Shurmur taking over play calling

[The Alabaster Yak]

I get that, but you have to be successful to convince them. You are right, Wilkerson had a good run on Saturday. Most of our runs in Pac12 play have been not good.

I'm not really against the idea of establishing a running game, I'd love the idea of a) having an offense that was actually successful and b) not getting our QB killed, I am just doubtful that it is actually possible. I still see us facing 3rd and long regularly, just as we have been doing.

I'm also not opposed to trying something different. Again though, color me skeptical that we'll have a different outcome.

You don't have to be successful, you just have to force them to keep defending it. Once they know you're not going to run the ball, they change personnel to rush the QB and defend the pass. If they think you are still going to run, they can't do that. It sounds like chicken/egg, but it's really not. It requires patience and likely some 3 and outs, but it also sets up a lot of 3rd and 3-4 type situations instead of 3rd and 9-12 situations.

The only way this team is going to win another game this year is if they can consistently stay out of 3rd and long. The first three games it never really felt like an issue, but any pass that takes longer than a 2 step drop from Shedeur is low percentage for this offense right now.

 

[Alfred91]

it also sets up a lot of 3rd and 3-4 type situations instead of 3rd and 9-12 situations

I think this is where you guys are missing my point. We watch our o-line, we watch our running plays. Unless we are talking about scheme changes or some sort of magical transition of the o-line's run blocking ability, I don't believe that it will result in any less 3rd and longs than we've been seeing.

Again, I'm all for trying something different. I'm just not expecting different results. I am still expecting 3rd and long and Shedeur running for his life on that down.

 

[Birch1]

eh, watching a CU football team massively regress and fail to adapt as it misses a bowl game in tragic, if not pathetic, circumstances is something I'm pretty over.

The bowl game was there, we had it! Arghhhh. The Stanford second half was one of the worst half’s you could possibly have, and it was all coaching. I hope Prime learns, I hope he truly watches film and knows what he needs to do to win games at this level. Game management/time management. We’ve been a joke.

 

[SeanMSan]

You’re not going to want to watch the 2nd half. On one of those sacks near our goal line, you can hear him yelling, “****!”, “****!”. He’s in some serious pain and it hurts to watch.

I wonder if it was a reaction to pain or a reaction out of frustration of not getting any semblance of blocking/time to read before running for his life and having to pick himself up off of the ground (again) or both?

 

[SpacemanSpiff]

I wonder if it was a reaction to pain or a reaction out of frustration of not getting any semblance of blocking/time to read before running for his life and having to pick himself up off of the ground (again) or both?

In the moment, it definitely felt like it was a reaction to the pain in his ankle.

 

[bldrbbott]

I think this is where you guys are missing my point. We watch our o-line, we watch our running plays. Unless we are talking about scheme changes or some sort of magical transition of the o-line's run blocking ability, I don't believe that it will result in any less 3rd and longs than we've been seeing.

Again, I'm all for trying something different. I'm just not expecting different results. I am still expecting 3rd and long and Shedeur running for his life on that down.

I think the point is that after 2 runs for 2 yards you have a third and 6 where the DL and LBs have to read. A third and 6 after a quick throw and an incomplete pass is a marginally different reaction for the defense. If you do that for at least half the game, you have the defenders and their coordinator choosing between three options (pass blitz, rush 5 and cover, read and react). with football, I'm a fan not a tactician or player so I might be wrong about this, but that has always been my feeling going back to the Terrel Davis Broncos where no one freaked out about a first half where he'd have 8-10 carries for 20-30 yards but we'd be ahead based on a few long pass plays and then in the final third of the game they'd smash out 6-8-12 yard runs and TD would end up with ~ 100 yards. (yes, the broncos OL was different, but the concept holds in my mind)

 

[jaybird]

The bowl game was there, we had it! Arghhhh. The Stanford second half was one of the worst half’s you could possibly have, and it was all coaching. I hope Prime learns, I hope he truly watches film and knows what he needs to do to win games at this level. Game management/time management. We’ve been a joke.

Eh. The bowl game wasn't really there.

Yes, a win against Stanford would have put us closer, but we still would have had to win another and the way we have been playing that was and still is looking unlikely considering our schedule.

The TCU game was really the only game we played well. Even Nebraska was not pretty. We almost lost to CSU! Our 3-0 start lulled us all into thinking a bowl was an almost certainty, when in reality we were still very far away.

