1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Offense and Defense

Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by buffalo30, Sep 2, 2007.

  1. buffalo30

    buffalo30 Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    774
    Likes Received:
    36
    Both coordinators are still suspect. Offensively it is great to have a quarterback who can decide to throw _when_ he realizes it can be caught and can throw the ball to the point _where_ it will be caught. Last year, the quarterback threw the ball after he realized it could be caught and many times didn't get it to the point where it could be caught. Big difference.
    The play calling should have avoided the same play when it was realized the surprise was up and it wasn't going anywhere... i.e. the direct snap and the motion split back around. A few variations of the motion theme did eventually work. Sumler ran hard. That has been something missing for a while. Offensive line needs to get better, but I was pleased overall. As always, would like to have seen more running from the I-formation.

    Defensively they seem to be playing soft rather than attacking. The 3rd and long really gets me. Collins insists on running a 3 man "let them complete a long 3rd down pass" rush. I expected more pressure on the quarterback. Dizon was all over the place and saved the defense butt. Wheatley finally had enough of watching guys fail to cover Sperry. In the overtime he got into position for the interception. The tackles played well, but the overall defense needs to attack rather than just play position. It seems too soft to me. Helfrich seemed to show more with what he has to work with than Collins in the first game. There is work to do, but I'm sure pleased with a win against a team that basically plays a one game season.

    Special teams was pretty good except failure to tell the front line to watch the ball before retreating on a kick off. That play cost the Buffs 7 points. Having the front line watch the ball before retreating is something guys should learn in junior football even before high school. Nevertheless, special teams played pretty good.

    Congratulations to the players, coaches, families, friends, students, and everyone who supports the Buffs. Back to work to get better.
     
  2. Scotch

    Scotch Registered User Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Jul 9, 2005
    Messages:
    9,813
    Likes Received:
    431
    Gee 30, I didn't see that one coming. :wink2: :lol:

    I kept thinking they were setting CSU up for something with that direct snap. Never came, and didn't understand why they kept using it. :confused: Unless they're setting it up for something later in the season.

    For all of the praise laid on Kyle Bell yesterday, and he definetly deserved it(135 yard on 40 carries), Sumler ran just as well(85 yards on 16 carries). Hopefully both backs stay healthy.

    My biggest concern was time of possesion/plays ran. CSU had the ball for 37:01, and ran 83 plays. CU had the ball for 22:59, and ran 60 plays. The Buffs will need more parity in this area if they want to pull off a win in the next couple of weeks.
     
  3. JimmyBuff

    JimmyBuff Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2005
    Messages:
    16,901
    Likes Received:
    227


    That's from the ole book "HOW TO COACH DEFENSE IN DIV 1 FOOTBALL".. By Vince Okruch.. :lol:
     
  4. Duff Man

    Duff Man Moderator Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2006
    Messages:
    39,726
    Likes Received:
    4,729
    It's a huge concern. As Chilly mentioned in another thread, it's all about third down defense, or lack thereof it right now. The defense needs to start making stops on third down.
     
  5. PhillyBuff

    PhillyBuff Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    7,006
    Likes Received:
    317
    I didn't understand the 3 man rush when it was 3rd and 15 in the third quarter.

    IT NEVER WORKS!!!!!

    Send atleast 4! 5 would be nice!

    This is so frustrating to watch and we continually do it.... from Barnett to Hawkins.... its the same darn defense!
     
  6. CarolinaBuff

    CarolinaBuff Weekend Poster Club Member

    Joined:
    Sep 14, 2006
    Messages:
    18,651
    Likes Received:
    523
    I noticed that too and I've never liked it. Obvious passing situation, so let's rush less guys and give the QB even more time to find an open receiver and set up his throw. :huh:
     
  7. Chilly

    Chilly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2005
    Messages:
    2,618
    Likes Received:
    90
    I think our D has taken a step back under Hawkins. I agree the V.O. D was very suspect, but Hankowtiz had a a very very very good D his last year here. We were extremely good against the run, and if we would have had a slightly better set of CB's we could have been a top 20 D overal that year. IMHO.
     
  8. sackman

    sackman Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    48,522
    Likes Received:
    4,516
    Are you forgetting the last two games of that year? The defense was flat out horrible. Whether that was due to a "mail it in" attitude from the players, I don't know.
     
