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!

The Boise offense

Buff_since76

Still a fan...
Club Member
I watched about a quarter of the BSU vs OSU game on Saturday night. One of the big items I noticed was how undisciplined the BSU team was. It was part of the way through the 3rd quarter and they already had 9 penalties, and the announcer said their average was 9.5 per game. They would have a first down rush of -3 yards, a false start, and then a tricky little pass play that went for 15 that would create a third and short. It seemed on any given play they could get sacked, fumble, throw a pick 6, get a first down, or score a TD. They were all over the place . In a way I did feel like I was watching the CU offense, except for the whole gain most of the yards lost due to screw ups on second down part.
 
First, there is no correlation to penalties and winning. You have to look at the type and timing of penalties - are they penalties for aggressive play or are they just stupid penalties. Plus good teams overcome their penalties - bad teams do not.

I did not watch much of the Boise game but they averaged over 7 yards a play so they must of had a lot of plays when they were not out of sync.
 
I don't mind Boise. Before I thought their success cheapened the game, but they consistently beat everyone that lines up against them, big names, big games. At some point, you have to respect that they are no longer lucky. They are good. Their offense seems to steamroll down the field. Moore won't get an NFL sniff, but he is a great college QB.
 
There were a lot of unsportsmanlike conduct penalties, mouthy little punks aren't they?
 
I don't mind Boise. Before I thought their success cheapened the game, but they consistently beat everyone that lines up against them, big names, big games. At some point, you have to respect that they are no longer lucky. They are good. Their offense seems to steamroll down the field. Moore won't get an NFL sniff, but he is a great college QB.

I still think they are largely a product of their schedule. A B12/P12/SEC/B10 type schedule would wear them down, IMO.

That's just one more reason I want a playoff. If they could beat 2-3 big teams in a row then I would STFU about their schedule. I'm still pissed they sent us Hawkins, too.
 
I am very slowly coming around to the notion that TCU, Utah, BSU are really pretty good teams. They do line up and beat very respectable competition. I do also think that if they had to play a full schedule of BCS teams, there record would not be what is is now. You do have to give them credit though, even if they are still, to a degree, a product of their schedule.

Penalties don't bother me so much if they are of the unnecessary roughness/aggressive PI/roughing the passer sort. I am not advocating Miami style thuggery, but aggressive hard hitting will draw some of those type of penalties, the illegal procedure, delay of game, illegal subtituion penalties are what kills you...and that seems to be a HaLk coached team specialty.
 
I am very slowly coming around to the notion that TCU, Utah, BSU are really pretty good teams. They do line up and beat very respectable competition

i tend to agree; although, one could point to Utah's Pitt win as fairly diminished.....Miami beats Pitt 31-3. and Boise's W over Va Tech takes a hit with VT's loss to James Madison.
 
i tend to agree; although, one could point to Utah's Pitt win as fairly diminished.....Miami beats Pitt 31-3. and Boise's W over Va Tech takes a hit with VT's loss to James Madison.

I have no idea what James Madison's record is, but why not give them a shot if they run the table? They beat Va Tech, which seems to qualify the BSU Fraud Boys.
 
Last edited:
I did watch most of the Boise v OSU game and Boise looked tough. Fast and physical. Plus, they played with a swagger. They had attitude & confidence. They are 100% confident that they could play with anyone team in the nation and I actually think they are right.
 
well we are going to find out how tough Utah is next year. their schedule this year is an absolute joke. Once they have to play Oregon, Stanford and USC in successive weeks, we can see how tough they are.
 
Boise is for real. They execute as well as any team I've ever seen. Penalties, perhaps so far this year, although I doubt they'll average 9/game all year - but the players are always in the correct position, they block and tackle superbly, and they seem to play with the perfect mix of smarts and aggression.
 
This thread reminds me if Invasion of the Body Snatchers, is Allbuffs being infiltrated by BSU pods? Boise is for real as what - a good team, a national championship contender?
 
I tend not to buy this argument. What if losses to Utah and Boise took chunks out of Pitt and VT's armor (confidence), opening the door for future letdowns? Perhaps if they are not beaten in the season openers, they are also not beaten by Miami (at least that bad) and JMU.

At the time they beat them, Pitt and VT were highly regarded teams.

i tend to agree; although, one could point to Utah's Pitt win as fairly diminished.....Miami beats Pitt 31-3. and Boise's W over Va Tech takes a hit with VT's loss to James Madison.
 
Penalties kill you, but there are many good teams that are heavily penalized.

What I see when I watch BSU is that they very disciplined. They have attitude and aren't timid.

The *biggest* thing though is that they do not miss assignments. Most CFB teams there is at least 1 person that doesn't do what they are supposed to. You never see a RB not pick up a blitz. I'd be shocked at the % of assignments missed if it was higher than 10%. Hardly anyone in CFB plays like that. Same thing with TCU.

BSU rarely have blown coverages and they do not miss tackles. They rarely go for the big hit, but rather just wrap up the person. Sound fundamental football. Not necessarily thrilling, but very sound. They can't afford those miscues since, in all honesty, they just don't have the talent level of a lot of the top teams in the NCAA. That's why they are a good team, and why we are a really bad one.
 
In a similar vein, I tend to downgrade bowl games in which an upstart faces a traditional power. The two I'm thinking of are Boise/Oklahoma and Utah/Alabama. I know first-hand that fans and players of OU and Bama were highly disappointed to be paired with these mid-majors. As such, the emotional angle isn't as strong for them, and they are primed for being upset. Meanwhile, for the underdogs, it is their Super Bowl. So in these cases, I doubt that the best team always wins.


I tend not to buy this argument. What if losses to Utah and Boise took chunks out of Pitt and VT's armor (confidence), opening the door for future letdowns? Perhaps if they are not beaten in the season openers, they are also not beaten by Miami (at least that bad) and JMU.

At the time they beat them, Pitt and VT were highly regarded teams.
 
In a similar vein, I tend to downgrade bowl games in which an upstart faces a traditional power. The two I'm thinking of are Boise/Oklahoma and Utah/Alabama. I know first-hand that fans and players of OU and Bama were highly disappointed to be paired with these mid-majors. As such, the emotional angle isn't as strong for them, and they are primed for being upset. Meanwhile, for the underdogs, it is their Super Bowl. So in these cases, I doubt that the best team always wins.

First of all you quoted yourself.

Secondly, as we all know after the Hawkins era at CU, football is about who wins and who loses. Not much else manners. If Boise consistently beats the teams they are presented with, in my mind they are better than the teams they are presented with. If the other teams can't get up for the games, that's their ****ing problem.
 
First of all you quoted yourself.

Secondly, as we all know after the Hawkins era at CU, football is about who wins and who loses. Not much else manners. If Boise consistently beats the teams they are presented with, in my mind they are better than the teams they are presented with. If the other teams can't get up for the games, that's their ****ing problem.

This is what kills me when they present the " they play in a weak conference" argument. Well, VA tech had a whole off-season to get ready for them. ALABAMA had an entire month to get ready for utah and got waxed. But it's either they weren't into the game because they lost to florida or some other made up excuse.

So what their saying is, these other teams do a piss poor job of game planning vs boise etc...with the same amount of time.
 
Back
Top