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!

Official Buffs vs. USC Game Thread --- 8:45 PM on FS1

If we take that initial pick and shove it down their throats...they are on the verge of quitting. The USC fans are not happy with the USC coaching staff....and they always were waiting for the disaster to strike.

Chiv needs to do some soul searching. This was the game where we needed to do SOMETHING different...e.g. RPO. Watching live the pocket collapse and Montez stand there clueless was brutal.
 
If we take that initial pick and shove it down their throats...they are on the verge of quitting. The USC fans are not happy with the USC coaching staff....and they always were waiting for the disaster to strike.

Chiv needs to do some soul searching. This was the game where we needed to do SOMETHING different...e.g. RPO. Watching live the pocket collapse and Montez stand there clueless was brutal.
Chev has gone silent. By this time of the day, he is usually at 100 tweets and counting. Hope he is game planning for next week.
 
If we take that initial pick and shove it down their throats...they are on the verge of quitting. The USC fans are not happy with the USC coaching staff....and they always were waiting for the disaster to strike.

Chiv needs to do some soul searching. This was the game where we needed to do SOMETHING different...e.g. RPO. Watching live the pocket collapse and Montez stand there clueless was brutal.

Don't worry, chev will have a whole new package of jet sweeps ready to go for Washington.
 
Failure to capitalize on the two early picks was, in my opinion, the difference in the game. Part of that was OL play, part of that was play calling. It seemed like we spent the entire first half trying to set up what we wanted to do in the second half. Problem was, by the time the second half came around, we had to change our game plan.
 
Original statement = still true. Go untwist your panties. I'm done responding to your desperate attempts at self-justification.
Nothing is twisted. I have been a long-time critic of MM, especially his inept leadership style. I see. It hh g to change such. In fact, last night his on- and off-field performances only added to this observed truth. Why does it bother you that he is such?
 
Last night, they had their best ILB out (the guy who calls the defense) with a freshman starting in his place and their 2nd best ILB was battling injury. Where were the screen passes, the crossing routes, the designed QB runs, the quick slants and the seam passes to challenge those guys? Especially with as much pressure as USC was bringing.
Very good question, I don't have the answer for it, other than it should've damn well been part of the plan. Chev bricked in this one, imho. Also, I think Montez plays better and more comfortable when he is part of the running game. It was just bad all around, gotta leave it in the rear view.
 
Quarter series Down Gain Loss
1, score 0-0 14:54 USC throws int on 1st down
111&10Pass to shaunalt, loss-3
1 2&13KD Nixon short pass1
1 3&12Montez sacked-10
1 4&2212:54 Punt
1 11:24 USC Punts
121&10Handoff MacMillian for a loss-2
1 2&12Pass to shaunalt5
1 3&7Pass to shanault, inc-hit hands0
1 4&7 10:03 Punt
1 7:13 USC Punts
131&10Handoff MacMillian7
1 2&3Handoff MacMillian1
1 3&2Pass to shaunalt, 1st down (goes off injured)
1 1&10Handoff, Evans0
1 2&10Pass to Nixon9
1 3&1Handoff, Evans 1st down
1 1&10Handoff MacMillian5
1 2&5Handoff MacMillian for a loss-1
1 3&6Pass to shanault, inc-hit hands
1 4&63:29 Punt
1 2:36 USC throws int on 1st down
141&10Handoff, Nixon for a loss-3
1 2&13Handoff MacMillian for a loss-1
1 3&14Pass to Brown2
1 4&120:45 Punt
2 13:13 USC Punts
251&10Handoff MacMillian9
2 2&1Handoff MacMillian0
2 0-7 3&1Direct Snap Shanault, Touchdown49
2 7-7 10:11 USC Kickoff after touchdown
261&10Handoff MacMillian1
2 2&9Pass to MacIntyre for a loss-2
2 3&11Pass to MacIntyre5
2 4&68:21 Punt
2 6:10 USC Punts
271&10Overthrown pass to Shanalt0
2 Penalty inelligble man down field
2 1&15Montez sacked-9
2 2&24Pass to shaunalt13
2 3&11Pass to MacIntyre, Incomplete Injured0
2 4&114:25 Punt
2 14-7 3:333:33 USC Kikcoff
281&10Handoff MacMillian for a loss-5
2 2&15Montez, throws the ball away due to pressure0
2 3&15Handoff MacMillian5
2 4&102:25 Punt
2 21-7 1:10 USC Kickoff after touchdown
291&10Pass to Nixon7
2 2&3Pass to Nixon, 1st down4
2 1&10Pass to MacMillan6
2 2&4Pass to shaunalt, 1st down5
2 1&10Pass to shanault, inc-hit hands0
Penalty USC Taunting 15 yards
1&10Montez, overthrows shanault in end zone.0
Time expires
[TBODY] [/TBODY]


Chev bricked in this one, imho
Chiv needs to do some soul searching. This was the game where we needed to do SOMETHING different.

