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!

Offensive Line...

ScottyBuff

Well-Known Member
Obviously this is the heart of the team, and the problems the OL had last season dictated our entire season. There are some notes in the "2-deep" thread, and some about individual players, but as this is a "unit" thought I would post this as a complete thread.

With the talent and experience gained last season for our tackles, if only we could get some stability at the interior line positions, especially replacing Girthy at Center this year could be alot better than last season, but it still feels really thin and most likely we are another year away from having a complete unit with the depth to fill holes when they open.

I remember reading when Hawk took the job that he said it was stated goal to recruit 5-6 OL recruits every season to rebuild the depth there.

Since then the 2006 class included:
Nate Solder (as TE, now starting LT)
Eric Lawson (as OG, converted to DT)
Wes Simon (as C, no longer with program)
Quintin Borders (as OT, no longer with program)
Bill Boyer (as OT, no longer with program)
Erick Faatagi (as OG, no longer with program)
Keenan Stevens (Walk-on, in the mix as starter at C)

2007:
Ryan Miller (as OT, now starting RT)
Blake Behrens (as OG, s/b starting OG/C this year)
Sione Tau (as OT, ineligible in '08, in the mix as backup)
Ethan Adkins (as OT, s/b in the top 5 at OT)
Matt Bahr (as OG, not sure what position he will be at but s/b a backup)
Shawn Daniels (as OG, probably the least talked about interior lineman?)
Mike Iltis (as OG, injury, but definitely in the mix at OG, some say at C?)
Kai Maiava (as C/OG, no longer with the program)
David Clark (Walk-On as OT, depth player)

2008:
Bryce Givens (as OT, R/S in '08 but in the mix as a top 5 OT)
Max Tuioti-Mariner (as OG, likely starter at RG)
Ryan Dannewitz (as OT, in the mix as a top 5 OT)

2009 (projected as of now):
Jack Harris (as OT)
Gus Handler (as OG)
David Bakhtiari (as OT)
Shaun Simon (as C)

To really prove the point of the youth and lack of depth, look at GB's last recruiting class in 2005:
Devin Head (as OG, most likely starter at LG)
Bryce MacMartin (as C, JuCo now graduated)
Paul Backowski (as OT, no longer with program)
Jeremy Hauck (as OG, no longer with program)

To recap:
2005 produced only 1 offensive lineman, with 1 starter
2006 produced only 2 offensive lineman, 1 starter (poss. 2)
2007 produced 8 offensive linemen, 2 starters
2008 produced 3 offensive linemen, 1 starter

I agree with some of the posters about Devin Head, but have left him in as the de-facto "starter" at LG. I really think another off-season of development will see Blake Behrens in that role, unless he takes the Center position. Does anyone have any info on Shawn Daniels?

If Head, Behrens, Iltis, Stevens, Daniels, and Mariner are all healthy and continue in their development we could be set this season, but that is alot of "IF's" to have them all come true.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: SCB
Just to make it clear you should label Bryce McMartin as Graduated...he was a Juco who came in and played for 2 years. So 2005 produced 2 OL players and 2 starters.

I don't know how the team is better just because Sanders is gone? Maybe I misread what you were saying.

I don't know that Tau was injured but he was ineligible academically. I worry because I hear very little about his status.
 
Thanks for the updates on MacMartin and Tau. Forgot about Bryce being JC and got mixed up on Tau.

Definitely didn't mean to imply that we are better without Sanders. I meant that replacing Girthy added to the issue of getting stability at the interior line positions. But, that as a whole the line could be better given that the other four positions return more experience than we did last year.
 
Head lost the starting job in '07 to Maiva (true freshman) and he lost the starting job in '08 to MTM (true freshman). He is a backup. A nice solid guy, but lacks any hint of mobility or ability to find a LB or Safety to block.

You've made a nice clear case for why CU hasn't been competitive. It starts here with the big uglies and we have been hurting badly there.

Tau was mentioned by Hawkins in the last luncheon as a "big dude" who we really missed this year. I think he will be in the mix for playing time.

All three guys from 2008 class are future starters and should be in the two deep this year, from what i've heard.
 
The health of the O-line will be the determinig factor for CU's season and DH's job.
 
The health of the O-line will be the determinig factor for CU's season and DH's job.

If healthy, they should be better, but I don't expect they will be great, 'cause they will still be primarily soph's and freshmen.

They will be the major factor of whether our offense picks it up in a major way or not though.

Given the recruiting that is going on, DH's job isn't riding on this next season. Pure fantasy. Bohn has a long term vision and he's not firing a guy who is playing primarily freshmen and sophomores.... Thank God he has more sense than that! If he fires DH, he's going to be interviewing whom? silly....
 
