Comments on: Texas/Colorado Football Analysis

By: Longhorns4life

Longhorns4life — Sat, 04 Oct 2008 00:42:09 +0000

This is the type of game the buffs want. you guys came off of a 4 cupcake schedule with all the confidence in the world. you forgot to mention pat williams who hasnt done much due to double coverage. Colorado’s LB’s are top 3 in the conference in my opinion. The runningbacks have a lot of talent limited by a young OL. I think our LB’s will play well but this is our first test. Dont get too confident! I dont want to be another Oklahoma, especially before the RRS!

By: All Day Long

All Day Long — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 20:39:00 +0000

Good Analysis, except I think the Colorado corners are a little worse than what was said. However playing in Boulder has proven tougher for teams than expected and with the crowd sold out and being a night game Colorado should come out with some good energy. Second half I see the longhorns pulling away but closer than a lot of posters have it. I’d say 35-24.

By: all hat

all hat — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 03:12:44 +0000

sheee – yut!
what in the hay -all are you talking about?
pass me another one of them Pearls there son.
aint nuttin but and never been nuttin but ladies on that coloradie football team.

Iffin we dont win by at least 2 dozen touchdowns and I wont renew my season pass to Wolfcreek

By: sooner tim

sooner tim — Thu, 02 Oct 2008 15:27:50 +0000

Everybody thinks they’ll go into Boulder and roll….until they don’t. It’s a funky place. You’ll win but I be surprised if by more than two TDs.

By: Kafka

Kafka — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:21:04 +0000

HJ:
Scipio says that Josh Smith is their only good WR (so I assume Josh is good). If the horns are playing man coverage, then it makes sense that they will give safety help on the best WR that CU has (especially if he is the only good WR for CU).

Scipio:
CU may have a viable offense if they able to run OK against UT. CU ran for 4.7 yards per rush against West Virginia on 45 rushes and racked up 24 first downs. If CU can run close to that effectively against UT and throws short effectively to backs and TE, they could end up grinding a lot of clock.

Running effectively (as you mention) would also make play action more dangerous (especially when you are playing freshman safeties).

UT has also mostly played a nickel against the good passing teams that it has played this season. Against CU, UT will probably have to stay in a 4-3 to deal with CU’s running attack (if CU can run adequately).

CU will probably mostly stick to the short passing game when it passes. Attacking a 4-3 with a short passing game is easier than attacking a nickel because you can pick on an LB rather than a DB. It also presents the opportunity to use some of those running backs that CU has in such abundance (and get a mediocre CU WR off the field). Short passes are easier to catch than long passes and don’t require much pattern running memory/ability (i.e. it is easier for an RB to participate in the short passing game than for longer passes).

Defending short passing is distracting to the LBs, thus has a synergistic effect on the run game.

Lastly, it is nearly impossible to sack the QB on a short pass.

UT has wonderful run D stats this season but has not really been tested by a good running team thus far so we don’t know for sure how good UT is against the run. I am guessing pretty good but you never know until they play the game.

Finally, I found it non trivial to respond to your post because it was so complete. Being a devil’s advocate for the buffs is more interesting than simply saying “Another great post, Scipio”.

By: Gene Claude

Gene Claude — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:54:33 +0000

The MU and UT lines are easy money this weekend…unless we start fumbling or some shit.

By: ChrisApplewhite

ChrisApplewhite — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 19:42:27 +0000

Their defense is sloooooowwwwww. They miss Dizon. Now they are seeing what it’s like to go from DJ to Killebrew.

I bet we can outscore them fairly easily, unless we start fumbling or some shit.

By: dedfischer

dedfischer — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:54:13 +0000

Well shit, you covered it all in your write-up. Should have known better.

By: dedfischer

dedfischer — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:48:54 +0000

I caught a replay of the OU/CO game from last year and watched the last quarter and a half. It refreshed my memory a little and reminded me of some things they like to do. Most of their offense is generated out of playaction and Hawkins is most effective on rollouts out of playaction and short passes to the TE, or the deeper option of WR on the backside. He really likes to go to the TE. They’ll run a lot of out routes with the WR and corner routes with the TE. What Dan Hawkins really likes to do is test your LBs. After re-watching that game it reminded me of how bad Ryan Reynolds sucks, and how grossly overrated Curtis Lofton was, although he was playing pretty damn salty towards the end of the year. Hawkins had the OU LBs guessing the whole second half, and he’ll do some subtle things formationally to give his OL great blocking angles. He’ll also you the FB lead a lot. Muckelroy should be okay, but I would be a little concerned about Norton. He’ll be running in circles for most of the game. That being said, they don’t really have anything for longer down and distances. Their offense must stay on track on 1st and 2nd down, or the playbook gets pretty limited. 90% of their passing game is generated through playaction.

By: Scipio Tex

Scipio Tex — Wed, 01 Oct 2008 17:21:20 +0000

I just don’t see a good scenario for their offense unless our secondary completely loses their mind in play action.