I don't know. Wherever he is, he's probably not writing about CU athletics. I'm guessing he moved out of state. The T-C editor couldn't remember where he had gone to, which leads me to believe it wasn't anyplace around here.
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!
Thanks for the laughs Mr. Woelk
- Thread starter Duff Man
- Start date
I don't know. Wherever he is, he's probably not writing about CU athletics. I'm guessing he moved out of state. The T-C editor couldn't remember where he had gone to, which leads me to believe it wasn't anyplace around here.
I liked the article. I am only upset with myself. I buy into about everything Woelk wrote (except for the bad breaks stuff). My expectations are high and I believe we are going to be pretty darn good. I am mad at myself for believing we will be good because I know DH is still the coach. I am likely headed for disappointment, but I can't help myself. I wish I did not believe in this team, because it is much easier to go into as season with low expectations.
Winning cures all! We can and will do it this year!
Winning cures all! We can and will do it this year!
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
this is not at all the point i make about Woelk. my point is nearly the opposite. he used to be critical of the AD (when CU was good or bad), now when we are bad.....he pumps sunshine. i don't even understand how your claim that CU=good, Woelk=good vs. his production now even makes sense.
It does seem that Woelk has become little more than an extension of the CU SID's office. Lots of towing the company line. What do they need BG Brooks for when they have Neil Woelk? It's one of the reasons why it's a shame that Patrick Ridgell is gone. For whatever reason, the CUAD didn't think Ridgell had much of a following, and must not have done anything to try to influence him. He was free to call em as he saw em.
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
that really stinks to lose Ridgell. he was by far the best around here.
I don't have any question that 65% of football is about luck. One of the things that makes the game fun to follow is the surprises, the unexpected plays, the change of momentum on turnovers, a big tackle, making a big stop or breaking a long play off a base play.
At the same time a lot of highly successfull coaches have said the same thing, "You make your own luck." How is it that some teams just seem to always come up with a fumble, a tackle for a loss, or force a penalty to kill a drive (or continue a drive) at just the right moment. On the other hand how is it that some teams always seem to be just a little short of making the big play happen, an inteception slips through a players hands, a big pass just goes off the fingertips, a big play gets called back on an illegal formation and all the other stuff that turns potential wins into potential losses.
Hawk has repeated ad nauseum about the "little things," but somehow it always seems like the little things go against his teams. Last year he talked about being 10 plays away from a bowl, if that is so why did we end up on the short end of these 10 plays, just like we have ended up on the short end of the game changing plays for the past four years. Everybody gets some bad breaks, everybody occassionally loses a game they should have won, that's football. The problem is that when it happens over and over and over again then it isn't bad luck, it's a failure to make good things happen and prevent the bad.
I don't have a problem with Woelk publishing this column at this time. This is the time for optimism, there are reasons to believe that this year could and should be better that the last few. That all said we can look at talent and experience and everything else we want to. The fundamental issues that are causing this team to lose are not addressed in the column and Hawk has given no indication that he recognizes them and has done something to change them. Again, I hope I am completely wrong about this and Hawk and the players make this a year to remember. If so I will glady eat my words but for now I have been disapointed to many times to step up for another round of punishment at the hands of Hawk and his world of dillusions.
Woelk, over time, has become, more and more, the mouthpiece of the AD. If you read his stuff through that prism, it isn't all that bad. It's time for fall camp, of course he is going to write stuff that pumps up the Buffs....he should be. I have no problem with it, even if I don't really believe it.
I think the worst possible thing for a team to be thinking while playing is: "we need to make sure we do all the little things right." Practice is where you work on the little things. When it comes down to gametime you just need to let it all out and play. I just hope the little things speeches are saved for practice, not halftime.
Thats the nature of the move in that industry. It took me awhile to get back to Colorado landing at the Greeley Tribune. To get better pay you have to move to a bigger paper and that often means going back out of state.
I read the article and just thought Woelk was unrealistic. I didn't feel he was blaming it on bad luck (I think it's gone both ways).
