For the Bohn haters

[Buffnik]

I've been a big supporter of Mike Bohn to this point.

But if Dan Hawkins is the football coach for the 2010 season then Mike Bohn will be dead to me.

 

[stl/dog]

We're giving him props for making the athletic department profitable in spite of the crap on the field and on the court. Most any other department would be swimming in red ink under the same set of circumstances.

And yes, he needs to fire the WR coach.

I do see your point and there is a value to that, no doubt, but it is hard for me to give Bohn any props, when.......... MB hired Hawk, Extended Hawk and is continuing to allow Hawk to be our Football coach.

imo, Bohn has responsibility here and he has the ability to fix the problem and is yet to do it.

And I wont even address that the mens hoops team lost more games in the history of the programs last year.:smile:

 

[sackman]

Bohn isn't going to come out and fire Hawkins in the middle of the season. That's not his style. He just won't do it. He'll want to see how the season plays out first. With that in mind, I have little doubt that he'll kick Hawkins to the curb at the end of the season. If he doesn't, I'll have to re-evaluate my opinion of him.

 

[BlackNGold]

I may be coming across as a Mike Bohn apologist. If so, fine. But it just occurred to me how much trouble we'd be in right now if he weren't here. Can you imagine how few people would actually be coming to football games if he weren't around to get people into the stadium? The entire athletic department would be bankrupt.

People get evaluated on the total job that they do not just part of the job. I think Mike Bohn does the pr thing well but comes up short in other areas. He has to take a different approach in his next coaching hire.

 

[wsp4820]

About the extension, at the time Hawkins had just finished his second of a four year contract, correct? Everyone is talking like it was the worst decision ever, but if you go back and think about it, it made sense at the time. 2-10 was ****ty, but then in 2007 we had the big OU win and things looked like they were on the significant rise. The recruiting class was looking good, we went back to a bowl and put up a pretty decent showing, etc. In college football you often have to extend your coaches out four years to avoid negative recruiting, and that was what Bohn was doing at the time. Maybe I have the facts wrong, but I don't think I do. With the facts at the time, the extension wasn't a bad idea, IMO.

In hindsight, he incorrectly bought Hawk's BS like all of the rest of us, but I don't think it's fair to say he ****ed up now. It's about what he does moving forward that he should be judged.

 

[Buffarino]

About the extension, at the time Hawkins had just finished his second of a four year contract, correct? Everyone is talking like it was the worst decision ever, but if you go back and think about it, it made sense at the time. 2-10 was ****ty, but then in 2007 we had the big OU win and things looked like they were on the significant rise. The recruiting class was looking good, we went back to a bowl and put up a pretty decent showing, etc. In college football you often have to extend your coaches out four years to avoid negative recruiting, and that was what Bohn was doing at the time. Maybe I have the facts wrong, but I don't think I do. With the facts at the time, the extension wasn't a bad idea, IMO.

In hindsight, he incorrectly bought Hawk's BS like all of the rest of us, but I don't think it's fair to say he ****ed up now. It's about what he does moving forward that he should be judged.

It's not the extension that was a bad idea, it was the fact that the buyout language was not modified, so he effectively put CU right back in the same position they were in when they had to fire Barnett. If Hawk's buyout was, say, $1mm, do you think we're even asking if CU has the money, or is it all but a done deal? Big mistake there.

 

[Buffnik]

The extension was definitely a mistake. It was a mistake most people would have made, but a mistake nonetheless.

Also, Rino's point about the buyout is solid. Often when an AD extends a coach, it's a public vote of confidence but it also makes it easier to terminate because the buyout gets reduced as part of the extension. Bohn extended contract length and increased the buyout dollars despite the fact that Hawkins had no leverage in the negotiations. It's not like the NFL or the big money colleges were calling.

 

[stl/dog]

It's not the extension that was a bad idea, it was the fact that the buyout language was not modified, so he effectively put CU right back in the same position they were in when they had to fire Barnett. If Hawk's buyout was, say, $1mm, do you think we're even asking if CU has the money, or is it all but a done deal? Big mistake there.

yes.

 

[Darth Snow]

Didn' tthe extension start sometime after the DS recruiting class came in? And then was signed post WVU? HOw in the hell did all those months of negotiating change NOTHING in the buyout? My only real problem with Bohn's handling of this situation

 

[Buffarino]

Didn' tthe extension start sometime after the DS recruiting class came in? And then was signed post WVU? HOw in the hell did all those months of negotiating change NOTHING in the buyout? My only real problem with Bohn's handling of this situation

It looks like Hawk's agent worked Bohn. That's what happened, IMO. It's just one instance of Bohn giving away more than he had to, and it's one reason why I say I don't think he's a good negotiator. He gives things away that he doesn't have to give away.