What's new
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!

Thoughts on the upcoming recruiting cycle

MtnBuff

Not allowed in Barzil 2
Club Member
It seems that there is a lot of pent up frustration here regarding the upcoming recruiting class. A lot of us, myself included, experienced the years when Buff football meant something nationally and are just plain sick of sucking, we want to win and want to win now. It doesn't help that we are in a time period that is without much footballwise and no other college sports to distract our attention.

This year may be a very frustrating year for a couple of reasons. One is the small numbers we are looking at in the class. We simply don't have enough schollies that we can really offer and accept enough guys to keep a constant stream of commits coming. We will have some long stretches between good news driving us nuts.

We also have some pretty high expectations but the profile of the program is such that the coaches are going to have to do a serious selling job to fulfill some of those expectations. The last time CU was relavent the kids we are recruiting were in elementary school so it is an uphill battle. I think we are going to see a number of cases where we get our hopes up only to see a USC, Oregon, Stanford, or even a UW (who went to a bowl last year) or Boise (who has won a lot of games even if they were against the little sisters of the poor) sweep in and grab the kid. The good news is unlike Hawkins our staff is going after kids other major conference schools want, the bad news is that we have to do more convincing to get those kids.

Much of the frustration is going to be at positions like OL where kids recognition is more based on team success than individual statistics. A guy like PRich can stand out on a 3 win team with numbers and highlights, what does an offensive lineman have to show for his efforts other than some bruises and a dirty uniform.

I think it is critical that the team show significant progress on the field this season. Our schedule sets up for it but we have to win in our OCC and get some conference wins. We also have to put up a better fight in our losses, at least show that we belong on the field instead of having the other team decide when to go into mercy mode. A bowl, any bowl would be huge for this team and our recruiting.

I don't have anything specific that I can back this with but I sense that a number of our best recruits are going to come on board late. I also get a sense that we are going to see even more kids dropping commitments and switching that we have in past years. Again I can't point to specific kids or situations but it seems like a lot of kids have committed just to have a school next to their name but aren't as solid as that commitment makes it sound.

Because this class is smaller we also can't miss on the kids we take. They may not have to be the superstars but we can't afford to have a lot of misses, we need kids who are able to contribute at this level and who don't become non-factors
 
Very nice post. Thoughtful, insightful and realistic. Speaking completely with an outsider's perspective, and no offense is intended by this, but I sometimes see a disconnect between what a team's own fanbase feels about their program vs. what an outside perspective can sometimes be. TC's post here felt very balanced and fair to me.

About the only thing that I would add to the original post above is that I think it would really help Colorado Football get back on the national radar in a hurry would be they could get an upset or a statement type win. The type of win that gets the team in the headlines and says, "We're on our way back folks."

Hard to get, but on the field anything can happen on any given day of college football. Knocking off a USC or an Oregon can certainly catch headlines and the eyes of undecided recruits.
 
Last edited:
I think most would agree with most of both in the above posts. Mtn sets a good expectation, our coaches are going after the right caliber guys (hopefully) and we are likely to lose a few battles along the way. I strongly agree that it is far better to set our sights high and suffer a few disappointments along the way than to not even give the guys that can make a difference a shot.
Along with that I think all of us are looking forward to that huge win that would spark national interest, but even DII showed that those can happen and not fundamentally change the direction of a program. I will be much more satisfied with a five or six win season where the Buffs take care of business in the games that we have a realistic chance of winning, than I would be with a 3 win season where they have one miracle knock off and then fail to close on teams like Fresno St or Utah. This season is going to have a steep learning curve, I am looking for a season where the fundamental offense that EB is implementing continues to take shape. The discussion of TEs in another thread shows that this offense may be growing to the evolution that the pro sets are showing...multiple backs with different styles, multiple TEs that are threats to release and catch and speed outside to stretch the opposing defenses. Get those types of skill players in and OL recruits will see the potential to specifically develop their playing style to be NFL ready. Getting to the point where they are knocking down the door to be here may still take some time, but I really look to that as our in with linemen rather than one big upset, (not that those would hurt!).
 
I thought I was verbose in this forum :lol: Many have said in other threads that until we start winning consistently we will not consistently get a lot of blue chips to commit. Those that do will because they buy what Embree&Co are selling, early playing time, and/or they have a real reason to want to come to CU (legacy, live in the area, like to ski, academics etc.).

We know that JE and EB at least are recognized world class recruiters. Their biggest job is to put a winning product on the field as soon as possible. Difficult given the depleted nature of what he inherited but that's what has to be done. Here's to hoping the 2012 class is as good as JE thinks it could be.
 
