We are going to pass the ball a LOT next season

[Duff Man]

Didn't we throw it something like the first 11 or 12 plays from scrimmage against Okie St? That kind of got my attention, so to think that we will throw a lot next year makes sense.

Just looked it up. We began the game with 13 straight passing plays, not including punts. Two resulted in sacks.

I think that game is the blueprint for next season. While I would like to see the offense Buffaholic talks about, I do not think we will see that. I really think it is going to be passing the ball a good majority of the time. Will it work? Not so sure.

 

[DBT]

I think that game is the blueprint for next season. While I would like to see the offense Buffaholic talks about, I do not think we will see that. I really think it is going to be passing the ball a good majority of the time. Will it work? Not so sure.

Well, we shall see. I still believe Hawkins believes in balance. At least that's what he always says. So, I'm thinking that his plan is to use the threat of throwing it anytime and anyplace to open up the offense, including the running game.

 

[ThndringHerd]

Running out of the shotgun requires a QB who is at least a threat to pull the ball every now and again on the zone read and go around the weak side. CH was absolutely no threat in that regard and teams respected thtat part of the run game not at all. '08 was an exercise in futility largely for that reason. Remember DS running into what seemed like a brick wall or the weak side DE crashing down the LOS with no regard for the QB running? It was stupidity of the highest order. TH can run and that type of O could be productive. I have very little confidence this staff will know what to do though.

Nice theory, and I think we could put up some pretty numbers.

Here's the rub. I think DC's around the country, and especially in the Big XII have the X's and O's figured out to the point that this stuff's not going to work as well as it did the last couple years. Does the staff really think we're going to run the spread as well as TT, OSU, OU, UT, or MU? That makes us the #6 (at best) spread/passing attack in the conference... :huh:

I couldn't care less how many yards we get. I'm more concerned with wins. Don't see us winning more than 5 if we're chucking the ball up 50 times a game.

 

[ThndringHerd]

Deleted. Double post.

 

[leftybuff]

Nice theory, and I think we could put up some pretty numbers.

Here's the rub. I think DC's around the country, and especially in the Big XII have the X's and O's figured out to the point that this stuff's not going to work as well as it did the last couple years. Does the staff really think we're going to run the spread as well as TT, OSU, OU, UT, or MU? That makes us the #6 (at best) spread/passing attack in the conference... :huh:

I couldn't care less how many yards we get. I'm more concerned with wins. Don't see us winning more than 5 if we're chucking the ball up 50 times a game.

Good points. I'd take the #6 spread O in the B12 as opposed to the #12 overall O we've been watching....

 

[ThndringHerd]

Good points. I'd take the #6 spread O in the B12 as opposed to the #12 overall O we've been watching....

What's the difference between losing 28-14 or 49-28? Not much in my book.

I guess the point I tried to make, and didn't is that the Big XII is pretty ripe for the picking for someone to come along and do what Harbaugh did at Stanford. If we want to try our hand at turning games into track meets? We're going to get smoked. Alot. Badly. Again.

 

[buffsyko]

These coaches haven't figured out what offense to run for 4 years. Might as well do what everyone else is doing. If you can't be a powerful running team who can get 250 + a game, no sense fooling yourself.

 

[leftybuff]

What's the difference between losing 28-14 or 49-28? Not much in my book.

I guess the point I tried to make, and didn't is that the Big XII is pretty ripe for the picking for someone to come along and do what Harbaugh did at Stanford. If we want to try our hand at turning games into track meets? We're going to get smoked. Alot. Badly. Again.

I agree. A ball control offense in the B12 N would clean house. It didn't look to me like our OL is anywhere near being able to run that type of O. Many times I saw OL simply getting knocked backwards...hardly the type of surge a team needs to pound the rock. I wish CU could do it, but from what I saw last year, I doubt they can.

If they can spread it out and beat Hawaii, ISU, KU and KSU, that would be an improvement....

If Hawk doesn't figure out this is bull riding, not mutton busting, his fifth rodeo may be his last here...