 

[BuffUp]

Where are we on this? After watching CP presser yesterday almost sounded like a one game (osu) change?

 

[leftybuff]

Eh. The bowl game wasn't really there.

Yes, a win against Stanford would have put us closer, but we still would have had to win another and the way we have been playing that was and still is looking unlikely considering our schedule.

The TCU game was really the only game we played well. Even Nebraska was not pretty. We almost lost to CSU! Our 3-0 start lulled us all into thinking a bowl was an almost certainty, when in reality we were still very far away.

I think a bowl game was there. Bad coaching gave the Stanford game away. Even with a stiff schedule the rest of the way, AZ and WSU were within grasp. CU should be able to take one of those two, although I would say now AZ looks much, much tougher than they did at the beginning of the season.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

Where are we on this? After watching CP presser yesterday almost sounded like a one game (osu) change?

Nah it’s a full time change for at least the rest of the year. First, you don’t just make a move like that for one week, but mostly, if you watch Well Off from the other day, he told the team the “Coordinators” were going to come up and talk about where they were and where they are, Pat Shurmur came up for the offense.

He also said in his press conference that “we’re not going to bother these kids with grown folks problems”. Pretty sure this relationship was damaged and probably broken because of actual friction between them, not just gameplanning and playcalling

 

[leftybuff]

Nah it’s a full time change for at least the rest of the year. First, you don’t just make a move like that for one week, but mostly, if you watch Well Off from the other day, he told the team the “Coordinators” were going to come up and talk about where they were and where they are, Pat Shurmur came up for the offense.

He also said in his press conference that “we’re not going to bother these kids with grown folks problems”. Pretty sure this relationship was damaged and probably broken because of actual friction between them, not just gameplanning and playcalling

If I had to guess Prime hired his coordinators and let them largely run their own shops. SL brought in BOB, and they told Prime the O, and the OL, were ready to roll. Then SS2 got the stuffing beat out of him because SL and BOB constructed a G5 OL and everything went south.

 

[JMBuffs]

If I had to guess Prime hired his coordinators and let them largely run their own shops. SL brought in BOB, and they told Prime the O, and the OL, were ready to roll. Then SS2 got the stuffing beat out of him because SL and BOB constructed a G5 OL and everything went south.

I still believe the line would be manageable with better coaching. More of an X's and O's failure here.

 

[BuffUp]

I re-watched the nub game last night and in hindsight, our O was really stagnant most of the game. With how the offense has performed recently, that should have been a red flag. Klatt mentioned several times during the game the same issues we see now.

 

[Da Lama]

I mean, I agree, and trying to run Edwards between the tackles on those few times we have hasn't been encouraging, but we've seen Hank and Wilkerson get stuffed enough, haven't we? I mean, are we talking significant scheme changes, or just calling the same ****ty run plays that haven't been working. 'Establishing the run' doesn't really mean anything if we get 2 yards on 1st, 1 yard on 2nd, and then Shedeur is trying to stay alive on 3rd and long.

Wilkerson actually looked decent during his very brief cameo appearance on Saturday night. Running Edwards between the tackles has to fvcking stop.

 

[Da Lama]

Yeah, it probably took him a good 5 seconds to get off the field after that one. He also was jogging on the sidelines during the following OSU possession, presumably to prove that he could still play.

And not one of his linemen turned back to help him. Frickin' cowards.

 

[jaybird]

I think a bowl game was there. Bad coaching gave the Stanford game away. Even with a stiff schedule the rest of the way, AZ and WSU were within grasp. CU should be able to take one of those two, although I would say now AZ looks much, much tougher than they did at the beginning of the season.

Certainly there was some coaching mistakes, on both sides of the ball, that allowed Stanford to come back and win that game. But even if the buffs somehow managed to pull a win out in the end, the remainder of the schedule was always a problem.

Sure, on any given Saturday anything can happen, but the way we were playing the best chance of getting a sixth win(if we won Stanford) would have been if our offense was showing improvement game over game. However, we have been seeing the complete opposite. Now our best chance of even winning a 5th game is our defense....who actually have been improving in my opinion.

That's not to say we can't still pull off two wins this year. But not the way we have been playing. Something needs to change. But oh boy, if we had even just a serviceable o line, this year would have been vastly different and we may have actually lived up to most, if not all of the hype.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

Certainly there was some coaching mistakes, on both sides of the ball, that allowed Stanford to come back and win that game. But even if the buffs somehow managed to pull a win out in the end, the remainder of the schedule was always a problem.

