Barnett interview

[Highflyer]

Hmmmm....believe the guy who took Northwestern to a Rose Bowl and spent a significant amount of his career in Boulder, or believe the guy who thinks aliens are coming to take over the world???

Should be noted that TBD has more personal experience with GB than anyone on this board.

 

[Buff fanatic]

Should be noted that TBD has more personal experience with GB than anyone on this board.

Thats fine if the debate had something to do with his character or attitude. If we're talking knowledge of the program, I dont care who knows him. GB has plenty.

 

[Highflyer]

Thats fine if the debate had something to do with his character or attitude. If we're talking knowledge of the program, I dont care who knows him. GB has plenty.

His kid played for Barnett for 5 years. I'm not saying what TBD is saying I agree or disagree with, but his perspective is certainly much more intimate than most.

 

[Waldo]

Thats fine if the debate had something to do with his character or attitude. If we're talking knowledge of the program, I dont care who knows him. GB has plenty.

that what we are debating dickwad, all I said is GB is making excuses for bad coaching

 

[Buff fanatic]

that what we are debating dickwad, all I said is GB is making excuses for bad coaching

Thanks DBT.:thumbsup:

I think you said something about him being an asshole, blah, blah, blah. I dont have the time to go back and quote your post, but, I dont see how thats relevant to what he knows about coaching at CU. I think he knows a little about the culture as head coach at CU, like him or not---no matter how well you know him. If he makes excuses, im sure theres a reason for it.

 

[Waldo]

Thanks DBT.:thumbsup:

I think you said something about him being an asshole, blah, blah, blah. I dont have the time to go back and quote your post, but, I dont see how thats relevant to what he knows about coaching at CU. I think he knows a little about the culture as head coach at CU, like him or not---no matter how well you know him. If he makes excuses, im sure theres a reason for it.

go back to netturds dickwad, go listen to the interview specifcally the last 2 minutes with cheese

 

[White_Rabbit]

I'm so tired of excuses. I'm ready for some accountability.

 

[Buff fanatic]

go back to netturds dickwad,

eat ****. I cant get advice on ****ing stupid ass gold and conspriacies over there.

 

[Liver]

those of you making excuses for hawkins are buying into the bs that is being sold to you.

the CUAD is in the process of redefining what "success" is. success isn't "10 wins, no excuses" any more. success isn't "this ain't intramurals. this is the big 12" any more. success isn't "the pride and tradition of the Colorado Buffaloes will not be entrusted to the timid or the weak."

instead, the new definition of "success" is grade point averages, grad rates, good citizenship, life lessons, etc.

the GOAL of participating in intercollegiate athletics is to ****ing try to ****ing WIN.

we are about to enjoy our 4th consecutive losing season. this is nearly unprecedented in our history of playing football. failing to meet the number one ****ing goal of the program is being rewarded.

and, i am also pissed off by this subtle and not-so-subtle message that we enjoy some kind of ****ing moral superiority over the teams that are kicking the **** out of us, week in and week out. excuses are for ****ing losers. i expect a coach to meet ALL the objectives of the university, not just the ****ing off the field touchy feely bull**** objectives.

i don't care to hear any ****ing more about how hard it is at CU. sure, there are challenges, but there are also opportunities. guys have won and won big here before. it isn't impossible. we've enjoyed many many years of success. this whole mindset of "oh well, at least we are building strong young minds" is misguided.

don't buy the crap being pitched to you. the goal is to win. the goal is to win. the goal is to win. has this staff achieved this goal? in 4 ****ing seasons? how does this measure against every other ****ing staff in the history of Colorado football save the benchmark "worst coach of all time" chuck fairbanks?

hmmm?

gawd, this is frustrating. take off your television-induced coma happy glasses and focus.

