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!

What in the Holy Hell does Ceal Barry think she's doing

What is ironic to me is all the bitching and moaning over a 10% cut in discretionary spending when businesses do that all the time. You challenge your people to do more with less. When revenue returns, those efficiencies you have gained by cutting your costs will allow you to focus the new revenue on needed improvements instead of waste. Ceal is in position to shephard the department through until a permanent replacement is named. Facing the budget deficit she has, it makes perfect sense to call for a cut in spending by each program. In my industry, we face budget challenges all the time. The goal is to cut waste. As an investor in the program I want to know that my dollars are going to finding the best people and creating the best facilities, and not being wasted on Evian when Sam's Choice is the same thing.
 
Liver said:
barry is no friend of big time sports. this is why i have been so direct in my criticism of her as a candidate for ad. she's completely out of touch, imho. i think she believes there should be some kind of equivalency between revenue generating sports and the rest. and, she lives in a bubble of illusion created by a culture of academic aloofness and politically correct group think. so, we shouldn't be surprised when she fumbles something as simple as a budget cut. remember that she was THE precipitating factor that got CU tagged with a "lack of institutional control" for a ****ing training table violation. she completely misplayed that. just like this.

she cannot be trusted to make a real world, big budget athletic department run.
Click to expand...
Exactly!
 
AeroBuff99 said:
What is ironic to me is all the bitching and moaning over a 10% cut in discretionary spending when businesses do that all the time. You challenge your people to do more with less. When revenue returns, those efficiencies you have gained by cutting your costs will allow you to focus the new revenue on needed improvements instead of waste. Ceal is in position to shephard the department through until a permanent replacement is named. Facing the budget deficit she has, it makes perfect sense to call for a cut in spending by each program. In my industry, we face budget challenges all the time. The goal is to cut waste. As an investor in the program I want to know that my dollars are going to finding the best people and creating the best facilities, and not being wasted on Evian when Sam's Choice is the same thing.
Click to expand...


I agree. Plus, I see this as Ceal kind of falling on the sword right now as interim AD so that the new AD doesn't have to deal with the same issue. She can be the bad guy (yes, I get the irony in that) and let the new AD start fresh with (hopefully) less of a deficit as we are now seeing.

I understand the frustration over the media and the fact that it's on the front page of the Post but I don't expect anything less than the local media to harp on any negative news out of Boulder.
 
AeroBuff99 said:
What is ironic to me is all the bitching and moaning over a 10% cut in discretionary spending when businesses do that all the time. You challenge your people to do more with less. When revenue returns, those efficiencies you have gained by cutting your costs will allow you to focus the new revenue on needed improvements instead of waste. Ceal is in position to shephard the department through until a permanent replacement is named. Facing the budget deficit she has, it makes perfect sense to call for a cut in spending by each program. In my industry, we face budget challenges all the time. The goal is to cut waste. As an investor in the program I want to know that my dollars are going to finding the best people and creating the best facilities, and not being wasted on Evian when Sam's Choice is the same thing.
Click to expand...
But what if a company is running efficiently and are still told to cut 10%. At some point, any returns are diminished. Also, budget cutting can be a moral killer. Lets say the soccer program is working on a shoe string budget, barely able to eek by. Now they are told to cut their budget by 10%. (I know this isn't an edict). Now, couldn't that be unfair to the program and hurt moral as well?
 
Last edited:
As long as we're making analogies with the business world, I'll say this. Making flat across the board cuts is a tactic used by lazy or clueless managers.
 
AeroBuff99 said:
What is ironic to me is all the bitching and moaning over a 10% cut in discretionary spending when businesses do that all the time. You challenge your people to do more with less. When revenue returns, those efficiencies you have gained by cutting your costs will allow you to focus the new revenue on needed improvements instead of waste. Ceal is in position to shephard the department through until a permanent replacement is named. Facing the budget deficit she has, it makes perfect sense to call for a cut in spending by each program. In my industry, we face budget challenges all the time. The goal is to cut waste. As an investor in the program I want to know that my dollars are going to finding the best people and creating the best facilities, and not being wasted on Evian when Sam's Choice is the same thing.
Click to expand...

The flaw in this line of thinking is the assumption that there is at least 10% waste in every department that is worth cutting - why not instead take a hard look at each program and determine where the actual waste is? As an investor in these programs I would want to know that we are being smart about where to cut and not just cutting across the board without any regard for what actually makes sense.
 
J.R. Ewing said:
As long as we're making analogies with the business world, I'll say this. Making flat across the board cuts is a tactic used by lazy or clueless managers.
Click to expand...

Spot on.

