Discussion in 'Colorado Football Message Board' started by buffsyko, Nov 27, 2009.
two words... Special teams. They cost us the game in my opinion with field position giving up yet another PR and missing 2 FGs.
Hawk is bad with field position. That's why we had a chance against OSU, Gundy is just as bad about it.
Our first 4 drives were started inside our own 20. Our KO team is bad without DS, although sometimes B-Lock was able to break one away for a good gain. He was stopped at the 15 3x today, at least.
Special teams and turnovers. We also got like 80 yards in garbage time on that last possession.
That last possession pretty much just offset the fuskers one good drive of the game... :huh:
I don't really understand what you're saying. Our last possession offsets their one good possession which happened to clinch the game for them? Okay. I'm just saying, 80 of our yards came when the game was over.
I'm just saying the 200 yard advantage didn't just come right at the end of the game. We were outgaining them pretty much all day. But yeah, that last drive of theirs was a killer, and in the end statistics are for losers... :huh:
Agreed. We had our chances to be sure, turnovers and special teams are the great equalizer. I really hope we can improve our red zone offense next year, if we don't we're screwed.
If you know anything about football, those little things Hawk likes to refer to, are not little things. They are huge during the course of a game in determining who wins. Yall saw today so I rest my case.
Special teams weren't positive contributors, but I don't see them as the reason for the loss. Three drives deep into Neb territory. Placing the ball on Goodman's "wrong side of the field" - the left hashmark. Those are decisions made on Offense that cost points.
Coach Hawkins said he had the team ready to play, but was he aware that a First Quarter existed? Apparently not on Offense, at least. The offense didn't make any first-downs, receivers ran into coverage instead of away from it, and the O-line were handing out free passes into the backfrield.
The Defense only gave up two TDs. On that first allowed TD, they were tired and gassed. On the last one, they'd had plenty of rest - the Offense was gaining ground and grinding out restful minutes. But the Defense was still tired and gassed, and looked like they just gave up after their Offense's last drive inside the 20 resulted in no points.
Calling a time-out to give up a 3rd-down pass... how depressing. Nice adjustment, Coach.
Special teams set a bad tone of Quit, Give Up, whatever. But I think the refusal to call plays that continually exploited the obvious weaknesses was a bigger factor. And once again, the team didn't show up for the entire game.
I think we'll see a lot more of this in the future. I think "Quit" will become one of Coach Hawkins' most successfully-taught traits. We saw it this year for quite a few games. I expect he'll be even more successful teaching this next year.
Ah, the little things again. We're having a hell of a time fixing them.
I really wish we had that kind of accountability from our coach. I wonder what coaches like Pelini think of Hawk and his goofy feel good crap.
Hawkins is right about this team being close. I question whether he's the coach who can get us over the hump, but that ship has sailed now so all I can do is hope that he is.
I don't know about that. We were every bit as close to 1-11 as we were to a bowl game imo. I just don't see an offseason fixing the issues this team seems to have under Hawk.
It is patently bad logic to say we are a handful of plays away from winning X number of games that we lost without considering that we are a dropped pass by an excellent KU receiver and similar kinds of luck against A&M from being 1-11.
I completely disagree with special teams not being the reason for the loss. Gave up a punt return which is 6, two missed fg's 6 more, and they completely owned field position in the first quarter which led to a score and the punt return. We also gave up a pick 6 and yes stalled drives. However special teams set the tone in this game. I respect your opinion but I dont agree with it fwiw.
One reason for hope next year is we 'lose' DiLallo. His punts look like line drives which doesn't help coverage teams at all. Hopefully Grossnickle can get some hang time on those bad boys.
They missed a long field goal, too, so I'd say we were 3 short of where we should have been. Other than that I completely agree with you. That 2nd miss was inexcusable in that situation. It took all momentum away. Then there's the return (-10 points). Then there's fielding a punt over the shoulder at the 3 to ensure bad field position that led to their one offensive touchdown in the 1st half (-17 points). Plus we didn't make any plays while their punter pinned us deep with one great directional punt and one punt that seemed like it went 70 yards before going out at our 10. We absolutely lost this game on special teams.
Special teams are like 3's in basketball. If you are hitting them, they can completely change momentum and outcomes of games. If you are not, they can get you beat really easy and they are taken for granted by alot of coaches.
"We just need to clean some things up ..."
Here we go again. :wow:
And I can't believe that he really believes "Take away probably 10 plays and we're in a bowl game". Well, change about 3 plays and we're 1-11. Did you mention that?
Also our punts were generally complete crap. When neither team is moving the ball on offense, you can't be consistently outpunted by 20 yards or you end up getting the ball inside your 20 and giving them the ball past the 50 pretty quickly.
To his other point, I completely disagree about this team quitting this season. If anything positive can be said about this team this year, it's that they consistently fought in games that looked to be over.
If this doesn't give credence to the old saying "statistics are for losers" nothing does.
You had 12 ****ing weeks to clean them up!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I was just saying that we outgained them by a substantil margin and still lost.
When you can tilt the field with good ST play, and run effectively, you can win alot of games where you are outgained. As much as I hate to: kudos to the nubs. Old school.
Exactly - all that matters is the W, not the stats.
this is just pathetic, the damage Bohn and the other 3 morons have done and are continuing to do the program is unbelievable, everyone is chalking Colorado up as an easy win. Even they know that our stupid idot of a coach is incapable of winning, even when ahead and when given plenty of opportunities.
I don't know if you have checked lately, but we are already screwed.
Quite a few teams who have lost to the fuskers have said, "but look at the total yards!"
Those are valid points, but I think about the OTHER THREE QUARTERS.
It's like saying, "Gee, if only we had 4 plays to do over, or 10, or 3, or 6..."
Well, there were indeed 60 OTHER plays to have success with. WHY NOT THOSE?!!
And I'd argue that, while those set the OPENING TONE, the rest of the game saw a much stronger performance. Those set a tone, too. There were chances to set even BETTER tones, but those decisions were not made.
And just about everything is still based on decisions - what plays to call, what squads to put out there, where they cover or don't, where they cut or don't, where they throw, which holes in the defense WRs run to, etc. All decisions. CU made decisions that gave them this loss.
Coach Hawkins talked before the game about "our team's ready to play" (HA! "So, Coach, tell me about WHEN they actually WILL play? 2nd Quarter?!!") and "We'll play the field position game" (yes, and give up points because you choose to play the BAD field position).
The "outgained opponent" argument is also a tone-setting issue - "We gain yards yet decide not to score points. Decide to jump before the snap, decide to not line-up quickly enough, etc. "Outgain But Still Lose" is another way of saying "Incredibly inefficient" - why should THAT be any positive at all?!!
Someone should happily argue, "Winners that have less yardage are more efficient and make better decisions" therefore, and why shouldn't Better Decisions create wins? I think they do.
Separate names with a comma.