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!

Debunking the "Youth Excuse"

Buffnik

Real name isn't Nik
Club Member
Junta Member
Thanks to rward for these stats that he compiled and posted at Rivals and AZ's.

Colorado is 0-2 with only 40% (27 listed) of their two deep being Jrs and Srs with two losses against two non-BCS school.

Missouri is 2-0 with only 33% (17 listed) of their two deep being Jrs and Srs with a win against a BCS school in a neutral site.

UCLA is 2-0 with only 41% (27 listed) of their two deep being Jrs and Srs with a win against a BCS school in on the road.

Michigan is 2-0 with only 41% (26 listed) of their two deep being Jrs and Srs with a win against a BCS school.

Wisconsin and West Virginia with 25 total Jrs and Srs on the two deep are 2-0.

11 teams with less Jrs and Srs listed on the two deep than CU has listed are 2-0. 6 others with the same amount are 2-0.
 
Yeah, but those other schools actually play their talented folks.
 
Interesting, but I wonder how many of the Jrs and Srs at those other schools are starting compared to CU.
 
Thanks to rward for these stats that he compiled and posted at Rivals and AZ's.

Colorado is 0-2 with only 40% (27 listed) of their two deep being Jrs and Srs with two losses against two non-BCS school.

Missouri is 2-0 with only 33% (17 listed) of their two deep being Jrs and Srs with a win against a BCS school in a neutral site.

UCLA is 2-0 with only 41% (27 listed) of their two deep being Jrs and Srs with a win against a BCS school in on the road.

Michigan is 2-0 with only 41% (26 listed) of their two deep being Jrs and Srs with a win against a BCS school.

Wisconsin and West Virginia with 25 total Jrs and Srs on the two deep are 2-0.

11 teams with less Jrs and Srs listed on the two deep than CU has listed are 2-0. 6 others with the same amount are 2-0.

Good research.
 
And despite the mounting evidence, there are still people that believe Juicebox is doing a good job, and it's just a matter of time until the 'light goes on' and things "crack"

Mods... you need to get a 'facepalm' emoticon!
 
Just like you are gonna tell Brian Fuentes how much he ****ing sucks face to face?
 
I'd like to see you say that to the kids you are putting down face to face.

That certainly could have been worded better, they're not saying that the players on the field don't have talent. Even you DBT, captain sunshine, can't argue that Hawkins is, in fact, keeping more talented athletes on the bench.

Other teams, winning teams, tailor their offense to get their MOST talented kids on the field. Hawkins doesn't, that's not even an arguable point anymore. Hawkins himself has admitted he'd rather play less talented kids that know HIS system, than more talented kids that he'd have to change his system for. The infamous quote is all over the place.
 
That certainly could have been worded better, they're not saying that the players on the field don't have talent. Even you DBT, captain sunshine, can't argue that Hawkins is, in fact, keeping more talented athletes on the bench.

Other teams, winning teams, tailor their offense to get their MOST talented kids on the field. Hawkins doesn't, that's not even an arguable point anymore. Hawkins himself has admitted he'd rather play less talented kids that know HIS system, than more talented kids that he'd have to change his system for. The infamous quote is all over the place.
Is that the "infamous quote" that was on that AZ guy's website? The one that is heresay?
 
I think this is like Bush's accounting (never included Iraq in his budget) - you can make numbers say anything. Who's getting PT? Good question. What's the pool of players? Here's that answer, from Rivals team recruiting final rankings.