My memory was that there were several passes that went thru someones hands or off of someones hands. So I did the above to explore that. And was struck by how few plays we ran where we tried to go deeper down the field.
 
Last edited:
OL had a really rough game no doubt. USC got pressure so fast that for much of the game Montez barely had time to make read. And this was definitely not a good game in terms of offensive play calling. Hopefully everyone learns from it.
The first offensive series pretty much showed how sc had game planed. Very physical on the line and with LS, they paid very little attention to Nixon or Brown. Without a history/tape of CU using the TE we made ourselves one dimensional. Shenault had best start getting use to it he's going to see a lot more of it and it will benefit him when he goes to the league. I could see why Chev called what he did for a time early on, he figured the best action to take would be to take advantage of sc's aggression. Problem was the quick outlets weren't vertical, Nixon is fast and he couldn't outrun the D. The most disappointing to me was seeing O linemen standing around at the end of many a play. They didn't/couldn't hold their blocks and several times you could see in replays they were actually looking for someone to block. If Montez was truly tunnel visioned with LS it was only because he knew he would be where he was suppose to be to throw. Both are human and sooner or later one or the other is going to miss on a connect. Disturbing to me is the fact the Montez is very mobile and I'm beginning to wonder if through Spring ball and Fall practice he's been schooled to not leave the pocket. There were a couple of sacks he took last night that he moved up in the pocket he could've ran, but instead got sacked as though that was the better alternative than hearing about it later.
 
Last edited:
USC I think had speed and talent along their DL that we were not used to. The most talented team we faced all year so far and that surprised us. The play calling on offense was too conservative for the first half. The defense played a good game, better in the 2nd half.

USC has DL who are as quick and athletic as some other schools have at LB.

Normally when a offensive linemen faces a defensive lineman who he can't stonewall he can use that guys momentum and just guide him around or past the QB in the pocket. CUs offensive linemen have done this a lot this year as we are playing some guys who are undersized or not as developed and strong as is ideal.

Problem we saw last night is that usually when you drive the guy past the QB he is out of the play. For USC those guys are quick enough that even when they are run past the QB they can reverse their direction and get back into the play from behind.

Last night we had a lot of plays with Montez hurried or brought down by a guy coming at him from his backside and unlike against a lot of schools he couldn't outrun these guys.
 
So, 5-1 isn’t success?
No. It’s not success on a six year view. Maybe for a Sunday in October, but not upon close examination.

Beat somebody good. Then beat somebody better than you. Then sustain it. Then engrain it.

5-1 is a shiny object, bright to many in a way that obscures some fundamental leadership and program issues.
 
No. It’s not success on a six year view. Maybe for a Sunday in October, but not upon close examination.

Beat somebody good. Then beat somebody better than you. Then sustain it. Then engrain it.

5-1 is a shiny object, bright to many in a way that obscures some fundamental leadership and program issues.
If CU finishes 9-3 and signs a top 35 recruiting class, will you be disappointed?
 
No. It’s not success on a six year view. Maybe for a Sunday in October, but not upon close examination.

Beat somebody good. Then beat somebody better than you. Then sustain it. Then engrain it.

5-1 is a shiny object, bright to many in a way that obscures some fundamental leadership and program issues.
How about on a three year view? 20-12. Not a success?

Wouldn’t you agree that the first three years were spent cleaning up a colossal mess? You give him zero credit for a winning record since then?

Bill McCartneys record his first three years was 7-25-1. He made a bowl game his fourth year. Then failed to make a Bowl his fifth year. In year six, he made a Bowl again. (Sounds familiar?)

By your definition of success, he was a failure.

Frankly, your incessant blathering comes across as having an axe to grind rather than objective criticism.
 
No. It’s not success on a six year view. Maybe for a Sunday in October, but not upon close examination.

Beat somebody good. Then beat somebody better than you. Then sustain it. Then engrain it.

5-1 is a shiny object, bright to many in a way that obscures some fundamental leadership and program issues.
what-youve-just-said-is-one-of-the-most-insanely-19798259.png

Speechless. And you say are 60? Age definitely does not grant wisdom in your case.
 
How about on a three year view? 20-12. Not a success?

