Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
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: Regents Meeting, Benson Decision, Investigation Report -- Monday, 6/12

Status
Not open for further replies.
5 weeks. Figure 40-50 hours a week the lawyers are billing us for. So say 225 hours at $1,200/hour. Tab is up to about $270,000 at the moment. How this the drive for $105 looking?
 
letsgoavs192 said:
5 weeks. Figure 40-50 hours a week the lawyers are billing us for. So say 225 hours at $1,200/hour. Tab is up to about $270,000 at the moment. How this the drive for $105 looking?
Click to expand...
$1,200/hr.?

Who are we using for counsel?
 
letsgoavs192 said:
5 weeks. Figure 40-50 hours a week the lawyers are billing us for. So say 225 hours at $1,200/hour. Tab is up to about $270,000 at the moment. How this the drive for $105 looking?
Click to expand...

That assumes the lawyers are somehow still working on this. I assume their work was done weeks ago and the regents are waiting for school to be out for summer before announcing anything from the findings.
 
It's got to be getting really stuffy in the Regent's conference room. The doors been closed for two months. I hope they get potty breaks.
 
Important email from Dan Mills this morning:
Hey all. We got a problem. As mind blowing as it is it seems a significant contingent of the board of regents don't want to ratify Coach Mac’s contract. The way it works is Rick George has offered Mike a contract and Mike’s agreed to it, but the regents must ratify it and currently it is not certain there are enough votes to support it. There are nine regents, four democrat and five republicans. The issue appears to be split down party lines, Dems against the contract. Republicans in support with one republican wild card that nobody knows which way he’ll vote. I’m not exactly clear on what is driving the lack of support, but the catalyst is the Joe Trumpkin issue that arose when Mac was contacted and allegations arose concerning Trumpkin’s relationship with a woman. It’s been in the paper. You all know what I am talking about.
Where we are right now is the regents are scheduled to vote on this contract May 17th and if they don't approve it I believe Coach is gone, sooner or later. And I guaranty if they don't approve it every other program will use the uncertainty of his future with CU as a recruiting tool against CU. Many of you know Coach Mac and know he is a man of great character and shouldn't be subject to this political crap. And by the way according to my proverbial well placed sources we could lose Rick George too. And even more of you know Rick and understand he is cut from the highest quality cloth. These men do not deserve this ever and especially not with all the success they have had on and off the field.
It seems that some how this has become a Title 9 issue. How and why I don't know. Title 9 is the class of federal regulations that ensure women students, athletes and employees of a university are treated fairly. This illustrates further irony in that Rick has driven a culture that is as open, diverse and friendly towards women as any Colorado AD maybe ever.
As a business guy the fiscal irresponsibility shown here is serious. CU has a $180,000,000 facility to pay for and the only way to do that is through a successful football program. Kinda like the one they are building. Losing the most decorated coach in the county would gut the program. My PWPS shared with me CU has 4000 more applicants this years than ever before and I believe it is because of the success of the football program. It’s not just my opinion. This phenomenon is only being replicated in Boulder. It has happened in Tuscaloosa, Ann Arbor and even in Fort Collins during Sonny’s hey days. Athletics are the front porch of a public university.
The reason I am telling you all this is the vote is May 17th and you need to email every single regent and tell them how you expect them to vote and why. Their contact information can be found at https://www.cu.edu/regents/meet-regents.
I know you're all busy. So am I, but on a bright, sunny blue bird Saturday afternoon when you're sitting in Folsom Field with 15,000 or so lethargic fans watching CU get embarrassed buy Oregon 70-7 you will wish you had sent that email.
Feel free to share this.
GO Buffs!!!!!!!!!
Dan
Dan Mills
 
If I were to a write an email, what would the talking points be?

I get the "renew the contract" part. But how would we structure the support for that point?
 
