Come on DBT, I know you are just arguing these days because you want to disagree with the crowd, but are you going to argue Woelk has not been an ardent Hawkins defender? Really?
Listen, I don't read that many Woelk articles. I think he tends to be a bit more like I. Kind of pragmatic. I think he pointed out that the most important thing is winning but there are other things to look at. One was "Quality of wins and margin of defeat." He did not compare Hawkins all that favorably to Mac. I thought his argument was correct that we will have a good core of players returning next year and
if we win this year, this bodes well.
If.
His "Recruiting" comparison was weak. Mac was bringing in top ranked classes even while he did not have that much success on the field. Hawkins is not. But I do agree with Woelk that Hawk does seem to have a pinchant for finding diamonds in the rough. IF he turns this thing around and is retained, that will be one of his strengths.
I agree, also, with his "Coaching Staff" comparison to some degree. I've got a friend who played for CU, was MVP in the Gator Bowl, and played one year in the NFL. I will never forget, way back in the mid 80's, as Mac was beginning to turn things around, saying to him, "Hey, how about that Mac?" He said, yeah, he's doing well but he doesn't have a very good coaching staff. Remember, Hawk thought he'd be bringing his staff from Boise to CU. Didn't happen. So, he's had to build a staff on the fly. While we can argue about the likes of Collins, Johnson and Riddle, it looks like Prince and Ambrose may be really good. Also, I think Kiesau will be really good.
But like Woelk says, winning is "clearly the most important part of the discussion..."