Home › Football
Buffs break camp happy with progress
Fall camp officially ended Saturday for the Colorado football team with an 80-play scrimmage that focused on specific game situations and produced no significant injuries.
STORY TOOLS
More Football
- Hawk's graduate assistants carry full-time load
- Student fee reaps $1.5 million for CU
- Buffs' Smith a player with definite purpose
Share and Enjoy [?]
The Buffs begin the 2008 season a week from today in Denver against Colorado State at Invesco Field feeling better about themselves than they have at the outset of either of the first two seasons under coach Dan Hawkins.
"This training camp really isn't even comparable to last camp, both in execution and overall productivity," quarterback Cody Hawkins said. "We got a lot done. We got a lot better as a team. We developed a lot of team chemistry, and I thought we became much better football players."
Dan Hawkins said he is happy with the way his players approached camp and how they progressed over the past three weeks, but much remains to be done in the final week of preparation.
"We've got way more in and we're further along than we have been before," Dan Hawkins said. "But there is still a lot of cleanup to do between now and Sunday."
Coaches have some decisions to make after assessing film of the scrimmage. They will likely name starters at guard sometime this week, but several players are likely to see playing time until two begin to standout.
Redshirt freshmen Blake Behrens and true freshmen Max Tuioti-Mariner are listed as co-starters at right guard and junior Devin Head and redshirt freshman Shawn Daniels are co-starters on the left side.
While not every position battled is settled, the Buffs have found some answers.
Players voted four fifth-year seniors as team captains, naming wide receiver Patrick Williams, fullback Maurice Cantrell, center Daniel Sanders and safety Ryan Walters earlier this week.
They identified two starting cornerbacks in junior Cha'pelle Brown and senior Gardner McKay. As many as four other cornerbacks will push them for those jobs throughout the season.
Junior Jason Brace will start at right defensive end, but coaches expect Marquez Herrod to see plenty of action there, too.
Coaches plan to use a handful of running backs, but sophomore Demetrius Sumler was identified as the starter. Junior Kevin Moyd, and freshmen Rodney Stewart and Darrell Scott will also get playing time.
The Buffs came into camp wanting to refine their new no-huddle offense, focus on limiting or creating turnovers and improving in third and fourth-down situations on both sides of the ball. They believe they did well in those areas in camp, but how they do during the season remains to be seen.
Posted by olsdaddy777 on August 24, 2008 at 12:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Why do all you cu fans want to get rid of the CSU game. Its good for football in this state. Just because CSU beats you half the time doesn't mean you should get rid of the game. Sounds kind of cowardly to me.
Posted by cbuffsu on August 24, 2008 at 2:45 a.m. (Suggest removal)
58-19-2 is not "half the time"
At least at CU we are required to know a little bit about math...or at least how to operate a calculator.
Gotta love our little sisters to the north.
Posted by mewag28 on August 24, 2008 at 3:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Fact is it has been a very competitive game recently and it is good for CU and the State.
Posted by Odog on August 24, 2008 at 6:06 a.m. (Suggest removal)
All time series records are irrelevant to Fusker fans unless its kNU's all time records of course.
Fusker logic. Gotta love it.
Posted by zonabuff on August 24, 2008 at 8:52 a.m. (Suggest removal)
It's funny, UA has the same Napoleonic complex with respect to ASU that CSU has with CU. The childish jealousy makes the winning all the sweeter. UA probably wins the battle of the whiniest coaches, though. The last few games with the lambs have been close, but does anyone really expect the same this year? We are in different stages of rebuilding, and should win by double digits. However, speaking of numbers, I don't see how bringing the game to Folsom increases attendance from the 68,000 plus last year.
Posted by ruffemupbuffaloes on August 24, 2008 at 8:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Great special edition insert about college football in the DC this morning. Good job Ringo etal! Keep it coming.
Posted by SnowBuff on August 24, 2008 at 9:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)
The game does nothing for football in the state. All it does is prop up CSU. I fail to see how that is good for CU.
Posted by rnorthro14 on August 24, 2008 at 9:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
oldsdaddy777 - Quite frankly in an overall series where CU has dominated, the Buffs have less to gain and more to lose from this series. CU is stuck surrendering a home game every other season. CU comes from a BCS conference while CSU, while among many competitive teams (BYU, TCU, Utah, etc.), is not. To CSU's credit, they are a threat to beat CU in any given season. If the Rams lose, they can still have a good season and say they lost to a BCS school. If CU loses, everyone wonders what happened that a non-BCS school could beat a BCS school. And quite frankly, I am kind of tired of seeing those guys when we could schedule someone new and different.
