Official 2022 Fall Camp Thread

[SpacemanSpiff]

Out of curiosity, why do you think this about the offensive scheme?

That’s just been my impression from the little bit that I’ve heard/read. I don’t have links or remember exactly where I heard/read it. As mentioned, I have not been playing close attention at all, so I may be completely off base.

Disclaimer: Since 1984, I have never spent less time paying attention to CU football. It’s likely a defense mechanism. And it makes me sad.

 

[MtnBuff]

That's the stuff that drives me crazy.

I understand that we'll miss on some coaching hires and recruits. That sports is cyclical and there will be some bad stretches to weather as a fan of a team.

What I'll never understand or accept is an organization which runs inefficiently and which doesn't value its customers. CU does not behave as if they need to re-sell us every year (should be every week) on being boosters, ticket holders and fans. They act as if they're entitled to our support no matter how poor their customer service and how lacking their amenities & other things outside W/L which go into the value proposition for the customer.

This,

Customer service is not rocket science.

Make taking care of customers a priority, put some effort and resources into it, and you can be at least competent.

It is rarely more expensive to keep the customers you have than it is to replace them with new ones. There are a lot of businesses out there that actually have pretty mediocre products but hold onto their customers by providing good service.

 

[J.R. Ewing]

This,

Customer service is not rocket science.

Make taking care of customers a priority, put some effort and resources into it, and you can be at least competent.

It is rarely more expensive to keep the customers you have than it is to replace them with new ones. There are a lot of businesses out there that actually have pretty mediocre products but hold onto their customers by providing good service.

That's basically Chick-fil-a in a nutshell.

 

[Not Sure]

That's the stuff that drives me crazy.

I understand that we'll miss on some coaching hires and recruits. That sports is cyclical and there will be some bad stretches to weather as a fan of a team.

What I'll never understand or accept is an organization which runs inefficiently and which doesn't value its customers. CU does not behave as if they need to re-sell us every year (should be every week) on being boosters, ticket holders and fans. They act as if they're entitled to our support no matter how poor their customer service and how lacking their amenities & other things outside W/L which go into the value proposition for the customer.

It’s the fans fault the football program is in the situation it now faces. - Dave Plati, probably.

 

[GawainBuff]

It’s the fans fault the football program is in the situation it now faces. - Dave Plati, probably.

Let’s be very honest. This is absolutey true. None of us are named Phil Knight. None of us overpay for our season tickets by a factor of 1,000. None of us have hired any players under exorbitant NIL contracts to mention our businesses on social media a few times a year.

Really. No one to blame but ourselves.

 

[Buffnik]

Let’s be very honest. This is absolutey true. None of us are named Phil Knight. None of us overpay for our season tickets by a factor of 1,000. None of us have hired any players under exorbitant NIL contracts to mention our businesses on social media a few times a year.

Really. No one to blame but ourselves.

 

[J.R. Ewing]

Let’s be very honest. This is absolutey true. None of us are named Phil Knight. None of us overpay for our season tickets by a factor of 1,000. None of us have hired any players under exorbitant NIL contracts to mention our businesses on social media a few times a year.

Really. No one to blame but ourselves.

Counterpoint.

Why give money to a program you know is not fully committed to winning? Why give NIL money to kids if the head coach isn't willing to check in with them at the end of the year? Why give money for a coaching salary pool if they're going hire a guy absolutely no program is after and pay him $3.5M/yr? Why pay to go after elite recruits if the school isn't flexible enough to admit them?

 

[Not Sure]

Let’s be very honest. This is absolutey true. None of us are named Phil Knight. None of us overpay for our season tickets by a factor of 1,000. None of us have hired any players under exorbitant NIL contracts to mention our businesses on social media a few times a year.

Really. No one to blame but ourselves.

-Dave Plati, probably.

 

[DBT]

Does Lewis transfer if Strout is named the starter?

Can’t worry about that.

 

[rosstr]

It’s the fans fault the football program is in the situation it now faces. - Dave Plati, probably.

That guy still has a job at CU? Shoulda been fired a long time ago.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

Even if Shrout wins the job, I think they’d be nuts not to have a package for Lewis, using it somewhat regularly, especially in the red zone or in short yardage. He brings a lot of athleticism that Shrout doesn’t and is still a solid passing threat. It also keeps him engaged and playing in the event he needs to take over as full time starter.

 

[HotRack]

It's all about EXPECTATIONS people!

The AD expects you to keep paying maximum for their minimum effort! Not that hard to figure out. C'mon yall!

(Sorry, forgot the italics...nvm, didn't need them)

 

[BuffWarHog]

Counterpoint.

Why give money to a program you know is not fully committed to winning? Why give NIL money to kids if the head coach isn't willing to check in with them at the end of the year? Why give money for a coaching salary pool if they're going hire a guy absolutely no program is after and pay him $3.5M/yr? Why pay to go after elite recruits if the school isn't flexible enough to admit them?

I bought a Parents and Family Association membership to the University of Arkansas. It was $65. That’s more than I’m willing to give to CU football right now. I feel horrible about that. But also, I don’t.

 

[Duff Man]

Even if Shrout wins the job, I think they’d be nuts not to have a package for Lewis, using it somewhat regularly, especially in the red zone or in short yardage. He brings a lot of athleticism that Shrout doesn’t and is still a solid passing threat. It also keeps him engaged and playing in the event he needs to take over as full time starter.

The second string QB needs to play. Full stop .

 

[Highlander]

The second string QB needs to play. Full stop .

I agree.

Still laughing at “and is still a solid passing threat”.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

I agree.

Still laughing at “and is still a solid passing threat”.

Lol well it occurred to me I was framing it like Lewis would only be brought in as a runner.

 

[MtnBuff]

We are going to be behind a lot, that means lots of passing to try to catch up. We also don't have much of an offensive line to protect them.

Odds of a QB playing healthy for a full season are pretty slim

Also the more we can force defenses to have to prepare for the better our chances.

 

[4BienemyTDs]

We are going to be behind a lot, that means lots of passing to try to catch up. We also don't have much of an offensive line to protect them.

Odds of a QB playing healthy for a full season are pretty slim

Also the more we can force defenses to have to prepare for the better our chances.

If you have a 2 QB system, then you do not have a true starter, and if that is what it is, then play both of them

 

[Buffnik]

If you have a 2 QB system, then you do not have a true starter, and if that is what it is, then play both of them

Mostly true. Exception would be like when UF had Tebow as a frosh or the Steelers with a young Kordell. You might install a short yardage/ goal line package for a freak athlete who isn't ready to run the show. But, yeah, other than those types of unicorn situations if you're playing 2 QBs it means that neither have been good enough to win the huddle and be the man.

 

[4BienemyTDs]

Mostly true. Exception would be like when UF had Tebow as a frosh or the Steelers with a young Kordell. You might install a short yardage/ goal line package for a freak athlete who isn't ready to run the show. But, yeah, other than those types of unicorn situations if you're playing 2 QBs it means that neither have been good enough to win the huddle and be the man.

Naming a starter in today's CFB is also a scary thing unless it is so obvious that everyone agrees with you. The non-starter could transfer or f-up the locker room. I hope they let them both play, and as much as we want to win, sorting that out is more important than winning game #1.

It is a good thing we have some cupcake non-P5 games to warm up a young team

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

In college, I don't really believe in the "if you have 2 QBs, you have none" mindset. These guys are still developing physically and mentally, and the range of skill sets at the QB position has never been greater. Whether it's to get your QB2 meaningful game reps for development purposes, or to take advantage of a unique skill set that QB1 doesn't possess, I think there should always be a bit of a time share, even if it's an 80/20 split.

Of course, you have to treat practice that way as well and have an intentional game plan for QB2, and not just send him out there to hand the ball off 3 times and then punt.

 

[Buffnik]

Naming a starter in today's CFB is also a scary thing unless it is so obvious that everyone agrees with you. The non-starter could transfer or f-up the locker room. I hope they let them both play, and as much as we want to win, sorting that out is more important than winning game #1.

It is a good thing we have some cupcake non-P5 games to warm up a young team

Yeah. My impression is that I'm seeing coaches wait as long as possible to name a starter in order to avoid transfer by the guy who loses the job. Especially if the loser is going to be the more veteran player.

 

[Bread]

Even if Shrout wins the job, I think they’d be nuts not to have a package for Lewis, using it somewhat regularly, especially in the red zone or in short yardage. He brings a lot of athleticism that Shrout doesn’t and is still a solid passing threat. It also keeps him engaged and playing in the event he needs to take over as full time starter.

That would require a level of competence that Karl Dorrell has yet to really show. Sure it's Sanford's offense but he's also as mediocre as they come.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

That would require a level of competence that Karl Dorrell has yet to really show. Sure it's Sanford's offense but he's also as mediocre as they come.