 

[Buff fanatic]

those of you making excuses for hawkins are buying into the bs that is being sold to you.

the CUAD is in the process of redefining what "success" is. success isn't "10 wins, no excuses" any more. success isn't "this ain't intramurals. this is the big 12" any more. success isn't "the pride and tradition of the Colorado Buffaloes will not be entrusted to the timid or the weak."

instead, the new definition of "success" is grade point averages, grad rates, good citizenship, life lessons, etc.

the GOAL of participating in intercollegiate athletics is to ****ing try to ****ing WIN.

we are about to enjoy our 4th consecutive losing season. this is nearly unprecedented in our history of playing football. failing to meet the number one ****ing goal of the program is being rewarded.

and, i am also pissed off by this subtle and not-so-subtle message that we enjoy some kind of ****ing moral superiority over the teams that are kicking the **** out of us, week in and week out. excuses are for ****ing losers. i expect a coach to meet ALL the objectives of the university, not just the ****ing off the field touchy feely bull**** objectives.

i don't care to hear any ****ing more about how hard it is at CU. sure, there are challenges, but there are also opportunities. guys have won and won big here before. it isn't impossible. we've enjoyed many many years of success. this whole mindset of "oh well, at least we are building strong young minds" is misguided.

don't buy the crap being pitched to you. the goal is to win. the goal is to win. the goal is to win. has this staff achieved this goal? in 4 ****ing seasons? how does this measure against every other ****ing staff in the history of Colorado football save the benchmark "worst coach of all time" chuck fairbanks?

hmmm?

gawd, this is frustrating. take off your television-induced coma happy glasses and focus.

I think Hawkins agrees. Not sure he's capable of it, but, he knows he needs to win. Has discussed this several times. I think GB's point is it's not an overnight turn around job that we saw at OU and places like that.

 

[Waldo]

I think Hawkins agrees. Not sure he's capable of it, but, he knows he needs to win. Has discussed this several times. I think GB's point is it's not an overnight turn around job that we saw at OU and places like that.

what does it take 40 years? How bout finding a coach that can coach

 

[Liver]

I think Hawkins agrees. Not sure he's capable of it, but, he knows he needs to win. Has discussed this several times. I think GB's point is it's not an overnight turn around job that we saw at OU and places like that.

overnight? wtf are you talking about? no offense, but that's way off. ou went thru howard schnellenberger, john blake, and maybe one other coach before their "overnight" success when they hired stoops.

usc went through larry smith, ted tollner, robinson revisited, and a couple other dumbasses before they landed on pete carroll.

it isn't easy to pick a winner. but, that doesn't mean you just accept losing. it means you keep trying to get the right fit in for your program. 4 ****ing years of losing. 2 road games won in 4 years! these guys can't freaking coach. let's get someone in who can. it may take a few tries.

 

[Buff fanatic]

what does it take 40 years? How bout finding a coach that can coach

I agree.

 

[Buff fanatic]

overnight? wtf are you talking about? no offense, but that's way off. ou went thru howard schnellenberger, john blake, and maybe one other coach before their "overnight" success when they hired stoops.

usc went through larry smith, ted tollner, robinson revisited, and a couple other dumbasses before they landed on pete carroll.

it isn't easy to pick a winner. but, that doesn't mean you just accept losing. it means you keep trying to get the right fit in for your program. 4 ****ing years of losing. 2 road games won in 4 years! these guys can't freaking coach. let's get someone in who can. it may take a few tries.

I agree----im not arguing for Hawkins. The overnight statement was relative...not literally overnight. I mean, with what GB, or better yet the "scandal" left the program---I think 4 years is fair to build the program. Stoops was in a national title game in 2----thats not possible at CU IMHO. However, its year four and barring winning out, im not seeing that we're headed in the right direction. So, I agree regarding Hawkins.
My argument was that GB probably knows a little bit about the culture at CU--whether or not his statements conform to our platforms. That being said, win 6 games and go to a bowl and I'll tolerate another year of Hawk. Outside of that, I wont be happy WHEN he comes back next year.

 

[Junction]

I think Hawkins agrees. Not sure he's capable of it, but, he knows he needs to win. Has discussed this several times. I think GB's point is it's not an overnight turn around job that we saw at OU and places like that.

GB would be an unlikely person to be making the argument that Hawk took over a program so totally ****ed up that 4 years is too soon to expect a winning season...