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Average Avg 2005-6 Avg 2007-9
Colorado 43 48 32 15 48 37 46 32
Missouri 39 47 33 25 40 37 43 33
UCLA 26 17 40 13 14 22 22 22
Michigan 6 13 12 10 8 10 10 10
Wisconsin 33 42 34 41 43 39 38 39
West Virginia 31 52 23 42 27 35 42 31

So let's throw Michigan out right off the bat - they consistently out-recruit every other team, and the "BCS" team they beat was ND (does that really count?). UCLA also has a much higher average athlete than the other schools listed. If you look at the juniors and seniors that are playing, CU is well behind the others. As our young players get into the lineup, I'd expect us to be right there with the remaining 3 teams. We still have catching up to do with Michigan and UCLA. Of course, this doesn't tell the whole story, but just putting up a bunch of selected teams' victory count is weak analysis. I didn't check, but I'm guessing the other team those guys played fall more in line with NU's starting two, so at least they get a warmup game. Our opponent weren't great shakes, and we should be beating those teams, but CSU is a setup game every year. I'm not defending the coaches, I don't understand our coaching decisions this year, but this is a cherry-picked argument.
 
Last edited:
dbt, your sunshine is pretty unbelievable, we got smoked by 2 nonbcs conf. teams, it's gonna be a third this weekend. when were 0-10 it will be hard to deny how whacky pumpkinhead really is.
 
dbt, your sunshine is pretty unbelievable, we got smoked by 2 nonbcs conf. teams, it's gonna be a third this weekend. when were 0-10 it will be hard to deny how whacky pumpkinhead really is.
No. You have it wrong. I'm not pumping sunshine, I'm just trying to understand the big picture. I'm pissed at the losses as well. I'm defending the kids here. I also put more stock into what Gary Barnett and Bill McCartney say then I do a bunch of message board cowboys. But there are plenty of things about Hawkins I'm not happy with. I just am tired of the incessent ripping of the program, the school, the kids, and, yeah, even Hawkins that is going on. I'm also trying to at least be objective and look at as many facts as I can. One of them is that of Hawkins' four recruiting classes, he has 3 srs, 9 jrs, a third not on the team, and about 60% fr and sophs. That coming on less than stellar classes, due to the recruiting restictions and bad publicity, preceding him.

And now that I haven't joined the "Hang Dan" mob, I'm getting ripped.
 
I'd like to see you say that to the kids you are putting down face to face.

Oooooooooohhhhhh. What's the matter, those hard facts get you all riled up because the excuses are running out?

96 didn't trash any player, he just said our talented ones ride the pine. He's not the only one who sees this, listen to the commentators and you'll get the same feedback.
 
You have to understand, it's just that those programs "popped". Give Juicebox his $950K a few more years and maybe CU will "pop" at some undefined point in the future too...
 
You have to understand, it's just that those programs "popped". Give Juicebox his $950K a few more years and maybe CU will "pop" at some undefined point in the future too...

I thought we were supposed to "crack". :confused:

Or was it that we were supposed to
DSC00037.JPG


Is Juicebox handing out Rice Krispie treats after the game now?
 
No. You have it wrong. I'm not pumping sunshine, I'm just trying to understand the big picture. I'm pissed at the losses as well. I'm defending the kids here. I also put more stock into what Gary Barnett and Bill McCartney say then I do a bunch of message board cowboys. But there are plenty of things about Hawkins I'm not happy with. I just am tired of the incessent ripping of the program, the school, the kids, and, yeah, even Hawkins that is going on. I'm also trying to at least be objective and look at as many facts as I can. One of them is that of Hawkins' four recruiting classes, he has 3 srs, 9 jrs, a third not on the team, and about 60% fr and sophs. That coming on less than stellar classes, due to the recruiting restictions and bad publicity, preceding him.

And now that I haven't joined the "Hang Dan" mob, I'm getting ripped.

I would say I feel for you, but I am glad to share my pain with at least 1 other person on this board.
 