I just don't understand the OL issues. We have had guys the last two years drafted including Solder who played great last year for the Pats. How are we not having better success getting players? Something is clearly not working with the message the coaches are delivering to recruits.

I'm not at panic stage, but if this trend continues once the season starts and we fail to get recruits into visits and land commits something needs to be done.

Regarding the other positions I'm very happy with the results thus far. First year in the PAC meant first time exposure to many prospects. A solid season record wise, and overall improved performance of the team should really help show prospects that CU is a great option. One thing that must improve is our road play. Since we are competing with so many other PAC schools there is always a chance that a recruit is visiting a school we are playing. Losing to UCLA by 40 and trying to tell a kid to come to CU instead of UCLA is a tough sales pitch.
 
I just don't understand the OL issues. We have had guys the last two years drafted including Solder who played great last year for the Pats. How are we not having better success getting players? Something is clearly not working with the message the coaches are delivering to recruits.

I'm not at panic stage, but if this trend continues once the season starts and we fail to get recruits into visits and land commits something needs to be done.

Regarding the other positions I'm very happy with the results thus far. First year in the PAC meant first time exposure to many prospects. A solid season record wise, and overall improved performance of the team should really help show prospects that CU is a great option. One thing that must improve is our road play. Since we are competing with so many other PAC schools there is always a chance that a recruit is visiting a school we are playing. Losing to UCLA by 40 and trying to tell a kid to come to CU instead of UCLA is a tough sales pitch.

This to me is a big issue. Kids have to be able to think that the program is close enough that they can make a difference and that winning is on the way. It is one thing to lose, it is another to get dominated and embarrased. That applies both at home and on the road.
 
I just don't understand the OL issues. We have had guys the last two years drafted including Solder who played great last year for the Pats. How are we not having better success getting players? Something is clearly not working with the message the coaches are delivering to recruits.

I'm not at panic stage, but if this trend continues once the season starts and we fail to get recruits into visits and land commits something needs to be done.

Regarding the other positions I'm very happy with the results thus far. First year in the PAC meant first time exposure to many prospects. A solid season record wise, and overall improved performance of the team should really help show prospects that CU is a great option. One thing that must improve is our road play. Since we are competing with so many other PAC schools there is always a chance that a recruit is visiting a school we are playing. Losing to UCLA by 40 and trying to tell a kid to come to CU instead of UCLA is a tough sales pitch.

The OL issues has to do with the guy that is recruiting this position. Marshall does not have the ability to be an outstanding or even an above average recruiter. In the short run we will need other coaches to establish and build the relationships that Marshall is struggling to build. But in the end we probably need to find an upgrade at this critical coaching position.
 
Some have said Marshall can coach. He evidently can't recruit, at least partly because of short tenures. It seems incongruous to fire him, then, instead of correcting that weakness. We would only benefit if we landed a "ringer" of an OL coach. What are the odds of that happening?
 
The OL situation could be better, but it is not all doom and gloom like most people will like to believe. The program was in a bad situation under Hawkins, it was going to be difficult to recruit. I don't know Marshall personally, so can't comment on if he is a good recruiter or not. All I know is at Cal, Cal recruited well on the OL when he was here, at CU during the Big 12 championship run, CU recruited well. Winning helps recruiting. I will give the OL recruiting a midterm grade of C+, the final exam has more weight. Still too early to panic. So far they are off to a moderately good start. The first recruiting class had players like Paulay Asiata, Stephane Nembot, Kelly,and Lewis. decent class considering that CU was not a bowl team and the late start in recruiting for the new staff. The 2nd class had players like Kough and Irwin, both guys are not the 4 stars or the 5 stars, but on tape they look like good developmental guys. This year we are still in on the best prospects, and we have landed a good looking prospect at Guard Collin Sutton. The focus for the 2012 recruiting cycle was the DL, going by the amount of offers being handed out, looks like the OL is the focus for 2013, I will reserve my final judgement until after signing day 2013.
 
Last edited:
My expectations are tempered for next year. With that being said, I think we will get to see how good our coaching staff is across the board. If they are ANY good, we will start out 3-0. After that, there are swing games against Stanford, UW, ASU, UCLA, and Utah, all at home. Sorry, none of those teams are unbeatable. We also have WSU and Zona on the road. Hardly invincible. Yes, we have some issues and youth, but every great coach we've seen take on a new job has found ways to shorten the rebuilding process. We need Embree and crew to prove their mettle, that they are more than rah rah motivational guys, and can pull out some games they have no business winning. With our home slate, I hope this is doable and happens.

