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!

Offensive Line

manhattanbuf said:
Getting whipped and letting the USC Front 7 get in Montez’ face for at least two full quarters of possessions seems like a bad job IMO.
Click to expand...

You actually read what I said? Did you watch the game?. Running nothing but flats and wr screens every other play and predictable runs won't work against good teams.
 
Bamalam CB#22 said:
You actually read what I said? Did you watch the game?. Running nothing but flats and wr screens every other play and predictable runs won't work against good teams.
Click to expand...

I watched the whole game. I read your commentary why the OL “did enough to win.” The OC likely ran those quick out plays because the OL was allowing pressure to get to the QB so he wanted the ball out. When they tried to establish a run game, the OL didn’t do much there either since they got 0 push to create 2.78 on 37 carries, including one long viska run.

The OL was not helped by the game planning. I think most can agree here. They didn’t help the cause themselves.
 
The OL is pretty offensive this year. Given the struggles I think CU still has a chance at nine wins, which would be great. I’m a lot more excited for next years line featuring:

Haigler - Please leave him at RT
Sherman - He’s going to be good
Moretti - If only he could get healthy
Pursell - He’s going to be good too
Ray - We’ll see what we have here
Fillip - Looks like he’s going to be a stud

Add in Lynott, Tonz, Kutsch and Lytle for depth and I like that better. This year is going to be growing pains...
 
OkieBuffster said:
The OL is pretty offensive this year. Given the struggles I think CU still has a chance at nine wins, which would be great. I’m a lot more excited for next years line featuring:

Haigler - Please leave him at RT
Sherman - He’s going to be good
Moretti - If only he could get healthy
Pursell - He’s going to be good too
Ray - We’ll see what we have here
Fillip - Looks like he’s going to be a stud

Add in Lynott, Tonz, Kutsch and Lytle for depth and I like that better. This year is going to be growing pains...
Click to expand...
The talent is there to be better than what we have seen. The issue is that it is mostly players who have been injured or very young. The talent is there though.
 
If CU figures out how to recruit linemen, MAC could be a legend. So far it is his kryptonite.
 
There are enough frontline potential studs in the room based on the list just written. I love this team this year, but would be thrilled to have all the young guys start or be a major part of this season with eyes on next season. Feel like the young guys have huge ceilings, thus all reps lead towards massive improvement.
I have been wondering about how big/fat we want our OL to be? Nebraska and Wisconsins lines are fatter than ours, so I wondered if we choose to stay leaner?
 
4BienemyTDs said:
There are enough frontline potential studs in the room based on the list just written. I love this team this year, but would be thrilled to have all the young guys start or be a major part of this season with eyes on next season. Feel like the young guys have huge ceilings, thus all reps lead towards massive improvement.
I have been wondering about how big/fat we want our OL to be? Nebraska and Wisconsins lines are fatter than ours, so I wondered if we choose to stay leaner?
Click to expand...
I thought this debate occurred some time ago here.
 
manhattanbuf said:
I watched the whole game. I read your commentary why the OL “did enough to win.” The OC likely ran those quick out plays because the OL was allowing pressure to get to the QB so he wanted the ball out. When they tried to establish a run game, the OL didn’t do much there either since they got 0 push to create 2.78 on 37 carries, including one long viska run.

The OL was not helped by the game planning. I think most can agree here. They didn’t help the cause themselves.
Click to expand...
Are you watching this game? How do you feel about the same run plays every first down? Still throwing the ball at the line of scrimmage every pass?
 
manhattanbuf said:
Dude. You’re the one who said the OL did enough to win last week.

They are getting murked today
Click to expand...
That's because every ****ing drive starts with a run up the middle then a short pass. It's so predictable it's almost a joke<--LOUD AND CLEAR FOR YOU, NO ****ING O LINE WOULD WIN WHEN THE PLAY CALLING IS THIS PREDICTABLE
 
Bamalam CB#22 said:
That's because every ****ing drive starts with a run up the middle then a short pass. It's so predictable it's almost a joke<--LOUD AND CLEAR FOR YOU, NO ****ING O LINE WOULD WIN WHEN THE PLAY CALLING IS THIS PREDICTABLE
Click to expand...

You must be blind because, at some point, the players have to do something. They have to fulfill their assignments.

Why don’t you give me an assessment of kaiser whiffing and/or holding or tonz getting ragdolled in the run game against 4-5 man boxes?
 
Bamalam CB#22 said:
That's because every ****ing drive starts with a run up the middle then a short pass. It's so predictable it's almost a joke<--LOUD AND CLEAR FOR YOU, NO ****ING O LINE WOULD WIN WHEN THE PLAY CALLING IS THIS PREDICTABLE
Click to expand...
When the defense has only 6 in the box and the safeties deep, you should be able to run straight at a team and not have your RB dodging defenders in the backfield. Can we at least agree on that?
 
Buffnik said:
When the defense has only 6 in the box and the safeties deep, you should be able to run straight at a team and not have your RB dodging defenders in the backfield. Can we at least agree on that?
Click to expand...
guard and center play was as bad as it gets. Hell, I saw Filip, our supposedly gifted RT (frosh, nonetheless, but he was supposed tobe ready) 4 yards in the backfield on the 4th down wildcat.

Why we trusted them to get yards after the first quarter is just nuts to me.
 
@Bamalam CB#22. I could not agree more. Our O line is a weakness. How is it that most all see it but yet either Chiv does not realize it, as demonstrated by his incredibly predicable play calling, or he sees it but hangs them out to dry anyways. I'm note sure which is worse.
 
NY Buff said:
@Bamalam CB#22. I could not agree more. Our O line is a weakness. How is it that most all see it but yet either Chiv does not realize it, as demonstrated by his incredibly predicable play calling, or he sees it but hangs them out to dry anyways. I'm note sure which is worse.
Click to expand...
He is hearing whispers in his ear. MM and Roper like to slow it down. Keep it close have a chance in 4Q.
 
Washington State has more passing attempts at half than cu did all game but at least chev only called 4 jet sweeps
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top