Last edited:
No. You have it wrong. I'm not pumping sunshine, I'm just trying to understand the big picture. I'm pissed at the losses as well. I'm defending the kids here. I also put more stock into what Gary Barnett and Bill McCartney say then I do a bunch of message board cowboys. But there are plenty of things about Hawkins I'm not happy with. I just am tired of the incessent ripping of the program, the school, the kids, and, yeah, even Hawkins that is going on. I'm also trying to at least be objective and look at as many facts as I can. One of them is that of Hawkins' four recruiting classes, he has 3 srs, 9 jrs, a third not on the team, and about 60% fr and sophs. That coming on less than stellar classes, due to the recruiting restictions and bad publicity, preceding him.

And now that I haven't joined the "Hang Dan" mob, I'm getting ripped.

I think this is a reasonable place to be. I don't understand how productive the shrill hysteria over ousting Hawkins is. CU doesn't have the money to get rid of Hawkins now or probably even at the end of the season. We might as well back the team as it stands now. We must accept finite disappointment, but we must never lose infinite hope. I'm going to start my hope small... I think we cover the spread tomorrow.
 
That certainly could have been worded better, they're not saying that the players on the field don't have talent. Even you DBT, captain sunshine, can't argue that Hawkins is, in fact, keeping more talented athletes on the bench.

Other teams, winning teams, tailor their offense to get their MOST talented kids on the field. Hawkins doesn't, that's not even an arguable point anymore. Hawkins himself has admitted he'd rather play less talented kids that know HIS system, than more talented kids that he'd have to change his system for. The infamous quote is all over the place.
That is the key phrase. It's not all about getting the most talented players or best athletes on the field. If they don't know what they're supposed to do or where they are supposed to be then it doesn't matter.
 
Thanks to rward for these stats that he compiled and posted at Rivals and AZ's.

Colorado is 0-2 with only 40% (27 listed) of their two deep being Jrs and Srs with two losses against two non-BCS school.

Missouri is 2-0 with only 33% (17 listed) of their two deep being Jrs and Srs with a win against a BCS school in a neutral site.

UCLA is 2-0 with only 41% (27 listed) of their two deep being Jrs and Srs with a win against a BCS school in on the road.

Michigan is 2-0 with only 41% (26 listed) of their two deep being Jrs and Srs with a win against a BCS school.

Wisconsin and West Virginia with 25 total Jrs and Srs on the two deep are 2-0.

11 teams with less Jrs and Srs listed on the two deep than CU has listed are 2-0. 6 others with the same amount are 2-0.
Actually, I looked at the depth chart vs. Wyoming and counted only 19 Jrs. and Srs.
 
Last edited:
Actually, I looked at the depth chart vs. Wyoming and counted only 19 Jrs. and Srs.

He pulled from the Toledo game, fwiw.

The point that matters is that other teams are winning while playing as many youngsters against more difficult schedules.

This only leaves 3 possible conclusions:

1) Recruiting has failed to bring in enough talent;

2) Coaching has failed to utilize talent; and/or,

3) Hawk's UC-Davis/Willamette/Boise system requires a veteran-laden team of over-achievers in order to be effective.

I believe that it's all three. And the third point is the one that convinces me that Juicebox will never be successful at CU. We are one of the 25 most prestigious football programs in college football history and have won both a National Championship and Heisman in the past 20 years. We play in the #1 or #2 best BCS football conference. Given that, CU will not be as fired up as our opponent for most games. We wear the target, not Wyoming. At this level, the way you win is with toughness, attitude and explosive players. Juicebox does not and will not get this. It's not his system. He belongs in the WAC.
 
That is the key phrase. It's not all about getting the most talented players or best athletes on the field. If they don't know what they're supposed to do or where they are supposed to be then it doesn't matter.

You're wrong, that's exactly what it's about, especially at the college level. It's about using your most talented players and best athletes to their fullest ability, even if you have to change the offense or defense a bit. If they don't know what they're supposed to do though, or where they're supposed to be, at this point of the season, the coaches are doing a bad job. Period. Can you honestly sit there and say with a straight face that Simmons can't run Espy's 3 yard curls and 5 yard outs. As much time as they take in the huddle, there's no reason Cody can't tell them what route to run.