No coach at CU in the past 15 years has shown the willingness to give QB2 meaningful game reps (when QB1 isn't hurt), not just Dorrell, and most coaches around the country don't do it either. However, this feels like the first time in a long time there has seemingly been a true QB competition at CU between two guys with different skill sets. Hopefully they acknowledge that and get B Lew in the game if he doesn't win QB1

 

[MtnBuff]

In college, I don't really believe in the "if you have 2 QBs, you have none" mindset. These guys are still developing physically and mentally, and the range of skill sets at the QB position has never been greater. Whether it's to get your QB2 meaningful game reps for development purposes, or to take advantage of a unique skill set that QB1 doesn't possess, I think there should always be a bit of a time share, even if it's an 80/20 split.

Of course, you have to treat practice that way as well and have an intentional game plan for QB2, and not just send him out there to hand the ball off 3 times and then punt.

This is the thing. No rule says that if you play two guys they get equal time.

You can have a starter who is your primary guy getting most of the snaps. The second guy can be used situationally such as short yardage or when the pass rush is chewing up a less mobile starter or it can be a change of pace situation or even on a planned schedule such as first possession of the 2nd and 3rd quarters.

In each of these you are giving the defense something different to deal with, giving the 2nd guy a chance to develop, and developing cohesion with that QB and the starting offense so you aren't adjusting on the fly if the first guy goes down or just isn't effective.

 

[Bread]

No coach at CU in the past 15 years has shown the willingness to give QB2 meaningful game reps (when QB1 isn't hurt), not just Dorrell, and most coaches around the country don't do it either. However, this feels like the first time in a long time there has seemingly been a true QB competition at CU between two guys with different skill sets. Hopefully they acknowledge that and get B Lew in the game if he doesn't win QB1

ehhh I would say plenty of coaches around the country make packages for guys even if they aren't QB1. Recent examples without even researching, Justin Fields at Georgia, Hurts when he was the backup at Bama. I know Dorrell won't give meaningful snaps otherwise but a package should be the bare minimum and it's not that hard.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

ehhh I would say plenty of coaches around the country make packages for guys even if they aren't QB1. Recent examples without even researching, Justin Fields at Georgia, Hurts when he was the backup at Bama. I know Dorrell won't give meaningful snaps otherwise but a package should be the bare minimum and it's not that hard.

Lol yes, when 5* QBs are riding the bench behind other 4*/5* QBs, some coaches at blue blood programs have done that. Most coaches don't do it, though. It's not unique to Dorrell.

 

[Bread]

Lol yes, when 5* QBs are riding the bench behind other 4*/5* QBs, some coaches at blue blood programs have done that. Most coaches don't do it, though. It's not unique to Dorrell.

Ok, fine some non blue blood examples when I thought a little harder.

Luke McCaffrey - Nebraska
Plumlee and Corral - Ole Miss

It doesn't require a 5 star backup or a blue blood status to make a package for a guy with a different skill set. And think of all the programs that have a wildcat type package for a super athletic guy like we had with Viska. It happens pretty often.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

Ok, fine some non blue blood examples when I thought a little harder.

Luke McCaffrey - Nebraska
Plumlee and Corral - Ole Miss

It doesn't require a 5 star backup or a blue blood status to make a package for a guy with a different skill set. And think of all the programs that have a wildcat type package for a super athletic guy like we had with Viska. It happens pretty often.

I agree it doesn't require that, which is why I said they would be crazy not to do it with Lewis and Shrout.

My point is the vast majority of college coaches don't do it. It's not unique to CU and/or Karl Dorrell. Embree didn't do it, MacIntyre didn't do it, Tucker didn't do it. Wittingham didn't do it last year, Cristobal didn't do it at Oregon, Day didn't do it at Ohio State, Saban didn't do it at Bama, etc.

Most coaches play their starting QBs 100% of the meaningful snaps (pre garbage time).

 

[BuffWarHog]

This is the thing. No rule says that if you play two guys they get equal time.

You can have a starter who is your primary guy getting most of the snaps. The second guy can be used situationally such as short yardage or when the pass rush is chewing up a less mobile starter or it can be a change of pace situation or even on a planned schedule such as first possession of the 2nd and 3rd quarters.

In each of these you are giving the defense something different to deal with, giving the 2nd guy a chance to develop, and developing cohesion with that QB and the starting offense so you aren't adjusting on the fly if the first guy goes down or just isn't effective.

I totally agree. But your offense also has to be able to adjust to the different skills/strengths of QB2. It’s frustrating AF when you put in a backup QB with a different skill set but continue to run the same type of offense that was used with QB1.

I do also believe we highly limited BLew’s mobility due to an absolute lack of of a back up. I can see them giving him a little (lot) more leash this year…whenever he plays.