On the other hand, it has been a good competitive series lately and gets the region talking about college football which is a nice break from the meathead Broncos chatter.
Posted by olsdaddy777 on August 24, 2008 at 10:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I see the point that CU is a BCS school and that they have more to lose in the BCS standings, but you can lose any other game just as easily. Why not take on a rivalry like CSU? The only reason CU fans want to get rid of this game is so they can still say they are the "class" of the state. If you don't play CSU at all then it makes it a lot easier for you.
And yes I am aware of the all time numbers of this rivalry and that it is heavily in favor of CU but we all have seen what a great battle this game has been in the last 10 years.
On another note. CSU has a great deal to lose too, but at least they relish the oppurtunity instead of try to run away from it. Since they are not lucky enough to get to play a lot of BCS caliber teams year in and year out this is a chance for them to get to play a good quality team (and rival no less) and get a little national exposure. Don't you think they want to have a good showing?
Posted by Saheeb on August 24, 2008 at 11:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well summed up rnorthro14. I agree completely. The CU-CSU game is usually entertaining, which is fun and exciting. But, yeah, I just think we risk a lot and gain very little in return and give up an opportunity for a true home game. If we lose it's huge for our season and if we win it means little nationally to anyone. I'd rather play someone new and different and CSU every couple of years and definitely not the first game of the season when anything can happen.
Posted by hound397 on August 24, 2008 at 11:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
To olsdaddy777 who states that we are trying to run I seriously have to question your thinking. Colorado year in and year out plays one of the toughest out of conference schedules (Phil Steele ranks Colorado's 2008 schedule as 7th toughest) in the nation. We routinely schedule the best the college football world has to offer has to offer (Michigan, Miami, West Virginia, Florida State, Georgia, USC). I think you basically make the point that if the best in college football don't want to bother with CSU, why would we?
Posted by mgmtgrad on August 24, 2008 at 11:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)
As long as it make national TV every year then it's a good game. How many non-conference games of NU or others with cup cake preconference schedules make National TV?
Marcus J
Posted by olsdaddy777 on August 24, 2008 at 11:58 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Hound 397. because its a competetive in state rivalry. Yes I know you play the good teams. But all of those good teams you named have to play non BCS schools too at some point in their schedule. CU fans logic is that if they only play good BCS teams and still lose then they can say that at least it was to a BCS team. Give me a break. College football shouldn't exclude the smaller non BCS schools (Montana St. and Appalachian St. for example) more than it already does because that's what makes it great. Anything can happen. The CU CSU game is good for college football in this state period. Whether CU fans admit it or not.
Posted by walto_clown on August 24, 2008 at 2 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Olsdaddy,
You falsely state that "all" Buff fans would like to get rid of the so-called RMS. I've seen plenty of debate on the topic on other boards, and the sampling of Buff fans posting on various boards appear to be split 50/50 on the issue.
You additionally speculate the reason that the Buff fans who would like to abandon the series are driven to that decision by cowardice. An interesting theory--I'd be curious to know how you arrived at that conclusion. I suspect those fans could provide a variety of reasons and the lose/lose proposition (which I think is what you mean by cowardice--we don't get a lot of credit for beating a team we're supposed to routinely beat...but heaven help us if we lose) is one reason that's occassionally cited. The majority bemoan the atmosphere of the game and tailgating at Invesco, and would much rather play half of the games at Folsom. Return the games to our home fields and I believe more CU fans will support the series.
While I concede that our teams have played some great games in this last decade, your assertion that the rams beat CU "half the time" is laughable as was already addressed. Aside from a spurt in the late 90s through the early part of this decade, the Ws just haven't stacked up for CSU. Good job in 2006--CSU, Montana State and nearly everyone else got their shots in that year.
Finally, I believe that these things are cyclical, and the rams will certainly be competitive again some day...the trend in the near term clearly favors CU. Anything can happen in college football, but I suspect this season the rams may take a significant enough beating that even you will want your team to withdraw from this series.
Go Buffs!
Posted by 14ers4me on August 24, 2008 at 2:54 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't want to see CU stop playing CSWho altogether, just not every year. Nothing to gain by winning at all. Even though the games recently have been close it is getting boring. I expect to see it get a lot more boring beginning this year as CU's talent level is on the rise and li'l bro's is on the decline. Play them every 3-4 years and mix in AFA and a few other teams instead.
Go Buffs!
