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!
You can't stop recruiting arguments, you can only hope to contain them
- Thread starter buffs233
- Start date
1. Ok where do you expect us to be ranked in the PAC12? Nationally?
2. Well RG has been giving facility presentations on official visits and some recruits have even mentioned 2015 as a completion date... so yes they have been selling details.
Let me respond to 2 first. He has not even sent out requests for proposals yet so the completion date is simply a wild guess and a goal at best. My firm is monitoring the solicitation as we may be interested in bidding for at least some of the building systems. The presentation he is giving is likely the same one he gave the regents and that only gives a general idea of what CU wants to build. Not what will end up being built.
I expect us to be in the middle third of the Pac next year and likely the year after. In Mac's fourth year I expect to be competing for the south title, at least in the discussion. Nationally I expect us to begin showing back up in the top 50 this year. Top 35 the next. Top 25 the year after.
We're supposed to think Henderson is brave because he says we are a very bad program? What undaunted courage! Will he go out on a limb next and rail against the torturing of puppies and kittens?
Mac is doing a fine job considering the **** sandwich he was handed. If all goes well, we should be at .500 next year or the year after.
1. I doubt recruits think about tat, and it's clear by their updates.
2. Zero expectations this year? Ok
I'm out
Showing back up in the top 50 isn't an expectation? Ya its a ****ty one but we have been in the bottom 100 the past two seasons, so that would be a major improvement. I have already said I expect us to get to .500 which would be bowl eligible.
(edit: we are #80 in Sargarin rankings. Getting to #50 would be a remarkable improvement)
Well 18 year olds will likely be very disappointed when it isn't done until 2016 or later. To get it done by the end 2015 they will need shovels in the ground by the end of the spring semester and even that is very aggressive.
Last edited:
I know you guys won't miss me but I am removing myself from these ad nauseum discussions about our "miserable state of recruiting" I am doing so for a few reasons:
1.) We don't really know sh*t anyway; 2.) tired of the same old debates about how many stars our players have and how we are the worst, etc. 3.) I tend to disagree, in large part, because HCMM has proven where he has been before and what he did at the end of his 1st class that he can recruit and coach them up and referring to #1, he and his staff know a crapload more than we do, and that includes almost always having personal interaction on the field with everyone they recruit-this is inside advantage even the recruiting services don't have (as well as many other BCS teams that don't get in front of so many prospects).
You guys have fun-carry on.
1.) We don't really know sh*t anyway; 2.) tired of the same old debates about how many stars our players have and how we are the worst, etc. 3.) I tend to disagree, in large part, because HCMM has proven where he has been before and what he did at the end of his 1st class that he can recruit and coach them up and referring to #1, he and his staff know a crapload more than we do, and that includes almost always having personal interaction on the field with everyone they recruit-this is inside advantage even the recruiting services don't have (as well as many other BCS teams that don't get in front of so many prospects).
You guys have fun-carry on.
jpbuff
Well-Known Member
Completely agree. Have to find a way to keep the attrition to a minimum.
I have been waiting around 10 years to have a senior ladden team. Not just a big senior class, but a team of starters that are mostly seniors.
Just gets old playing vetran teams while we are playing young men.
I want to be in your optimistic boat, but I have a hard time. I look at the raw talent and speed we are bringing in with the idea our coaches and working hard can turn them into great players, but after taking that approach year after year and seeing hindsight 20/20 it is a real stretch to pretend that this is going to be any different than the past.
FlatironsBuff
Well-Known Member
No ****. Our starys have 4 to 10 games of experience versus the other teams starters having 25 plus games played. It makes a difference.
FlatironsBuff
Well-Known Member
We suck too much to be recruiting 'great players'. We are hoping for solid good players at this point. I understand the instant gratification that everyone wants, but CU was such a train wreck that that isn't a possibility. We got the right coach IMO to do what CU needed. Build a base. Make it solid through coaching, teaching fundamentals, and keeping kids in school so we can have a junior and senior laden starting lineup in two years, unlike now where the best players were mostly fresgmen and redshirt freshmen. Then as we are a better team with fundamentals, strength and execution, use the extra wins, lower level bowl hames and facilities to up the quality of athletes we are able to attract.