cu2x said:
Important email from Dan Mills this morning:
Hey all. We got a problem. As mind blowing as it is it seems a significant contingent of the board of regents don't want to ratify Coach Mac’s contract. The way it works is Rick George has offered Mike a contract and Mike’s agreed to it, but the regents must ratify it and currently it is not certain there are enough votes to support it. There are nine regents, four democrat and five republicans. The issue appears to be split down party lines, Dems against the contract. Republicans in support with one republican wild card that nobody knows which way he’ll vote. I’m not exactly clear on what is driving the lack of support, but the catalyst is the Joe Trumpkin issue that arose when Mac was contacted and allegations arose concerning Trumpkin’s relationship with a woman. It’s been in the paper. You all know what I am talking about.
Where we are right now is the regents are scheduled to vote on this contract May 17th and if they don't approve it I believe Coach is gone, sooner or later. And I guaranty if they don't approve it every other program will use the uncertainty of his future with CU as a recruiting tool against CU. Many of you know Coach Mac and know he is a man of great character and shouldn't be subject to this political crap. And by the way according to my proverbial well placed sources we could lose Rick George too. And even more of you know Rick and understand he is cut from the highest quality cloth. These men do not deserve this ever and especially not with all the success they have had on and off the field.
It seems that some how this has become a Title 9 issue. How and why I don't know. Title 9 is the class of federal regulations that ensure women students, athletes and employees of a university are treated fairly. This illustrates further irony in that Rick has driven a culture that is as open, diverse and friendly towards women as any Colorado AD maybe ever.
As a business guy the fiscal irresponsibility shown here is serious. CU has a $180,000,000 facility to pay for and the only way to do that is through a successful football program. Kinda like the one they are building. Losing the most decorated coach in the county would gut the program. My PWPS shared with me CU has 4000 more applicants this years than ever before and I believe it is because of the success of the football program. It’s not just my opinion. This phenomenon is only being replicated in Boulder. It has happened in Tuscaloosa, Ann Arbor and even in Fort Collins during Sonny’s hey days. Athletics are the front porch of a public university.
The reason I am telling you all this is the vote is May 17th and you need to email every single regent and tell them how you expect them to vote and why. Their contact information can be found at https://www.cu.edu/regents/meet-regents.
I know you're all busy. So am I, but on a bright, sunny blue bird Saturday afternoon when you're sitting in Folsom Field with 15,000 or so lethargic fans watching CU get embarrassed buy Oregon 70-7 you will wish you had sent that email.
Feel free to share this.
GO Buffs!!!!!!!!!
Dan
Dan Mills
Click to expand...
So, interesting email, but who is Dan Mills and is this credible?
 
Can't say exactly. I have gotten his emails fro several years and he is a huge Buff supporter. I thought my being a season ticket holder is how he got my info. He has been correct over the years.
 
Looking back at the email, he is the VP of Flood and Peterson Insurance. that's all I've got
 
The damage is already done. Now it's just a question of how much worse it will get. I don't know why CU bothers to have a football program, when they constantly invent ways to destroy it.

If I am MikeMac and George, I don't really care that much if this contract goes through, I've got one foot out the door already. If my superiors won't support and defend me, when seemingly warranted, then.. bye.
 
cu-regent-jack-kroll.jpg

Regent Jack Kroll -

"My opponent has attacked me for my stance against the recent $170-million CU football stadium renovation. While I am an avid sports fan and a devoted Broncos and, unfortunately, Rockies enthusiast, the world of college athletics has gotten out of hand. In fact, over the past five years the University has made over $24-million in bailout loans to the athletics department to cover losses. Losses that were incurred, in part, as a result of paying golden parachute clauses in the contracts of fired football coaches. I say we build up our students, not our stadiums."

Denver Post
 
Uncle Ken said:
If I were to a write an email, what would the talking points be?

I get the "renew the contract" part. But how would we structure the support for that point?
Click to expand...

  • Football improvement - this is pretty easy, 10-4, bowl game, 4 players drafted. Nice summary here.
  • Academic standing improvement. Probably needs a little research. But as a start you can get GSR here.
    • 2016: (most recent available) 74 (Fed rate 60)
    • 2015: 77 (64)
    • 2014: 71
    • 2013: 70
------------------- MacIntyre hired ---------------------------------
  • 2012: 63
  • 2011: 59
  • 2010: 59
  • 2009: (which includes students back to 2003) 64
  • Importance of a strong football program to the rest of athletics and the school. New facilities would not have been possible without RG's leadership. Athletic salaries are paid from the athletic budget, and fund the school through scholarship, not the other way around. (looking at you Kroll). MacIntyre and RG have set new standards and should be retained to continue this progress. A coaching change under these circumstances would undermine the ability of the University to hire subsequent AD/coaches that can perform at an equal or better level.
  • As for the elephant in the room, we as fans may not have all of the facts, but it appears that MacIntyre and Rick both did they best they knew how once they were informed of the Tumpkin situation. (I would guess that this is where some of the regents may differ in opinion). Process changes or training would be a better way to strengthen CUs response in the future, rather than throwing out the baby with the bath water in this case.
 
CU gonna CU?

This, if the email post is accurate, is ****ing pathetic. Who's the supposed "Kennedy/tie breaker" on the board? Nutless ****.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top