 

[Mick Ronson]

to me, it sounded like Gary was talking about his own legacy at CU a little, kind of sideways. a little bit of personal puffery. I can't really see him suggesting Hawk wasn't aware of the "extra" stuff beyond coaching when he was hired given that PR landscape at the time....and that just now Hawk is getting used to it. Hawk's been doing *that* stuff with a lot of energy since he got here. having profs on the all-access show in the first year, going to hospitals, taking you to the CU art gallery on the coach's show, etc. how he wants his players to remember "the lessons" he's teaching them and on and on.

it's the football part that seems to have eluded him thus far.

 

[Scotch]

to me, it sounded like Gary was talking about his own legacy at CU a little, kind of sideways. a little bit of personal puffery. I can't really see him suggesting Hawk wasn't aware of the "extra" stuff beyond coaching when he was hired given that PR landscape at the time....and that just now Hawk is getting used to it. Hawk's been doing *that* stuff with a lot of energy since he got here. having profs on the all-access show, going to hospitals, taking you to the CU art gallery on the coach's show, etc.

it's the football part that seems to have eluded him thus far.

:nod: Yup

 

[Liver]

it's the football part that seems to have eluded him thus far.

amen.

all that other stuff is just part of what a coach should be expected to do...

i have nothing against hawk the person. i just don't think he can coach at this level. or, at least, thus far, he's demonstrated a remarkably consistent inability to coach at this level, but hey, maybe this thing is gonna pop?

 

[buffs04]

Some of you guys would have excuses for Hawkins if he managed to get CU moved to the Sun Valley Conference and ran the table in reverse.

Lose to Montana State? Empty cupboard.

Lose to CSU repeatedly? Changing the culture.

Lose to Toledo? We can't change this thing around overnight.

Nearly lose to Eastern Washington University? EWU is a powerhouse, STFU.

Lose to Iowa State after having a huge lead? The risk-taking retarded coaching decisions will pay off down the road and lead to big wins.

Beat Oklahoma in a fluke win? 2nd coming of Christ, here's your extension.

Allow Missouri to hang something like 110 consecutive points on you and lose to Kansas 3 years in a row? (here's my favorite one of all) Pinkel and Mangino turned it around in Year 5 and had one good season, Hawkins is going to DOMINATE the national football landscape in year 5. (didn't we hear this about year two, year three, year four, and hell, year one?)

Lose to Kansas State when you should be coming off a big win with some momentum? Well, the guys need to tell each other how to play on the road, and, oh, they have JUCOs and we don't.

Lose to Baylor? We are the new Baylor, so we can't be expected to actually beat them.

When has there ever once been a "we aren't getting it done, this loss is unacceptable." Ever? Even once? No, all we hear is more talk about how we are going to be a dynasty tomorrow (****ing laughable each and every time) but things are really hard and it is all Barnett's fault.

When Hawkins is still here in 2012, and he will be, because the one thing that Bohn and Hawkins excel at is not giving a **** about winning and spinning BS to the end of the earth, and still will have yet to post a single winning season, we will still be hearing about how he is really a great coach and it is just the little things and that we are going to get it turned around and blah blah blah blah ****ing blah.

CU has lost to just about every single **** team we have played.

 

[Buff fanatic]

GB would be an unlikely person to be making the argument that Hawk took over a program so totally ****ed up that 4 years is too soon to expect a winning season...

Thats my opinon. Not GB's.

 

[Junction]

I think Hawkins agrees. Not sure he's capable of it, but, he knows he needs to win. Has discussed this several times. I think GB's point is it's not an overnight turn around job that we saw at OU and places like that.

GB would be an unlikely person to be making the argument that Hawk took over a program so totally ****ed up that 4 years is too soon to expect a winning season...

Thats my opinon. Not GB's.

 

[Buff fanatic]

Some of you guys would have excuses for Hawkins if he managed to get CU moved to the Sun Valley Conference and ran the table in reverse.

Lose to Montana State? Empty cupboard.

Lose to CSU repeatedly? Changing the culture.

Lose to Toledo? We can't change this thing around overnight.

Nearly lose to Eastern Washington University? EWU is a powerhouse, STFU.

Lose to Iowa State after having a huge lead? The risk-taking retarded coaching decisions will pay off down the road and lead to big wins.

Beat Oklahoma in a fluke win? 2nd coming of Christ, here's your extension.

