Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
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!

practice report 8/9 with a defensive slant

Let me start by saying that I'm DROWNING IN KOOLAIDE - and a 2:1 powder to water ratio at that. And yes, I think Brown is a great defensive coordinator. However, I can't help but remember our D-backfield from 2001 - and that was with Donald Strickland and Michael Lewis. Horrible. Even my wife would say "why does it seem like the Colorado guys who are trying to knock down the passes don't look like they know what they're doing?" Just check the last 3 games:
Nebraska - every time Crouch decided to throw it was successful. They eventually put up 36 points. Can the 2011 offense overcome that routinely?
Texas (Big 12 champ game) - as soon as they put in Major (Apple)white, he launched an aerial assault on our D.
Oregon (Fiesta Bowl) - It's like Harrington was playing against a pop-warner d-backfield.
2002 was even worse.
 
Last edited:
Boulder Buff said:
The hype on Pete Thomas is not warranted.
Click to expand...

Due to past failure? Or do you feel he doesn't have game? Serious questions because I have always been afraid the light may come on for that guy and all the sudden he would be pretty good.
 
CUFan said:
Due to past failure? Or do you feel he doesn't have game? Serious questions because I have always been afraid the light may come on for that guy and all the sudden he would be pretty good.
Click to expand...

You can time his release with a sun dial and his arm strength is average, not particularly mobile either. Very limited upside and he is not ever going to be much better than he was last season.
 
Buffnik said:
A hooker in a cave? Rep for making up a superlative (that kind of worked).

I might have gone with "blinder than a hooker who would give SnowBuff a discount", but this will play. :smile2:
Click to expand...

I forgot to say this: **** you. And you've obviously never gone with me to the midget hookers of Tijuana. All you gotta do is show a one month or sooner medical report showing that you are clean and they cut you 25% off.
 
SnowBuff said:
I forgot to say this: **** you. And you've obviously never gone with me to the midget hookers of Tijuana. All you gotta do is show a one month or sooner medical report showing that you are clean and they cut you 25% off.
Click to expand...

Did the forged medical report cost more than the discount saved you?
 
buffaholic said:
UT = Utes.
Can't believe nobody went crazy when I slipped in WSU. I expect them to be pretty efficient in the passing game. All of the teams I mentioned have pretty good QBs returning. I left out Oregon, they have enough weapons that they won't need to try to pick on our CBs, they will just do what they do against everyone.

So I'll throw CSU in there. If they can protect Thomas, he will put 4 TDs on the board.
The Cal QB was pretty good at Buffalo.
The ASU QB (Oswalter) played late in the year and was really good, but makes some bad decisions, so we will see.
The Hawaii QB is really good, but I'm hopeful our pressure will get to him.

There's a reason P-Rich scores everytime he catches the ball right now.

I'm advocating keeping our expectations under control and hope we are pleasantly surprised. There's still time for Brown to find some young CBs to emerge.
Click to expand...

Seriously you need to qualify this as I see absolutely no evidence to back this up. The last FIVE games last season he threw 3 TD and 5 INTs. And that included playing against 1-11 NM and 3-9 WYO. The dude has a looong way to go to prove he can perform at that level. So where are you pulling this guess out of?
 
I think that our D is going to be much improved this year. We will be much more solid in the middle and better against the run. I also believe that we will not see the yearly defensive swoon we have seen in recent years as the players came to understand that our coaches had no clue and that they were playing a passive defense almost designed to get beat up on.

The corners are a big concern and will give up some big plays, especially since we play a number of teams that have very good passing offenses. At the same time I think that impoved line play and more aggression will result in more big defensive plays for us as well.

We had better hope for good health however because the last coaching regiem left us thin on defensive athletes. That combined with the learning curves on new schemes and defensive attitude and techniques means that if we have a lot of subsititution required by guys going down could make things hard for us.
 
