SINKRATZ
PhD in Analogy
That should be the case, but it doesn't appear that recruits are buying that message.
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!
That should be the case, but it doesn't appear that recruits are buying that message.
No, and why would they? They don't need to. There are plenty of programs out there that "they could be a part of a turnaround" that are going to have winning records and are going to bowls. Basically, those programs are a lot further along in turning it around than we are and thus, are much more enticing. Hell, one of those options is now right up road north of Boulder. We are staring 2-10 in face again and frankly, I really don't like the schedule next year. The "winnable" games all seem to be on the road making things that much harder. CU's new reality is a giant sh#t sandwich and we're all gonna have to take a bite.
I guess that explains ESPN viewing them as the same. Wait, ESPN has talked about CU being much improved but unable to get over the hump. Improvement and progress are synonyms, so I find it odd that you are differentiating between the two.
FlatironsBuff
Well-Known Member
Would like a link if you can find one. TO any sportscaster saying we gonna win. I like that. It's like a verbal security blanket.
Waash dissh he shay abood ush?
BuffNut99
Club Member
It beats the hollow platitudes that filled the 2nd halves of curbstompings of years past. Like when announcers would say (with the score 70-14 and the other team clearly showing mercy) that we're just trying to put together a good drive or a good quarter to gain confidence as part of the rebuilding process.
Bufffan68
Club Member
The problem is we need to be getting 4-5* so we can turn this thing around more quickly. We are getting good kids, but these 2-3* guys really should be in the system for a couple years before seeing the field.
Right now we're depending on 2-3* kids to do what we need 4-5* to do. The only solution to this it seems to keep the guys believing, pushing and working until we field a team of mature 2-3* guys....that is the job of the coaches.
Can they do it?? Time will tell, but if their previous history is any indication, I think it will happen.
Right now we're depending on 2-3* kids to do what we need 4-5* to do. The only solution to this it seems to keep the guys believing, pushing and working until we field a team of mature 2-3* guys....that is the job of the coaches.
Can they do it?? Time will tell, but if their previous history is any indication, I think it will happen.
Bufffan68
Club Member
I rewatched the game on Football in 60 on PAC12, I left hopeful actually. Sure, we got gashed in the first half by Shaq, and gave the game away in 3rd quarter. I get tired of hearing the youth "excuse"...but if you tell the kids all week to tackle low and they don't, and they don't hold on the ball like they practice...how else can you explain it other than youth.
But...excluding these big plays, I thought we looked really good. The OL is good. Adkins is the man. The D was pretty solid. ST were pretty good.
So...if we can stop with the "youth" problems, I give us a 20% chance against AZ. Otherwise, it will be a USC-esque blow out I'm afraid.
But...excluding these big plays, I thought we looked really good. The OL is good. Adkins is the man. The D was pretty solid. ST were pretty good.
So...if we can stop with the "youth" problems, I give us a 20% chance against AZ. Otherwise, it will be a USC-esque blow out I'm afraid.
Man, the DP article on attendance was a punch in the gut. I knew it had gotten bad, but not THIS bad. We've gone from the 45k to 50k range from '05 to '12 down to 37/38k the last two years. All of this despite huge growth in the population base. We need to start winning and start winning SOON!
If you take away all our bad plays, we look pretty good.And ST were "pretty good"? Say what?
Bufffan68
Club Member
LOL. Yeah, I realize that's what I'm saying. But the big plays came, if you believe MM, because of youthful mistakes. My point is I didn't see them dominating either line of scrimmage, which is progress especially considering their DL is so good and our OL has historically been so bad. I saw us moving the ball effectively on a very good D...especially running the ball. Those things give me hope that we aren't outmanned.
The best public explanation for most of the large running plays has been lining up incorrectly and poor understanding of assignments. You could attribute that to youth, but I don't this far into the season. It is has to be coaching or leadership issue at this point. The youth excuse could go if our linebackers or safeties lacked starts or playing time. But, they all have a reasonable amount to understand how to read an offensive formation and line up appropriately.
