What's new
By:
  • Prime Time. Prime Time. It's 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!
  • After multiple requests and discussion, Twitter/X links will again be allowed on the board. Be mindful of the content you choose to post. Inflammatory, misinformation, or any content that violates the ToS will be removed. Repeated offenses may result in temporary suspensions. If you would like to still have Twitter/X links hidden from your feed, send a PM to Bread. Any other questions can be discussed in the customer service/support forum. Examples of hide tweet options shown here: https://allbuffs.com/threads/twitter-x-ban.161161/post-3915936

Big Picture: What Are Your Expectations For CU Men's Basketball?

What Are Your Expectations For CU Men's Basketball?

  • Xavier - NCAA's with S16's Thrown In

    Votes: 14 21.5%

  • Pittsburgh - NCAA's Consistently with Some S16, Some NIT

    Votes: 38 58.5%

  • New Mexico - NCAA / NIT Mix

    Votes: 10 15.4%

  • Georgia - Is it Football Season Yet?

    Votes: 3 4.6%
  • Total voters
    65
  • Poll closed .
Should probably win a tournament game at some point before setting the expectation of being a consistent Sweet 16 team etc.

Expectations seem out of whack with reality in this thread. The team is average and nothing they've done in recent history dispels that notion.
 
Darth Snow said:
That's reasonable.
Click to expand...
No where in the criteria did it say you had to be reasonable, realistic is so ambiguous to me. Someone asked what I wanted and I answered.

I remember before McCartney was hired in football people thought we would be better off in the WAC (No MWC at the time). McCartney said no we are going to be as good as Nebraska. If you don't aspire to it you will not achieve it.
 
BlackNGold said:
No where in the criteria did it say you had to be reasonable, realistic is so ambiguous to me. Someone asked what I wanted and I answered.

I remember before McCartney was hired in football people thought we would be better off in the WAC (No MWC at the time). McCartney said no we are going to be as good as Nebraska. If you don't aspire to it you will not achieve it.
Click to expand...

We'd all love it if CU hoops could get to UofA's level!! Would be damn nice. Not sure the AD or University would ever have the will to support the hoops program like UofA supports theirs.
 
aghcsm said:
There's an ongoing misunderstanding about the NIT selection process by AB posters. Frankly I didn't understand it either, until 2 years ago. Here are the obstacles to getting an NIT bid:

- NIT offers automatic berths to regular-season conference champs who lose their conference tournament. Every D1 basketball conference is involved in this, and there are a lot. In 2016 there were 15 NIT berths filled this way.

- There are only 32 total teams in the NIT.

So in 2016, 15 berths were filled by teams that almost certainly will not include CU in 2017, leaving 17 at-large invitations. Therefore the Buffs would have had to be in the top 17 teams that missed the NCAA tourney, at least by last year's criteria, to be invited to the NIT. Sure it's possible, but it's not a shoo-in alternative to the NCAAs, not an easy fallback in case we don't make the Big Dance. It's very possibly that if we miss the NCAAs, we go nowhere (assuming Tad learned his lesson about taking a weak, non-motivated team to the CBI).
Click to expand...

I respect what you're saying and yes I understand the NIT selection process. I guess (despite the recent loss @ Washington) I expect the Buffs to still rally from this and be a hot team by the time late Feb/early Mar roll around. Their remaining schedule is extremely favorable. I am still seeing the "potential" for a 9-9 or 10-8 finish - seriously, by the time all is said and done.
If you can picture that : a really hot CU team, at THAT time, carrying a 19-12 or 20-11 record going into the Conf Tourney, and with the potential for an additional win their, you're looking at an NCAA outside Bubble Team and thus a potential high-seed in the NIT. That is what I meant.

But I could be wrong of course. This team me baffled for sure.
 
I don't see that kind of finish. What about the performance this year indicates the potential to go 9-3 or 10-2 the rest of the way? They've played one complete game and that was game 1. Otherwise, besides some flashes here and there, the mental toughness just isn't there with this team. If they can't win at Washington or ASU, how will they win on the NorCal trip, or in Oregon? That's 3 losses right there. And I see a few more losses at home with Oregon, Cal and Utah still on the schedule.
 
coereg said:
I respect what you're saying and yes I understand the NIT selection process. I guess (despite the recent loss @ Washington) I expect the Buffs to still rally from this and be a hot team by the time late Feb/early Mar roll around. Their remaining schedule is extremely favorable. I am still seeing the "potential" for a 9-9 or 10-8 finish - seriously, by the time all is said and done.
If you can picture that : a really hot CU team, at THAT time, carrying a 19-12 or 20-11 record going into the Conf Tourney, and with the potential for an additional win their, you're looking at an NCAA outside Bubble Team and thus a potential high-seed in the NIT. That is what I meant.

But I could be wrong of course. This team me baffled for sure.
Click to expand...
At this point an NIT bid would be great, it would mean a dramatic turnaround and some excellent Buff basketball. I'm skeptical. Guess I was was a little tired of seeing posts suggesting we might have to settle for the NIT, which isn't really an option for a mediocre team. I suspect that virtually all at-large NIT bids go to teams that, to some extent, feel they should have made the NCAAs. If we get to that point, it would be a dramatic change from performance thus far.
 
