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!

Karl Dorrell officially named Colorado HC

Here4hottakes said:
You are confusing the program with the tenure of MM. Even Hawkins was able to get some recruiting wins here. He just didn't know what to do with them once they got here. Calhoun is the worst case scenario, and a sign that the administration is really not serious about having a big-time football program. I really don't understand fans that are ok with mediocrity.
Click to expand...

I think it's actually admirable how many people around here maintain such high aspirations and expectations for this program.

I'd love if Sark could come in and keep the recruiting momentum and relevance going.

But I've been beaten into submission over the last couple decades that perhaps the Tad Boyle hire actually makes sense for us. Anyway -- a lot of convincing arguments that we need to aim higher for football. I'm open to all of that. But I maintain that we could do a lot worse than Calhoun as our fallback guy.
 
Portland sports radio talking about Sark. Generally positive about the possibility. Made the same comment that I’ve seen here that CU might come out of this in a better spot.

One comment that I thought was good was that Sark at $3M is a no brainer over Tucker at $5M
 
Man who knows. Feels like Xmas morning. Please make it a pony. I still hear it’s Calhoun and the contract offer is already out. I’ll probably eat my words. I do have to admit that Sark would be exciting as well
 
JWP303 said:
I think it's actually admirable how many people around here maintain such high aspirations and expectations for this program.

I'd love if Sark could come in and keep the recruiting momentum and relevance going.

But I've been beaten into submission over the last couple decades that perhaps the Tad Boyle hire actually makes sense for us. Anyway -- a lot of convincing arguments that we need to aim higher for football. I'm open to all of that. But I maintain that we could do a lot worse than Calhoun as our fallback guy.
Click to expand...
Yep, most people that frequent here have higher expectations than fallback guy.
 
Duff Man said:
Provided the next guy gives CU three years, who gives a **** if he views it as a stepping stone job?
Click to expand...

Why is the idea that Sarkisian becomes a CU lifer that far fetched? He's held two of the best jobs in the league already, and he knows the alcoholism won't help him-you couple the fact that we want to give him an opportunity with the huge buyout he knows is coming with this offer he could stay a long time. This program has a title-you can win big here.
 
NW Buff said:
Portland sports radio talking about Sark. Generally positive about the possibility. Made the same comment that I’ve seen here that CU might come out of this in a better spot.

One comment that I thought was good was that Sark at $3M is a no brainer over Tucker at $5M
Click to expand...

Troy Calhoun at $3m is better than Melvin at $5m. Melvin is in the right place for Melvin
 
JWP303 said:
I think it's actually admirable how many people around here maintain such high aspirations and expectations for this program.

I'd love if Sark could come in and keep the recruiting momentum and relevance going.

But I've been beaten into submission over the last couple decades that perhaps the Tad Boyle hire actually makes sense for us. Anyway -- a lot of convincing arguments that we need to aim higher for football. I'm open to all of that. But I maintain that we could do a lot worse than Calhoun as our fallback guy.
Click to expand...
Calhoun would be a Bzdelik hire. To jump up to a Tad-like hire you'd need to get Chris Peterson or a young Ferentz or Dantonio.
 
Bill Cody said:
What standard are you holding them to?
Click to expand...
Power 5 hire with recruiting chops and leadership skills that has a lot of knowledge of the game. I know that's subjective but a coach that hasn't consistently outperformed the competition in the MWC is not hitting the standard
 
Creebuzz said:
Aren’t head coaches hired before the regent vote? I want to say that Tucker was doing media events well before his contract was ratified by the Regents.
Click to expand...

I thought the other way but you may be right. It’s CU so whatever SHOULD be done will be the opposite of how we will.
 
Howell sheds some light on the subject...

There was a report Wednesday that CU’s board of regents was planning to meet Friday about the coaching search. However, multiple regents have told Buffzone that no meeting has been planned or discussed.

While the contract of the new head coach does need to be approved by regents, it’s not necessary before a coach is hired. In December of 2018, Tucker’s contract went to a regent vote six days after he was introduced as head coach.

 
GoBuffs7 said:
Howell sheds some light on the subject...

There was a report Wednesday that CU’s board of regents was planning to meet Friday about the coaching search. However, multiple regents have told Buffzone that no meeting has been planned or discussed.

While the contract of the new head coach does need to be approved by regents, it’s not necessary before a coach is hired. In December of 2018, Tucker’s contract went to a regent vote six days after he was introduced as head coach.

Click to expand...


Yeah - any discussion of regents and politicians as pertains to this search is stupid. The search, the offer, and the hire are all done without any need to consult the regents. Who knows, maybe that's Kroll's real hangup.

Anyway, there's no need to wait for a special regents meeting to announce and introduce a coach.
 
ahoelsken said:
That's the point I was trying to make. Mel Tucker is going to flop there-I damn sure would hate to see us give Mel that type of money if we had it.
Click to expand...

Im not certain he will but I’m rooting for it. If he left next year or the year after I’d be annoyed we couldn’t keep him. After this debacle? **** that guy. I hope every time he washes his head he gets soap in his eyes and it ****ing burns.
 
ahoelsken said:
We get Steve Sarkisian we get a better coach for 60% of the money.
Click to expand...

🙏 🙏 🙏

giphy.gif
 
Alfred91 said:
Yeah - any discussion of regents and politicians as pertains to this search is stupid. The search, the offer, and the hire are all done without any need to consult the regents. Who knows, maybe that's Kroll's real hangup.

Anyway, there's no need to wait for a special regents meeting to announce and introduce a coach.
Click to expand...
I could swear the Regents must approve salaries. Although I think since it’s AD money the BoR shouldn’t have any say in the matter.
 
DBT said:
I could swear the Regents must approve salaries. Although I think since it’s AD money the BoR shouldn’t have any say in the matter.
Click to expand...

No, they have to approve them, and as people have warned lately, perhaps a further shift in the political situation of the BoR will make this a different process, but it's still a rubber stamp thing right now. Hopefully they will have learned their lesson or got it out of their system last go round, but even if the 3 idots grandstand again, it won't make any difference in the end.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top