Simmons and Wright are QUICK. Even if they don't know EVERY play, their mere presence on the field forces the defense to respect them and the deep threat opening up the run and taking pressure off the o-line. We've seen what they're capable of when they go in for one deep throw and then come out. So what they don't run perfect routes every time. As soon as a safety guesses wrong and comes up against the run when it's a pass, they're gone to the post. Even if they run the same short routes, being just half a step quicker is the difference in going down at the spot of the catch and breaking off some YAC.

Mahnke is really banged up and it showed against Toledo. Put someone out there that's more physically able to go and simplify the defense and maybe you get another tackle or two, or catch someone from behind.

Fact is, scattered throughout all levels of football, winning coaches tailor their systems to accentuate the skills the best players have. They don't force players to fit into a system they can't or don't yet understand.

Matt Barkley doesn't know the whole offense, and he's far from USC's most experienced QB, but he's the most TALENTED and Pete Carroll takes what he does well and concentrates on it. And admitedly from them, that's only about 30% of the offense right now.

Especially in college football, a vanilla system with superior athletes will beat a 'guru' system with average athletes almost every time.
 
Especially in college football, a vanilla system with superior athletes will beat a 'guru' system with average athletes almost every time.

That's it, in a nutshell. You've got to put your best athletes on the field and work with them. Andre Simmons with only 25% of the playbook is better than a 100% Espinza, IMO.

Not to say Espy isn't a hard worker or a good kid, he just does not possess the physical talents that a guy like Simmons has. Just watch Wyo's safeties tomorrow. I guarantee they'll be in a step or two when Simmons, Simas, Jefferson and Wright are off the field. Hopefully that won't be very often, but if last week is any indication, we're going to get a steady diet of Espy and Ebner in lieu of those other 4.

And Scotty is a solid #2 or #3 receiver, but you're in trouble when he's your #1.
 
You're wrong, that's exactly what it's about, especially at the college level. It's about using your most talented players and best athletes to their fullest ability, even if you have to change the offense or defense a bit. If they don't know what they're supposed to do though, or where they're supposed to be, at this point of the season, the coaches are doing a bad job. Period. Can you honestly sit there and say with a straight face that Simmons can't run Espy's 3 yard curls and 5 yard outs. As much time as they take in the huddle, there's no reason Cody can't tell them what route to run.

Simmons and Wright are QUICK. Even if they don't know EVERY play, their mere presence on the field forces the defense to respect them and the deep threat opening up the run and taking pressure off the o-line. We've seen what they're capable of when they go in for one deep throw and then come out. So what they don't run perfect routes every time. As soon as a safety guesses wrong and comes up against the run when it's a pass, they're gone to the post. Even if they run the same short routes, being just half a step quicker is the difference in going down at the spot of the catch and breaking off some YAC.

Mahnke is really banged up and it showed against Toledo. Put someone out there that's more physically able to go and simplify the defense and maybe you get another tackle or two, or catch someone from behind.

Fact is, scattered throughout all levels of football, winning coaches tailor their systems to accentuate the skills the best players have. They don't force players to fit into a system they can't or don't yet understand.

Matt Barkley doesn't know the whole offense, and he's far from USC's most experienced QB, but he's the most TALENTED and Pete Carroll takes what he does well and concentrates on it. And admitedly from them, that's only about 30% of the offense right now.

Especially in college football, a vanilla system with superior athletes will beat a 'guru' system with average athletes almost every time.
Do you think Hansen is more talented than Cody? You have to have talent on the team but there are many other factors that go into it such as experience, maturity, playing individual positions, playing together as a team and the mental aspects which are even more difficult to gauge, to name a few.

Saying the issue is just talent and just putting the most talented players on the field, despite all of these other factors, will solve the problem is an over-simplification that only makes some feel better.

The fact here is that none of us are at practice everyday to see what is going on, we're just making judgements from the distance.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top