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!
I'm on the "Fire Hawkins" bandwagon now
- Thread starter DBT
- Start date
Really? I keep hearing this. I didn't know our offense was good enough to shut it down and save plays. I guess CAL didn't care about showing their offense and scoring 50+.
Deleted member 807
Guest
Cal shut it down at halftime. They didn't play starters in the 2nd half. They were playing a bad FCS team, though, while we were playing a bad FBS team. Similar performances, I think. Ours may have been the more impressive.
:lol: No. I have no ulterior motives. I probably had my hopes up way too much. I REALLY expected us to come out and flex a ton of muscle. Looking at the stats, I'm really disappointed, even the day after, in our running game. I'm disappointed in the lack of pressure put on Wilson. 'braska fired a coach after a 10 win season because they saw the trend.
Now, that is my "harsh" take. If, indeed, we came out, got up by 21 and put it into cruise control, then next week's game will be the litmus test. We cannot even think about cruise control against Cal.
And, if that happened, we set it on cruise, then, frankly, I'm even more disappointed in Hawkins. That just is not the way you do things. You know the old saying, "You play how you practice." Well, I would take that to mean that in practice or in walk over games, you play hard to the last snap. I'm not saying I am right. But if it were me, and that is all I have to go on, I'd have had the philosophy of going out there and stomping the ever living **** out of csu and then telling the world, "OK, you didn't believe in us. You didn't respect us. We obliterated csu and we will obliterate any team that we step on the field against! BRING IT ON!"
So, if the rumors of a "shut down" are true, I kind of take that as, "Oh my. Well, we think we can kick some ass (sorry for the bad language), but we, kind of, want to surprise some people. Surprise. Yeah. Thats the ticket."
So, if Dan Hawkins wants DBT to back off the "Fire Dan" stance, he had better stop pussy footing around and go KICK SOME ASS! TAKE NO PRISONERS! KNOCK GUYS OUT OF THERE JOCK STRAPS!
Thats all i'm asking. Is that too much?
Tytechortz
Member
I don't think they wear jock straps anymore. They have these longer pants with all the pads integrated into the pant. Not sure what they are called. And it would be harder to knock someone out of their integrated pad bearing football underhosen.
Just gotta hit 'em harder. Thats all. No more jock straps? Really? What the **** is this world coming to? Damn.
I didn't see a problem with effort or emotion yesterday. Just my opinion..
Obviously our coaches think our offense is that good. We shall see next week if that as a good move or not.
Tytechortz
Member
If we shut down our offense based on a 17-point lead with an entire half of football remaining, then the coaches are dumber than I thought.
Interesting. Did you think that game was ever in jeopardy?
When I say shut it down, I mean we went with a vanilla scheme the rest of the game. We weren't giving up. We weren't saying 17 points was a big enough lead. We were just saying, "we can beat this team with a vanilla scheme" so why show anything Cal can practice for.
this... that game wasnt even close... the only reason i was sweating the game was the heat...
Dude! You give them WAY too much credit.
I am not inclined to believe that we shut it down. The simplest explanation, which is usually the correct one, is that the offense we saw in the second half is a continuation of past offenses which ranked among the worst in college football.
I am also generally not inclined to believe that an offense, which has shown that is mostly inept, is in a position to shut it down with a 17 point lead. First, you just might lose the game. Second, it is good to practice something that you are bad at. If I suck at something, I would rather practice it, instead of being afraid that others might see me practice it.
While it seems completely illogical to shut it down for the reasons stated above, nothing this staff does surprises me anymore.
clemons said they didn't even touch his long routes. we showed nothing yesterday. (other than we can't run the ball)
Shutting it down means not showing everything we have in our playbook. Whether you choose to believe what we showed today was the full playbook or not doesn't matter. We'll find out soon enough.
I know everyone wanted a 50 point beat down of the Rams, but I don't think our offense is any kind of juggernaut just yet (Regardless of the transfers we bring in). There is definitely talent on this team and that is encouraging. But, considering all the rough outings yesterday by BCS teams, I'll take a 3 TD win over an in-state rival in game 1.
That being said, if this rumor is true, these coaches obviously decided that it was more beneficial to the team for them to close the playbook. Like I mentioned above, we'll see if this was a good decision or not come Saturday.
I think it's very reasonable for the coaches to have decided at halftime that they could keep it vanilla and expect the offense to win against the CSU defense based on execution instead of scheme.
Honestly, if not for some bad penalties, misfires, missed blocks on blitz pickup and screen passes, and drops... we would have scored in the 40s without opening up the playbook. There was really no need for it. Lot of work to do between now and next Saturday to improve our execution, though.
Honestly, if not for some bad penalties, misfires, missed blocks on blitz pickup and screen passes, and drops... we would have scored in the 40s without opening up the playbook. There was really no need for it. Lot of work to do between now and next Saturday to improve our execution, though.
TheBestMayne
Member
If you don't think that they were in basic offense mode in the 2nd half, you weren't watching the game.
Yep, you nailed it
You're right. We should have opened up the entire playbook in game 1 against a team we were dominating. Maybe shown all of our fakes instead of kicking extra points, field goals or punts.
Are you serious, syko?
Of course we should pull out all stops against Cal. It's a huge game against a big-time opponent. But even then, if we are up 3 scores in the 2nd half with the defense completely shutting them down, I'll expect Kiesau to milk clock and keep things vanilla.
I think this is very simple. The offense is better than last year--they scored points when they were trying hard--but we're still not a good enough team that we can score points simply by out-athleting a D1 opponent. This team doesn't have a power running game that can churn out 4-5 yards a carry when the other team knows we aren't going to pass. However, I thought the 82-yard drive was a good look at what this offense could be this year. We are going to spread the field and make defenses prepare for deep fly routes, quick bubble screens, crossing routes, and the run out of the shotgun once the defense is on the backpedal. We are not going to be able to line up and knock the other team off the ball when they know we want to run because we're up 24-0 and trying to kill the clock.
Razorbuff
Member
So you are saying that if not for everything that has been occurring with the offense for the past few seasons, we would have scored in the 40s?
+1. Sorry nik, what you just listed have been the only constants with this team under hawk.
Sounds like a lame excuse for executing poorly but we won so whatever, I guess seeing what i've seen the last 5 years is my mistake. Looking forward to all the new plays come saturday.
BlackNGold
Club Member
"We did not open up the play book...." This is always a funny argument to me. When we killed Nebraska in 2001 we never opened up the playbook - we ran the same play over and over again. You don't need a bunch of fancy stuff to win but you do need to play solid football with good execution.
Heck they ran two end arounds in the second half so I do think they were trying to get fancy at times.
Heck they ran two end arounds in the second half so I do think they were trying to get fancy at times.
I'm not making an excuse for executing poorly. Once again, and maybe this time it will be clear:
Issue #1: CU not opening up the playbook on Saturday.
I say that we did not open it up and this was the correct decision.
Issue #2: CU's execution on offense on Saturday.
I say this was poor and we've got some things to fix.
syko, you seemed to be arguing on point #1. That's where I disagree with you. Now you seem to be changing the subject to point #2, which I don't disagree on. In fact, I believe I was the first one who brought up point #2 within this thread.