My head just exploded
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!
We are seeing our Buffs being rebuilt
- Thread starter 90sBuff
- Start date
My head just exploded
God I hope so.
FLounder
Think Positive and life will be Positive.
Mac has forgotten more then Hawk ever new about the game.
Based on CU's recent history with highly rated recruits, I'm not sure how you can argue. The ones that we are going to get to be interested in our terminal looser of a program are most likely going to be the ones that better programs pass on for one reason or another. Some work out, but a lot in our recent history have been flakes.
Plenty of lower ranked guys flake. We just don't notice as much
Mr. Babar
I have no elephant books
Guess I read your post incorrectly. Sounded like you were implying suggesting we should expect to be competing with USC was a 'ridiculous statement.' I agree we should be competitive with other P5 schools, and if you looked at rankings last year we were competitive with the bottom 20% of the P5 schools. We are bottom 20% right now obviously. Recruiting needs to improve - 0-7 in PAC12 play didn't help.
SINKRATZ
PhD in Analogy
Sorry for the confusion, I see that argument made a lot that 5* kids don't want to come here which implies that there's no room between where we are recruiting and the 5* kids which is ridiculous.
Bottom line for me, the coach is responsible for winning and recruiting, which comes first? We can't, on one hand, keep excusing the lack of wins because we are so young and lack talent, then turn around and excuse the recruiting because we can't win. Eventually something had to change, and I'm ready for eventually to start happening.
The problem here is that in most programs, if you're a solid coach, you can take a team of scrubs and turn them into a respectable football team and win 5-6 games per year. Here, we're playing 11 other teams in our own conference that are well coached, talented football teams. We have to climb over other teams, and there isn't a single team that is an easy target for us to climb over. I worry that we may have hit our ceiling with the players we have this year.
Unfortunate for us we didn't get WSU this year.
I have a hard time believing we've hit our ceiling with these kids given how many freshman and sophomores we are still playing.
I actually agree with this. Many of the non P5 programs who have big seasons tend to have a lot of upperclassmen during those big seasons.
We haven't hit a ceiling. Come on, man!
MrFrumpylane
Well-Known Member
Upperclassmen or more experience does not always translate to progress.
Mr. Babar
I have no elephant books
Like your enthusiasm, but I'd be happy with 7-6 next year. Haha.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I'll take my chances.
Bufffan68
Club Member
Look what Sparkles did in Ft. C. He has/had a ton of upperclassmen and is doing well. Sure, 9-1 in the MW is like 1-9 in the PAC12, but he's winning and looking decent doing it.
Unfortunately MM had neither talent nor upperclassmen...talk about being burned to the ground.
I'm saying that with the talent we have on the roster right now, we may have hit our ceiling. The guys on the roster aren't going to play any better. Even with another year of experience. I may be wrong there, but that's what my gut is telling me. This is as good as I've seen our OL since the Barnett years, and it hasn't translated into any more wins. We're in an extremely difficult conference, and nobody is going to take any pity on us. Did you see the spanking ASU put on Notre Dame? ASU might not even be the third best team in the division. Forget the Pac 12, they might not even be third in the P12-South. That, more than anything, represents the daunting task ahead of us and MM. There are no gimmes in the Pac 12. None. Every team, every week, has the ability to win. They're ALL better than us, and they aren't getting worse. So while I agree that if we were in the MWC, ACC or even the BiG, we'd be staring at a 8-4 season right now, that's a luxury we don't have. We're in the Pac 12, and that means it's going to take a really, really long time to dig out of the hole we dug ourselves.
Says the Gator, when it suits him of course.
FlatironsBuff
Well-Known Member
Everyone acts like every other team will improve and stay that good for perpetuity.
Even if there is development, the rest of the league is developing faster and further. We keep talking about how we're going to coach up our players and they'll be better just because they're a year older. Well, the rest of the league isn't graduating 100% of their roster this year, so they'll be a year older, too.
Nothing to suggest otherwise. At least in the forseeable future. Look at the other 11 teams. Who will get worse? OSU? Maybe. WSU? Maybe. Anybody else? I don't see it. And we play those teams on the road next year. Yay for us.
Bufffan68
Club Member
I see a let down (though maybe not dramatic) for a few programs, with their QBs leaving. Marriota, Halliday, Kelly, Manion and Hundley should all either graduate or leave for the NFL. Now, whether enough teams take a big enough drop and/or we improve enough is certainly left to be seen.
I agree with you on the depth of the hole we have dug ourselves. We are playing in one of the top talent conferences in the nation, arguably the most talented in terms of speed/skill players. SEC is ahead in the trenches.
M2 ended up playing against that talent level having inherited a roster that was less talented than some FCS teams. A few good players but I wonder how many overall we had that would have started last year for North Dakota State.
A lot of our players may have fairly limited ceilings but overall I think we still have a lot of room for growth. It may not be spectacular growth but it will be effective growth. Guys like Kelley and Irwin on the OL along with Kough and Kronsage will be helped a lot by adding another year of S&C work and by another year of spring ball to work on technique, now with some real experience to build on. Will they ever be able to impress like the 4* guys USC runs out on the OL? No but they can be more effective than they are now. Same could be said for the young guys playing DE, undersized and inexperienced. Add 10-15 lbs of quality size to them and some good work and we get notably better at the position. Still not great but much better.
We aren't going to contend for conference championships with these guys but based on this year it sure looks like the margin between winning multiple conference games and zero isn't that great anymore. If we can win enough to look like an actual member of the conference then we can start getting some of those higher ceiling guys to seriously look at us and come.
Solid steps will get us there, since we aren't going to make bounds.
There are at the same time a number of guys who probably are at their limit. How much better is KO going to get? Our RBs may develop physically but do they have the instincts and extra physical ability to be a lot better than they are now?
Unfortunately after all the pain of watching our once proud program decay into the pit we found a couple years ago climbing out isn't going to be fast, easy, or painless either. I do think though that we are moving the right direction.
Just as a quick example, Utah has 16 starters that are Jr's or Sr's, the Buffs have 10. You would be pressed to convince that having 6 more players starting as Juniors or Seniors (more than 25% of the 22 starters) would not improve our understanding of the schemes, be stronger from being a year older, etc.