Sure, on any given Saturday anything can happen, but the way we were playing the best chance of getting a sixth win(if we won Stanford) would have been if our offense was showing improvement game over game. However, we have been seeing the complete opposite. Now our best chance of even winning a 5th game is our defense....who actually have been improving in my opinion.

That's not to say we can't still pull off two wins this year. But not the way we have been playing. Something needs to change. But oh boy, if we had even just a serviceable o line, this year would have been vastly different and we may have actually lived up to most, if not all of the hype.

I agree in a vacuum, but had they continued rolling in the second half and won 42 - 14 and gone into the Bye week at 5-2 (potentially ranked), I think that changes the team's confidence, mindset, coaching approach, etc going to UCLA in what was a one score game within reach until the 4th quarter. They might not have won, but you never know. There are just too many other variables at play to suggest that Stanford collapse didn't matter one way or another.

 

[Da Lama]

I agree in a vacuum, but had they continued rolling in the second half and won 42 - 14 and gone into the Bye week at 5-2 (potentially ranked), I think that changes the team's confidence, mindset, coaching approach, etc going to UCLA in what was a one score game within reach until the 4th quarter. They might not have won, but you never know. There are just too many other variables at play to suggest that Stanford collapse didn't matter one way or another.

THIS x1000000000000. We beat Stanford and confidence goes up drastically. Hell, with the hype we had we probably get ranked again. The narrative within the team changes knowing that all they have to do is win one of the last 5 which for a coaching staff makes things much easier stress-wise. And you have a locker room full of players who can practically taste it and are practicing at a very high level.

That 2nd half at Stanford was a season killer. Anyone who has ever played or coached the game will tell you this.

We beat Stanford and without hesitation I'd have bet my house and my 401k that we find a way to win one more and go bowling.

 

[jaybird]

I agree in a vacuum, but had they continued rolling in the second half and won 42 - 14 and gone into the Bye week at 5-2 (potentially ranked), I think that changes the team's confidence, mindset, coaching approach, etc going to UCLA in what was a one score game within reach until the 4th quarter. They might not have won, but you never know. There are just too many other variables at play to suggest that Stanford collapse didn't matter one way or another.

That's fair. And I am looking at it in hindsight as well.

Although the score in that UCLA game didn't tell the whole picture imo. Many of our games didn't. Testament to how good #2 has been at keeping us in games we would have been blown out in if he wasn't there.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

That's fair. And I am looking at it in hindsight as well.

Although the score in that UCLA game didn't tell the whole picture imo. Many of our games didn't. Testament to how good #2 has been at keeping us in games we would have been blown out in if he wasn't there.

They are probably 1-11 again without 2 unless Staub or whomever is a hidden gem. What didn't tell the whole story against UCLA was the turnovers. Credit is due to the defense because they legit forced each one, but that's the only reason that wasn't a 45-12 kind of game. Still, though, the defense has been keeping them in the last two games against two pretty good teams, and they've hung around. They just need a semblance of blocking up front the next 3 weeks and they'll have a chance, IMO.

 

[Fogo]

And not one of his linemen turned back to help him. Frickin' cowards.

That in itself could be a tell about that relationship too.

 

[jaybird]

They are probably 1-11 again without 2 unless Staub or whomever is a hidden gem. What didn't tell the whole story against UCLA was the turnovers. Credit is due to the defense because they legit forced each one, but that's the only reason that wasn't a 45-12 kind of game. Still, though, the defense has been keeping them in the last two games against two pretty good teams, and they've hung around. They just need a semblance of blocking up front the next 3 weeks and they'll have a chance, IMO.

I totally agree the defense has been forcing turnovers. According to this, we are tied for 5th in turnover margin, so we are doing really well there.

NCAA College Football FBS current team Stats | NCAA.com

Discover the current NCAA FBS Football leaders in every stats category, as well as historic leaders.

www.ncaa.com

Again partially because of #2 since he only has 3 interceptions on the year, but yes our defense has been forcing them. I also agree we are probably a 1 win team without him.
But the offense has not been able take advantage of a lot of those turnovers. Even when given really good field position. It's so frustrating when we get a turnover in or almost in field goal range, and then take a 15 yard loss on a sack and have to punt the ball away....ugh.

