Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by Shldr2Shldr, Sep 11, 2014.
Don't see any changes.
Are the substitutions listed in any particular order? i.e. does it mean anything that Callahan is listed first at guard?
That is the way I understand it.
The whole chart layout is funky.
That is a big TB / FB combo. Pound those dudes in there then throw speed at them when the DL starts dragging (fat guys at altitude vs BIG guys in a hurry up tempo) sweet
if that is the case we will see JMac
J-Mac is like receiver #8? Don't think we see him. We could though. If we do, we might see Lee as well which I am excited for.
Would love to see that. Also keep that ASU offense off the field, and minimize the number of times Nembot needs to pass block.
saw that roaming around on twitter.
Bizarre. Not sure why it is needed with the names on the jersey.
WTF? Who thought that was a good idea? Ugh.
ignoring the skin color thing, why the **** isn't Callahan starting? What the hell gives?
I asked Adam from Rivals about that last week. He said that once the starting 5 are decided they typically don't change unless there in injury during the season. He did say with the performance at RT he would not be surprised to see some changes soon though.
LT Jeromy Irwin - 60.7%
LG Kaiwi Crabb - 61.8%
C Alex Kelley - 55.1%
RG Daniel Munyer - 70.8%
RT Stephane Nembot - 55.1%
Source: Adam on Rivals
This staff is seriously concerning me if they don't see a reason to insert a guy that was 2nd team on a national championship runner up to this craptastic line.
crazy how badly they regressed, grade wise, from week 1.
Well here is the problem. Callahan plays RG in our offense, which is the highest grading OL position. As weird as it may sound they may be right about that. Auburn plays a completely different style offense. His footwork and technique may not fit in at the RT position here at CU because of the offensive system we run. Whether Callahan is having trouble picking up the new type of offense, isn't suit for this type of offense at RT or the coaches are playing favorites right now I guess is all open for debate.
However I don't think it is as easy as saying he played 2nd string for SEC Champ so he can play for us.
Even weirder is that the rushing improved.
Not clear why they just have "African" but not "Inter-city African (ICA)" to satisfy Sly's racist world view on skin color. Wrong thread?
I'm guessing that's what they give to the TV/Radio folks calling the game, but still, WTF?
No man, just no. He can be a LEFT TACKLE for Auburn, but doesn't have the footwork to do it for us, while Nembot does? That's so incredibly inaccurate it borders on insanity.
Fact: Our OL sucked ass vs UMASS. UMASS.
General question: Why do you think our OL is struggling this year? Is it coaching? Talent? Youth?
Yes. And it's hard to imagine that Callahan is not better than some of these guys.
All I have heard from camp was how much Callahan was dominate at practice in the pass rush drills and the scrimmage. Coach needs to get Callahan out there. I can't figure it out! Regardless of what coach thinks regarding tackle or guard. We have nothing behind the tackles that can step in the game. We all know what Mustoe can do and all reports tell me that Lisella is not even close to being ready. Did Callahan have any practice time at tackle? If not that seems like a poor coaching decision.
To their credit, MM and staff pulled the plug on Wood last year. I'm not sure what's going on but I don't believe that it's blind loyalty or stubbornness.
I agree. There has to be a reason. I can't imagine they would not be starting the kids they felt would give them the best chance to win.
I don't know if this change was in effect last week but I did notice Christian Shaver (C) is a defensive end starter now in place of Jimmie Gilbert (A).
SI dept. has way too much staff. Fire a couple and hire more recruiting support staff.
The "does not know the system" argument in regards to Callahan really needs to stop.
I don't believe that anybody made that argument in this thread. S2S said it was open for debate but certainly didn't make the argument.
Separate names with a comma.