 

[ThndringHerd]

I agree. A ball control offense in the B12 N would clean house. It didn't look to me like our OL is anywhere near being able to run that type of O. Many times I saw OL simply getting knocked backwards...hardly the type of surge a team needs to pound the rock. I wish CU could do it, but from what I saw last year, I doubt they can.

If they can spread it out and beat Hawaii, ISU, KU and KSU, that would be an improvement....

If Hawk doesn't figure out this is bull riding, not mutton busting, his fifth rodeo may be his last here...

:lol: Couldn't even manage that last year. The ewes kicked our ass in our own corral. :huh:

 

[Sexton Hardcastle]

opcorn:

 

[ScottyBuff]

I don't think we have much of a choice next year but to throw the ball around a lot.

Speedy/Sumler/Lockridge would all fit better as RB's in a pass-heavy system and could have specific roles designed for their strengths.

The WR corps is one of the most talented groups at CU this millenia.

We are thin and inexperienced at TE/FB with only Deehan returning with playing time. Talent might be there with Thornton but that is asking a lot for a first time starter.

The O-line isn't built as a group of road-graders that can dominate a power running attack.

Tyler Hansen can be a threat to run the ball in a zone-read offense.

What other offense can we even remotely expect to be successful running in 2010?

The QB "battle" will be interesting. I don't mind if it is "open" just that it is truly FAIR.

I think Hansen will build on his 2009 season and take a step up with the competition making him a better player, so hopefully he gets 1st team snaps to start the spring.

 

[Mick Ronson]

i guess we've even stopped pretending there was ever such a thing as "the Boise Playbook" or that it's so vast we can go from (massive failure)"the hurry up" to the even being able to run a 2 minute O in one season and ditching the newly emphasized (and massive failure) run game when we got stuffed by a(nother) 3 win team in game 1.

 

[somebody]

Unless the OL really performs and Hansen has time to get the ball down field to all those big WRs, it's going to be a long year, again. I find myself not really looking forward to it as much as I did this year... I think it's going to be another brutal season.

 

[leftybuff]

I don't think we have much of a choice next year but to throw the ball around a lot.

Speedy/Sumler/Lockridge would all fit better as RB's in a pass-heavy system and could have specific roles designed for their strengths.

The WR corps is one of the most talented groups at CU this millenia.

We are thin and inexperienced at TE/FB with only Deehan returning with playing time. Talent might be there with Thornton but that is asking a lot for a first time starter.

The O-line isn't built as a group of road-graders that can dominate a power running attack.

Tyler Hansen can be a threat to run the ball in a zone-read offense.

What other offense can we even remotely expect to be successful running in 2010?

The QB "battle" will be interesting. I don't mind if it is "open" just that it is truly FAIR.

I think Hansen will build on his 2009 season and take a step up with the competition making him a better player, so hopefully he gets 1st team snaps to start the spring.

Why do I have this sinking feeling CH may "win" that competition....

 

[ThndringHerd]

i guess we've even stopped pretending there was ever such a thing as "the Boise Playbook" or that it's so vast we can go from (massive failure)"the hurry up" to the even being able to run a 2 minute O in one season and ditching the newly emphasized (and massive failure) run game when we got stuffed by a(nother) 3 win team in game 1.

The only place the run game was emphasized was at press conferences. Let's face it - that was just lip service to shut the fans up. How many games last year did we actually open up running the ball more than 3 of the first 10 plays? I can't recall even one.

 

[Hank]

If the QB rushes are counted as pass plays (there were probably only a handful of designed QB runs) then we have 572 pass and 280 rush for 2009.

I expect to see a lot of passing too. Teams that are behind pass a lot. I expect to be behind a lot.

 

[sackman]

You play to your strengths. Going into last year, we all thought our strength would be running the ball. We had a big, strong, deep and athletic offensive line and a stable of four running backs that would keep defenses on the field. Our coaches told us that we'd be a "downhill running team".

This year, we have a quarterback with a stronger arm and a lot of speed, athleticism, and depth at WR. So naturally we think we'll be passing a lot more.

Don't bet on it.

 

[jpbuff]

Why do I have this sinking feeling CH may "win" that competition....

If CH "wins" that competion you can say goodbye to TH. Can't see him putting up with this for another year.

 

[Duff Man]

I also wonder if we will see a return of the dreaded two QB system.

