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!

That second TD they scored...

Timbuff10

Member
I am pretty sure it was the second one. In the first quarter it was about a 10 yard slant over the middle that went for about 60 yards or whatever...

About 5 seconds before that play started I knew exactly where they were going with that pass. There were three receivers at the top of the screen with the two guys farther out being played up close by our guys. The guy closest to the linemen in the slot was covered by our DB who gave him a 10 yard cushion. The middle receiver then basically ran a pick and confused the hell out of his defender and our other guy that was 10 yds back which led to the slot guy catching the ball and scoring. To me, this was the play of the game and totally broke our will. It just looked like a totally crappy way to play defense and it seemed like such an easy play for the QB to make.

Anyway, did anyone else see this play and how we defended it? I don't think I have ever seen that type of defense before and am really wondering if our DB blew it by lining up wrong or if that was the scheme?
 
It isn't about winning, week to week, it really isn't. It's about getting better and fixing the little things. My dad was a logger. He never went to work thinkining, "I'm going to take down 10, 11 trees." Dad wanted to be the best in taking down just one tree. Clean, you know. He wanted that tree to fall just right. And we're working on the same thing. We want to have that one perfect play. Once we've done that, then we'll have two, then three perfect plays. Then it'll start. We'll just pop.

I thought the kids competed out there. I really did. Yeah, we stayed in the locker room in the first half. We really did. But we came out in that second half, and you have to give Aric some credit there for making that field goal at the end of the half, we came out and won the second half. We really did.

I'm reading this book, "The Ten Steps to Step No. Eleven" and, you know, you can't get to step number eleven, ever, unless you get through steps one through ten. And that's where we are, it really is. We are at step number, oh, say number 4. It is one step at a time. It really is.
 
It isn't about winning, week to week, it really isn't. It's about getting better and fixing the little things. My dad was a logger. He never went to work thinkining, "I'm going to take down 10, 11 trees." Dad wanted to be the best in taking down just one tree. Clean, you know. He wanted that tree to fall just right. And we're working on the same thing. We want to have that one perfect play. Once we've done that, then we'll have two, then three perfect plays. Then it'll start. We'll just pop.

I thought the kids competed out there. I really did. Yeah, we stayed in the locker room in the first half. We really did. But we came out in that second half, and you have to give Aric some credit there for making that field goal at the end of the half, we came out and won the second half. We really did.

I'm reading this book, "The Ten Steps to Step No. Eleven" and, you know, you can't get to step number eleven, ever, unless you get through steps one through ten. And that's where we are, it really is. We are at step number, oh, say number 4. It is one step at a time. It really is.

Problem is Hawk isn't capable of making it up and over that step. I hear you on the winning thing though. This team can go 0-12 and we could still be on the right track. Losing isn't a deal breaker for me, it is the way we win or lose. At no point over the past 4 years has Hawk ever looked like he knew what he was doing or had this thing pointed in the right direction. Sure the OU win looked good on paper, but any time something has gone right it has been through pure dumb luck or circumstance.
 
It isn't about winning, week to week, it really isn't. It's about getting better and fixing the little things. My dad was a logger. He never went to work thinkining, "I'm going to take down 10, 11 trees." Dad wanted to be the best in taking down just one tree. Clean, you know. He wanted that tree to fall just right. And we're working on the same thing. We want to have that one perfect play. Once we've done that, then we'll have two, then three perfect plays. Then it'll start. We'll just pop.

I thought the kids competed out there. I really did. Yeah, we stayed in the locker room in the first half. We really did. But we came out in that second half, and you have to give Aric some credit there for making that field goal at the end of the half, we came out and won the second half. We really did.

I'm reading this book, "The Ten Steps to Step No. Eleven" and, you know, you can't get to step number eleven, ever, unless you get through steps one through ten. And that's where we are, it really is. We are at step number, oh, say number 4. It is one step at a time. It really is.

