If you were AD... MacIntyre's job security

[CitizenKane]

Troy has been a rising force with Neal Brown there and they know it: Want Neal Brown as your Coach? Pay Troy $3 Million.

Think about that CU would have to buyout Coach Mac, and all of his staff that just received long-term contracts. Anyone who thinks a new coach is going to keep everybody is nuts. Then we would probably have to buyout the new HC from his current school and maybe even some of his assistants.

Not a problem if they just sign some stadium naming rights deals.

 

[leftybuff]

Mike Norvell is gonna be a top-shelf candidate for alot of big schools looking for a coaching change next year. What makes you think we could bring him to CU? Why does he look better than MM did when he came out of taking SJSU to a bowl game as a ranked team?

Somebody will roll the dice on Norvell....

 

[ScottyBuff]

Places like Cal, Cincinnati, Minnesota, Oregon State, Fresno State, Mississippi State, Arizona, and Rice are able to attract solid coaches. Hell, CSU has hired consecutive high-profile SEC coordinators to coach in Ft Collins so there's no reason CU can't attract a really good coach.

Butch Jones was the CU top choice and instead we landed MikeMac. It's impossible to say what would have happened if the two switched places back then.

My point is that Mac's resume at the time looked exactly like somebody we needed and if he was on the market again today there would be many people who would be interested in him. Hindsight is great, but you cannot know who will be successful in any particular environment or that you can do better now than what you have. Of course we could just keep the revolving door going until we strike lightning again (and then hope we can keep them) meanwhile throwing money into buy-out after buy-out. Just because you don't like being below .500 last year means we aren't on track to become a more regular above .500 team. Hitting the reset button could backfire just as easily as be successful.

Today's CU football program is not built like it was during the late 80's and 90's. We aren't a program that is going to invest "top 25" resources into being a football factory. We don't have a deep-pockets booster to take us into the realm of the uber rich programs. We have a stadium that is beautiful but doesn't see north of 50k attendance in any kind of regular way (even when we had once-in-a-decade season). We aren't sitting on hotbed of local recruits that dream of going to CU. We don't have "loopholes" to get elite recruits onto the team that don't qualify academically.

We are however a very good athletic department with a good program and lots to offer and we should expect to be in the top 50 with occasional extended stays in the top 25 but the occasional regression below .500. We have begun to regular produce NFL talent once again; which had dropped off significantly post-Barnett.

Tell me truthfully why we should expect to be more successful on a regular basis (not just based on this year's coaching changes, talking long-term) than Utah, Arizona State, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, or even Washington State (with Leach)? I think we are slightly above Cal and Arizona in regards to overall football program strength but not by much.

Just because of our past success? Are we a higher profile program than the team we shared the MNC with, Georgia Tech? Do you think of them as a national powerhouse? Look at the financial makeup, last 3 years record, their in-game attendance, recruiting, etc of the Yellow Jackets and you would find that we are fairly comparable.

 

[Darth Snow]

trump is 72 or 73 and a lot of folks trust him to build the team, call the plays nationally. maybe you should start a movement to impeach him for his age alone

Ahahhhahhahhahahhahahs

 

[brockbuff]

[QUOTE.Just because of our past success? Are we a higher profile program than the team we shared the MNC with, Georgia Tech? Do you think of them as a national powerhouse? Look at the financial makeup, last 3 years record, their in-game attendance, recruiting, etc of the Yellow Jackets and you would find that we are fairly comparable.[/QUOTE]
GT has missed a bowl game twice in the last 20 years. They did come in the last two years but they’re far more consistent than we are. I’m not saying we should win 9-10 games every year but we damn sure should never miss a bowl game. Literally half of college football makes a bowl and we’ve been there once in the last 10 years. I’m not asking for greatness, just demanding that we aren’t disgraceful.

 

[SINKRATZ]

Butch Jones was the CU top choice and instead we landed MikeMac. It's impossible to say what would have happened if the two switched places back then.

My point is that Mac's resume at the time looked exactly like somebody we needed and if he was on the market again today there would be many people who would be interested in him. Hindsight is great, but you cannot know who will be successful in any particular environment or that you can do better now than what you have. Of course we could just keep the revolving door going until we strike lightning again (and then hope we can keep them) meanwhile throwing money into buy-out after buy-out. Just because you don't like being below .500 last year means we aren't on track to become a more regular above .500 team. Hitting the reset button could backfire just as easily as be successful.

Today's CU football program is not built like it was during the late 80's and 90's. We aren't a program that is going to invest "top 25" resources into being a football factory. We don't have a deep-pockets booster to take us into the realm of the uber rich programs. We have a stadium that is beautiful but doesn't see north of 50k attendance in any kind of regular way (even when we had once-in-a-decade season). We aren't sitting on hotbed of local recruits that dream of going to CU. We don't have "loopholes" to get elite recruits onto the team that don't qualify academically.