#2 definitely gives us a chance, but he is getting battered left and right out there and it is certainly showing. He doesn't have the same pocket presence he did at the start of the season, and I can't blame him for it. He knows he won't have time and has to play with his head on a swivel.

 

[JMBuffs]

Man it's frustrating to think we are a couple plays away from 7 - 2

Oregon State: Offensive momentum killers: Edwards drops a quick cross, Hankerson falls on his ass with a **** ton of room to run, and the stupidest Offense play calling with 40seconds left in the 1st half.

UCLA: Refs were killer: facemask in the endzone (no call), inconclusive UCLA catch out of bounds that was overturned, the worst intentional grounding call I've ever seen. Oline disaster.

Stanford: Defensive substitutions, Overtime coaching blunders, PI on Stoutmire, Ridiculous catch around Hunter.

Of all of these deficits the things we have control of are mainly incompetent coaching. DC Kelly seems to have gotten his **** together over the last 3 weeks. . . Clearly the offensive staff needs some serious P5 experience next year.

 

[Costa Rica Buff]

My apologies if this has been discussed but isn't it possible that Sheduer himself has audibled out of run plays called by the OC at key moments? It may not be a high percentage but SS himself admitted to inexplicably audibling into run plays when he shouldn't have against USC (which I believe cost us a chance win that game). Its not like the OC can criticize SS publically without the suffering the ire of CP. I still can't get by Shurmur calling fewer run plays than Lewis after a full week of the entire world calling on the OC to run the ball more, including CP. Everything about it feels off.

I'm sure OC is mostly to blame but I can't help but think the SS has played a role in the poor game management. Its all speculation of course.

 

[Corey Trevorson]

Highly highly doubt SS2 is changing plays to the tune of a nearly 70% pass:rush ratio...not touching on the formation and basic scheme issues that are completely different from what we saw week 1.

 

[Buffnik]

My apologies if this has been discussed but isn't it possible that Sheduer himself has audibled out of run plays called by the OC at key moments? It may not be a high percentage but SS himself admitted to inexplicably audibling into run plays when he shouldn't have against USC (which I believe cost us a chance win that game). Its not like the OC can criticize SS publically without the suffering the ire of CP. I still can't get by Shurmur calling fewer run plays than Lewis after a full week of the entire world calling on the OC to run the ball more, including CP. Everything about it feels off.

I'm sure OC is mostly to blame but I can't help but think the SS has played a role in the poor game management. Its all speculation of course.

That's part of it. But I would assume the vast majority of that is seeing the box stacked, knowing that running into it is unlikely to work, and switching to a hot route because it's technically the better play. SS's job is to get the team into the best play. The disconnect, I think, is communicating and getting full buy-in on the importance of establishing the run game even when that means running 5-10 plays a game you know are unlikely to work.

 

[Costa Rica Buff]

Highly highly doubt SS2 is changing plays to the tune of a nearly 70% pass:rush ratio...not touching on the formation and basic scheme issues that are completely different from what we saw week 1.

Well, I did say 'key moments'. I agree its nothing to the extent of 70% pass/rush ratio. My inclination is to believe SS is responsible for a few of the more agregious situational game management snafus like the last drive against USC and OT goaline Stanford. But as I said, its speculation based on what I believe is SS's inexperience with the philiosophy behuind the run game (as Buffnik states above).

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

That's part of it. But I would assume the vast majority of that is seeing the box stacked, knowing that running into it is unlikely to work, and switching to a hot route because it's technically the better play. SS's job is to get the team into the best play. The disconnect, I think, is communicating and getting full buy-in on the importance of establishing the run game even when that means running 5-10 plays a game you know are unlikely to work.

I'm not sure if CP and SS truly believed that, possibly until the last couple weeks.

 

[Buffnik]

Well, I did say 'key moments'. I agree it's nothing to the extent of 70% pass/rush ratio. My inclination is to believe SS is responsible for a few of the more agregious situational game management snafus like the last drive against USC and OT goaline Stanford. But as I said, it's speculation based on what I believe is SS's inexperience with the philiosophy behuind the run game (as Buffnik states above).

Seeing the forest through the trees. Like the USC thing. They were defending against the pass, so a run play was set up to have a higher chance of success. So SS went run since it was the best play. But the best play went counter to what the offense needed to do in order to have the best opportunity to win. SS doesn't yet see the game like a coordinator, which is his next progression in his development.

 

[#1 pick]

Another day, another hit piece, this time from 247sports