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!

Special Teams

leftybuff said:
I saw when they showed the camera angle from the end zone and asked why in the hell they weren't calling a time out...the spread punt formation has to be the stupidest idea anyone has had for a while.
Click to expand...

If you lack the talent along the line to effectively block for the punter at all points of attack then the spread makes some sense to me. Which fits the narrative on our past recruiting. Basically, we cant play power along the OL during the punt so we spread things out.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
If you lack the talent along the line to effectively block for the punter at all points of attack then the spread makes some sense to me. Which fits the narrative on our past recruiting. Basically, we cant play power along the OL during the punt so we spread things out.
Click to expand...
No. Punt and FG formation blocking requires almost zero talent. You literally step in toward the ball and hold your ground for about a second and a half, not letting anyone get through your inside shoulder. It has nothing to do with a supposed inability to play power along the OL.
 
Last edited:
onealcd said:
It's really 4 on 3 right? Number 9 was chipped by Chido and stopped his rush as shown. Another reason to hate this punt formation is how do you even fake a punt here? Outside guys are far away for a punter to make a pass and they are always covered. Three guys inside are going to have to be there to block for the punter so they can't go out for a screen/pass. The only way to fake it is a run and that will rarely work with the rush the formation allows.
Click to expand...

Youre correct that 9 stopped his attack and turned up field. For us it's #5 far, #70 in the middle, and #43 closest to the camera. The break down appeared to be on the far side of the 3. Our #5 had to choose wether to block Michigan's #81 or #44. When he chose #44 #81 squeezed thru the gap and got contact. On the inside #43 also got beat Michigans #23. Only #70 held his block on Ms #10.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
If you lack the talent along the line to effectively block for the punter at all points of attack then the spread makes some sense to me. Which fits the narrative on our past recruiting. Basically, we cant play power along the OL during the punt so we spread things out.
Click to expand...
Maybe. Most proponents of the spread punt formation view it as an aggressive punt formation. Specifically, the punt coverage team is already in their coverage lanes which reduces their need to run laterally, or it an angle, to get in their punt coverage lane. Theoretically, they get down the field faster. The shield is supposed to pick up any leakers, or people who blow the gap in between the spread splits. The problem with that formation is what we saw on Saturday. If somebody is willing to gamble and put four or five guys right over the deep snapper and come hard up the middle they can overwhelm the shield. The answer, of course, is to either call a timeout and go to a standard formation, or have a ready-made audible fake to take advantage of the fact that some of your punt coverage team has to be uncovered if the punt return team commits four or five guys to the center of the field. CU you did neither. If you watch, the deep snapper made no attempt to block anybody. I'm sure that is what he is coached to do, and the deep snapper, admittedly, has made tackles on the punt return team.

People who criticize the standard punt formation used in the NFL, usually point to what a waste it is to have five offensive lineman, who aren't particularly fast, nor good tacklers, committed to the punt team. Nobody said you had to use offensive linemen in the standard punt formation. There's no reason you couldn't use between tweeners like linebackers, tight ends and fullbacks to fill the four offensive line positions next to the snapper.

The spread formation simply invites the creative special-teams coordinator from the other team to exploit the gaps. It's stupid.
 
The issue was a simple numbers game. They had one more rusher than we had blockers. Our long snapper can't have anyone directly over him or be touched off the snap, and therefore he isn't going to help in blocking either, and our Punter obviously isn't blocking anyone. Take out their PR from the equation and it's really a 10 on 9 in favor of the PR team. The breakdown didn't really happen due to any one player not doing his job, but rather it was just the spread formation, in general.

In a traditional tight punt formation, all players can squeeze down, not allowing any rush straight up the middle (using the long snapper as part of the blocking scheme), and they can put a hat on a hat and account for all rushers.
 
AeroBuff99 said:
Anybody ever notice how no NFL teams use that spread punt formation. They all are tight in with two split wide and the upbacks on the the corners of the line. Why don't we just go back to that?
Click to expand...
NFL is a totally different animal. First, other than the wide outs, they can't release until the ball is kicked. So a roll out to the kick and get guys downfield isn't practical. Second, NFL punters get mega hang time and third, NFL cover guys are faster than ****.
 
The most annoying thing about our special teams is that it's like this almost every year. Search for Kent Riddle on this website, it's hilarious. Aric Goodman kicking with his eyes closed, J Fly catching a kickoff and having an out of body experience, our return games constantly being in the bottom of the nation, the haunting special teams play goes on and on. I even remember a punt bouncing off our token good hands guy's face in the Alabama bowl game. I swear special teams is the most frustrating thing about our team this past decade.
 
leftybuff said:
Maybe. Most proponents of the spread punt formation view it as an aggressive punt formation. Specifically, the punt coverage team is already in their coverage lanes which reduces their need to run laterally, or it an angle, to get in their punt coverage lane. Theoretically, they get down the field faster. The shield is supposed to pick up any leakers, or people who blow the gap in between the spread splits. The problem with that formation is what we saw on Saturday. If somebody is willing to gamble and put four or five guys right over the deep snapper and come hard up the middle they can overwhelm the shield. The answer, of course, is to either call a timeout and go to a standard formation, or have a ready-made audible fake to take advantage of the fact that some of your punt coverage team has to be uncovered if the punt return team commits four or five guys to the center of the field. CU you did neither. If you watch, the deep snapper made no attempt to block anybody. I'm sure that is what he is coached to do, and the deep snapper, admittedly, has made tackles on the punt return team.

