Discussion in 'Colorado Basketball Message Board' started by Quattro, Apr 16, 2014.
You never go full Gottlieb.
Unless your friends have excellent credit, then get in there and get you some.
You say ****tard, I say Bollackfaced ****nubbins
Gottlieb would give his left nut to coach at CU, but we would turn him down just like everyone else
The twitter makes my head hurt. I can't even figure out who's talking half the time. I think I've finally mastered the Google though.
Which Pac-12 program has the longest active streak of NCAA tourney appearances?
If we're talking about all-time program prestige, CU is probably dead last.
If we're talking about home recruiting grounds, CU is probably only better than Utah and Wazzu.
But if we're talking about where a coach could come and win 20+ games a year with a stocked cupboard, good facilities and good fan support while making great money... the CU job is now in the top third of the Pac-12.
Only UofA/UCLA are clearly better jobs than CU. You could make some arguments below that, that certain schools are better than CU. But putting them in the bottom 1/3 is just lazy.
What are your arguments?
Are you asserting that CU is a better job than UCLA or UofA?
Interesting. I thought this was about football at first (I know, I know, Basketball forum) and I thought, 'what a dick! CU entered the PAC as its second winningest team. Where the respect?!'
Then I realized it was basketball, and I thought, 'What a dick! Who cares about history? CU is a team on the rise! We're quickly becoming a force in the PAC!
Turns out I'm just a fan.
UCLA, UofA, and Oregon are all ahead of CU. Then we're in the group with Cal, Stanford, and Washington. Anywhere between 4-8 imo
EXPLAIN YOUR ARGUMENT, how can you possibly put Oregon ahead of CU?
1. Entirely new arena and other facilities.
2. Recent success on par with CU with deeper tourney advancement & higher AP ranks.
3. Higher ranked recruits and very high profile transfers (Oregon is about as cool as it gets for teenagers).
4. Portland is a better recruiting area than Denver for basketball.
5. Greater willingness to play dirty to get talent.
6. No limit to what they'd pay a HC.
I think he's pissy because I asked him what his arguments were.
Arizona - Not sure there's much argument here. Great recruiting. Great fanbase (from a attendance perspective) that makes the McKale Center very, very tough to win at. National title contending team.
UCLA - Their name along means they will always recruit at a very high level. Their fanbase knocks them down from #1 though
Oregon - Nike money and the Oregon brand makes Oregon a desirable place for a recruit
Colorado - Very good coach, very good facilities facilities and growing and already great fanbase with a lot of passionate fans that make The Keg a tough place to win at which every coach would love. With the increasing talent in Colorado every year this is what puts CU over Utah
Utah - Very good coach in a program that has proved it can be at the top not to long ago. As I said above, the only reason I rank us higher is because of the in-state talent pool that is growing
Cal is so low because of their AD issues
Gottlieb is a troll-feeder and a miserable follow on Twitter.
There's a difference between what schools can offer the best theoretical job placement and which schools have the best program currently.
You could make arguments for schools ranked 3-10 on either question, but I don't see any justifiable reason to place CU below 6th on either front
Gottlieb wasn't talking about the best program, he was talking about the best spot for a HC.
What HCs care about:
1. Resources to win a championship (historical proof it can be done there a major plus).
2. Money the school pays for the position.
distant 3. Location that will keep the wife happy.
That may be historically, but I think that's currently debatable and not even much of a question if we expand it to Colorado>Oregon as a recruiting area
2. Resources to win chips - 1. money 2. Fan/Admin support 3. traditional recruiting hotbeds 4. facilities...8. historical proof
If Tad wasn't here, where would we be? Probably around 9th in the league. He's not that wrong. He's being a dick about it, but the fact remains that this isn't a destination job for any basketball coach OTHER than Tad Boyle. We're lucky that he's as good as he is.
Problem is you're assuming that program value doesn't change over time. If Tad were to god forbid leave, do you not see CU as one of the more attractive jobs in the West (Colorado and West)? We've got excellent facilities, a strong program backing that we didn't have even 4 years ago, and growing in-state talent. We haven't proven that we can put up big money for coaches, but we also haven't needed to with Tad.
That's about right for range of where we fall, except I'd take Cal out of that mid-level group and put Utah in there.
There is a lot of CU love in this thread. CU fans have forgotten what CU was like before Tad Boyle. Tad Boyle isn't so successful because of CU. CU is so successful because of Tad Boyle.
Lose Tad Boyle and chances are exceptionally high that CU falls back to being a below average basketball team.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Dougs brother is on the staff at Cal. This is not a big surprise. (should say was).
Why didn't somebody ask, hey Doug steal any credit cards lately? Pretty sure that doucher got bounced out of one program for something like that.
Not too diminish Tad's success, but the practice facility is here which wasn't here before Tad. And as already noted here, the in-state talent is better than what it used to be. In addition, the foundation has been built for future success. CU administration has shown a bigger commitment to basketball than before, that began with Bohn.
Could we slip, sure. Would I want to lose Tad, absolutely not. But I'm not so doomsday.
Crotchlieb got exactly what he was aiming for -- people are discussing his (stupid) comments.
Point is - the ONLY coach at CU to create this level of success is Tad Boyle.
If Tad Boyle leaves tomorrow - it's just as likely that the Buffs slip back to being terrible (as history indicates it will) as it is that they have further success.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I don't think we'd be the laughingstock of the P12 on a yearly basis like we were in the Big 12. I don't want to test that out, but I don't think it's jut as likely. And I indicated the reasons. Bzdelik is a big reason for the success as well. I'm not sure if Tad successful at all without Bzdelik laying the groundwork. I don't think Bzdelik would've experienced the same success had he stayed that Tad has, but he was getting things in the right place and unlike Wake, he had time to do it.
Separate names with a comma.