AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its 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!
New Bill to allow multi-year contracts for coaches in CO (NOW A LAW!)
- Thread starter Buffnik
- Start date
We should introduce your dad and my dad.
We have a thread dedicated to the law:
https://www.allbuffs.com/threads/st...-on-contracted-employees.112838/#post-1908348
https://www.allbuffs.com/threads/st...-on-contracted-employees.112838/#post-1908348
Certainly not Brian Howell. He said he didn't know anything about it when asked in his weekly chat. You'd think the beat reporter could stay as informed as Allbuffs posters.
http://www.buffzone.com/buffzonechats/ci_30728863/live-chat-cu-buffs-beat-writer-brian-howell
jkppkjjkp
Well-Known Member
To quote Paul Ryan re: PP funding: "Money is fungible"
I don't agree that it's a sufficient reason to oppose the bill, but it would be an argument that any opposition would make.
Disagree - we lost Grimes a while back as well for near the same money because he got a 3 year deal elsewhere - birds in the hand (or contract) are always worth more than not.
If you offer me 1 million a year on a yearly renewing contract OR 3 for three years - I take the 3 for 3 everyday and twice on Sunday. So does everyone else.
Three years begins to be a point where I can see it. But the post said for Clark it was 2 years. But I suppose "risk management" gets down to one's comfort level. I do not see a year to year contract at CU over 2 years as being much of a risk.
Barnett lost that WR coach after just two weeks to a multi year deal at Oklahoma. This has been a problem for awhile.
aik
Well-Known Member
Kevin Sumlin? Yikes. Not sure how well it would've helped recruiting being that it was around the time of self-imposed sanctions, but damn.
I thought that was because his wife didn't like Colorado or Boulder?
Ha. If he was under contract that wouldnt have mattered. Instead it became the excuse why they left. Because they could.
If this thing sails through, I'm going to be pissed with lived without it for the last 25 years.
EddieCrowder
Well-Known Member
BehindEnemyLines
beware the habu
I wonder if the CU admin has started planning for all the possibilities stemming from this bill?
For those of you in the know.
Is this a problem for the universities outside of athletics as well. I know that there is some protection from tenure but what happens if the school wants to hire someone based on some important and high profile research. If two schools are in competition he/she would be very likely to go to the school that offers a multi-year guaranteed contract long enough to ensure that most of his/her current research study could be completed.
Same situation for a high profile surgeon or researcher in the med school.
If it is a problem I could see how it would help the universities on a bigger basis. Sometimes these high profile people can mean millions of dollars in research grants and a lot of good publicity for the school. Stupid to lose them because you can't promise longer than 12 months at a time.
Is this a problem for the universities outside of athletics as well. I know that there is some protection from tenure but what happens if the school wants to hire someone based on some important and high profile research. If two schools are in competition he/she would be very likely to go to the school that offers a multi-year guaranteed contract long enough to ensure that most of his/her current research study could be completed.
Same situation for a high profile surgeon or researcher in the med school.
If it is a problem I could see how it would help the universities on a bigger basis. Sometimes these high profile people can mean millions of dollars in research grants and a lot of good publicity for the school. Stupid to lose them because you can't promise longer than 12 months at a time.
I would assume since George and Distephano presented testimony in favor of the bill that they have a plan.
They are going to have to work with the State Congress to delay this bill now. Way too easy for congress folks to vote no due to the JT DV situation.
"Why would we want to put our universities in a situation where they have to pay out a contract to someone who beats their girlfriend!?!"
This is untrue, of course, as contracts have behavioral clauses, but it doesn't matter - they would see it as a popular position (unfortunately).
"Why would we want to put our universities in a situation where they have to pay out a contract to someone who beats their girlfriend!?!"
This is untrue, of course, as contracts have behavioral clauses, but it doesn't matter - they would see it as a popular position (unfortunately).
Maybe. But there's no opposition that I can find. CSU and other state universities are supporting. It goes beyond athletics to any part of the university that isn't going to use tax dollars to foot the bill for terminating someone under contract, too, so it's hardly even relevant to tax payers.
@MtnBuff
This has never been an issue for university of Colorado health. They are not employed by the hospital or school, but by a 3rd party. Something that CU could have done with a rich benefactor. Year to year deal with the AD, 3 year deal with a separate company. Heck a company could just hire coaches and the school pay X rate for the services.
This has never been an issue for university of Colorado health. They are not employed by the hospital or school, but by a 3rd party. Something that CU could have done with a rich benefactor. Year to year deal with the AD, 3 year deal with a separate company. Heck a company could just hire coaches and the school pay X rate for the services.
This is gonna happen or not? To take that next step, it needs to.
I agree with every thing you are saying from a logical, fact-based perspective. I would be delighted for this to be the reality, but am concerned emotion decision making may rule the near term.