44-20
Posted by oz_in_cali on August 24, 2008 at 3 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Personally, I like the RMS and will even concede that since the series been revived, little brother has earned the right to call it a rivalry. Nobody can deny that we have had some donnybrooks, and some hard feelings that always make it a dangerous game (even this year).
Having said that, I would prefer the series not be locked in every season. I have no problem playing, CSU or Wyoming or Air Force, in fact a match-up (in Denver if you want) every few years with one of those teams would be fun.
But Marcus J hit the nail on the head when he said "As long as it makes national TV every year then it's a good game."
Unless the Buffs can schedule a big name in place of CSU its really not worth changing. What's the point of scheduling a team that may or may not be as good as CSU, in place of a game like the RMS (in which our boys have to be on their toes even in a year like this one where we should beat 'um down pretty good).
If they can replace the game with a middle of the road BCS team or a big name team that is being carried by the ghost of it's past (like miami, ucla, penn state, fsu, Nebraska - oops we already play them every year, but beating them twice might be fun), and that would get our boys on TV (like the RMS does) then sweet.
Otherwise, bring on lil brother CAM.
Posted by Beezbeme on August 25, 2008 at 8:30 a.m. (Suggest removal)
CSU is just like Eastern Washington - warm up game. Get the kinks out. Beat on a lesser opponent. Plus it is fun. There is a reason it is not home and home but in Denver---MONEY. CSU doesn't have the facility to entice a big name school to come there and play and they won't agree to always be at CU thus a nuetral site. Yes this game helps prop them up but CU won't lose any recruits to CSU -- Ft Collins or Boulder --- where would you rather spend 4 or mor years of your life?
Posted by BuffulanceMan on August 25, 2008 at 8:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
There's a number of ways to look at this, and I go back and forth a lot, but after debating this a lot, I've come to the realization that playing the Rams on a consistent basis is a necessity. It allows smacktalk between fans, and god knows there's tons of Coloradans who couldn't get into CU, so they attended CSU and now have a huge chip on their shoulder. Honestly, if we are the "big brother", then we should encourage this game as we need to put little brother in their place. Sure, every once in awhile the lil bro gets lucky and wins, but you can't call yourself the Big Man In The State if you can't beat the little guy. Also, it's only a matter of time before we go on another 10 game win streak in the series where we're beating them by 20+ consistently, then they'll be calling on us to end the series.
Bring 'Em On. CU 63 CSU 2
Posted by BuffNut99 on August 25, 2008 at 10:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
SnowBuff - you're wrong. This game is good for the Buffs, great for the state and great for CSU. National TV, Invesco sell out (or close to), good for recruiting, supports the rivalry, $$$ for the AD, etc. Get on board.
Posted by seanspradling on August 25, 2008 at 10:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Couldn't agree more BuffNut99. This state suffers from a serious lack of enthusiasm for our teams in general. We may never have the type of fan base that OU and NU have because of the percentage of people that move here from other places but things like the CU/CSU game help create excitement around the programs. I still think it is pretty shameful that none of the local stations are carrying the game and that the "newspaper" here in the Springs hasn't said anything about it but those things come in time. CU is getting itself back together. CSU will in time get better as well. The rivalry between the two sells tickets, brings recruits and will bring more media dollars. All of that in turn leads to better programs and the cycle begins again.
Sure we risk a loss. But if we loose to CSU then we deserved to and we didn't do our job in coaching, recruiting and playing the game. We risked a lot playing Montana State.
Posted by BuffTime on August 25, 2008 at 12:20 p.m. (Suggest removal)
I still say we should move it back a game or 2. Let both teams get some experience under their belts and make it a better quality game. Yes it has been exciting these past few years, but not because of the sharpness of the 2 teams. They should both put their best work on the field and not be working on polishing things up in their first game.
Posted by ventman on August 25, 2008 at 1:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)
CU would not likely schedule another national power pre-big 12 , 2 out of 4 is likely enough. Playing CSU is better than scheduling some cupcake.
Posted by DrTom on August 25, 2008 at 2:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Puffs don't want to play it.
Once again I hear the chickens clucking.
Posted by ventman on August 25, 2008 at 4:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)
What do CU and CSU students have in common?
They were all accepted at CSU.
Posted by extrapoint on August 25, 2008 at 9:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Too bad CSU isnt playing the pusskers. Can you imagine the extent of lame with ramamania and dr. tom going at each other?
Posted by BuffTime on August 25, 2008 at 10:24 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Seriously, Ramalamb, you should get some professional treatment for your psychosis. You keep hearing chickens everywhere. Oh wait, that's right. I forgot, you go the CSU. Those are the cheerleaders!
(Requires free registration.)
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.