Looks like the Buffs will have a very dominating O Line for years to come as long as all stay healthy.

:beerme: The rilvalry between the Huskers and Buffs is going to get interesting.
 
They key is staying healthy.

I believe we have the talent at the position, but I am worried about all of the talent recovering from serious injuries
 
I think we have good talent, but this core is both very young and coming off a lot of injuries. It will be the big question mark once again this year (but it can't help to be a lot better)

Givens - FR (serious concussion issues)
Miller - SO (broken leg)
Iltis - SO (torn ACL)
Tuioti-Mariner - FR (Torn ACL)
Solder - JR
Behrens - SO (shoulder surgery)
Tau - SO
Dannewitz - FR
Bahr - SO
Head - SR (Shoulder surgery)

Not to mention that Behrens the Fullback had knee surgery....
 
Thanks for posting the subtext to my post.

In hindsight an exclamation mark was needed in my post. Oh well, back to mocking old people.
 
Last edited:
Given the recruiting that is going on, DH's job isn't riding on this next season. Pure fantasy. Bohn has a long term vision and he's not firing a guy who is playing primarily freshmen and sophomores.... Thank God he has more sense than that! If he fires DH, he's going to be interviewing whom? silly....

Yessir. :thumbsup:
 
If healthy, they should be better, but I don't expect they will be great, 'cause they will still be primarily soph's and freshmen.

They will be the major factor of whether our offense picks it up in a major way or not though.

Given the recruiting that is going on, DH's job isn't riding on this next season. Pure fantasy. Bohn has a long term vision and he's not firing a guy who is playing primarily freshmen and sophomores.... Thank God he has more sense than that! If he fires DH, he's going to be interviewing whom? silly....

So, what happens if hawk has losing season's in year 4 &5? Will the zen keep him afloat? Sometimes, I think i'm on a chicago cubs board.
 
If he doesnt come away with a winning season and a bowl win next year, his goose is cooked. No more zen-spin, rants, and "believing is seeing" or any other ----ing quotes. In the end its only about wins. I mean you want your team to be classy, high grad rate, good PR, and all that, but in the end the wins column is the biggest indicator of success. If he cant get it done, then step aside for someone who can.
 
Last edited:
If he doesnt come away with a winning season and a bowl win next year, his goose is cooked. No more zen-spin, rants, and "believing is seeing" or any other ----ing quotes. In the end its only about wins. I mean you want your team to be classy, high grad rate, good PR, and all that, but in the end the wins column is the biggest indicator of success. If he cant get it done, then step aside for someone who can.

The problem is that there is no one who can get the job done who CU can afford. Anyone who is a great recruiter and has an eye for good assistant coaches will cost and if they're that good, the SEC or one of the big boys will win out. So Hawk will get 7 years to get the job done. He will become fire-able after season six. By then his best recruiting classes will have matured and they'll either produce or not.

This upcoming season does have to be a winnable one though. Not 10 wins, but 6-8 will be considered successful.
 
The problem is that there is no one who can get the job done who CU can afford. Anyone who is a great recruiter and has an eye for good assistant coaches will cost and if they're that good, the SEC or one of the big boys will win out. So Hawk will get 7 years to get the job done. He will become fire-able after season six. By then his best recruiting classes will have matured and they'll either produce or not.

This upcoming season does have to be a winnable one though. Not 10 wins, but 6-8 will be considered successful.

:lol:

Your posts just keep getting better.
 
The problem is that there is no one who can get the job done who CU can afford. Anyone who is a great recruiter and has an eye for good assistant coaches will cost and if they're that good, the SEC or one of the big boys will win out. So Hawk will get 7 years to get the job done. He will become fire-able after season six. By then his best recruiting classes will have matured and they'll either produce or not.

This upcoming season does have to be a winnable one though. Not 10 wins, but 6-8 will be considered successful.
I am a sunshine pumper, but six wins would ****ing suck and barring some sort of mitigating circumstances (like the world ending), I would be pretty ****ing pissed. Gimme 8+!
 
I am a sunshine pumper, but six wins would ****ing suck and barring some sort of mitigating circumstances (like the world ending), I would be pretty ****ing pissed. Gimme 8+!

Nevermind that. Buffocrat (the same guy who said going to a bowl game was worthless:lol:) is now saying Hawk will get SEVEN years no matter what.:lol::lol:
 
Nevermind that. Buffocrat (the same guy who said going to a bowl game was worthless:lol:) is now saying Hawk will get SEVEN years no matter what.:lol::lol:
the sad thing is, if Hawk gets us to 9 wins or something awesome like that next year, I can totally see someone scooping him up. How in the hell is CU gonna compete with the salaries SEC coaches are getting these days? Hell, Tennessee's DEFENSIVE COORDINATOR is making about what Hawk makes, or MORE!