It's like anything. Consider household spending. We all know people who are thrifty, others who go spend well beyond their means, and a lot of people somewhere in the middle. If you were a financial adviser to a group of your neighbors, would your advice to all of them be to cut their discretionary spending by 10%? Hell no.
 
is oregon cutting by 10% ? cu should just crawl into the big sky! then when we beat csu one out of 4 years it would be an upset!
 
leftybuff said:
What is truly ironic, and somewhat sad, is that these academics are in charge of finding someone to run the AD "like a business". Honestly, actions like this convince me the PTB couldn't find their asses with both hands and a flashlight, much less know what to look for when considering qualities an executive might have that would lend themselves to being successful in business. I seriously doubt Dr. Phil or Ceal could successfully run a lemonade stand.
Click to expand...

Not with Phil drinking all the inventory with his vodka...
 
I can't imagine that the Pac 12 offices and Larry Scott will be too happy with this coming out either. Maybe it is a desperate cry for the Pac 12 to bail out CU so that they can provide a small resemblance of what the Pac 12 expects from it school.
 
I wish the PAC 12 would give us an ultimatum to start investing now or risk being kicked out. I know this is probably not a realistic idea, but CU doesn't do anything until it absolutely must.
 
CUFan said:
I wish the PAC 12 would give us an ultimatum to start investing now or risk being kicked out. I know this is probably not a realistic idea, but CU doesn't do anything until it absolutely must.
Click to expand...


This all goes back to how bad our product was on the football field last year. Boyle's quote says it all---this doesn't bother him at all. He believes it can be fixed with a better football product. In addition, its only an issue because Ceal or Dr. Phil decided it would be a good idea for her to talk to Henderson......Not a big deal, but the way it was handled shows that CU's leadership has no idea how the business that is college athletics works.
 
This 10% isn't even news. If anyone is shocked the CU AD is running a current deficit with the special set of circumstances the last few years and our historical lack of donor funding (blame most of that on the CU AD/CU and CU Foundation), then they haven't been paying attention. Exactly why I was so pissed off when this article was published. Does nothing but bring negative attention and dragging CU through the mud and it was totally unnecessary. AD's run in the red, it happens. Only at CU do we publicize it.

Can only hope aside from being an astute business man - the new AD is also a rockstar in PR and marketing.
 
Last edited:
SD Buff said:
Can only hope aside from being an astute business man - the new AD is also a rockstar in PR and marketing.
Click to expand...

Quick, raise your hand if you think the next AD will be paid less than our last AD!

Lets summarize our situation: we just fired a guy who was, by nearly all measures, a competent and passionate director of athletics. We are paying him close to a million dollars to go away. We have no idea who we are going to replace him with, but the two names that have been out out there as candidates will both cost a lot more than the $350,000 or so we paid Mike Bohn. Meanwhile, the interim AD is chirping about needing to tighten the belt because they're running a deficit.

If it weren't happening here, this would be hilarious.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
 
sackman said:
Quick, raise your hand if you think the next AD will be paid less than our last AD!

Lets summarize our situation: we just fired a guy who was, by nearly all measures, a competent and passionate director of athletics. We are paying him close to a million dollars to go away. We have no idea who we are going to replace him with, but the two names that have been out out there as candidates will both cost a lot more than the $350,000 or so we paid Mike Bohn. Meanwhile, the interim AD is chirping about needing to tighten the belt because they're running a deficit.

If it weren't happening here, this would be hilarious.
Click to expand...

Throw in the fact that DiStefano makes $389k per year. He gets other benefits, but I'm not sure he's eager to have an AD making more than he does. We'll see.
 
sackman said:
Quick, raise your hand if you think the next AD will be paid less than our last AD!

Lets summarize our situation: we just fired a guy who was, by nearly all measures, a competent and passionate director of athletics. We are paying him close to a million dollars to go away. We have no idea who we are going to replace him with, but the two names that have been out out there as candidates will both cost a lot more than the $350,000 or so we paid Mike Bohn. Meanwhile, the interim AD is chirping about needing to tighten the belt because they're running a deficit.

If it weren't happening here, this would be hilarious.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...
Since Ceal is the interim AD, I believe the correct term would be: barking.
 
sackman said:
Quick, raise your hand if you think the next AD will be paid less than our last AD!

Lets summarize our situation: we just fired a guy who was, by nearly all measures, a competent and passionate director of athletics. We are paying him close to a million dollars to go away. We have no idea who we are going to replace him with, but the two names that have been out out there as candidates will both cost a lot more than the $350,000 or so we paid Mike Bohn. Meanwhile, the interim AD is chirping about needing to tighten the belt because they're running a deficit.

If it weren't happening here, this would be hilarious.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk 2
Click to expand...

Maybe by your measures but by mine I wanted him gone for a long time. Here is guy that said he balanced the budget every year and then left the program almost $30 million in depth - how does that happen.
 