CUAviator said:
Let me start by saying that I'm DROWNING IN KOOLAIDE - and a 2:1 powder to water ratio at that. And yes, I think Brown is a great defensive coordinator. However, I can't help but remember our D-backfield from 2001 - and that was with Donald Strickland and Michael Lewis. Horrible. Even my wife would say "why does it seem like the Colorado guys who are trying to knock down the passes don't look like they know what they're doing?" Just check the last 3 games:
Nebraska - every time Crouch decided to throw it was successful. They eventually put up 36 points. Can the 2011 offense overcome that routinely?
Texas (Big 12 champ game) - as soon as they put in Major (Apple)white, he launched an aerial assault on our D.
Oregon (Fiesta Bowl) - It's like Harrington was playing against a pop-warner d-backfield.
2002 was even worse.
Click to expand...

Can anyone remind me how many we scored in that game?
 
I think our defense is going to be hit and miss this year. We'll probably have a lot of 3 and outs and turnovers, coupled with a lot of big plays against us.
 
sackman said:
I think our defense is going to be hit and miss this year. We'll probably have a lot of 3 and outs and turnovers, coupled with a lot of big plays against us.
Click to expand...

Agree, those plays when our pressure doesn't quite reach the opposing QB our secondary will be vulnerable to giving up the big play. Here's hoping there aren't too many of those opportunities.
 
Buffs@5345' said:
Agree, those plays when our pressure doesn't quite reach the opposing QB our secondary will be vulnerable to giving up the big play. Here's hoping there aren't too many of those opportunities.
Click to expand...

i'll repeat myself from some other posts: i think we will need to win the 4th quarter a lot to win the kind of games we need to be .500 or bowl eligible. like take it the length of the field twice or get a game changing turnover late. i hope we are in games in the 4th (fading was a Hawk trademark, D fading because you can't give the opposing teams the short fields we did....or fail to put points on the board like we did: missed FG/jump offsides on 3rd and 1, take a sack out of FG range...on and on.....).

it sucks to say: but i think we grow up some this year only because more is expected on the field. not in terms of wins, but of "letting em know you are there" (Slaphot ref). but, to the orig point....4th quarter we are going to need to win. home stretch with WSU, UA, UCLA. must wins.
 
Mick Ronson said:
i'll repeat myself from some other posts: i think we will need to win the 4th quarter a lot to win the kind of games we need to be .500 or bowl eligible. like take it the length of the field twice or get a game changing turnover late. i hope we are in games in the 4th (fading was a Hawk trademark, D fading because you can't give the opposing teams the short fields we did....or fail to put points on the board like we did: missed FG/jump offsides on 3rd and 1, take a sack out of FG range...on and on.....).

it sucks to say: but i think we grow up some this year only because more is expected on the field. not in terms of wins, but of "letting em know you are there" (Slaphot ref). but, to the orig point....4th quarter we are going to need to win. home stretch with WSU, UA, UCLA. must wins.
Click to expand...


This is spot-on in my opinion. We may only equal our win total from last year but I guarantee the product on the field especially in terms of effort and toughness will be there. I expect we will win at least one we are not supposed to and this season will be foundational for the rebuilding and eventual success of the program in the PAC-12.
 
Mick Ronson said:
i'll repeat myself from some other posts: i think we will need to win the 4th quarter a lot to win the kind of games we need to be .500 or bowl eligible. like take it the length of the field twice or get a game changing turnover late. i hope we are in games in the 4th (fading was a Hawk trademark, D fading because you can't give the opposing teams the short fields we did....or fail to put points on the board like we did: missed FG/jump offsides on 3rd and 1, take a sack out of FG range...on and on.....).

it sucks to say: but i think we grow up some this year only because more is expected on the field. not in terms of wins, but of "letting em know you are there" (Slapshot ref). but, to the orig point....4th quarter we are going to need to win. home stretch with WSU, UA, UCLA. must wins.
Click to expand...

"Bleed all over 'em, let'em know you're there"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top