However, the ****ty economy may get us another year. hooraay!
 
Good

I'm glad you find the truth funny

Like the truth that going to a bowl game doesn't help recruiting?:lol:

Try as you might to paint CU as one of the worst jobs in America (I believe you have said it is one the five worst jobs in the country:lol:), coaches have to deliver well before year six here. Your "truth" is nothing more than bull****.
 
Nevermind that. Buffocrat (the same guy who said going to a bowl game was worthless:lol:) is now saying Hawk will get SEVEN years no matter what.:lol::lol:

No what I said was going to the Alamo Bowl or below is worthless. And as bowl season proves again and again.....it pretty much is.....

And who do you think that CU can bring in to really right the ship if Hawk doesn't get the job done........

I'm waiting.
 
No what I said was going to the Alamo Bowl or below is worthless. And as bowl season proves again and again.....it pretty much is.....

And who do you think that CU can bring in to really right the ship if Hawk doesn't get the job done........

I'm waiting.

I can't help if you don't think recruits notice the difference between going to a bowl game with a chance for a winning record and finishing 5-7. It had an effect on recruiting, and not in a positive way. Feel free to live in fantasy land.

I have no idea if there is anyone out there better than Hawk. Neither do you. However, everyone following the CU football program knows that there is absolutely no way that Hawkins will get a free ride for at least 6-7 years, no matter what happens on the field. Eventually, wins are going to matter. So stop trying to argue otherwise.
 
No what I said was going to the Alamo Bowl or below is worthless. And as bowl season proves again and again.....it pretty much is.....

And who do you think that CU can bring in to really right the ship if Hawk doesn't get the job done........

I'm waiting.

A lot of what the crat says is just crap, but this point is valid unless we take a flyer on some up and coming non-BCS school coach/assistant cause we sure aint gonna pay 2 mil+ for the next petrino

Sound familiar?
 
A lot of what the crat says is just crap, but this point is valid unless we take a flyer on some up and coming non-BCS school coach/assistant cause we sure aint gonna pay 2 mil+ for the next petrino

Sound familiar?

That's a wondeful sentiment. It doesn't change the fact that Hawk is going to have to start winning some games (in 2009 and 2010) if he wants to keep his job. Crat is trying to argue that he is here for at least 7 years regardless, it is simply not true.
 
Like the truth that going to a bowl game doesn't help recruiting?:lol:

Try as you might to paint CU as one of the worst jobs in America (I believe you have said it is one the five worst jobs in the country:lol:), coaches have to deliver well before year six here. Your "truth" is nothing more than bull****.

No I said it's one of the top five hardest jobs to win at

Why? because again......there are no fertile recruiting grounds for miles and there are so many administrative hurdles to remain competitive with your larger mainstream BCS schools. Maybe this will help you out:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/andy_staples/01/20/recruiting/index.html

Remember, there are 60+ teams playing in bowl games. If it really helped recruiting, there should be some shift in the top teams that go to the higher end bowls year in and year out. But it's not...USC, LSU, Texas, Ohio State....same schools year in and year out.

You can continue to laugh....but Im not the one that's going to be angry at the end of 2009. You are!
 
That's a wondeful sentiment. It doesn't change the fact that Hawk is going to have to start winning some games (in 2009 and 2010) if he wants to keep his job. Crat is trying to argue that he is here for at least 7 years regardless, it is simply not true.
trooo. no way he goes 5 losing seasons in a row and keeps his job.
 
No I said it's one of the top five hardest jobs to win at

Why? because again......there are no fertile recruiting grounds for miles and there are so many administrative hurdles to remain competitive with your larger mainstream BCS schools. Maybe this will help you out:

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2009/writers/andy_staples/01/20/recruiting/index.html

Remember, there are 60+ teams playing in bowl games. If it really helped recruiting, there should be some shift in the top teams that go to the higher end bowls year in and year out. But it's not...USC, LSU, Texas, Ohio State....same schools year in and year out.

You can continue to laugh....but Im not the one that's going to be angry at the end of 2009. You are!

So if CU can't finish with top 10 recruiting classes every year, lower level bowl games don't matter.:rolleyes:

I won't be angry at the end of 2009. I expect 7 wins and I have little doubt the Buffs will deliver. You're the one that continually plays the "woe is us" card on this board and act you're the only one that is realistic.:rolleyes:

And no, CU is not one of the top five hardest jobs to win at, try again.
 
Back
Top