Now that the poll is locked and we have our results, I can say I'm slightly surprised by them but not totally. Most recent data I can find is from the calendar year of 2014. Here are the operating expenses of all of the schools above in men's basketball

[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD] [/TD][TD] Expenses[/TD][TD]Revenue [/TD][TD]Profit/(Loss) [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Colorado[/TD][TD]$5,641,560[/TD][TD]$6,024,905[/TD][TD]$383,345[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Georgia[/TD][TD]$5,933,136[/TD][TD]$9,029,690[/TD][TD]$3,096,554[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]New Mexico[/TD][TD]$3,538,650[/TD][TD]$6,101,069[/TD][TD]$2,562,419 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Pittsburgh[/TD][TD]$8,621,103[/TD][TD]$14,926,723[/TD][TD]$6,305,620[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Xavier[/TD][TD]$5,518,383[/TD][TD]$12,100,195[/TD][TD]$6,581,812[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]

To all those that want CU to make the "next step", how are we going to pay for it? Football is king on campus, always will be. It drives most of the money. CU spent $15 mil on a basketball facility and it was considered an huge expense and was such a big deal that our former coach had to have it written into his contract. They spent $150 mil on a football facility and it was (rightfully) considered "way overdue". Just like football is an arms race, so is basketball. So if you want CU to make the jump to the Xavier level (personally, I think we're in the Pitt level, but on the low end of it), how are we going to do it? Xavier spent almost as much as we did in 2014 on a campus that is 1/6 the size of CU's. What is the AD going to do to help the program make more money so it can make changes? And honestly, this comes back to some of the things that Bohn did that RG got rid of. I understand why he did it as CU was in a budget crunch, but the money that Bohn spent on C-Unit was, as @jgisland put it, was "a rounding error". It helped the atmosphere at games, it sold more tickets (I know that I personally am more excited to go to games when I know the student section will be packed and fun) and it built a future generation of alumni who may donate the big money so we can spend the next $10-15 mil on improvements for the basketball program.

Tad's been getting a lot of heat lately and in no way am I saying he's perfect (although, as someone who sat through a lot of bad Ricardo Patton coaching, Tad's strengths greatly outnumber his weaknesses), but I honestly don't know outside of the elites who could succeed in this sort of financial environment.

I'm not saying that CU is doomed to failure, but it really appears that the fan base has champagne tastes on PBR budgets.
 
I'm in with the majority, but not necessarily expecting my expectations to happen, if you get my drift.
 
Goose said:
Will, as always, says it better than I can.

http://bsndenver.com/whelan-be-careful-what-you-wish-for-with-colorado-basketball/
Click to expand...

Agree completely with Will's point about fans. The games are entertaining, and CU wins the majority of home games, despite some of the results so far this season. It amazes me how many excuses are made for not making it... weather, drive times, poor opponent, etc. In our 4 years as season ticket holders, my wife and I have missed a grand total of 5 games, and in each of those instances, we have given the tickets to others who have used them. That's right- our seats have been used for every game in 4 years. It's just sad to see so many empty season ticket holder seats nearly every game. Quit making excuses and support the team, or at least give the tickets to someone who will show up.
 
Goose said:
...
[TABLE="class: brtb_item_table"][TBODY][TR][TD][/TD]
[TD] Expenses[/TD][TD]Revenue [/TD][TD]Profit/(Loss) [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Colorado[/TD][TD]$5,641,560[/TD][TD]$6,024,905[/TD][TD]$383,345[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Georgia[/TD][TD]$5,933,136[/TD][TD]$9,029,690[/TD][TD]$3,096,554[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]New Mexico[/TD][TD]$3,538,650[/TD][TD]$6,101,069[/TD][TD]$2,562,419 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Pittsburgh[/TD][TD]$8,621,103[/TD][TD]$14,926,723[/TD][TD]$6,305,620[/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD]Xavier[/TD][TD]$5,518,383[/TD][TD]$12,100,195[/TD][TD]$6,581,812[/TD][/TR][/TBODY][/TABLE]
To all those that want CU to make the "next step", how are we going to pay for it? ....
Click to expand...
CU has comparable or better academics than all those schools, except maybe Pitt. Theoretically, those academics that should correlate to income of alumni. I'm looking for the university fund raising group to up their game before we throw up their hands and say "CU just doesn't have the money to compete".

Other schools I follow have full time personnel who do nothing but spend time convincing rich alumni to will a good chunk of their legacy to the school. if CU has comparable activities, I have to assume that either the healthy Colorado lifestyle is causing those alumns to live past their time, or that the funds simply don't go to athletics.

I also think there might be a strategy to the 'football first and foremost' attitude that we're perceiving. football is the cash cow, and the most expedient route to athletic revenue increase in general, might be to over-invest in the football program. Once CU has re-established football as a valuable product, that opens new revenue forms (mandatory Buff Club donations for season tickets, PSLs) and the rising tide should life all ships, hoops included.

Last, that Whelan guy had a good point about CU not making good use of social media, which is practically free.
 
Goose said:
Will, as always, says it better than I can.

http://bsndenver.com/whelan-be-careful-what-you-wish-for-with-colorado-basketball/
Click to expand...
Very nicely put. I recall the same discussions during the 2014-15 season about Tad, but most complaints disappeared last year. MikeMac was really on the "fan hotseat" before last Fall happened, but complaints will return if next Fall turns out bad.

In the end it's just chatter that increases with disappointment and impatience. Tad Boyle will be at CU for as long as he wants, and when he is gone we'll probably see the program take a dive.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top