If we can give recruits more than just an idea of what we're trying to do, by showing some tangible results on the field and even a bowl game, I think some kids that are balking at us now, could be open down the road. Plus, there are always seniors that develop nicely. Look at Tupou. Nobody even knew that guy was on the radar and I think he maybe be one of the top 5 guys we signed this year when it's all said and done.
 
The OL situation could be better, but it is not all doom and gloom like most people will like to believe. The program was in a bad situation under Hawkins, it was going to be difficult to recruit. I don't know Marshall personally, so can't comment on if he is a good recruiter or not. All I know is at Cal, Cal recruited well on the OL when he was here, at CU during the Big 12 championship run, CU recruited well. Winning helps recruiting. I will give the OL recruiting a midterm grade of C+, the final exam has more weight. Still too early to panic. So far they are off to a moderately good start. The first recruiting class had players like Paulay Asiata, Stephane Nembot, Kelly,and Lewis. decent class considering that CU was not a bowl team and the late start in recruiting for the new staff. The 2nd class had players like Kough and Irwin, both guys are not the 4 stars or the 5 stars, but on tape they look like good developmental guys. This year we are still in on the best prospects, and we have landed a good looking prospect at Guard Collin Sutton. The focus for the 2012 recruiting cycle was the DL, going by the amount of offers being handed out, looks like the OL is the focus for 2013, I will reserve my final judgement until after signing day 2013.

Who are we in on at this point? The ONLY 4* that's showing any interest at this point is Lopez, and of the 3*'s that seem to be good prospects, we're in the mix on Redmond and maybe Skipper, but the ship seems to have sailed on guys like Hunt, Harlow, Koehler, etc. Other than that, we're pretty much looking for a diamond in the rough that no one else is offering. Just because we're listed in a Rivals or Scout db on a player doesn't mean we're in the hunt.
 
Let's stop with the "it's early" talk. It may be a long time until February, but the coaches need to start making some headway with OL recruits this summer.

I feel like some people are only going to panic if we are still struggling in mid-January (when it will be too late).
 
Who are we in on at this point? The ONLY 4* that's showing any interest at this point is Lopez, and of the 3*'s that seem to be good prospects, we're in the mix on Redmond and maybe Skipper, but the ship seems to have sailed on guys like Hunt, Harlow, Koehler, etc. Other than that, we're pretty much looking for a diamond in the rough that no one else is offering. Just because we're listed in a Rivals or Scout db on a player doesn't mean we're in the hunt.


When I look at HS OL, I don't look at star rating. I look at how they will project at the next level and their tape.


I will be happy with this 5 OL

OT-Skipper
OT- Cochran
OG-Sutton
OG-Huckins
OG- Borrayo
 
When I look at HS OL, I don't look at star rating. I look at how they will project at the next level and their tape.


I will be happy with this 5 OL

OT-Skipper
OT- Cochran
OG-Sutton
OG-Huckins
OG- Redmond

Weird because that's what star ratings do
 
I also look at academics and the player's character or personality.

I would do that too if I had access to their transcripts and the ability to personally interview them and those who know them. Unfortunately, I'm forced to form my opinions off a bit of game film and the evaluations of people I respect.
 
When I look at HS OL, I don't look at star rating. I look at how they will project at the next level and their tape.


I will be happy with this 5 OL

OT-Skipper
OT- Cochran
OG-Sutton
OG-Huckins
OG- Borrayo

We might end up with two out of the five.
 
We might end up with two out of the five.

We've got 1 with Sutton. Cochran's off the board (allegedly per AZ).

I haven't looked into the other three recently to see where we stand, but my impression of Skipper is that he's enamored with the idea of playing out of state.
 
I would do that too if I had access to their transcripts and the ability to personally interview them and those who know them. Unfortunately, I'm forced to form my opinions off a bit of game film and the evaluations of people I respect.

But the coaches have access to the players and will have an idea of how well they are doing academically. The coaches are the ones making the decision, not some journo evaluation and definitely not you.
 
But the coaches have access to the players and will have an idea of how well they are doing academically. The coaches are the ones making the decision, not some journo evaluation and definitely not you.

So you're saying you're a coach?
 
That would be great, but I think we get atleast 3 maybe 4 out of 5.

This is where I get confused with your posts. How would ending up with two out of the five be "great"? Just ending up with five OL in this class is not good enough. There need to be some "wins" in the group as well.
 
Back
Top