We are however a very good athletic department with a good program and lots to offer and we should expect to be in the top 50 with occasional extended stays in the top 25 but the occasional regression below .500. We have begun to regular produce NFL talent once again; which had dropped off significantly post-Barnett.

Tell me truthfully why we should expect to be more successful on a regular basis (not just based on this year's coaching changes, talking long-term) than Utah, Arizona State, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, or even Washington State (with Leach)? I think we are slightly above Cal and Arizona in regards to overall football program strength but not by much.

Just because of our past success? Are we a higher profile program than the team we shared the MNC with, Georgia Tech? Do you think of them as a national powerhouse? Look at the financial makeup, last 3 years record, their in-game attendance, recruiting, etc of the Yellow Jackets and you would find that we are fairly comparable.

You've resigned to mediocrity, that's fine and makes sense why you're happy to stick with Mac indefinitely. That's not where I'm at.

The difference between CU and programs like Utah, Washington State, Georgia Tech, and even Stanford and Washington is that those programs hired very good coaches who won while we haven't. Are you telling me that CU should expect to be below WSU in the Pac12 pecking order? That's insane.

In 2008 CU made a bowl game and was pulling in a highly ranked recruiting class and things were looking up for this program. That same year Washington went 0-12!! What has happened since? UW made two good coaching hires and are now at the top of the conference. Standford went 1-11 in 2006 then made two great coaching hires - that's the difference.

This revolving door argument is nonsense - this will be Mac's 6th season, that's long enough to know if he's your guy going forward or not.

 

[J.R. Ewing]

You've resigned to mediocrity, that's fine and makes sense why you're happy to stick with Mac indefinitely. That's not where I'm at.

The difference between CU and programs like Utah, Washington State, Georgia Tech, and even Stanford and Washington is that those programs hired very good coaches who won while we haven't. Are you telling me that CU asshole expect to be below WSU in the Pac12 pecking order? That's insane.

In 2008 CU made a bowl game and was pulling in a highly ranked recruiting class and things were looking up for this program. That same year Washington went 0-12!! What has happened since? UW made two good coaching hires and are now at the top of the conference. Standford went 1-11 in 2006 then made two great coaching hires - that's the difference.

This revolving door argument is nonsense - this will be Mac's 6th season, that's long enough to know if he's your guy going forward or not.

Yup, we should know pretty quickly if 2016 or 2017 was the aberration.

 

[OsideBuff]

trump is 72 or 73 and a lot of folks trust him to build the team, call the plays nationally. maybe you should start a movement to impeach him for his age alone

Our national coaching candidates last time....The leisure pant suit wonder is 70....the Orange Man 71....and the Bernmeister 76....now that is a pathetic coaching search final 3....ugh. One collapsed on the trail....one echoed crap I haven't heard since adolescence.....and the other looks like Pa Kettle. How did that happen????

 

[MiamiBuffs]

My expectations for this program have dropped dramatically over the last decade plus. I am just not convinced we have the interest or support from the admin or the fan base. There are a variety of reasons for this, no need to get into here, but I think 7-10 win seasons are going to be more rare than we want (under our current structure and support).

I also think MikeMac has improved this team, but I think it has been way too slow. His rebuilding should have started in the trenches. We should have a healthy, full pipeline of OL and DL by now. Not gaps everywhere and young guys playing out of necessity (not because they are stars). I am pleasantly happy and surprised by our WR and CB recruiting. We’ve done really well there. But our OL and DL recruiting (while very recently trending up), was just plain bad for too long. There really is no excuse for the horrible depth and talent problems we have at those positions, and I think you need a good OL and DL to have consistent success. I just don’t understand why that hasn’t been a priority.

This. It's been difficult to maintain enthusiasm.

 

[8Jah]

Of all the upstarts that we could hire (Philip Montgomery, Frank Wilson, Jason Candle, Ken Niumatalolo, Matt Lubick, Bryan Harsin, Mike Norvell, Jedd Fisch or name anyone else that would come to CU) I think Leavitt would be a better candidate than any of them? I really like Niumatalolo and Norvell, but Norvell is a well known brand now. But we don't need another five years of experimentation. We need a proven commodity.

 

[MtnBuff]

My expectations for this program have dropped dramatically over the last decade plus. I am just not convinced we have the interest or support from the admin or the fan base. There are a variety of reasons for this, no need to get into here, but I think 7-10 win seasons are going to be more rare than we want (under our current structure and support).

I also think MikeMac has improved this team, but I think it has been way too slow. His rebuilding should have started in the trenches. We should have a healthy, full pipeline of OL and DL by now. Not gaps everywhere and young guys playing out of necessity (not because they are stars). I am pleasantly happy and surprised by our WR and CB recruiting. We’ve done really well there. But our OL and DL recruiting (while very recently trending up), was just plain bad for too long. There really is no excuse for the horrible depth and talent problems we have at those positions, and I think you need a good OL and DL to have consistent success. I just don’t understand why that hasn’t been a priority.