As we could not attract a Saban or the like to come here, this seems like a good solid plan. Great talent that signs then flunks out or quits doesn't help at all. The only great talent we have brought here since the early 90s has seemed to never actually play. I will take building a solid foundation of kids who are the kind of workers who will succeed in school and grow on the playing field...
Re: the whole "keep them in the program" argument is flawed. Sure that would help with guys with actual skill such as Vincent Hobbs and Gerald Thomas. But you can't bring in below level athletes and just expect them to be good when they're JR's/SR's. We had a senior class of 28 (a lot of experience) a couple years ago, and won a whopping 3 games. Guys like Patrick Mahnke, Tyler Ahles, Ethan Adkins, Anthony Perkins etc had tons of experience but they weren't any good late in their careers. Is keeping Terrel Smith on the team for 5 years going to pay dividends just because he is old and experienced?
Last edited:
What are you whining about? DH brought in several decently ranked classes and WB's 2nd class was ranked what? 34th? Its not like there was/is no talent, but that much of it went away for one reason or another! The talent that stayed was never properly coached or developed, particularly on both sides of the the line.
Attrition has been a major factor as has been youth. As is the fact that neither of the previous regimes had S&C coachs worth spit! Pittman, aka "Wheelbarrow Man" was added nothing and neither did Malcolm Whatsis, WB's guy. They were old school weightlifters masquerading as S&C guys and weightlifting is NOT the be-all, end-all of S&C for young men.
Reality is that 4* & 5 * guys are generally advanced and physically mature for their ages; just look at the sidelines at a U$C or "Bama game. Their players look like they are 24-26 years old (in 'Bama's case with red-shirting in junior high amd HS in their prime recruiting areas, that could be true!) In contrast, many of CU's players look like they don't even have any experience with razors.
I like what Forman (Stanford background) has done for injury time (better than advertised, I think) and having read much about Stanford's S&C approach, I'm more than willing to give him the opportunity to develop those kids into solid, PAC 12 level players. Add to that, the teaching quality of this staff and the plan that HCMM has in mind and is clearly executing, based upon proven experience with other "dead" programs, this program is definitely on the right track, recruiting included.
Selling "player development" though, to an 17 yr. old is a tough "go", when a positive W/L record is not yet established. And that's the resistance this staff is seeing. Our culture wants instant results, as all the neg-nancy, deb-downer, whiners here on this board have more than amply proven.
Ozbuff
Member
This isn't accurate. Embree's S&C coach talked about the importance of strengthening the core and that simply lifting weights was not his approach or philosophy. Not sure where you get that impression from. As for overall recruiting, I think it's clear that this class doesn't look great on paper, but we need to give HCMM more time to see how it plays out.
Whining about? What are you talking about? I am as ambivalent as can be about Coach Mac and recruiting. I wish we could be getting hirgher ranked players and ones with other offers, but unlike some of the nancy-pants on here I am not pointing my finger at him and calling him a ****ty recruiter that is over his head in the PAC12.
I do believe he is a solid coach and that he will develop the guys better than the past couple of regimes we've had, but I also am not getting my hopes up that this class is the foundation of a Championship team, no matter how well coached they may be. Once we get some facilities updates and another year on the field I expect Mac to be able to recruit right their with Washington and ASU. Beyond that, who knows.
I do believe he is a solid coach and that he will develop the guys better than the past couple of regimes we've had, but I also am not getting my hopes up that this class is the foundation of a Championship team, no matter how well coached they may be. Once we get some facilities updates and another year on the field I expect Mac to be able to recruit right their with Washington and ASU. Beyond that, who knows.
OUBuff
American
Jon Embree was also the head coach of that team
Rabble rabble rabble!
I'm not overly impressed by the recruiting and certainly some of our most recent recruits don't seem to be highly sought. But, can it be said that some of our earlier commits would have and possibly do have other offers that aren't known to the recruiting databases simply because of their early commitment? I'm thinking specifically of guys like Lopez, Miller, Shaver, and Keeney. The obvious example would be Rodriguez who commits to CU as a two star, we hear very little about him for the next few months. Then, the LSU rumblings start near the end of the season and now we're in a recruiting battle against Les Miles.
