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!

QB Recruiting - Clear trend toward dual-threat

Duff Man said:
I think OSU is closer to Auburn than Oregon. Much more running between the tackles than Oregon. Very physical.
Click to expand...

You're right. The more I think about it and watch some of their tape, the more I see the Counter Tre, Inside Zone and even Power concepts. They definitely have a much more physical brand of running game than Oregon does. It's pretty crazy how many variations they have of each using different formations, pre snap motion, jet sweep fakes, etc.. Here's a pretty cool link...

http://www.elevenwarriors.com/2013/02/20094/the-urban-meyer-ohio-state-offense-base-run-game
 
Darth Snow said:
I would say OSU is most physical, Auburn is a mix, and Oregon is the speed end of the spectrum. Not that either OSU or Auburn are slow, it's just a different mentality.
Click to expand...
I wonder where Lindgren's ideal version of the spread running game would fall on the spectrum.
 
Darth Snow said:
I have a feeling somewhere closer to Wazzu :lol:
Click to expand...

I think it is very possible the Buffs can get more of a power run game going this year with the changes at guard and the probability that those fill ins will not be as good in pass pro as Munyer was.
 
onealcd said:
I think it is very possible the Buffs can get more of a power run game going this year with the changes at guard and the probability that those fill ins will not be as good in pass pro as Munyer was.
Click to expand...

Lindgren comes from a very pass based background. I think if you see this, it will be HCMM's influence. I also think that our tendency to over pass in the 2d half in games comes when HCMM gets distracted/ buffs get farther from initial game plan. Lindgren's preference/tendencies are to pass, and he reverts as the game goes on.
 
TSchekler said:
You're right. The more I think about it and watch some of their tape, the more I see the Counter Tre, Inside Zone and even Power concepts. They definitely have a much more physical brand of running game than Oregon does. It's pretty crazy how many variations they have of each using different formations, pre snap motion, jet sweep fakes, etc.. Here's a pretty cool link...http://www.elevenwarriors.com/2013/02/20094/the-urban-meyer-ohio-state-offense-base-run-game
Click to expand...
Rep for the link. Good stuff. So many different ways to approach running the football, interested to see how it evolves in our offense.
 
Darth Snow said:
Lindgren comes from a very pass based background. I think if you see this, it will be HCMM's influence. I also think that our tendency to over pass in the 2d half in games comes when HCMM gets distracted/ buffs get farther from initial game plan. Lindgren's preference/tendencies are to pass, and he reverts as the game goes on.
Click to expand...

Yeah I hope that changes this season.
 
Darth Snow said:
Lindgren comes from a very pass based background. I think if you see this, it will be HCMM's influence. I also think that our tendency to over pass in the 2d half in games comes when HCMM gets distracted/ buffs get farther from initial game plan. Lindgren's preference/tendencies are to pass, and he reverts as the game goes on.
Click to expand...

onealcd said:
Yeah I hope that changes this season.
Click to expand...

on that note, it would be really interesting to see if my mental impression of overpassing in the 2d half is accurate. That may be difficult to figure out given the pressure our offense was constantly under due to the poor defense/special teams... but I remember the UW game really being an example of this issue.

Duff Man said:
Rep for the link. Good stuff. So many different ways to approach running the football, interested to see how it evolves in our offense.
Click to expand...
That is a cool link, neat stuff.
 
Washington Game 2nd half: Started the half leading by 3

1st drive - 4 runs, 4 passes resulting in 49 yard FG - CU lead by 6
2nd drive (after UW fumble) - 2 runs, 1 pass (Lindsay fumbled) - CU lead by 6
3rd drive (after UW TD, CU down by 1) - 1 run, 1 pass (pick 6) - UW lead by 8
4th drive (after UW punt) - 1 run, 2 pass, punt - UW lead by 8
5th drive (after UW punt) - 2 run, 5 pass, punt (returned for TD) - UW lead by 15
6th drive - 1 run, 3 pass (1 was off PI), punt - UW lead by 15
7th drive (after UW punt) - 4 runs, 14 passes (some penalties and 4th downs extending drives but turnover on a sack on 4th down) - UW lead by 15

UW ended up running out the clock. Seemed pretty balanced to start the half but definitely got more and more lopsided in favor of the pass as the lead got into double digits. Totals were 15 runs to 30 passes in the 2nd half.
 
It would definitely be interesting to look at other games (Cal and Oregon State come to mind) to see what balance we had because my memory is similar to Darth's, it seemed like we got very pass happy in second halves.
 
Duff Man said:
It would definitely be interesting to look at other games (Cal and Oregon State come to mind) to see what balance we had because my memory is similar to Darth's, it seemed like we got very pass happy in second halves.
Click to expand...

I think I'm being played but **** it, I'm bored at work:

Oregon State - 26 passes to 9 runs in 2nd half
Cal - 34 passes to 20 runs in 2nd half and both OTs (4 of the runs came at the end during the 1st and goal series starting at the 2 in OT2)
 
TSchekler said:
I think I'm being played but **** it, I'm bored at work:

Oregon State - 26 passes to 9 runs in 2nd half
Cal - 34 passes to 20 runs in 2nd half and both OTs (4 of the runs came at the end during the 1st and goal series starting at the 2 in OT2)
Click to expand...
ymssr. And YIKES at the OSU #.
 
TSchekler said:
I think I'm being played but **** it, I'm bored at work:Oregon State - 26 passes to 9 runs in 2nd halfCal - 34 passes to 20 runs in 2nd half and both OTs (4 of the runs came at the end during the 1st and goal series starting at the 2 in OT2)
Click to expand...
Heh, you are not, much appreciate it. Those numbers are not good.
 
We were playing from behind against OSU. Cal was more of a back-and-forth situation. So I'd expect more runs versus Cal.

But considering Lindgren's statement about his idea being up to 65% running, we're a long way off.

P.S. I personally think that 65% statement was a bunch of hogwash unless he was considering those short passes that are used like runs as being part of the run game.
 
TSchekler said:
I think I'm being played but **** it, I'm bored at work:

Oregon State - 26 passes to 9 runs in 2nd half
Cal - 34 passes to 20 runs in 2nd half and both OTs (4 of the runs came at the end during the 1st and goal series starting at the 2 in OT2)
Click to expand...

This is why I am so interested in the players arriving this summer on the RB ranks, and happy that the OL should be a bit better. Those stats have to change.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top