Allow Missouri to hang something like 110 consecutive points on you and lose to Kansas 3 years in a row? (here's my favorite one of all) Pinkel and Mangino turned it around in Year 5 and had one good season, Hawkins is going to DOMINATE the national football landscape in year 5. (didn't we hear this about year two, year three, year four, and hell, year one?)

Lose to Kansas State when you should be coming off a big win with some momentum? Well, the guys need to tell each other how to play on the road, and, oh, they have JUCOs and we don't.

Lose to Baylor? We are the new Baylor, so we can't be expected to actually beat them.

When has there ever once been a "we aren't getting it done, this loss is unacceptable." Ever? Even once? No, all we hear is more talk about how we are going to be a dynasty tomorrow (****ing laughable each and every time) but things are really hard and it is all Barnett's fault.

When Hawkins is still here in 2012, and he will be, because the one thing that Bohn and Hawkins excel at is not giving a **** about winning and spinning BS to the end of the earth, and still will have yet to post a single winning season, we will still be hearing about how he is really a great coach and it is just the little things and that we are going to get it turned around and blah blah blah blah ****ing blah.

CU has lost to just about every single **** team we have played.

Lose to Montana State? Empty cupboard. It was.

Lose to CSU repeatedly? Inexcusable.

Lose to Toledo? I said losing in year 4 is ridiculous.


Nearly lose to Eastern Washington University? EWU is a powerhouse, STFU. Someone said that???

Beat Oklahoma in a fluke win? 2nd coming of Christ, here's your extension. Fans gave him an extension??

When Hawkins is still here in 2012, and he will be, because the one thing that Bohn and Hawkins excel at is not giving a **** about winning -- I think thats the furtherst thing from the truth about either one of them.

 

[Buff fanatic]

Because of grade requirements, assistant coach contracts, administration problems. I added in that the scandal ****ed us.

 

[Chilly]

amen.

all that other stuff is just part of what a coach should be expected to do...

i have nothing against hawk the person. i just don't think he can coach at this level. or, at least, thus far, he's demonstrated a remarkably consistent inability to coach at this level, but hey, maybe this thing is gonna pop?

And yet so few of them do it anymore.

 

[Chilly]

Some of you guys would have excuses for Hawkins if he managed to get CU moved to the Sun Valley Conference and ran the table in reverse.

Lose to Montana State? Empty cupboard.

Lose to CSU repeatedly? Changing the culture.

Lose to Toledo? We can't change this thing around overnight.

Nearly lose to Eastern Washington University? EWU is a powerhouse, STFU.

Lose to Iowa State after having a huge lead? The risk-taking retarded coaching decisions will pay off down the road and lead to big wins.

Beat Oklahoma in a fluke win? 2nd coming of Christ, here's your extension.

Allow Missouri to hang something like 110 consecutive points on you and lose to Kansas 3 years in a row? (here's my favorite one of all) Pinkel and Mangino turned it around in Year 5 and had one good season, Hawkins is going to DOMINATE the national football landscape in year 5. (didn't we hear this about year two, year three, year four, and hell, year one?)

Lose to Kansas State when you should be coming off a big win with some momentum? Well, the guys need to tell each other how to play on the road, and, oh, they have JUCOs and we don't.

Lose to Baylor? We are the new Baylor, so we can't be expected to actually beat them.

When has there ever once been a "we aren't getting it done, this loss is unacceptable." Ever? Even once? No, all we hear is more talk about how we are going to be a dynasty tomorrow (****ing laughable each and every time) but things are really hard and it is all Barnett's fault.

When Hawkins is still here in 2012, and he will be, because the one thing that Bohn and Hawkins excel at is not giving a **** about winning and spinning BS to the end of the earth, and still will have yet to post a single winning season, we will still be hearing about how he is really a great coach and it is just the little things and that we are going to get it turned around and blah blah blah blah ****ing blah.

CU has lost to just about every single **** team we have played.

I have yet to see anyone make any excuses. Not sure which thread you are reading.

 

[Swish]

"Not a football factory", "Administration isn't behind the athletic department". "They would rather not have a football team at all".

I've heard these things lately.

So maybe we set our standards too high. Why don't we just keep Hawk, enjoy a clean, little program and just get used to settling for a bit less.

