so we can at least sniff some Ws and not look like a FCS team. It's obviously too late, but I could envision evolving from a triple to a spread to eventually a I / pro style when we get more horses. Of course, this is coming from just a fan who wants it all and wants it now and has no comprehension on how hard retreaking an offense is.
 
ParkerBuff98 said:
Alright, took my 6 year old to his 1st CU game. He was very excited with Ralphie, Chip and the whole atmosphere until ...... the game started. Throughout the game, he kept on asking me how much we scored and how much they scored. After a few scores, he started squinching his face after I said we still haven't scored. After it was 35 - 0, my son just couldn't stand it anymore and said disgustingly "CU runs as slow as me!!".

My son diagnosed one of the many problems we face and that is team speed. So my question is, why are we trying to run a pro set when we have so few horses in the barn? Become like Stanford? Uh, the have an all world QB so they may revert back to irrelevance once Luck leaves. If Embree doesn't knock it out of the park with recruiting, he may not be around in few years.

On the "other board", when Barnett was fired, I suggested 2 coaches (NB cleared out the old posts, but trust me, I wrote it). Number 1, Jon Embree and number 2, Paul Johnson. Johnson is a former coach of Navy and is the current coach of GT. GT runs the triple option. GT has had success with that offense. So why are we trying to put a square peg in a round hole and insist on a pro set offense? I'm slightly more than a casual fan but if BM can run it, why wouldn't me? Enlighten me, please.

http://www.playbookexchange.net/playbooks/Offense/01080201-1992Colorado.pdf
Click to expand...
How about we let Embree get players that fit his offense before we jump to conclusions about changing systems? We were a spread (if you can call it that) offense with no speed and we're still playing with those players.

84Buff said:
How appealing is it for recruits to see the Buffs get killed on TV whenever they're on? To see a completely inept offense, one that is supposed to be playing smashmouth, run it down your throat offense? The square peg and round hole right now is not impressing any recruits, and each year this staff doesn't get an upper division finish in recruiting it just sets the program back even more. It's happened for the last three and we're seeing the results. 11th in the PAC 12 right now means there's a lot of ground to make up for the 2012 class.
Click to expand...
Let's see, since we're modeling ourselves after Stanford, let's compare the recruiting rankings.

Jim Harbaugh (2007-2010)
2007: #10 in the Pac 12
2008: #9 in the Pac 12
2009: #3 in the Pac 12
2010: #5 in the Pac 12
Average class rank: 6.75 and yet, they're at the top of the Pac 12 with Oregon and passed USC who damn near every year gets the #1 overall class in the Pac 12.

Oh man if only Stanford had gotten higher recruiting classes the first few years. You can never build a base off of 3* players like Harbaugh did. Harbaugh got his QB and Stanford went up from there. Embree has yet to have a full cycle to recruit, and will be better than Harbaugh's first class was by far. And for comparisions sake, here's Dan Hawkins' recruiting classes:

Dan Hawkins (2006-2010)
2006: #9 in the Pac 12
2007: #4 in the Pac 12
2008: #3 in the Pac 12
2009: #9 in the Pac 12
2010: #12 in the Pac 12 - left Embree with one commit when he was fired IIRC
Average class rank: 7.4 so even though we essentially recruited the same as Stanford, they're miles ahead of us, I wonder why that is.

We don't really have the speed or run blocking ability to run the option or spread offense either. That'd be like trying to fit a triangle into a square.
 
Creatini said:
How about we let Embree get players that fit his offense before we jump to conclusions about changing systems? We were a spread (if you can call it that) offense with no speed and we're still playing with those players.
Click to expand...

Yeah, it's just my frustration talking. I hate being numb to when we get destroyed. I haven't been a fan as long as some of you all, but was up there for Ha(Loser)kins' inaugural season. Ah, the days of the bubble screen, being barely top 25 and getting our teeth kicked in by top 10 teams. Whoever allows a girl kicker on the team should be shot, oh yeah we'll play him.
 
ParkerBuff98 said:
I love our commits but without the hogs on the line, our stud QBs are going to be enjoying the Boulder skyline on their backs. That's why I suggest something option so we can at least sniff some Ws and not look like a FCS team. It's obviously too late, but I could envision evolving from a triple to a spread to eventually a I / pro style when we get more horses. Of course, this is coming from just a fan who wants it all and wants it now and has no comprehension on how hard retreaking an offense is.
Click to expand...

Not going to happen with the type of QB's we have coming in.

People need to realize that the biggest problems we have had this season are injuries, suspensions, brutal schedule with no bye. Sorry, but even Alabama or Oregon would have our problems this year with the luck we've had.

Next year should be better with a more favorable schedule and hopefully a lot less injuries. Add in the fact that a lot of the younger guys have looked decent
 
You have a few choices as a head coach.
What type of offense (or defense) will be successful? Option, Spread and Pro
What type of offense am I capable of actually coaching? Pro
Do I have the players to run a Pro offense? No.
Can I get them? Yes
Can I get them if I run another style, a style more suited to my current players, in the meantime?

Ah, it's that last question that gets you. Paul Johnson ran the option at Tech before he had option players. Harbaugh ran the Pro before he had Pro players. In fact, every coach seems to implement their offense before they have the players to really run it! The reason is because you can't recruit to a system that you're "going" to run, because the recruits will always wonder if you're actually going to make the change (a mindset the other recruiters will help to promote).
 
I thought changing offenses every year was the way to go? I guess I had better throw away my Hawk book on "Football 101"?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top