Looking at Oregon State's commitment list, you see similar level offers and that's a program I think we should be emulating. Maybe I'm just trying to be overly optimistic.
Looking at Oregon State's commitment list, you see similar level offers and that's a program I think we should be emulating. Maybe I'm just trying to be overly optimistic.
Buffenuf
massive tool
You're right, Bracken "talked about" it (I read Brooks' article, just like you did), but didn't seem to actually DO IT! I don't know about other's impressions, but mine was that Bracken was much more old school (he won the S. Carolina Iron Man award for being strongest at his position) than innovator; his record as far as team injuries goes, was terrible in the time he was here. WB's teams lost record numbers of player-games to injury; which means either Bracken was definitely old school in approach or that WB beat up his players with his NFL system of only working the "1's" during the week and working them hard in full contact. A good S&C guy would have put the brakes to that, if he recognized the impact on college kids bodies, as he claimed he did. Bracken returned to the pros after his stint at CU.
I also heard HCMM state that his DL guys need more leg strength (and if the DLs are short on that, its logical to assume the OL suffers from that as well) and that's foundational to core strength, so obviously something was missing from previous S&C regimens.
Ozbuff
Member
Maybe you're right. Personally, I'd take Bracken at his word. Why would say he has a certain approach and do something else? What's his incentive for doing that? I'm not sure injuries are necessarily a great indication either. P-Rich tore his ACL is non contact drills. I guess what I'm saying is that a lot of the criticism of Blacken doesn't seem warranted to me. He had a certain approach that (unless he was dishonest in interviews) was not simply based on lifting weights. As for the current S&C coach, I have no idea if he's better or worse. He may very well be better.
it's hard to see the benefit of a well integrated strength and conditioning program when you are playing so many true and rs freshman. they simply haven't had time to transform their bodies. objectively, look at games or downs list to injury as a measuring stick to compare the various approaches from the coaches
First, MacIntyre should have been absolutely certain he hired a couple of good recruiters as assistant coaches on his staff. Since the salary pool seriously increased for the new staff, this should not have been difficult. He failed IMO, with a staff of WAC level recruiters - Jeffcoat, Clark, LaRussa, Lindgren, Adams and Neinas, or older assistant coaches who simply don't have the necessary passion for recruiting - Baer and Bernardi. Even Troy Walters is just a mediocre recruiter IMO - ask A&M fans, that was his rep there. If necessary, MacIntyre could have easily hired 1 or 2 coaches off of the prior staff who are in-fact proven good recruiters at the BCS level, like Bobby Kennedy or Mike Tuiasosopo.
Secondly, start recruiting 2nd and even 3rd tier players from the inner city like other PAC 12 programs. At least they have athletic talent. But, they may not be great students and choir boys, so CU and this staff does not want them? How many players on CU's roster are from inner city Houston, Dallas or even Los Angeles? Very few - watching Washington last night, the had great talent from the following high school programs - Long Beach Jordan, LA Dorsey, LA Crenshaw, LA Narbonne, LA Centennial, Dominguez and St John Bosco (all in Compton), Sacramento Grant, Oakland McClymonds, Miami Norland. For the most part, this staff does not appear to recruit ther inner city high schools in any meaningful way. Why not?
Finally, there should be much more emphasis in recruiting jucos and four year transfers. At least it is a pipeline to talent. We needed 5-10 jucos in this class, even McIntyre said CU could take up to six. Here again, the staff failed to successfully recruit the juco ranks, signing only Akhello Weatherspoon and a long snapper in the early signing period.
My view is this staff is way over its head trying to recruit at this level. In fact, I don't think they will recruit appreciably better even if CU miraculously wins 6 games next year and makes a bowl game.
No one sane is asking for 4 and 5 star recruits, but I counted a total of 11 other BCS offers for 20 recruits!
Bogus statistics and you probably know it. I am talking about other BCS offers, not including CU. I counted 11 BCS offers for 20 recruits, a prescription for failure at a BCS program.
You are one of the few that get it - CU is going nowhere with this staff's awful recruiting.
I thought you retired?
Semper Gumby
Semper Gumby