  9. Liver

    Liver modded mod Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    22,871
    Likes Received:
    2,688
    i have a working hypothesis about the defense and calls to go with a 2 or 3 man rush in 3rd and long... lemme test it out with you guys and tell me what you think.

    so, basically, i think we've got serious speed deficiencies (except for t-wheat and dizon and to some extent walters) at lb and db. we are also really undersized (including dizon) at lb across the board. so, we simply can't rely on most of our guys in man coverage in obvious passing downs. you saw what happened with sperry across the middle. he is good but our D made him look like superman. that was because our lbs don't have the speed to cover him one on one and we don't have the athleticism at lb or at safety (other than walters) to make up a gap.

    so, my working hypothesis at this time is that on obvious pass downs, the staff is trying to get more speed on the field by bringing in basically 6-8 dbs to break the field into sectors and go zone coverage.

    i think they are just trying to band-aid a big problem we've got on the defensive side. i am not saying it is pretty, but options are somewhat limited.

    also, i hope to hell we find some size/speed as the year goes on. putting aside our problems in pass coverage, do you guys realize what watson and the fuskers are going to do to our interior d if it doesn't get shored up? ****, they will run the counter all freaking day and blow our lbs up. lucky will go for a bajillion yards and we will be on the wrong side of that beautiful 62-36 game. i figured shortbus shawn would improve their o and it looks like he has...

    on the plus side, that's a long way away so there is plenty of time to improve.
     
  10. Chilly

    Chilly Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2005
    Messages:
    2,618
    Likes Received:
    90
    I will give you the last 2 games, but the team had pretty much quite by that point. Even after those 2 debacles of a game, this D still gave up less than 100 yards a game rushing on D. This was good for top 9 ranking. Our overall D came in ranked 44 at the end of that year. Our passing D was horrible still. But we were much better against the run under Hank then now.

    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/ncaa/stats/2005/divia/team/rushing_defense_byRUSHYDS_PER_GAME.html
    http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/football/ncaa/stats/2005/divia/team/total_defense_byDFNSYDS_PER_GAME.html
     
    Last edited: Sep 2, 2007
  11. Junction

    Junction Moderator Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    47,534
    Likes Received:
    1,000,005
    It's an interesting hypothesis I hadn't considered. That might be what is going on. My problem with it would be that if you have that much of a speed deficiency, receivers are going to get away from your db's, no matter how many of them there are, if they are given enough time to do so. That's my problem with the 3 man rush - you are basically asking your dbs to cover the receivers forever. If the receivers are that much faster than them, it's just not going to work. It seems to me that the best way to make up for that speed deficiency is to not give the receivers time to work - get after the qb and make him throw the ball quickly. Sure, it's probably going to result in some big plays, given our flaws. But it's also going to result in a lot more drives stopped before they can put up points and wear down the defense. At least that's the way it seems to me.:huh:
     
  12. Costa Rica Buff

    Costa Rica Buff Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2005
    Messages:
    740
    Likes Received:
    41
    Brad Jones is the fastest lb by a wide margin and overall, the lb's as a unit aren't slow. The problem is that our safties, who often function as lb's, are slower than molasses.
     
  13. Liver

    Liver modded mod Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    22,871
    Likes Received:
    2,688
    jones had a very rough game. sperry ate his lunch, emptied his pockets, and stole his candy. hopefully, he will learn a lot from the experience.

    our lbs, in my opinion, are, as a unit, not athletic/speedy enough to cover in man, nor big enough to be relied upon without safety help (nod to your comment above) in running situations.

    walters had an ok game... he doesn't have great speed but he is a legit b12 safety, unlike whomever we've tried to plug in thus far on the other side. i am hoping jalil steps up on the other side and soon.

    and we got mauled in the middle. rj is a gamer but he is definitely going to be challenged due to his non-typical size/speed/athleticism. he will need to always be in the right spot to make up for that (tom hubbard, anyone?).
     
  14. sackman

    sackman Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    48,522
    Likes Received:
    4,516
    If defensive backfield speed was a problem, the way to mitigate that is to jam the receivers at the line and send the house after the QB on obvious passing downs, with the safeties playing deep to avoid getting burned by the blitz. We don't do that.
     
  15. RalphieSpeaks

    RalphieSpeaks Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2005
    Messages:
    1,558
    Likes Received:
    135
    didn't really like the direct snap much myself. the only way i could see it being effective for us is if you have bjax in the backfield and you give him a run/pass option.

    not sure what to make of the defense. i mainly blame the dline....they had all day to throw and you cannot expect your db's to cover for that long. and our lb's really got exposed.
     
  16. SJBuff

    SJBuff Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    4,707
    Likes Received:
    251
    I saw our DB's doing the opposite a lot yesterday. Seemed like they were giving 8, 10 and sometimes 13 yard cushion on the WR's. Maybe we are that slow (except wheately) and need a lot of cushion in order to keep their WR's from getting behind us (which didn't really happen at all yesterday).
     
  17. Liver

    Liver modded mod Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    22,871
    Likes Received:
    2,688
    yes, that's my feeling... our secondary IS that slow.

    you can't man up and blitz when your guys in way-back are going to get their asses burned.
     

Share This Page