Here's what I thought was laughable:
1. Nate Solder - yes, good player. OLine has been a weak spot and you need a unit, not a star.
2. Ryan Miller - see above
3. Love Speedy, but no proven depth. Lock is not an every down back. Both were taken out for better pass blocking... yikes
4. Jimmy Smith - talented. But our DB's were burned regularly early and I've yet to reconcile why
5. Linebackers - big question marks here remain. Cabral is probably the best at making sure we are up to the task though.
6. Receivers - Hopeful. This could be the biggest impact position. But it's an improved unit in theory only.
7. QB - Hopeful. Tyler shows signs. Cody will be a nice backup if needed.
8. Experience - only if they learn/improve from it. They should. But the OLine should have been a lot better last year for example.... We'll See.
9. Depth - still a lot of unknowns on the depth chart (Orms, Nobriga, etc). But it's getting better each year.
10. Staff - big upgrade at WR. Kiesau experience should matter (see 8). Johnson - God I hope so.
11. Schedule - pretty tough. Cal, Georgia, OU, NU, Mizzou all look real tough. None of the rest are easy W's. All winnable, but....
12. sure ok. They need some confidence and leadership. A kicker who was automatic would help a lot also.
Reasons to Tremble:
1. Kicker is ?
2. Punter is ?
3. RB depth
4. TE inexperience
5. OLine returns, but will they be better (where will the weak link be)?
6. LB's core depth gets very young in a hurry
7. DB depth - ditto.
8. depth in general still isn't there and CU is prone to injuries like they have been for a decade.
Not you in particular. It just seems that everyone used to love Woelk. Remember all the "Woelk hits another home run" posts? Now everyone seems to be accusing him of being a "mouth piece" for the AD. He was hitting "home runs" when he was defending the school during the scandal. Now he is a "mouth piece" because he speaks positively about the team's chances this year.
:lol:
JimmyBuff
Well-Known Member
Not really. I have always thought woelk as nothing but a pom pom waver of CU athletics. Other than Patton (i'm guessing woelk/patton didn't care for each other personally since he is the only coach that Woelk has been critical of since I've read him), Woelk has continued to make excuses for every coach at CU. As BB said in the earlier post, thanks for the laughs Woelk.
Finally read the articles and I really don't get all the uproar towards Neil on this one. It's an opinion piece on a list of things that might give some Buff fans reason to hope we could be better this year. It wasn't a list of reasons the Buffs will go 10-2 this year. BFD.
This is what happens when there is no actual football to report on, everyone needs to chill out.
This is what happens when there is no actual football to report on, everyone needs to chill out.
BlackNGold
Club Member
Here is the problem with Neill Woelk, somewhere along the way he decided he wanted to be the AD and that he had the plan for making CU successful. He openly lobbied for the firing of Dick Tharpe - he lobbied for the hiring of Mike Bohn. In the process he basically has forgotten any responsibility to the readers. He use to be a good advocate for the fan and kept the coaches and the AD honest. To me, it is analogous to someone who starts out in politics for all the right reasons but over time becomes too much a part of the system that they lose sight of their original goals.
Del
Well-Known Member
Well I really don't have a problem with the article because CU needs somebody outside of BG Brooks to put a little positive spin on things for once. This is the only big time college program I know of where the home town turns its back on the team and wishes them gone i.e. Boulder. The Flagship school of the state, with all the great things it has done academically and in sports constantly gets put down. I don't think I will ever understand why so many people in Colorado are down on the school especially since it is the only school in the state that competes in the big leagues of college sports. From an out of state perspective, it seems like the only people that like the school at all in the state are CU alumni. Everybody else loves to take shots whenever they can. Granted I wasn't in Denver in the late 80's through mid 90's when CU was consistantly good at an elite level but I start to think that even if CU won a national championship there would still be a lot of people complaining about the athletic budget and doing whatever they could to dig up a new "scandal" or something else.
I'm a proud CU alum from that came from out of state but it really makes me sad when the home town folks outside of the alumni can't rally around the program.