 

[Mick Ronson]

when i see "a lot of passing"....i interpret "3 and outs".

if we have to make a living on 3rd and 10, Hanson is the only chance we've got.

 

[Mick Ronson]

The only place the run game was emphasized was at press conferences. Let's face it - that was just lip service to shut the fans up. How many games last year did we actually open up running the ball more than 3 of the first 10 plays? I can't recall even one.

this staff is too in love with trying to out-smart people (or thinking they are) to actually go hat on hat and run the ball.

i agree it was all bluster and the fans (and some posters) took off a bit wishfully with the "smashmouth" football idea. and posted as much over the summer.

 

[ThndringHerd]

You play to your strengths. Going into last year, we all thought our strength would be running the ball. We had a big, strong, deep and athletic offensive line and a stable of four running backs that would keep defenses on the field. Our coaches told us that we'd be a "downhill running team".

This year, we have a quarterback with a stronger arm and a lot of speed, athleticism, and depth at WR. So naturally we think we'll be passing a lot more.

Don't bet on it.

:lol: You're probably right...

 

[89BUFF89]

I'd love to see enough run game to set-up play action to Simas and Clemons deep. Hate to see us waste those guys with 5 yard out patterns...

 

[BlackNGold]

You play to your strengths. Going into last year, we all thought our strength would be running the ball. We had a big, strong, deep and athletic offensive line and a stable of four running backs that would keep defenses on the field. Our coaches told us that we'd be a "downhill running team".

This year, we have a quarterback with a stronger arm and a lot of speed, athleticism, and depth at WR. So naturally we think we'll be passing a lot more.

Don't bet on it.

I think you are saying that we have no offensive strengths.:smile2:

 

[leftybuff]

when i see "a lot of passing"....i interpret "3 and outs".

if we have to make a living on 3rd and 10, Hanson is the only chance we've got.

Oh you are so wrong, on a 3rd and 10, NOBODY will be looking for the three yard curl....:smile2:

 

[Buffnik]

I'll be shocked if we're not running single back, 3 wide plus an H-back/TE as our base package next season. That's been the tendency/preference of this staff and we simply haven't had the personnel to run it. In 2010 we do. I believe we will finally see the offense Hawkins has wanted to run since he got here.

McKnight-Simas-Clemons and company give us talent, depth and experience we have been missing from the WR position for a decade.

Hansen is the right type of QB for that offense.
Speedy is the right type of RB for that offense.
Deehan is the right type of TE for that offense.

And we return a veteran offensive line with at least 2 stars (Solder and Miller). I sincerely believe that CU will be right there as one of the top offenses in the Big 12 next year.

 

[ThndringHerd]

Oh you are so wrong, on a 3rd and 10, NOBODY will be looking for the three yard curl....:smile2:

Why do I get the feeling this guy has been our behind-the-scenes OC for the last 4 years?

[HIDE]

[/HIDE]

 

[absinthe]

You play to your strengths. Going into last year, we all thought our strength would be running the ball. We thought had a big, strong, deep and athletic offensive line and a stable of four running backs that would keep defenses on the field. Our coaches told us that we'd be a "downhill running team".

This year, we have a quarterback with a stronger arm and a lot of speed, athleticism, and depth at WR. So naturally we think we'll be passing a lot more.

Don't bet on it.

Made an edit for you we may have had a big crew but we didnt block ****.

 

[CUwhit21]

Knowing our luck: The offense will finally break through.. and the defense, led by Ron Collins, will have its worst season under Hawkins. One can only hope he was taking notes after Toledo.

 

[DBT]

You play to your strengths. Going into last year, we all thought our strength would be running the ball. We had a big, strong, deep and athletic offensive line and a stable of four running backs that would keep defenses on the field. Our coaches told us that we'd be a "downhill running team".

This year, we have a quarterback with a stronger arm and a lot of speed, athleticism, and depth at WR. So naturally we think we'll be passing a lot more.

Don't bet on it.

I think we will try to establish that we can and will throw the ball. I still think Hawkins wants a balanced attack. But I don't think teams respected our passing game and, late in the season, were able to really shut down our running game as a result.