People who criticize the standard punt formation used in the NFL, usually point to what a waste it is to have five offensive lineman, who aren't particularly fast, nor good tacklers, committed to the punt team. Nobody said you had to use offensive linemen in the standard punt formation. There's no reason you couldn't use between tweeners like linebackers, tight ends and fullbacks to fill the four offensive line positions next to the snapper.

The spread formation simply invites the creative special-teams coordinator from the other team to exploit the gaps. It's stupid.
Click to expand...
If an opposing team loads the A gap with four rushers, you simply call an audible and bring in one or both sides of the spread. You don't even have to bring in the whole spread, just the "speed guard".

Beyond formation and technique, ST by Committee is the central issue.
 
hawg1 said:
If an opposing team loads the A gap with four rushers, you simply call an audible and bring in one or both sides of the spread. You don't even have to bring in the whole spread, just the "speed guard".

Beyond formation and technique, ST by Committee is the central issue.
Click to expand...

ST by committee is impossible to avoid in some ways. It has to be a shared responsibility among the staff. One guy can't be running a practice segment coordinating the punt team while no one manages the punt block/return team, for example.

I don't ever want to see a dedicated ST Coordinator who doesn't have position group responsibilities.

I do, however, think there's value in a position coach also having the "ST Coordinator" title with the overall responsibility, authority and accountability. (I assume this is the point you were making -- need a guy rather than total committee management?)
 
I'm a total believer in the strategy of going for it on 4th down in all but a few situations. Mac is way too conservative to even consider that, but he should. This team should rarely punt IMO.
 
SINKRATZ said:
I'm a total believer in the strategy of going for it on 4th down in all but a few situations. Mac is way too conservative to even consider that, but he should. This team should rarely punt IMO.
Click to expand...
I agree as long as the play calling on 1st, 2nd and 3rd down is done with going for it on 4th down in mind.
 
leftybuff said:
Maybe. Most proponents of the spread punt formation view it as an aggressive punt formation. Specifically, the punt coverage team is already in their coverage lanes which reduces their need to run laterally, or it an angle, to get in their punt coverage lane. Theoretically, they get down the field faster. The shield is supposed to pick up any leakers, or people who blow the gap in between the spread splits. The problem with that formation is what we saw on Saturday. If somebody is willing to gamble and put four or five guys right over the deep snapper and come hard up the middle they can overwhelm the shield. The answer, of course, is to either call a timeout and go to a standard formation, or have a ready-made audible fake to take advantage of the fact that some of your punt coverage team has to be uncovered if the punt return team commits four or five guys to the center of the field. CU you did neither. If you watch, the deep snapper made no attempt to block anybody. I'm sure that is what he is coached to do, and the deep snapper, admittedly, has made tackles on the punt return team.

People who criticize the standard punt formation used in the NFL, usually point to what a waste it is to have five offensive lineman, who aren't particularly fast, nor good tacklers, committed to the punt team. Nobody said you had to use offensive linemen in the standard punt formation. There's no reason you couldn't use between tweeners like linebackers, tight ends and fullbacks to fill the four offensive line positions next to the snapper.

The spread formation simply invites the creative special-teams coordinator from the other team to exploit the gaps. It's stupid.
Click to expand...

If we were really tricky we'd line up Sefo in the shotgun and have him take the snap and then punt. With no one back to receive the coverage is much simpler. He could even roll out.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
If we were really tricky we'd line up Sefo in the shotgun and have him take the snap and then punt. With no one back to receive the coverage is much simpler. He could even roll out.
Click to expand...
I think I remember The Weasel doing that once - on third down.
 
Buffnik said:
ST by committee is impossible to avoid in some ways. It has to be a shared responsibility among the staff. One guy can't be running a practice segment coordinating the punt team while no one manages the punt block/return team, for example.

I don't ever want to see a dedicated ST Coordinator who doesn't have position group responsibilities.

I do, however, think there's value in a position coach also having the "ST Coordinator" title with the overall responsibility, authority and accountability. (I assume this is the point you were making -- need a guy rather than total committee management?)
Click to expand...

I thought Mac was that guy. Several big time head coaches own the special teams. Make it a pride thing.
 
Coaches outsmart themselves. Spread punt formations, rugby punts, etc.

NFL coaches know that a blocked punt is worse than a turnover. First make sure that the punter can get the punt off without having to rush it or avoid pressure.

If they are worried about coverage then coach the punter to kick it away from the return even to the point of kicking it out of bounds.
 
With limited coaches in college football it is stupid, IMO, to have a dedicated special teams coach. As mentioned earlier, it makes sense to have someone that has that title along with something else, but does not make sense at all for one person to do it. I am completely ok with the way they are handling special teams. It just needs to get fixed for the rest of the year. Can't lose another game that way.
 
[QUOTE="Beyond formation and technique, ST by Committee is the central issue."[/QUOTE]

I seriously doubt we have invented a completely new way of managing special team responsibilities, and that invention is the central issue. Instead, I suspect it has been done successfully many, many times at many places.

Also, what 'committee' means isn't public knowledge. I don't think we have the information to make managerial judgements that there isn't accountability or organization.[/QUOTE]
 
just poor recognition and execution all the way around. if they spent a good amount of time last week on it then it's disappointing it wasn't executed better. fix it.
 
Going into the game it was known that Michigan was very good on special teams - against Central Florida they blocked a FG and tipped a punt, recovered a fumble off a KO. Their coaches actually study the special teams of the other team and have a game plan for it. I wonder what CU does.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top