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!

Official 2023 Fall Camp Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
manhattanbuff said:
I don’t use a conventional model. My model rates every player, logs referee tendencies, and simulates game outcomes. I’ve expanded my NCAAF player pool since transfers are such a major iteration of the game. That’s why I find your characterization of the model as a Rube Goldberg machine to be… interesting.
Click to expand...
Tell us less.
 
Ok Fair enough, sounds like lots of effort and data feed it. Still pretty tough to rate every player we have right now with so little FBS game experience on the roster, seems to me.

Only real way to judge your model in general is how well it works. How well does it predict win/loss records, say compared to known pundits and the major sports or sports betting publishers?
 
Buff_since76 said:
I am a big Kool-Aid drinker, and think we are going to surprise the national media with how well we do. That being said, there are some concerns coming based on the camp reports:

RB - all of the press is about Edwards, and then the next RB mentioned is Offerdahl. Not hearing anything about McCaskill or Smoke is concerning to me. I think Edwards will be one hell of a weapon, but I don't think he can survive a 12 game season as the featured back. I assume McCaskill is being brought along slowly, but I hoped he would be getting some contact and scrimmage time at this point. Never hearing Smoke brought up really concerns me.

LB - On the reports about the defense there is a lot written about the secondary and D-line. The lack of press about the LB's has me a bit nervous. The LB coach has really been the only one to talk about them during his press conference. The videos from DNVR and Adam don't spend much time on the LB's. Maybe they aren't an issue, but the definitely don't get brought up as a strength.

OL - O'Boyle indicated that if Brown was approved by the NCAA he would start. Without him it feels like we are down one starter out of the gate. We could have 8 OL on board with all 5 starters, but instead we are at 7 with 4 starters. That feels like the potential difference between an upright SS, and a QB scrambling first.

DL - After Cokes and Bishop there seems to be a void. Am hopeful McNeill and Payne provide something, but it sounds like there is a huge difference between the 1's and 2's. I have been hopeful that Main is a 3rd down pass rushing force, but his name hasn't been coming up in any press reports either.

TE - honestly are we even going to put a TE out there? Seems like the two top guys working back from injury, and may not be ready for weeks.

WR/CB/S/QB #1 all seem to be in a good place right now.
Click to expand...
RB - They are doing well. Just non-contact. They can't be in the contact drills which are the scrimmages and practice sessions with tackling but they have impressed in drills.

LB - None of them are standouts. The one with the potential is a true freshman who's raw from England. I am interested to see how they play v. TCU.

OL - This is not going to be as big of an issue as some think. This offense scheme really benefits OLs and they have a lot of high IQ on this OL this year. I just worry about the athletic in-space stuff with the guards since Rock is likely out for the season. Bebee, Wilty, and Bailey aren't the best athletes. They aren't Washington, Tank, or Wells in space. I do worry if they had to play from behind. They just don't have athletic guards. Seeing Wilty in space was a nightmare.

Interior DL - Seems fine on pass rush, all units. running stopping seems to be an issue for the 2nd unit. That's something to keep an eye on.

TE - They are making some big plays. I think you might be underrating them. There is a chance, CU has three good TE's when it's all said and done this season.

The starters for the most part look pretty damn good. I still want to see Shilo do it in the game but he looks miles better than anytime I have seen him in Jackson over the last two seasons.
 
manhattanbuff said:
I don’t use a conventional model. My model rates every player, logs referee tendencies, and simulates game outcomes. I’ve expanded my NCAAF player pool since transfers are such a major iteration of the game. That’s why I find your characterization of the model as a Rube Goldberg machine to be… interesting.
Click to expand...
Did your model predict TCU's success last year?
 
Medford M. said:
Not everyone is gonna get brought up during camp. That's just silly to think that because a guy hadn't been mentioned that he must not be any good. As for McCaskill and Smoke...go look at DNVR's projected depth chart. They've seen practices and talked to coaches, and they have those two as first and second string.
Click to expand...
Maaaayyybe they are purposely holding out mccaskill and smoke vids as to not give opposing coaches anything. That’s what I’m hoping.
 
At any given time this year, whether on offense or defense, it’s very possible that the CU team on the field will be comprised of guys at least half of whom will be playing their first year of P5 football.

That’s either a bad thing or an irrelevant thing but it’s hard to see it as a good thing.
 
Buffnik said:
I'm pretty good with our C2 and CB3. I wouldn't have them on the list, especially CB3 (C2 gets a bit more challenging if Brown isn't cleared since our C2 could start at OG). My biggest concern with depth outside of QB is at ILB. Also, it's not TE depth I'm concerned about - I think it's fine - but I don't think we have a 3-down starter in the mix.
Click to expand...
Good points.
 
CUAviator said:
Maaaayyybe they are purposely holding out mccaskill and smoke vids as to not give opposing coaches anything. That’s what I’m hoping.
Click to expand...
Leonardo Dicaprio Kinda GIF
 
manhattanbuff said:
I don’t use a conventional model. My model rates every player, logs referee tendencies, and simulates game outcomes. I’ve expanded my NCAAF player pool since transfers are such a major iteration of the game. That’s why I find your characterization of the model as a Rube Goldberg machine to be… interesting.
Click to expand...
It was a joke!
 
manhattanbuff said:
According to my model, 3 wins is what this team can expect assuming Shedeur plays 12 games. Beyond that, injury to key players in other positions and ball bounces determine if the team can win 4+. The team has very poor DL and OL depth. We barely have enough players to have a normal rotation on the DL. We have major questions about stopping the short/intermediate pass game when not in nickle or dime defenses. This will be exploited by our opponents.

My model strongly disfavors teams who play opponents who have a strong QB and/or a strong running game and/or run defense.
Click to expand...
OL depth is a valid concern. We'll be fine at DL. The position to watch/be concerned about is LB.
 
MtnBuff said:
I wouldn't argue with that.

This is not even a rebuild of a program, it is essentially starting from scratch.

Prime and his staff have done an amazing job of finding and bringing in talent across the board but there are a number of positions where it appears to be a significant drop off from the starter or top of the rotation and the depth.

QB is maybe the toughest position to find guys. Fortunately Prime had a connection with a good one but a proven back-up wasn't something he found.

As it stands though is our back up situation any worse than our starters would have been had Dorrell been here another year.

At no point have I said that we shouldn't be concerned about what we have if Shedeur misses some time, only that most college programs don't have a second QB who inspires much confidence.
Click to expand...
We would have some bumps, but would be okay with Staub. Trust. \
Kuld ain't it. Has the size...and nothing else.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top