I really think this is much ado about nothing. Did anyone read the article? She requested that every one try to cut discretionary funding by 10% - it is not mandatory and it is not an across the board cut.

Any AD that comes in better know the lay of the land at CU so they should know the challenges they have to address.
 
BlackNGold said:
I really think this is much ado about nothing. Did anyone read the article? She requested that every one try to cut discretionary funding by 10% - it is not mandatory and it is not an across the board cut.

Any AD that comes in better know the lay of the land at CU so they should know the challenges they have to address.
Click to expand...
Missed the main point entirely.

The problem with this is not the request (although it is far from perfect). The problem is that she ran to the DP with it.
 
BlackNGold said:
Maybe by your measures but by mine I wanted him gone for a long time. Here is guy that said he balanced the budget every year and then left the program almost $30 million in depth - how does that happen.
Click to expand...
I was not a Bohn fan. But if you are going to can the guy, you do it at the same time you send Embo packing. The whole thing looks like the same old story...academic penis envy drives midget Chancellor to fire tall Athletic Director. The CU admin. literally cannot keep from peeing in their own mess kit.
 
BlackNGold said:
I really think this is much ado about nothing. Did anyone read the article? She requested that every one try to cut discretionary funding by 10% - it is not mandatory and it is not an across the board cut.

Any AD that comes in better know the lay of the land at CU so they should know the challenges they have to address.
Click to expand...

That article was the #1 most clicked on article in the post yesterday, an article that she gave legs and once again cast CU in a bad light, as one of the poors of college athletics. It did absolutely no good.

When the AD had a golden opportunity to instead to hit the media with the news of Boyle's extension which fans have been clamoring for, for what 15 months? We finally set Tad up with a competitive deal and had an opportunity to celebrate what has been the best 3 year run in Colorado basketball history. Instead of connecting with fans and spending a few days talking about one of the bright-spots in our recent athletic endeavors the department care-taker opened her mouth, aired our problems, and got everyone talking about how bad things are.

Is the content of what she said inherently bad? No it isn't, we need to cut some fat, but as has been discussed ad-nauseum in this thread; going public with that has only detrimental effects. A leader, a person so familiar with college athletics as Ceal, and one charged with taking care of our department as we find a new AD, should know better.
 
Darth Snow said:
Missed the main point entirely.

The problem with this is not the request (although it is far from perfect). The problem is that she ran to the DP with it.
Click to expand...

this is exactly correct. AND, i think it is a stretch to think that this was just a lack of savvy that caused her to misplay this. i think she did it intentionally and deliberately to pander to those that hate athletics and especially hate revenue generating sports in the big time. her complete and utter bull**** statement about how this is owed to the "taxpayers" in some way because of "tax dollars" is a breathtakingly mal-intentioned thing to say. her selection of the dp's biggest CU critic and ogler of underage girls for the story demonstrates her true position on this stuff. she is not a friend of CU football. and, if you aren't a friend of CU football then you have a basic misunderstanding of how big time athletics are conducted and funded. football is the engine that drives everything. cutting back on football recruiting dollars and marketing dollars and support dollars at this point is suicidal and incredibly stupid.
 
BlackNGold said:
Maybe by your measures but by mine I wanted him gone for a long time. Here is guy that said he balanced the budget every year and then left the program almost $30 million in depth - how does that happen.
Click to expand...

Of course you wanted him gone.

Are there any individuals at CU you approve of?
 
and another thing... any effin' athletic department that had any balls at all would threaten to pull hendo-perv's press credentials. he is a ****ing troll-hack and allowing him access, let alone feeding him stories is purely idiotic.
 
Liver said:
and another thing... any effin' athletic department that had any balls at all would threaten to pull hendo-perv's press credentials. he is a ****ing troll-hack and allowing him access, let alone feeding him stories is purely idiotic.
Click to expand...
It's ****ed up that Plati sees forums such as AllBuffs as awful things yet Henderson and Ringo still have their press passes despite them ****ting on CU every chance they get.
 
Liver said:
this is exactly correct. AND, i think it is a stretch to think that this was just a lack of savvy that caused her to misplay this. i think she did it intentionally and deliberately to pander to those that hate athletics and especially hate revenue generating sports in the big time. her complete and utter bull**** statement about how this is owed to the "taxpayers" in some way because of "tax dollars" is a breathtakingly mal-intentioned thing to say. her selection of the dp's biggest CU critic and ogler of underage girls for the story demonstrates her true position on this stuff. she is not a friend of CU football. and, if you aren't a friend of CU football then you have a basic misunderstanding of how big time athletics are conducted and funded. football is the engine that drives everything. cutting back on football recruiting dollars and marketing dollars and support dollars at this point is suicidal and incredibly stupid.
Click to expand...
Hmmm. Lots of food for thought there. Does Ceal have an agenda?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top