That, and the D-line, while better than early in the season, still gets pushed around or starts off going the wrong direction about 1 out of 4 plays.
Bufffan68
Club Member
We rank 105th in long rushing plays allowed.
http://www.cfbstats.com/2014/leader/national/team/defense/split01/category31/sort01.html
I do think that when we start to win the numbers will bounce back.
This year should be the low point. After the last couple of years you can't blame people for not buying tickets. Not only were we losing but games were not even competitive. In many cases the games were over before people got settled into their seats. Certainly not any kind of value for the time and money expended.
Fans this year haven't seen a lot of wins but at least the games have been entertaining. Anyone who has stuck with the team this long isn't likely to drop off after this season. We might even start to pick a few people back up.
To make advances though we do need to start having people see wins. Give them something to talk about around the coffee pot at work.
I'd be interested in seeing what our yards per carry allowed is sans the gashers. (Love that word, gashers. Hawk's only contribution to the fan experience.). So, let's say you remove all runs of 15 or 20 yards and higher, what is our YPC allowed? My point is, I think you can make a case for big runs being a case of a young player being out of position and the plays closer to the LOS being indicative of athleticism/ability. We can fix the "gashers", but if we are giving up 5 & 6 yard runs routinely, well, that is a bigger problem.
Get on that!
I'd bet, if there is such a stat, our yards allowed after initial contact is really high. We miss wrapping up a **** load of would be tackles, it seems like. To me, that boils down to technique, strength and athleticism and a lack thereof.
That is brutal. We need some better LBs and DEs fast.
The young DEs we have could develop and do a better job of setting the edge against the run in the future but our LB situation scares me.
Population base typically isn't an indicator for how well college teams draw. Just look how poorly BCS teams in major metro areas like Miami, BC, and GT draw. On the contrary, look at how well programs in small and fairly remote towns like PSU, Clemson, Auburn, etc. draw.
Oddly enough, our attendance was up 11% thru week 5 from last year:
http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...0421/college-football-attendance-down-in-2014
Attendance figures are usually based on tickets sold. Interesting that ours would be up that much, especially since the AD is doing fewer low cost ticket promotions.
We won't get these but I wonder what the numbers are for actual tickets used. I know that in 2012 by the end of the season our announced numbers weren't terrible because of pre-sold tickets in season tickets and corporate packages but lots of those tickets went unused. Last year we had a lot of the same with lots of ticket holders not making getting to the stadium a priority.
My impression is that this season a higher percentage of sold tickets are getting used. Also more fans are getting to games earlier and staying longer instead of showing up late and leaving at half.
We won't get these but I wonder what the numbers are for actual tickets used. I know that in 2012 by the end of the season our announced numbers weren't terrible because of pre-sold tickets in season tickets and corporate packages but lots of those tickets went unused. Last year we had a lot of the same with lots of ticket holders not making getting to the stadium a priority.
My impression is that this season a higher percentage of sold tickets are getting used. Also more fans are getting to games earlier and staying longer instead of showing up late and leaving at half.
Mr. Babar
I have no elephant books
This makes me want to puke. Holy hell.
As to youth, I wonder if where it hurts us is at practice. We don't have depth in terms of P12 caliber guys, and all week they are matching up against each other. Been thinking that is a reason for our slow starts.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It seems to me that our run defense is especially weak against the runs outside the ends. Especially to our D's right. That just seems to be what I recall and may not be fact. I think that is an indication that our LB's just don't have the speed to pursue those plays. I may be totally wrong on that.
Anyone notice that when Sefo is flushed, he usually seems, at least in the UCLA game, to be flushed to his right? When we are on the right hash and he's flushed to his right, it's a no hoper. The field is too compressed. Too much traffic. I wonder, like being susceptible to the sweep on D, if I'm just perceiving that or if it is true. I was thinking, then, why not run left on first down. Then if you have to pass on second, you have the ball on the left hash and you give Sefo more room to roam to his right.
Obviously, sounds great in theory, but.....
Obviously, sounds great in theory, but.....
Last edited: