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!

MacIntyre contract approved in 8-0 vote

hawg1 said:
I think he got a good deal regarding punishment. He could have very well been fired or suspended at another school. I applaud Salazar for mitigating the damage and punishment. In the end, another school might have reacted much more negatively to being "guilty (sorry, I don't know a better word) on 6 findings in the report, especially violation of the Regent's Clause.
Click to expand...
Quick, name ONE school that would have fired or suspended Mac for what happened. No wait, how about you name one school that would have even performed the investigation CU did after CU had already sent Tump packing. Yes, a regular Joe manager could have faced issues in the real world, but football and college athletics isn't the real world.
 
CitizenKane said:
Quick, name ONE school that would have fired or suspended Mac for what happened. No wait, how about you name one school that would have even performed the investigation CU did after CU had already sent Tump packing. Yes, a regular Joe manager could have faced issues in the real world, but football and college athletics isn't the real world.
Click to expand...
Did CU have reasonable justification to fire after the report? From what I have read, the whole issue lies with the Chancellor and failing to train staff since 2013.
 
Technically they could have fired him with cause but I'm sure that would have came right back against the university for not training properly.
 
CitizenKane said:
Quick, name ONE school that would have fired or suspended Mac for what happened. No wait, how about you name one school that would have even performed the investigation CU did after CU had already sent Tump packing. Yes, a regular Joe manager could have faced issues in the real world, but football and college athletics isn't the real world.
Click to expand...
Stanford.

All schools would have performed inquiries based on the info.

This is not about Tumpkin. It's about whether they followed procedures. They didn't.
 
hawg1 said:
Stanford.

All schools would have performed inquiries based on the info.

This is not about Tumpkin. It's about whether they followed procedures. They didn't.
Click to expand...
So is it one school (Stanford) or all schools?

I can tell you two schools that didn't investigate under wildly more egregious circumstances: Baylor and Penn State. And I will be willing to bet the great majority of P5 schools would have ignored this completely.

Hawg - I know you have been around for a while, but it may be worth it for you to go back and re-read this thread - particularly the last couple of pages.
 
hawg1 said:
Stanford.
All schools would have performed inquiries based on the info.
This is not about Tumpkin. It's about whether they followed procedures. They didn't.
Click to expand...

Stanford wouldn't have done a thing. If you really believe they would have then you don't fully understand what went on there during the Dennis Green or the Jim Harbaugh era's. There is a reason people at Stanford started to say, Its not creepy if its Jim Harbaugh, it's just Harbaugh being Harbaugh. Stanford sold its soul, its the reason they've been good for a while. If you don't know what went on because you weren't paying close attention to Stanford during those times I can't blame you, but you can do some research and find plenty of things that could have been investigated and weren't, or you can just get some older Stanford alums drunk. As for other schools, well, since you can't provide an example of one making a public mockery of themselves by airing all their dirty laundry, I am quite certain you're correct. I can tell you Kansas State wouldn't have done this, Arkansas wouldn't have done this, Tennessee wouldn't have done this, Notre Dame wouldn't have done this, Michigan wouldn't have done this, Oklahoma wouldn't have done this, Florida State wouldn't have done this, USC wouldn't have done this, Washington wouldn't have done this....heck I can go on and on, because they have each had issues that have made the media and quickly been buried. No investigations or in one case an investigation that was kept entirely out of the public eye and never saw the light of day.

Edit, and how about Oregon State....they so public aired their dirty laundry didn't they? I mean allowing a convicted sex offender on campus because he was a good baseball pitcher and not warning anyone? I mean we all watched for the last three years how they publicly embarrassed themselves over that one....wait...they didn't?
 
Highlander said:
So is it one school (Stanford) or all schools?

I can tell you two schools that didn't investigate under wildly more egregious circumstances: Baylor and Penn State. And I will be willing to bet the great majority of P5 schools would have ignored this completely.

Hawg - I know you have been around for a while, but it may be worth it for you to go back and re-read this thread - particularly the last couple of pages.
Click to expand...
You asked me to name one school who would have fired him. I did Stanford.

You asked to name s school who would investigate. I did. All, including PSU and Baylor

1. The thread is a love fest for MM. He did a good job. He got a good contract. I applaud

2 He didn't follow procedures and had consequences.

3. The Tumpkin issue is a judgement and judicial issue.

These are three different issues.
 
CitizenKane said:
Stanford wouldn't have done a thing. If you really believe they would have then you don't fully understand what went on there during the Dennis Green or the Jim Harbaugh era's. There is a reason people at Stanford started to say, Its not creepy if its Jim Harbaugh, it's just Harbaugh being Harbaugh. Stanford sold its soul, its the reason they've been good for a while. If you don't know what went on because you weren't paying close attention to Stanford during those times I can't blame you, but you can do some research and find plenty of things that could have been investigated and weren't, or you can just get some older Stanford alums drunk. As for other schools, well, since you can't provide an example of one making a public mockery of themselves by airing all their dirty laundry, I am quite certain you're correct. I can tell you Kansas State wouldn't have done this, Arkansas wouldn't have done this, Tennessee wouldn't have done this, Notre Dame wouldn't have done this, Michigan wouldn't have done this, Oklahoma wouldn't have done this, Florida State wouldn't have done this, USC wouldn't have done this, Washington wouldn't have done this....heck I can go on and on, because they have each had issues that have made the media and quickly been buried. No investigations or in one case an investigation that was kept entirely out of the public eye and never saw the light of day.

Edit, and how about Oregon State....they so public aired their dirty laundry didn't they? I mean allowing a convicted sex offender on campus because he was a good baseball pitcher and not warning anyone? I mean we all watched for the last three years how they publicly embarrassed themselves over that one....wait...they didn't?
Click to expand...
To not conduct an inquiry would have put CU (and any university) at substantial public perception and financial risk according to the two parameters against which Cozen conducted their investigation.

Nobody - I mean nobody - takes that risk in today's environment under the circumstances which CU found themselves. If they do, their Board and President are clueless.

I am very glad CU investigated this with great thought and care.

In the end, mistakes were made, consequences were had.

It is now time for the judicial aspects of the situation beginning this week with the Tumpkin hearing and then the suit by the alledged suit against CU.

I respect your opinion. I disagree, however.
 
Excellent op-ed in the DP explaining the simple economic truth of why a college football coach makes so much more money than a college professor.

As simple as market scarcity, not an indictment on our society's values. It's hard to find someone capable of succeeding at the highest levels of college football coaching. Not so hard to find someone with a PhD in a subject matter.

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/06/1...alaries-of-cu-football-coach-and-instructors/
 
DID NOT READ any of the above (I will later) but in my opinion the approval of his contract by the Regents was the central issue of all angst among us. The University did more than it needed to do for due diligence, which is a good thing. #skobuffs.
 
Buffnik said:
Excellent op-ed in the DP explaining the simple economic truth of why a college football coach makes so much more money than a college professor.

As simple as market scarcity, not an indictment on our society's values. It's hard to find someone capable of succeeding at the highest levels of college football coaching. Not so hard to find someone with a PhD in a subject matter.

http://www.denverpost.com/2017/06/1...alaries-of-cu-football-coach-and-instructors/
Click to expand...
Economic return. Saban has built a lot of hotels in Tuscaloosa.
 
Captain Obvious chiming in here, but this investigation was not NCAA-related, and CU hired the top-ranked firm in the country which performs such things. This has made very little national splash. Go Buffs.
 
CitizenKane said:
Quick, name ONE school that would have fired or suspended Mac for what happened. No wait, how about you name one school that would have even performed the investigation CU did after CU had already sent Tump packing. Yes, a regular Joe manager could have faced issues in the real world, but football and college athletics isn't the real world.
Click to expand...
Highlander said:
So is it one school (Stanford) or all schools?

I can tell you two schools that didn't investigate under wildly more egregious circumstances: Baylor and Penn State. And I will be willing to bet the great majority of P5 schools would have ignored this completely.

Hawg - I know you have been around for a while, but it may be worth it for you to go back and re-read this thread - particularly the last couple of pages.
Click to expand...
hawg1 said:
You asked me to name one school who would have fired him. I did Stanford.

You asked to name s school who would investigate. I did. All, including PSU and Baylor

1. The thread is a love fest for MM. He did a good job. He got a good contract. I applaud

2 He didn't follow procedures and had consequences.

3. The Tumpkin issue is a judgement and judicial issue.

These are three different issues.
Click to expand...
Come again? You have lost it, Hawg.
 
Extreme due diligence by CU Regents. No NCAA involvement. Unanimous Board vote to make MM the highest-paid public employee in the history of the Great State of Colorado. No big deal nationally. This is the best possible outcome out of all of this, boys. Let's get over it.
 
sackman said:
Lulz that Stanford would have done anything at all. They had a guy on their swim team rape a girl and they just stepped aside. By this definition, the swim team coach would have been fired. Absurd.
Click to expand...
Brock Turnet was convicted. He went to jail. He was kicked off the team. He did not return to Stanford. He was banned for life by USA swimming. Stanford students who caught him did the right thing. As did the Stanford police and the prosecutor. The judge let him off. Last I knew he moved back to Ohio to live with his parents.

How did Stanford just step aside? I don't understand your statement. Do you have additional details?
 
hawg1 said:
Brock Turnet was convicted. He went to jail. He was kicked off the team. He did not return to Stanford. He was banned for life by USA swimming. Stanford students who caught him did the right thing. As did the Stanford police and the prosecutor. The judge let him off. Last I knew he moved back to Ohio to live with his parents.

How did Stanford just step aside? I don't understand your statement. Do you have additional details?
Click to expand...
They didn't fire the head swim coach, which by your logic, they should have.
 
sackman said:
They didn't fire the head swim coach, which by your logic, they should have.
Click to expand...
What did the swim coach do that was wrong according to Stanford procedure?

There was, to my knowledge, no investigation of the swim team's response to this matter and no violations by the swim coach.

The matter was a judicial matter (rape) not a matter of inappropriate reporting according to established procedures.

I fail to see your logic in your thinking about the Stanford situation nor the similarities to the CU situation where there were clear failures by three personnel, including reporting violations and violations of the Regent's clause.
 
PAHIBuff said:
No, he really doesn't. But he'll have one in a few years.
Click to expand...
If he continues his upward trend, he'll have a continual top 25 team with great facilities in a fantastic local. This latest safu aside, I'm sure there will be no further reporting issues as everyone will be properly trained, which the OEIC should have been doing all along, but I did digress. If all that happens, which is likely, why wouldn't CU be a great HC job?
 
Highlander said:
I can tell you two schools that didn't investigate under wildly more egregious circumstances: Baylor and Penn State. And I will be willing to bet the great majority of P5 schools would have ignored this completely.
Click to expand...

Baylor and Penn State didn't investigate...until the **** hit the fan in the national media. They absolutely investigated after the storm hit and in both cases those schools had massive alumni backlash for giving into the investigations.

CU had to investigate this after the SI article and every single other P5 program would have had an investigation if that SI piece was about their coach and school. Before the SI article, CU was not investigating the Tumpkin allegations. The investigation process might have played out differently at other schools, but the same basic sequence of actions and reactions that happened at CU would have happened at every other school as well.
 
hawg1 said:
Brock Turnet was convicted. He went to jail. He was kicked off the team. He did not return to Stanford. He was banned for life by USA swimming. Stanford students who caught him did the right thing. As did the Stanford police and the prosecutor. The judge let him off. Last I knew he moved back to Ohio to live with his parents.

How did Stanford just step aside? I don't understand your statement. Do you have additional details?
Click to expand...
Brock Turnet is Joe Tumpkin, in this fantasy world of hypotheticals, no?
 
Highlander said:
Check out the three responses I laid out for you. I'm not sure who you are talking to.
Click to expand...
aybe I missed a thread. I maintain all schools - including today's PSU and Baylor - would investigate today.

Thanks for a good discussion. Onward with football, with a couple of legal matters thrown in.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top