This is the core of the problem.

We are now in year six. It took until year four before we started recruiting PAC12 level offensive line prospects. (Other than Lynott who we got because of his Colorado ties) The last couple years we have finally gotten a couple PAC12 level defensive line prospects.

Considering that normally these big guys need at least a year or two in the program before they even start contributing as depth it means that six years into the process we are finally just starting to see these kids enter the pipeline.

The "skill" position guys get lots of attention but how many programs maintain success without being solid on the line of scrimmage?

From the start this staff didn't put enough emphasis on recruiting with far to many coaches excused for not doing the work or getting the results in bringing in talent.

In cliché terms, it is the Jimmys and Joes not the Xs and Os. If MacIntyre ends up getting fired it will be directly because of his failure to recruit at the needed level.

 

[ahoelsken]

Norvell would be a great hire but the fact he didn't get a bigger job this year is concerning with the off the field rumors about him floating around.

Pass-he's shown he's great at winning with somebody else's players, but hasn't shown he can recruit. I've stuck to the bowl game or Mac gets fired since we got pasted in SLC last year, and if we make a change, I'd rather hire Todd Graham over pretty much any G5 coach. He's got one thing they don't have-success in our league.

 

[ahoelsken]

Of all the upstarts that we could hire (Philip Montgomery, Frank Wilson, Jason Candle, Ken Niumatalolo, Matt Lubick, Bryan Harsin, Mike Norvell, Jedd Fisch or name anyone else that would come to CU) I think Leavitt would be a better candidate than any of them? I really like Niumatalolo and Norvell, but Norvell is a well known brand now. But we don't need another five years of experimentation. We need a proven commodity.

How many games did Tulsa win last year? Lol Norvell has been at Memphis for two years, and he's still winning with Fuente's players.

 

[The Alabaster Yak]

Pass-he's shown he's great at winning with somebody else's players, but hasn't shown he can recruit. I've stuck to the bowl game or Mac gets fired since we got pasted in SLC last year, and if we make a change, I'd rather hire Todd Graham over pretty much any G5 coach. He's got one thing they don't have-success in our league.

Lol, Todd Graham had some success early at ASU with two 10 win seasons, but only one Pac 12 Championship berth (lost). The irony of your post is that once his recruits were there he was a sub .500 coach (18-20 overall, 12-15 in conference), so that doesn't really jive with your anti-Norvell thoughts. Besides, for a defensive coach, his ASU defenses were horrible.

 

[leftybuff]

I think CU Fan hit the nail on the head. It is hard to get excited about CU FB. 12 years of fiddle farting around leads me to conclude FB is going to be mediocre at best.

I think the admin. will be more than happy with 6 and 7 win seasons. RG probably won't, if he leaves, you know which faction won.

 

[leftybuff]

Pass-he's shown he's great at winning with somebody else's players, but hasn't shown he can recruit. I've stuck to the bowl game or Mac gets fired since we got pasted in SLC last year, and if we make a change, I'd rather hire Todd Graham over pretty much any G5 coach. He's got one thing they don't have-success in our league.

Is CU his dream job?

 

[manhattanbuff]

Very few Buffs fans expect nine wins "no matter what."

A down year really should not be 5-7, no matter how many times some of you guys talk yourselves into it.

I was ready to move on from MacIntyre after his last 14 games. Then, I dove into the economics of firing him after his extension and came to the realization that MacIntyre bought himself another 2-3 seasons after 2016. When a college football coach is not under a genuine threat to lose his job, no amount of rhetoric will force him to be accountable. Ultimately, MacIntyre has strong job security regardless of whether or not we like it.

 

[WarBuff]

So is MM the equivalent of Steve Sarkisian for the Huskies? Good enough to turn it around, but not capable of taking the program to the next level? The parallels are interesting.

 

[ahoelsken]

I was ready to move on from MacIntyre after his last 14 games. Then, I dove into the economics of firing him after his extension and came to the realization that MacIntyre bought himself another 2-3 seasons after 2016. When a college football coach is not under a genuine threat to lose his job, no amount of rhetoric will force him to be accountable. Ultimately, MacIntyre has strong job security regardless of whether or not we like it.

He's used one of them already.......

 

[ahoelsken]

Is CU his dream job?

No idea, but I'd rather hire him than pretty much any group of five head coach.

 

[BUFFset]

So is MM the equivalent of Steve Sarkisian for the Huskies? Good enough to turn it around, but not capable of taking the program to the next level? The parallels are interesting.

YES. Todd Graham is no Chris Peterson. I can't think of a coach that would parallel that coaching hire for CU.