I don't care if it isn't great journalism and just a CU fluff piece we need more positive stuff to help the program
I'm a proud CU alum from that came from out of state but it really makes me sad when the home town folks outside of the alumni can't rally around the program.
I don't care if it isn't great journalism and just a CU fluff piece we need more positive stuff to help the program
Mick Ronson
Well-Known Member
i agree here. Woelk mos def had a stiffy to get Tharp fired/quit. He continuously, in those days, used the derisive sobriquet "the gang on the Hill" to attack Tharp and Co. Patton, too, was in the mix as part of the "problem". And, to be honest, this is part of how i mean he used to be "critical"....but, he has consistently failed to be "critical" of 4 straight losing seasons with Hawkins and consecutive cellar finishes in hoops preferring to generate as if from a template articles whose main theme is: "good times are around the corner and after clouds comes sunshine" over and above any analysis which would lead inevitably to some unfriendly conclusions.
The Guest
Guest
Yes. He's been pretty good this year.
He's the head coach and he has to say public things some times. There's no way around it. But he's been remarkably quiet.
He's taking Syko's advice, "Shut up and win" to heart. Now he just needs to follow through.
But aside from the recurring QB controversy, we've got little to complain about as fans this off season.
Horrible comparison. People wouldn't be so negative if there were signs of things changing. Same comments, Going down in wins each year. We all want and hope cu has a great year, but I can't get myself to sunshine pump, I don't have faith in this coach.
Huge difference between the two, Hawk gives excuses, Mac built expectations, Hawk complains, Mac took responsibility, Hawk goes from one gimmick to another, Mac set a course and stuck to it.
With Mac the losses were there, some more heartbreaking than Hawks worst losses, but anyone following the program closely could see that Mac had a single well defined plan that he was giving his whole heart and soul to make happen. Over the first four years that Mac was here you could see the players growing into what Mac was selling, you could see a trust and a confidence that he inspired in them that said do your part to the best of your ability, be a part of what this team is all about, and if you stick with it you will be a part of something special. The players who I have talked to from that time to a man are better people in their lives for being a part of those teams.
With Hawk I see a guy who does care about the program and does care about his players but lacks the ability to communicate that special vision that results in turning a bunch of guys into something special. He had it at Boise, WAC or YAL league, you don't win as much as he did at Boise without having something going for you but he hasn't shown it here. After four years I am not willing to wait a lot longer for it to appear.
not that i disagree with anything you posted but, and even Mac will admit, everyone was (other than GG and BM... that is different) calling for his head after his first 3 or 4 years. that is one thing those two have in common. the point is that, not everyone was on the Mac bandwagon after the first 4 years. Mac says so here.... http://www.cubuffs.com/newMediaPlayer/consolewmp.htm?oemid=600&type=vod&id=70343&KEY=
around the 2 minute mark.
edit: if you can hear the damn thing. for some reason, the volume level grows over the course of the vid.
Last edited:
Macs players would go through a wall for him, hawk's players? Mac's players HATED losing and played with an ATTITUDE. Hawk's players? Mac's players would be ashamed of losing at home, Hawk's?
That's true, I guess we would have to define what luck in football really is. I don't really consider many plays being lucky. Injuries can definitely be chalked up as unlucky, assuming we can't blame the S&C coach. Bounces of a live ball, etc. I don't consider things like big plays or turnovers to be lucky, though. Jmo
A lot of the casual observers, the Denver media, etc. were calling for his head and labelling him a bust. The difference is that the people close to the program who knew what was going on every day in practice, in the meeting rooms, had a different sensation. The players sensed that they were part of something that was going to be special and took responsibility for making it happen.
The results on the field for Mac's first four years were not all that different than Hawk but what was happening in the team was way different in a unique and special way.
i understand. that was not the point. you will have to forgive me. i didnt make that post the way i wanted it to be. i did edit it. i was talking about the views of those surrounding the program. the media. they were no lovers of Mac in his first 4 year and they were following the program closely. that is all im saying.
The big difference between then and now was that even the casual fan could see the improvement from year-to-year with Mac.