I thought our receivers did work last year. Michigan has great DB talent and they still showed they could perform. If I am being honest though that is not the what I think will make this offense take a step forward though, I think it's about the run game and adding Montez to the mix so we can actually run the read option. I seriously want to see some two back shotgun sets with bish and Lindsay running a power off tackle and Montez having the option to keep if the defense collapses.
I agree. Strategically used, zone read could be deadly!Heh. I think we are in the minority, but I agree. Zone read could be lethal this season.
Fields gets most of the hype, but I'm not sure he's the second or even third best receiver on the team. I don't really have a rooting interest in who's best among them, as long as somebody gets open every play and El Passador finds the very best one - for that snap.They are overrated because they don't have a proven real elite #1 WR. Lots of good pieces.
Before anyone jumps on me, yes, Fields is damn good - but he hasn't been great in big games, and due to injury or something else, the WR corp wasn't awesome down the stretch last year and struggled to get open against elite defenses aside from 1 quarter against Michigan. USC, UW, not much there. IIRC they did ok against Utah.
What I'm saying is that they are a really good corp with a lot of depth, but that to be a top 5 unit, there has to be some real cream there. Is Fields a first round draft pick, or even a 2d round pick?
I don't really have a rooting interest in who's best among them, as long as somebody gets open every play and El Passador finds the very best one - for that snap.
So do I. Do you have a favorite child?I like El Passo
I do, of course, I don't have much to choose from lol.So do I. Do you have a favorite child?
Of the children I know about, yes.So do I. Do you have a favorite child?
F8uck youHoping I have to eat my words on this one, but think the hype for our offense might be getting excessive.
Points in last 7 games of 2016:
10, 20, 49 (Arizona),38 (WSU), 27, 10 and 8.
Prove me wrong, Buffs.
I think it will be a GOOD offense but seems like the hype is getting out of hand. Is this a GREAT offense?
F8uck you
just funnin.
got a hare?
I don't see a WR drafted from this group.
Get on a modified version of this one:El Passador is a good one! Nice job Ogre.
I think I agree with you, but I'd like to know: what do you consider to be the difference between a "very good" and "great" offense?
Is it radical? I honestly didn't think this was the consensus of opinion.You don't think Fields will be drafted? That's a pretty radical assertion
Possible. Productivity doesn't equal getting drafted. We saw that with Nelson Spruce (lack of straight line speed) and with Gabe Marks (size, physicality). I think, though, that Fields falls within the NFL range for physical traits while also having the productivity/film to go with it. He's not a freak like a 6'4" receiver clocking a sub 4.4 would be, though, so he's not a 1st round guy. That means somewhere from the 2nd round to priority UFA depending on how he tests, his health, and what sort of senior year he has.Is it radical? I honestly didn't think this was the consensus of opinion.
He's not physical at all and he disappears against the better teams (because he's not physical enough). He's good, but he's not NFL good (at least thus far).
Don't hold your breath. I can't understand why, but the TE position is simply a lost concept in this O.I think a TE emerging could really take the offense from good to really good level. Not sure we have one on the roster, though. Hopefully Poplawski comes in ready to play or Keeney finally turns the light on.
I think we worry way too much about how much the TE is used in the passing game. Anyone who has played fantasy football knows how few teams have TEs who are difference makers.Don't hold your breath. I can't understand why, but the TE position is simply a lost concept in this O.
I think we worry way too much about how much the TE is used in the passing game. Anyone who has played fantasy football knows how few teams have TEs who are difference makers.
We agree. And there's room in this offense's design to feature a TE if we have a guy who justifies that. Lindgren's pretty damn good at designing & modifying the playbook to fit the personnel strengths.I'm torn. It hard to find good college TEs, so why have an offense that relies on them. On the other hand, a TE can be a deadly weapon against most college defenses, so shouldn't CU try to find and use them.
Don't hold your breath. I can't understand why, but the TE position is simply a lost concept in this O.
Maybe. Having a least the threat of production out of the TE just adds another thing for opposing defenses to worry about. Even us amateurs know what will happen when Eddy Lopez lines up as a TE.I think we worry way too much about how much the TE is used in the passing game. Anyone who has played fantasy football knows how few teams have TEs who are difference makers.