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!

Talent Disparity?

The Alabaster Yak

The Alabaster Yak

Club Member
Club Member
I know the obvious narrative is that there is a massive talent gap between CU and the rest of the Pac 12. I have subscribed to that narrative, but the more and more CU remains competitive vs these far more talented P12 teams, the more I believe they aren't actually as talent difficient compared to most P12 teams as we like to think.

Now, this theory doesn't extend past the starting lineups and maybe depth is where the true talent disparity lies, but for the past two years, we have seen CU be more or less "right there" with UCLA, Arizona, Cal, Oregon (this year), OSU, Utah, Washington State, and Washington.

This was just a thought and if you disagree with this notion, then what is it that is continually keeping this team competitive against more talented teams? Coaching? Luck? Heart? Effort?
 
A better QB. Preferably one that's a true dual threat. We get a guy like that and we win games like today with a gassed defense.
 
TSchekler said:
I
This was just a thought and if you disagree with this notion, then what is it that is continually keeping this team competitive against more talented teams? Coaching? Luck? Heart? Effort?
Click to expand...

Coaching, coaching, and coaching. On the O side of the ball anyway.

And it would help to have a QB that can think on his feet. I love Sefo's toughness and raw physical talent ... but I truly question just how smart he is.
 
Coaching, effort, and emotion can go a long way to keeping less talented teams in the game. But in the end, we keep losing because there is a very real talent disparity.

We have some players with a lot of talent (Awuzie, Tedric, Spruce, the young RBs, etc), but not enough. The biggest thing I notice is the lack of game-breaking plays that superior athletes can make. I'm thinking of Perkins' 2 TDs and a couple of the Rosen to Payton connections. It was kind of easy for UCLA to score when they went down in the 4th.

Meanwhile the long throw to Ross (and Irwin had a long catch too) are the only game-breaking plays (20 yds +) I can think of that we had. A few more athletes who could score from distance might go a long way to helping our red zone problems.
 
We don't have big play talent on O...that's where I see a talent disparity. Otherwise we are competitive talent wise, with USC being the exception IMO.
 
Our biggest problem in on the line of scrimmage. Our OL is getting much better in recent weeks in the run game but we are still terrible at pass protection. In obvious passing situations we can't run anything deep because Sefo doesn't get the time for the patterns to develop. Our DL has trouble getting pressure without a blitz to support and also has trouble when it is just line-up and power.

The other difference is that we don't have the gamebreakers, the superior athletes who can turn any ordinary play into a huge play.
 
fwbuff said:
Coaching, effort, and emotion can go a long way to keeping less talented teams in the game. But in the end, we keep losing because there is a very real talent disparity.

We have some players with a lot of talent (Awuzie, Tedric, Spruce, the young RBs, etc), but not enough. The biggest thing I notice is the lack of game-breaking plays that superior athletes can make. I'm thinking of Perkins' 2 TDs and a couple of the Rosen to Payton connections. It was kind of easy for UCLA to score when they went down in the 4th.

Meanwhile the long throw to Ross (and Irwin had a long catch too) are the only game-breaking plays (20 yds +) I can think of that we had. A few more athletes who could score from distance might go a long way to helping our red zone problems.
Click to expand...
Agreed
 
MtnBuff said:
Our biggest problem in on the line of scrimmage. Our OL is getting much better in recent weeks in the run game but we are still terrible at pass protection. In obvious passing situations we can't run anything deep because Sefo doesn't get the time for the patterns to develop. Our DL has trouble getting pressure without a blitz to support and also has trouble when it is just line-up and power.

