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!

Ranking of CU's Recruiting Class

You need 14 to 17 Olinemen in the program at anyone time. As things stand today we will be at 14 going into the fall but we will only have one senior. I expect them to get one more oline commit. I am more concerned with the lack of linebackers so far. Jacobs looks like a safety to me. Rumors on Rippy are concrerning.
 
BlackNGold said:
You need 14 to 17 Olinemen in the program at anyone time. As things stand today we will be at 14 going into the fall but we will only have one senior. I expect them to get one more oline commit. I am more concerned with the lack of linebackers so far. Jacobs looks like a safety to me. Rumors on Rippy are concrerning.
Click to expand...
Which Rippy and why?

On the subject of OLs, I think the staff is high on Nembot and believes they have a 3-4 year LT solution there.
 
Buff_since76 said:
The following are Rivals national ranking by position. In some cases having a high number of recruits (RB and DT) helps to push up our ranking. In other cases having fewer than hurts (QB, OL, and LB):

QB: tied # 27
RB: # 11 (includes FB)
TE: tied # 20
WR: tied # 38
OL: not ranked
DT: # 13
DE: # 22
LB: not ranked
DB: tied #38
Ath: tied #41

This basically shows what has been the theme in this recruiting class. We are light on OL and LB heading into signing day, but overall we have a pretty good class that will fill in the necessary holes where we are missing talent. We will get the prototypical QB we want, add size and power to the running game, add talent to TE/WR, put bodies up front on the DL who are big and strong, and add talented DB’s so we aren’t converting RB’s mid season to DB’s.

We have 22 recruits for the cycle so far (counting McCartney as a GS and Norgard in the 2011 class), which means heading into NSD there are 3 spots left. With the NSD announcements I know the rankings above will move around a bit (WR and OT seem to have the highest rated prospects yet to commit), but in general that gives a good indication on the strengths/weaknesses of the class.

I would assume this highlights how important OL (and possibly LB recruiting depending on how NSD goes) recruiting will be in 2013.
Click to expand...

Now the #33 class overall and our rank for DB's jumped up to tied #15 now. Two slots left to fill.
 
Darth Snow said:
about the minimum of where we need to be. NOT where we should be.
Click to expand...

Right in line where we should be right now. I have said top 35 all along, so this is a good job by the coaching staff. Obviously things will need to improve the next few classes.
 
Jacobs would be big. I seem to think he'd have a chance to play SS right away. What an amazing DB class that would be if it were true. C'mon Rippy!
 
Need to load up on O-line next year. Would be nice to get some stud TE's as well. Also need to do better in-state and Cali
 
Darth Snow said:
one big miss is an elite TE prospect.
Click to expand...

I think we all liked what we got when we flipped Austin Ray from Ole Miss. But would have been nice to get McNamara or JCF. So I wouldn't call it a big miss. Hopefully this helps us land the Chaparral TE next year.
 
I think next year's class will be slanted toward the offense. I view just about every position on offense as a need (yes, even QB). Hopefully we will add some quality depth on defense as well.
 
Boulder Buff said:
I think next year's class will be slanted toward the offense. I view just about every position on offense as a need (yes, even QB). Hopefully we will add some quality depth on defense as well.
Click to expand...

Depending on how this class rounds out, we could be on the hunt for a pair of LBs.
 
Boulder Buff said:
I think next year's class will be slanted toward the offense. I view just about every position on offense as a need (yes, even QB). Hopefully we will add some quality depth on defense as well.
Click to expand...

Seems about right to me. Off the top of my head I would think that we'll have high priorities on: TE, Inside LB's, OL, S and any big time play maker we can get on the offense!
 
This class is much better than any of us have any right to expect given the level of football CU has played over the last several years. To expect a top-20 class from anyone at CU right now is delusional.
 
I decided to look into the differences between WHO we are getting in comparison to our PAC12 competitors. I liked what I found!

Rivals has Utah's class ranked as #28 and Oregon State as #27. Yet, I noticed that many of their 2 and 3 star players DO NOT have the kind of BCS offers that ours do. Especially in Utah's case.

OFFERS truly show more about a player than the star systems do. And in that department, we have a great class! If we had the recent success of a USC, Oregon or Stanford, I believe more of our 3 star kids would get a 4 star rating. But we'll earn that type of respect.

Our staff has done a great job of recruiting and winning battles. We'll get a couple more great commits before NSD and this class will be looked back upon as a huge point in CU's return to NCAA greatness.
 
Last edited:
loved the embree article in the bdc about all the d-linemen.

these guys have A PLAN. bring the heat upfront with a rotation of fresh athletic d-linemen and get big fast cover guys to protect you over the top. DONE and DONE.

embree and staff are building this right. a bowl game next year and this thing may turn around faster than some folks think.
 
Nice of the sites to update mid-day. Is that their policies the last couple of weeks, or was today an aberration?
 
Jaximus said:
I think we all liked what we got when we flipped Austin Ray from Ole Miss. But would have been nice to get McNamara or JCF. So I wouldn't call it a big miss. Hopefully this helps us land the Chaparral TE next year.
Click to expand...

Austin Ray is going to surprise people. He's one of the top TEs in the country.
 
Getting a couple great Olinemen would have been great during this cycle. Of course it could be a refreshing change to expect the Oline to be terrible and be surprised rather than expect them to have a breakout year and be disappointed.
 
Liver said:
loved the embree article in the bdc about all the d-linemen.

these guys have A PLAN. bring the heat upfront with a rotation of fresh athletic d-linemen and get big fast cover guys to protect you over the top. DONE and DONE.

embree and staff are building this right. a bowl game next year and this thing may turn around faster than some folks think.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. Neither LSU or Bama are offensive juggernauts. But their defense is ferocious. They keep the field short for the O and give the O more chances for points by getting off the field on 3rd down. Not saying we are anywhere near their level yet but i do like the focus on D for those reasons.
 
I'm a lifelong buffs fan and a lurker on this board for some time. This is where I came to find the Buffs on TV last year. I had to register. I like this class. They are getting DE's that are faster than some WR's. Last year they had no lateral speed. I don't like Yuri Wright. If he doesn't clean up his act, I'll want him gone. TCU and Boise state do well with kids like these. CU won 2 of their last 3? Once they started dropping some of the bonehead penalties, they were better and I don't see anybody in the PAC 12, except Oregon and USC and UCLA and Cal and maybe a couple of others do much better. (How did UCLA get a top 15 class?) I like this class. I like the job the staff is doing. All along I hoped and wished for them to snatch a couple 4- 5 star kids, but if they don't I still like this class.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top