Wouldn’t you agree that the first three years were spent cleaning up a colossal mess? You give him zero credit for a winning record since then?

Bill McCartneys record his first three years was 7-25-1. He made a bowl game his fourth year. Then failed to make a Bowl his fifth year. In year six, he made a Bowl again. (Sounds familiar?)

By your definition of success, he was a failure.

Frankly, your incessant blathering comes across as having an axe to grind rather than objective criticism.

There are plenty of areas where I am critical of MacIntyre including his excessive loyalty to some of his staff members and of his recruiting strategies. I also agree with the criticisms of some others including his failure to take (or make) opportunities to give real developmental opportunities to guys on the depth chart.

Using his early years schedule against him though makes no sense. Some other coaches may have built the program more quickly but considering the disaster the he inherited I have a hard time thinking of many coaches who would have had substantially better records. We were a disaster in terms of recruiting and outside of a few individuals had a roster of guys who were at best MWC level players. We stunk and no coaching magic was going to win games with that bunch.

Now we are six years in. The roster is his, the coaching staff is his, he now has facilities that compare favorably. It is completely fair to judge him on what this team does on the field. That wasn't the case 3-5 years ago.
 
Criticism of MM if completely warranted.

Specifically his game day roster management, his lack of aggressiveness (both with the lead and when down multiple scores), and his loyalty (both to players and assistants).
 
You have offered a tepid defense like MM.

No. It’s not success on a six year view. Maybe for a Sunday in October, but not upon close examination.

Beat somebody good. Then beat somebody better than you. Then sustain it. Then engrain it.

5-1 is a shiny object, bright to many in a way that obscures some fundamental leadership and program issues.

Do not feed this ****ING TROLL. He is not a fan of CU football. He has stated just that on several occasions.

Just why should he care about "fundamental leadership" or "program issues" within a program that he is not a fan of? Answer: he doesn't, he's just here to Troll. Ask yourself would any of you log on to say Washington's football blog to offer meaningful constructive criticism regarding their athletic department? Hell no. You'd troll them a bit if you even bothered to do this.

Has anyone ever seen this TROLL spontaneously praise this program, coaching staff, athletic department etc. etc. ? He may offer some faint praise here and there but only when cornered. His whole behavior with the Morretti situation was atrocious. DOCTOR HAWG appeared glad that Morretti had serious nerve issues. Why? Because a healthy Morretti made us hopeful that the OL would get better. This troll wanted to poison our hope.

Did any of you notice that he was conspicuously absent from this board from late August through late September? While we were winning? Against opponents that we were likely to beat? He hasn't resurfaced until the schedule got substantially tougher with some likely losses so that he can spread his cancer.

Now there are plenty of valid criticisms of MM and there are plenty of MM haters on here speak their voice. The difference is they are Buff fans. This guy has a deeper agenda than just trolling us. I think it is personal between he and MM.

Do not feed the troll.
 
Do not feed this ****ING TROLL. He is not a fan of CU football. He has stated just that on several occasions.

Just why should he care about "fundamental leadership" or "program issues" within a program that he is not a fan of? Answer: he doesn't, he's just here to Troll. Ask yourself would any of you log on to say Washington's football blog to offer meaningful constructive criticism regarding their athletic department? Hell no. You'd troll them a bit if you even bothered to do this.

Has anyone ever seen this TROLL spontaneously praise this program, coaching staff, athletic department etc. etc. ? He may offer some faint praise here and there but only when cornered. His whole behavior with the Morretti situation was atrocious. DOCTOR HAWG appeared glad that Morretti had serious nerve issues. Why? Because a healthy Morretti made us hopeful that the OL would get better. This troll wanted to poison our hope.

Did any of you notice that he was conspicuously absent from this board from late August through late September? While we were winning? Against opponents that we were likely to beat? He hasn't resurfaced until the schedule got substantially tougher with some likely losses so that he can spread his cancer.

Now there are plenty of valid criticisms of MM and there are plenty of MM haters on here speak their voice. The difference is they are Buff fans. This guy has a deeper agenda than just trolling us. I think it is personal between he and MM.

Do not feed the troll.
He's not trolling when it comes to MM. The criticisms of MM are very warranted and are alarming IMO.
 
Now we are six years in. The roster is his, the coaching staff is his, he now has facilities that compare favorably. It is completely fair to judge him on what this team does on the field. That wasn't the case 3-5 years ago.
His team is 5-1 with a road win at Nebraska and two conference wins over teams we lost to just one year ago.

Honestly, if you read enough if these threads, you’d think we were 1-5.
 
Back
Top