The other difference is that we don't have the gamebreakers, the superior athletes who can turn any ordinary play into a huge play.
Click to expand...
The o line is turn stile on pass pro. It's almost comical at this point. Some of it is due to injuries, but my goodness, we can not give sefo any time at all and limits our play calling. The hate going toward Lindgren is somewhat understandable, but the o line may be the worst pass protecting o line in college. We can't go down field cause we don't have time. It's so obvious.
 
patebuff said:
The o line is turn stile on pass pro. It's almost comical at this point. Some of it is due to injuries, but my goodness, we can not give sefo any time at all and limits our play calling. The hate going toward Lindgren is somewhat understandable, but the o line may be the worst pass protecting o line in college. We can't go down field cause we don't have time. It's so obvious.
Click to expand...

People wonder why Sefo looks bad when he does have protection. I believe it is because he has been hit so often when he doesn't that his mind is conditioned to pressure.. Get hit often enough and you come to anticipate it even when it isn't there.
 
MtnBuff said:
People wonder why Sefo looks bad when he does have protection. I believe it is because he has been hit so often when he doesn't that his mind is conditioned to pressure.. Get hit often enough and you come to anticipate it even when it isn't there.
Click to expand...
It's a combo of O line not very good at pass pro and a QB who is programmed not to do anything past his first two reads.
 
ZandiBuff said:
UCLA may have won it on a few big plays, but CU lost it on about 20 little plays, plays where they didn't go for the win. 15 of them were in the 1st quarter.

That IS coaching. No intent to win, just try to keep it close. Sit on it. No killer instinct.
Click to expand...
Last play of the game was predictable, no question about it. I thought Lindgren called a decent game. We had UCLA on their heels the whole game. Whole game.

If you didn't see that, then I won't even respond to anything else you say. We can rip on the O coordinator as much as we want, but we have to give him at least a few props for what he did right.
 
patebuff said:
Last play of the game was predictable, no question about it. I thought Lindgren called a decent game. We had UCLA on their heels the whole game. Whole game.

If you didn't see that, then I won't even respond to anything else you say. We can rip on the O coordinator as much as we want, but we have to give him at least a few props for what he did right.
Click to expand...

I think you are correct that Lindgren did a lot of things right. But the stuff he did wrong is what mattered and it cost us the game.
 
Idot Buff said:
I think you are correct that Lindgren did a lot of things right. But the stuff he did wrong is what mattered and it cost us the game.
Click to expand...
Probably true. The drive where we kept running up the middle for like 80 yards, got the ball within the 10 yard line, then ran two straight plays to the wise side is unexplained. Otherwise, I thought he called a decent game. Enough to win, IMO.
 
We obviously don't have the top flight underclass men that the top programs get but is our competitiveness due to the developing and playing upperclassmen strategy that MM seems to be wanting to utilize?
 
patebuff said:
Last play of the game was predictable, no question about it. I thought Lindgren called a decent game. We had UCLA on their heels the whole game. Whole game.

If you didn't see that, then I won't even respond to anything else you say. We can rip on the O coordinator as much as we want, but we have to give him at least a few props for what he did right.
Click to expand...

How many yards win a game? Oh, wait, its POINTS that win games. You know, those things we didn't get in the 1st half.

Whose job is it to pull the blatantly broken QB on the last drive?

Whose job is it to have a backup that has seen ANY kind of real game experience, you know, in case the starter goes down?

Decent doesn't win games. Especially on the road, in conference.

Go get a real OC. Maybe one that can recruit while he's at it.
 
TSchekler said:
We obviously don't have the top flight underclass men that the top programs get but is our competitiveness due to the developing and playing upperclassmen strategy that MM seems to be wanting to utilize?
Click to expand...
I think that strategy is actually one of Mac's biggest failings so far. By recruiting under the radar kids who may not be as talented, but with frames to grow into good players when they become upper classmen results in a team with no depth. When guys get hurt, you're forced to play young guys who just aren't ready. If instead you bring in talented kids, then when you're forced to play them due to injury they may make young player mistakes, but they are also able to make plays that lesser talent can't.

There's still a noticeable talent gap IMO.
 