 

[ahoelsken]

YES. Todd Graham is no Chris Peterson lol

Peterson is a once in a lifetime coach-hall of fame type. He'll win a championship at Washington before the end of his tenure there. For every guy like him, or Gus Malzahn, I can give you three former group of 5 coaches who have moved up to the Power 5 and either flopped (See Hawkins, Dan or Turner Gill) or underachieved (Sonny Dykes).

 

[Not Sure]

Any time you make a coaching change, you are rolling the dice. There are no sure things outside of a few guys like Saban and Meyer.

 

[Duff Man]

I think it is interesting that Leavitt is looked at as a coach who can take a team to the "next level."

 

[ahoelsken]

Any time you make a coaching change, you are rolling the dice. There are no sure things outside of a few guys like Saban and Meyer.

No, but I'd argue a guy like Pete Kwiatkowski (UW's DC) is less of a risk than somebody out of the Group of 5. This is different because the talent level is higher.

 

[CULifer]

You've resigned to mediocrity, that's fine and makes sense why you're happy to stick with Mac indefinitely. That's not where I'm at.

The difference between CU and programs like Utah, Washington State, Georgia Tech, and even Stanford and Washington is that those programs hired very good coaches who won while we haven't. Are you telling me that CU should expect to be below WSU in the Pac12 pecking order? That's insane.

In 2008 CU made a bowl game and was pulling in a highly ranked recruiting class and things were looking up for this program. That same year Washington went 0-12!! What has happened since? UW made two good coaching hires and are now at the top of the conference. Standford went 1-11 in 2006 then made two great coaching hires - that's the difference.

This revolving door argument is nonsense - this will be Mac's 6th season, that's long enough to know if he's your guy going forward or not.

Great post. which great hire can we realistically land end of 2018 if MM goes 4-8 this year?

 

[BlackNGold]

Butch Jones was the CU top choice and instead we landed MikeMac. It's impossible to say what would have happened if the two switched places back then.

My point is that Mac's resume at the time looked exactly like somebody we needed and if he was on the market again today there would be many people who would be interested in him. Hindsight is great, but you cannot know who will be successful in any particular environment or that you can do better now than what you have. Of course we could just keep the revolving door going until we strike lightning again (and then hope we can keep them) meanwhile throwing money into buy-out after buy-out. Just because you don't like being below .500 last year means we aren't on track to become a more regular above .500 team. Hitting the reset button could backfire just as easily as be successful.

Today's CU football program is not built like it was during the late 80's and 90's. We aren't a program that is going to invest "top 25" resources into being a football factory. We don't have a deep-pockets booster to take us into the realm of the uber rich programs. We have a stadium that is beautiful but doesn't see north of 50k attendance in any kind of regular way (even when we had once-in-a-decade season). We aren't sitting on hotbed of local recruits that dream of going to CU. We don't have "loopholes" to get elite recruits onto the team that don't qualify academically.

We are however a very good athletic department with a good program and lots to offer and we should expect to be in the top 50 with occasional extended stays in the top 25 but the occasional regression below .500. We have begun to regular produce NFL talent once again; which had dropped off significantly post-Barnett.

Tell me truthfully why we should expect to be more successful on a regular basis (not just based on this year's coaching changes, talking long-term) than Utah, Arizona State, Oregon, Stanford, UCLA, or even Washington State (with Leach)? I think we are slightly above Cal and Arizona in regards to overall football program strength but not by much.

Just because of our past success? Are we a higher profile program than the team we shared the MNC with, Georgia Tech? Do you think of them as a national powerhouse? Look at the financial makeup, last 3 years record, their in-game attendance, recruiting, etc of the Yellow Jackets and you would find that we are fairly comparable.

We should expect more because the AD told us he expects more....With your take everyone should suspend their donations and we should see if the RMAC would take us.

 

[manhattanbuff]

He's used one of them already.......

You’re right. But, given the buyout figures after 2018, buying MacIntyre out is doable but daunting. It is so tough that hiring a better replacement may be hindered by the funds shortage created by buying out MacIntyre and his staff.

The realistic expectations of posters on this site (me included) factor the enthusiasm for the program on campus and our financial standing. Relative to many of our competitors, Colorado is not in a good position to fire coaches for underperforming against high on field expectations. If I win $400 million in a lottery, you’ll see some movement. Otherwise, we are stuck with MacIntyre until the buyout is less burdensome regardless of outcomes.

 

[skibum]

I think it is interesting that Leavitt is looked at as a coach who can take a team to the "next level."

Doesn’t that sort of depend on which level you're at?

 

[married2abuff]

I think it is interesting that Leavitt is looked at as a coach who can take a team to the "next level."

South Florida ranked #2 in the country before he punched a kid seems like the next level to me.

Don't get me wrong, he's got some baggage for sure. But his success extends beyond what he may or may not have contributed at CU.