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!
This is why you can't build from the outside in
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
Who is responsible for offensive lineman being placed in situations where their play is so bad it appears designed to fail if the fault does not rest upon their position coach or on the players?
Who is responsible for CU's poor line play results when players and offensive line coach may not be to blame?
Early season performance of CU, FSU, and to an extent ND is opening bigger questions about whether you really can build a CFB roster from the portal. Forget outside-in in terms of position, I dont know yet if it works in terms of team construction.
Not in any way saying that a team doesn't need talent on the OL but more than any other position OL relies on technique and coordination.
That last couple of weeks we have seen multiple games where a team that recruits "less talented" players has stuck with or even beaten teams with much higher rated recruits because they have an OL that plays together and allows them to control the ball.
We watched NDSU take advantage of us time after time because their OL works as a unit and took advantage of what we were doing on defense.
Fogo
Well-Known Member
While I truly support the view of a balance, in the days of NIL and instant transfers you can get great guys out of HS and the minute someone waives a bigger bag in front of them, or they aren't 100% happy they are gone. We'll see if this holds true with Seaton this coming year. I sure hope not, I love having that guy on the team.
OL calls [usually made by the center] need to be on plan with the QB call at the line. It's almost as if the two aren't on the same page. Usually your OL coach is involved in run game planning also, not sure if that is happening. maybe 2 is changing the play after the Oline has set ?
ND losing to double digits underdog is more of the HC problem rather than protal problem.
GRM
I'm a ****ty troll
Last year, FSU and Michigan relied heavily on transfers, FSU much more so. Michigan had 3 transfers on the Oline/TE, 2 from Stanford. Both Michigan and FSU were gutted by the NFL draft and graduation. Doubtful a team can wholesale transfer in an entire Oline without growing pains. I do think having a # of guys playing in transfer year 2 is probably helpful, if they have talent for the 2-deep.
It does not look like teams can TP to Prime's extent in flipping rosters yearly, however he inherited a 1-11 team pretty much bare talent wise. However Ole Miss is still out there to prove us wrong. I think continuity of good coaches and systems pays off, so it is not a new O/D install every season.
It's increasingly obvious that our problem is daddy ball, with Shedeur not taking to coaching. BOB was not a bad coach, and he was far better than a first year OL coach in Phil Loadbolt. Unfortunately, we have a mess on our hands again.
Running those two off was a terrible idea. People were down on Wells after last season, but he was always pretty solid. There’s something else going on with our offensive scheme that doesn’t put the line in a position to win, imo.
BlackNGold
Club Member
I think it is more than that. I think this season will be a referendum on CP's overall approach to building a program. I think most believe that it is more Jimmys and Joes vs Xs and Os. But we have all seen highly talented teams that fall way flat. So you need to have talent but you also need to coach that talent - you cannot throw out the Xs and Os. Yes other teams are using the transfer portal but they are more strategic about it - they are developing a core group to provide stability and leadership.
CP is a unicorn when it comes to personality and charisma but how much does he really value coaching up the players - that is something I really question. Many of our assistant coaches are light on college coaching experience at the P4 level - does not mean they are bad. I am starting to get the impression that CP believes that if you have a lot of talent you will automatically dominate.
Gary Barnett majored in psychology and was alway interested in how to get a team to perform. He said that leadership from the players is paramount to success - he would say "...they will lead themselves much farther than you can lead them." Meaning that you have to have the right culture to have players lead the team to success. I always thought the success of the 2016 team had more to do a team having a group of Jr. and Sr. who provided leadership for the team and less to do with McIntyres coaching. That team was not overly talented.
I have always believed (and have stated) that college coaching is 40% recruiting, 40% coaching and game preparation, and 20% in game adjustments. CP has the first 40% nailed, it is the other 60% that has me worried.
Lining up against a DL that can completely disregard any gap integrity or run responsibility might have something to do with it.
Not sure I buy this narrative for transfers - Michigan has signed 22% of their classes as transfers, FSU is 42%....CU i 64%. That's a huge difference especially when CU has signed 128 guys total over the last 2 classes.
| TRANSFER PORTAL | TOTAL | % | |||||||
| Year | Colorado | Michigan | FSU | Colorado | Michigan | FSU | Colorado TP% | Michigan TP % | FSU TP % |
2022 | 6 | 3 | 14 | 31 | 25 | 31 | 19% | 12% | 45% |
2023 | 52 | 9 | 12 | 73 | 34 | 31 | 71% | 26% | 39% |
2024 | 43 | 9 | 17 | 55 | 35 | 40 | 78% | 26% | 43% |
| 101 | 21 | 43 | 159 | 94 | 102 | 64% | 22% | 42% |
I think that the lower-risk portal gets are at WR, Edge, maybe CB, and situationally at QB. And even those in limited doses.