If we keep him long enough, surely there will be at least one winning season in there :devil:

Who needs a winner on the field anyway when we have a winning attitude

Sorry, I can't join this club. I want a nationally prominent football program on the field. But hey I'm a dickwad, what can I say :smile2:

 

[MiamiBuffs]

Pretty much everything I've been telling you dickwads! :lol:

Are you the head dickwad or the senior dickwad? :smile2:

 

[Liver]

Are you the head dickwad or the senior dickwad? :smile2:

maybe the dickwad emeritus?

 

[buffaholic]

I have been a Hawkins defender so I will add my 2 cents:

The CU rebuilding job is bigger than most think. The talent level was run down, but I think Hawkins has done a good job in getting that back up to levels where we can compete again for North championships (you have to walk before you run). But we aren't competing too well.....

Why? Offense. Sure, there's been other issues. The first two games it was everything. But since then, it's been offense.

If Hawk could have brought in a seasoned, well-established, O-Coordinator, I think the QB situation and the whole Offensive situation may have been different at least this year. I think Kiesau is coming along but he's far from being Sarkisian or Peterson at this point.

So this brings up the point. Given (as GB said today) that CU can neither sign assistants to multi-year contracts OR pay them worth a hoot, is this the risk CU takes when hiring coordinators? Should Hawk have gone after a more seasoned VET in this key position? Could he?

I think hindsight certainly says yes he should have. Kiesau will be good but he is still early in the development process imo. Helfrich was a horrible hire and Kiesau was probably more of desperation. Who quits after the Spring game? We continue to "learn from experience" with first Helfrich and now Kiesau and it sucks. I love Kiesau, he's my favorite coach, and I think he's on track to be VERY good.

In my opinion, the offensive coaching has been a disaster and likely costs Hawkins his job here. Everything I've seen is that the players are behind him and he has a good eye for talent - every single guy I've seen come here can play (4 freshmen playing D-Line is hard to argue, with only one being BCS recruited - there is no arguing this).

And yes, GB DID do things right. But he wouldn't have been able to turn this ship as it was bigger than him (scandal) by that point.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

Gary Barnett is interviewed weekly on Denver Sports Radio. You can hear the podcast at http://www.thescore1510.com/. Here's a summary of what Barnett said this week about the Buffs:


I don't think Hawkins is under pressure. I think CU will win this week (Missouri is really struggling)

CU is in a good situation in that they are in the North division. No one, other than Nebraska, has the resources to be a powerhouse like the southern schools.

What Dan expected out of the environment of CU is not what he found when he got here. There's an image of CU that it is a football factory. It isn't. I didn't think Dan understood he'd be responsible for academics and other non-football issues. Once he got to Colorado he started
to realize the depth of that job - it's more difficult than alot of places. Dan is coming to grips to that right now. See all the guys he's lost to academics and who he couldn't get in.

Underneath all those statements Dan is saying, he's finally realizing what's involved with the CU job.

I don't think CU football fans totally understand the difficulty and complexity of the head coaching position at CU. The 1 year assistant contracts is a big problem - no other state in the country has that. That's an indicator of where things are, and how complex that job and the CSU job are.

You have to develop alot of players at Colorado.

Shocking revelation....Dan Hawkins is in over his head!!!

No way!

I hope we can sit through a 5th losing season in a row in 2010. We're close, getting our horns out and all the other Bull**** platitudes we've been hearing.

So sick of my Buffs being at best a mediocre football program.

And this is why Hawk is failing...

So, when did this all change to make the job much more difficult?

Was it when scholarships were reduced from 100 to 80
Was it when Albino became President?
Was it when the recruiting scandal hit that academia wrestled away entrance authority from the Ath Dept?

I certainly agree that a lot of players that should have gotten in didn't and that hurt. Would Westbrook, Salaam, Hagan, or Stewart gotten in by todays standards?

At what point did the standards get that much higher?

I'd also agree the revolving door for the assistants creates a lot of extra work for the HC. You have to have a list and you have to have it updated all the time. Perhaps we good citizens should take up the cause of a ballot initiative that releases the universities from this burden.

These are all fine points. Perhaps were destined to a lifetime of crappy football in exchange for higher academics.