Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
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!

DC Search Including & beyond the 1st 4 Candidates

Status
Not open for further replies.
DBT said:
The only people paying attention to this or who give a damned are message board vermin. Oh, and maybe, a little, some recruits. Other than that, no one cares. So, any talk of "damage" to the program is misplaced.
Click to expand...

Exactly so, DBT. Perhaps a textbook example of Sayre's law: "In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues at stake."
 
Illegal Jesus said:
He's not coming to CU
Click to expand...
Rumor is for some reason we lost interest in him. Perhaps he prefers the NFL or could not get in alignment with HCMM on what we want on the defense. It does sound like HCMM would like to be more hands on regarding schemes on D and that could scare away a more established a DC.

But at this point I think none of us have a ****ing clue exactly what HCMM is thinking or where this is going to end up. I have backed off following the news on an hourly basis so I can actually get work done. Someone wake me up when we finally hire someone :)
 
boydbuff said:
Rumor is for some reason we lost interest in him. Perhaps he prefers the NFL or could not get in alignment with HCMM on what we want on the defense. It does sound like HCMM would like to be more hands on regarding schemes on D and that could scare away a more established a DC.

But at this point I think none of us have a ****ing clue exactly what HCMM is thinking or where this is going to end up. I have backed off following the news on an hourly basis so I can actually get work done. Someone wake me up when we finally hire someone :)
Click to expand...
Where are you getting that "rumor"? The only thing he had been mentioned in was the original hot board but that's it. I don't think we ever showed interest.
 
Ya we didn't want that scrub anyway.

Re: Wazzu... Yikes. Horrendous hire for them. If MM pulls that type of hire... time for a pink slip
 
'Tini said:
Where are you getting that "rumor"? The only thing he had been mentioned in was the original hot board but that's it. I don't think we ever showed interest.
Click to expand...
The credibility of Adam's list of 4 has been debated ad nauseum in this thread so I won't rehash that argument. But if you accept that a.) it was credible and b.) was a vetted list of CU targets, than my statement that we must have cooled on him is not a reach. IF a and b are true, he was a top 4 candidate. 2 of the top 4 have reportedly rejected offers. Therefore, Pendergast was one of the only remaining options in our top 4 list.

We apparently have not offered him and rumors suggest that is because we cooled on him. Would love to know why. My guess is it is the same reason LSU "cooled" on him. He probably prefers the NFL and is interviewing for roles with the latest coaching changes.
 
boydbuff said:
The credibility of Adam's list of 4 has been debated ad nauseum in this thread so I won't rehash that argument. But if you accept that a.) it was credible and b.) was a vetted list of CU targets, than my statement that we must have cooled on him is not a reach. IF a and b are true, he was a top 4 candidate. 2 of the top 4 have reportedly rejected offers. Therefore, Pendergast was one of the only remaining options in our top 4 list.

We apparently have not offered him and rumors suggest that is because we cooled on him. Would love to know why. My guess is it is the same reason LSU "cooled" on him. He probably prefers the NFL and is interviewing for roles with the latest coaching changes.
Click to expand...

What rumors? Link them.
 
SuperiorBuff said:
What rumors? Link them.
Click to expand...
Guess where? Rivals. But regardless of the source, the facts are that we almost for sure had him in our top 4, he has not been hired elsewhere, and 2 of our other top candidates rejected offers (also reportedly via Rivals). This leaves really only 2 options. 1) We cooled on him, or b.) he rejected us.

However, there doesn't appear to be any source that believes we made him an offer. Therefore the most likely scenario is that we did not make him an offer. That could be because he told HCMM and RG that no money we offered would get him to come to CU. But i don't know he would have said that because a solid offer would make him appear more in demand and could improve his negotiations elsewhere assuming he had no interest in CU. So, the rumors on Rivals are not inconsistent with the little info we have.
 
I'd be happier if Pendergast rejected us rather than the other way around. That would be a huge FAIL if Pendergast was interested and we didn't want hiim
 
boydbuff said:
Guess where? Rivals. But regardless of the source, the facts are that we almost for sure had him in our top 4, he has not been hired elsewhere, and 2 of our other top candidates rejected offers (also reportedly via Rivals). This leaves really only 2 options. 1) We cooled on him, or b.) he rejected us.

However, there doesn't appear to be any source that believes we made him an offer. Therefore the most likely scenario is that we did not make him an offer. That could be because he told HCMM and RG that no money we offered would get him to come to CU. But i don't know he would have said that because a solid offer would make him appear more in demand and could improve his negotiations elsewhere assuming he had no interest in CU. So, the rumors on Rivals are not inconsistent with the little info we have.
Click to expand...

i think you have personalized this search.

:lol:
 
sliderNcider said:
Ya we didn't want that scrub anyway.

Re: Wazzu... Yikes. Horrendous hire for them. If MM pulls that type of hire... time for a pink slip
Click to expand...

Why. Don't lock yourself into "name" guys. Up and comer with the right experience would be fine
 
sliderNcider said:
It doesn't have to be a "name" guy. They hired a Safeties coach as DC. That is bad
Click to expand...
I actually agree with you in this instance given Leach's offensive background. You would think he would need a proven DC to basically run that side of the team.

However, promoting a position coach to DC would make a lot more sense for a guy like HCMM who wants his D run a certain way and has the experience/results at DC to prove it. It worked with Lindgren on the Offensive side of the ball as well. That said, not just any position coach will do. I'm just saying that you have to look deeper than that, is all.
 
Darth Snow said:
I actually agree with you in this instance given Leach's offensive background. You would think he would need a proven DC to basically run that side of the team.

However, promoting a position coach to DC would make a lot more sense for a guy like HCMM who wants his D run a certain way and has the experience/results at DC to prove it. It worked with Lindgren on the Offensive side of the ball as well. That said, not just any position coach will do. I'm just saying that you have to look deeper than that, is all.
Click to expand...

Lindgren was a proven OC at 2 different schools (granted small schools). Not quite just a position coach
 
sliderNcider said:
Lindgren was a proven OC at 2 different schools (granted small schools). Not quite just a position coach
Click to expand...
solid point, but counteracted by HCMM's defensive pedigree I think. Either way, position coach = HCMM should be fired is an extreme position to take.
 
Da Lama said:
I'm predicting an announcement in the next week or so to the effect of, "Mike MacIntyre will be taking on the role of DC in addition to his head coaching duties. He felt that his current knowledge of both the defensive personnel and Pac-12 offenses make him the best option to fill the role." All a smokescreen to cover up the fact that no legitimate candidates were interested in the job.

<weeps silently on keyboard for the demise of a once great program>
Click to expand...

BUMP.
 
The way I look at it, all great DC's had to start somewhere. Maybe Mac picks a younger guy for his first DC gig and sort of mentors/molds the guy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top