GRM
I'm a ****ty troll
Your stats are probably on in terms of overall transfer #/%'s of transfers. I was talking about guys in their respective teams starting line-up and/or two deep last year. Huge difference between the depths that CU is trying to overcome and where two teams started-out last year. Prime/CU was turning over a 1-11 roster and now in year 2. However, the transfer story for FSU and MI is notable.
For FSU, it was the conference title game not bowl depth chart that counts, since they missed playoffs. Norvell was in year 4. Florida State hit boxcars with their transfers producing last season with huge starter production. They had 10 guys drafted into NFL, 9 were transfers into their program. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_Florida_State_Seminoles_football_team. Also, they took Casey Roddick from CU that started for them too.
With Michigan, they were definitely more home-grown given Harbaugh was in year 9; however their story is Oline transfers. Hinton (from Stanford) was starting LT well into season, then went down with injury or he probably starts all games. Of their 9 transfers in last year, 8 made a huge contributions, as all were Srs or RS S. Nugent (C), Henderson (OL) and Barner (TE) all were transfer starters and now onto the NFL. That is 4 OL. 8 played in the two deep (one QB sat), 6 started substantial games. Not just the Oline, but their starting CB (who did not allow a TD last season) and all-conference K were also transfers in. Those are big contributions.
It probably goes without saying but those teams had much more experience and stability with their HC, AC coaching staff's and were not installing new O's and D's two (2) years in a row. That is unfortunate and some learning for CU and Prime. Also, they were further in the roster process. No doubt Prime's roster build methods are extreme, but for MI and FSU their transfers pushed a ton last season ... substantial inputs, monumental for FSU. With less transfers and less holes than CU, MI and FSU were certainly more palatable transfer destinations and maybe they could grab the creme of the crop, however they also had more established rosters, schemes, and coaching staffs. I'll be interested to see if Ole Miss and Lane Kiffin push into the playoff this season.
In some ways it is fair to criticize Prime and question the extreme methods given the sheer amount of turnover (both CU kids, past transfers and coaches), in other ways we are simply in Year 2 with a HC (new to P-4) and our fans/pundits really wanting/expecting to be in Year 4-5, not Year 2 building off of a 1-11 roster. If hope we win at CSU and Baylor at home over the next 2 weeks, we could still look like a good team coming off the bye week in Week 5.
Last thing it that Prime by bringing SS, TH and the other play-makers put buzz back in the CU program. It is harder to fill positions that require depth and time within a certain system than plugging transfers into an established system. CU did not have that. I would not say MI or FSU built from the outside in, I would say they built over years then bringing key transfers into something already running including on OL.
Last edited:
BlackNGold
Club Member
I have no idea why there is a discussion of FSU and Michigans use of the transfer portal. None of it is analogous to what is going on at CU.
The point was there is a massive difference in what CU has done and what the two schools you called out have done.
Patching depth she bringing in high level players is completely different than changing the roster over nearly twice in two years, being almost completely reliant on it, and not showing quality HS recruiting (no a HS class of 9 or whatever is not quality HS recruiting, yes I know dudes like Seaton).
Last edited:
GRM
I'm a ****ty troll
I was just responding to your long post comparing the transfer portal use, pointing out that transfers make a huge difference. Obviously, CU and MI/FSU are apples to oranges, as to where those teams started and where CU is coming back from in terms of successful football programs (CU has 1 winning season over 20 years?), roster talent (1-11), coaching continuity, and many other factors. Obviously, Prime's build is extreme via the portal, however the depths of turning CU over is a tough go. There is the coaching turn-over too, however I think this staff is better than last year's staff, I just hope they can put the pieces together.
Shout out to the DL. Missing two top guys in Nwankwo and Carter lasts game and that group still played well. Best front line talent and depth CU has had on the DL, particularly on the interior, in years if not decades.
Baylor going to be a big test. Both lines looked like they finally have started to settle in to the schemes.
Michigan won the natty last year and FSU went 13-0. Nothing wrong with the portal, you Just gotta hit on the players you bring in. Also, it takes time to build chemistry so schedule lightly
You're not building a team with the quantity of transfers brought in - there's a huge gap between CU and everyone else
CU had to do it due to the lack of quality. Then this year was about fit and areas of weakness plus depth.
Let's not act like CU wasn't in a terrible position
They had to do it in 2023, they didn't need to last year & there's still little to no focus on HS recruiting thus leaving the portal to be highly relied again once again.
Nwankwo, Barnes, Carter, BJ Green, Hayes, Okunlola, NHG, Hodge, McKinney, Benson, Mayers, Houston, Wester, Sheppard, Hayden, Augustave.
That's anywhere between 12-16 starters and/or guys who play and rotate a lot. I'm not sure why you think they didn't need to hit the portal and bring these guys in again this year.
The 2023 roster still needed massive upgrades in order to compete in Shedeur and Travis' last year.
12-16 out of 55 transfer players...