SINKRATZ said:
I think that strategy is actually one of Mac's biggest failings so far. By recruiting under the radar kids who may not be as talented, but with frames to grow into good players when they become upper classmen results in a team with no depth. When guys get hurt, you're forced to play young guys who just aren't ready. If instead you bring in talented kids, then when you're forced to play them due to injury they may make young player mistakes, but they are also able to make plays that lesser talent can't.

There's still a noticeable talent gap IMO.
Click to expand...

Also makes it much more unlikely that you are going to have those kids who are head and shoulders above the rest.

Most games, including this one, come down to a few key plays. More often than not those plays are made by the guys who are somehow "better" than the rest of the guys on the field. Might mean that they are a step faster or quicker or jump a little better or just see things that others don't.

This team has come a long way in terms of having guys who can compete on a play to play basis but how many guys do we have that other teams coaches are afraid of and have to specifically plan for?

Since Leavitt has been here is looks like we have gone after a lot more of the guys who could turn into those guys. I hope that M2 follows the lead and both expects a higher level of recruiting out of the rest of the staff and is willing to make some changes to get a couple more assistants who can deliver those players.
 
So for those that think the talent gap is still wide, how is this team, with under the radar recruits, competing with the UCLAs of the world in a legitimate (opposed to fluky) way? Is it coaching?

What could this staff do with some more talented players (that they are seemingly starting to bring in)?
 
The Buffs played very well today, except at the end of the game and at times in the first half. It is turning into a pattern, however, that the team fades in big moments, and that is a problem.

UCLA has the appearance of a team with a lot of talent that is also incredibly inconsistent. We made a lot of mistakes, but so did they. I am not a fan of rationalizing losses. We have a long way to go.

If CU was truly "almost as good" as UCLA, who is a top 25 team, we would not have a losing record right now. We gave them our best shot and came up short. You can point to mistakes, but these are the same type of mistakes that we make every game. They are part of our identity. On the other hand, I think you could also say that we probably didn't get UCLA's best game. For instance, I watched UCLA play Arizona this year and UCLA absolutely dominated an Arizona team that is better than our term.

The Hawkins years were overflowing with moral victories. Much of the discussion on these boards today is, in terms of content, identical to what was discussed back then (one refreshing and notable difference is that the quarterback isn't the coaches son). It is not automatic that moral victories turn into victories. This team needs some changes on its staff and it absolutely needs to recruit better athletes.

I do not necessarily advocate firing MM, but if we are having these exact same discussions one year from now, then he needs to go after 2016.
 
Ans
MtnBuff said:
People wonder why Sefo looks bad when he does have protection. I believe it is because he has been hit so often when he doesn't that his mind is conditioned to pressure.. Get hit often enough and you come to anticipate it even when it isn't there.
Click to expand...
Absolutely true. Dude doesn't feel he has time to set his feet even we he does
 
The difference between us and the mid level pac12 teams is depth. With injuries at LB and OL coaches have to get creative with the talent and youth we have on the depth chart. Without OL injuries alone we are a low bowl team this year.

To be a top pac12 team we need way more explosive/dominant players
 
TSchekler said:
So for those that think the talent gap is still wide, how is this team, with under the radar recruits, competing with the UCLAs of the world in a legitimate (opposed to fluky) way? Is it coaching?

What could this staff do with some more talented players (that they are seemingly starting to bring in)?
Click to expand...
They are talented enough to be somewhere between a 0 and 2-win Pac 12 team. What we've learned is that our coaches may be decent, but they're not good enough to out-scheme more talented teams. As a result we haven't won a game that we were not expected to win. Everything needs to go our way for that to happen, but it hasn't.
 
Idot Buff said:
Leavitt has brilliantly disguised the lack of talent at LB.
Click to expand...
This. My biggest fear this offseason is that Darth Snyder hangs them up and K$hit comes calling.

I have a man crush on Leavitt. Gamboa runs in molasses but what can you do right now. He shouldn't be playing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top