That is crazy talk and BS. This team was at step 5 in 07 and have gone backwards ever since. One step forward 2 steps back. The hourglass has run out of sand. The offense scored 1 td in the 2nd half and squandered 2 possessions in mizzou territory that could have made it 33-31.The buffs defense played better but down 33-3 how could they not play better. 2-6 bottom line. This isn't a 10 year plan.
 
Last edited:
That is crazy talk and BS. This team was at step 5 in 07 and have gone backwards ever since. One step forward 2 steps back. The hourglass has run out of sand. The offense scored 1 td in the 2nd half and squandered 2 possessions in mizzou territory that could have made it 33-31.The buffs defense played better but down 33-3 how could they not play better. 2-6 bottom line. This isn't a 10 year plan.

:huh: I think DBT is doing an impersonation.

EDIT: In fact I'm sure DBT was doing an impersonation. The bit about logging was funny, too. That goes for you too, Tim. I could really cut down on my post count if we only had that oft-mentioned sarcasm font!
 
I'm not usually one who pretends to know more about gametime strategies than the coaches who actually watched film all week, but it seems to me that when you know you are playing a team with a gimpy, immobile quarterback, the defensive strategy should be obvious, throw the ****ing kitchen sink at him.

Collins was rushing four pretty much the whole first half. Where were all the innovative blitz packages he had against WVU, UT, and Riesling? Gabbert could have been back there in a full body cast and it would not have made a difference, he had no pressure applied.

Me no get it.
 
:huh: I think DBT is doing an impersonation.

EDIT: In fact I'm sure DBT was doing an impersonation. The bit about logging was funny, too. That goes for you too, Tim. I could really cut down on my post count if we only had that oft-mentioned sarcasm font!
Yep. I think I posted it in the wrong thread, :lol:
 
I'm not usually one who pretends to know more about gametime strategies than the coaches who actually watched film all week, but it seems to me that when you know you are playing a team with a gimpy, immobile quarterback, the defensive strategy should be obvious, throw the ****ing kitchen sink at him.

Collins was rushing four pretty much the whole first half. Where were all the innovative blitz packages he had against WVU, UT, and Riesling? Gabbert could have been back there in a full body cast and it would not have made a difference, he had no pressure applied.

Me no get it.

Wasn't just you. I beleive the announcers even made comment about it. But they were not former coaches, so what do they know?:huh:
 
Remember, Collins didn't think there was anything wrong with his Mizzou gameplan last year when we lost 58-0. Seems to me we did pretty much the same thing until the end of the first half.
 
Yep, I was wondering how they would deal with it. I'm starting to wonder if we could just hire TV announcers on a week to week basis who seem to know more about how to defend an offense than our Defensive Coordinator.
 
Remember, Collins didn't think there was anything wrong with his Mizzou gameplan last year when we lost 58-0. Seems to me we did pretty much the same thing until the end of the first half.

The color commentator was openly questioning the defensive gameplan from the opening drive. That is pretty bad if the color commentator can pick that up from the get-go and the coach on the sidelines is clueless on making adjustments until it is too late after the opposing team has built a 33-point lead.
 
The color commentator was openly questioning the defensive gameplan from the opening drive. That is pretty bad if the color commentator can pick that up from the get-go and the coach on the sidelines is clueless on making adjustments until it is too late after the opposing team has built a 33-point lead.

they depantsed us the last two times to the tune of putting 113 points on our D....and we come out in the same no pressure deep sagging D and they have 33 more at halftime.

it's like masochism or something....why do the same thing (or close to it) that has been an astronomical failure? wtf?

i was just speechless in the stadium. but, yeah, i called the MU 2nd TD here to my buddy as well. i told him they made a living on us with the skinny post from the inside WR the last two years and it will "pop" for them here in a little bit. and "pop", a gasher.

at the half, MU had outscored CU 146-13 over the previous 10 quarters. there's no way to defend that, literally.
 
Last edited:
timbuff10...its called prevent you from winning d-fence...:bang:

Yeah, but half of our D was playing it and the other half wasn't. Two different approaches on the same play. For the defense, that is about the equivalent of the offense trying to run and pass at the same time.
 
Back
Top