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!

Recruiting the right kind of dogs

Buffnik said:
Gard was an interim that year. He makes about $2MM. Few is underpaid, but seems cool with it and Gonzaga is not a P5 program. Mack is also not at a P5 program (and like Gonzaga, no football media revenue) in a Xavier job that's been a stepping stone. He's a legacy, though, so I could see him being like a Few and coaching long-term for below his market value.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this post. Mid-Major, sort of Mid-Major in the big east, and a guy in Gard who was going to get paid but was in a weird situation from the season that data is from because of the Bo Ryan retirement. Gard got bumped to $1.75 million once the interim tag was taken off. http://www.foxsports.com/college-ba...gard-bo-ryan-replacement-interim-label-030716. I am curious to see if the big east schools will be able to keep up in an arms race without football revenue. Guys like Mack and Few seem content though. Both terrific coaches, no doubt. (Spokane is also a lot cheaper to live in then Boulder)

The troll will keep trolling though, and moves on to his next talking point when his BS gets shot down.

Back to constructive criticism though, I'm of the opinion that at least one of Prileau and Rohn need to move on. Not saying they're bad, but that it's gotten stale, and a new voice next to Tad a la Grier would be constructive. Thoughts?
 
torerobuff said:
Back to constructive criticism though, I'm of the opinion that at least one of Prileau and Rohn need to move on. Not saying they're bad, but that it's gotten stale, and a new voice next to Tad a la Grier would be constructive. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Hard to call for their heads because there's nothing wrong with them other than whatever negatives familiarity brings to the coaching room (balanced against the positives from that).

That said, I think it would be a positive if one of them moved on to a new opportunity. Wouldn't want to lose both Pri and Rohn the same offseason, but I think if one of them got a HC job it could be a good thing for everyone.
 
SDB said:
Tad makes more money than Mark Few, Chris Mack, Greg Gard.....Gonzaga, Xavier and Wisconsin....to name a few...lol. and oh yeah...average attendance has PLUMMETED that past four years...from well over 10,800 a game to a paltry 7700 this season...about the same as Tads first year...so he is now making four times or so the money he made when he came to CU...and the attendance is back where it was when he started. So...attendance down by over 3K per game from the high...wins went from an average of 22 to about 19....yeah...ALL IS WELL...give the man a raise...!!!!!
Click to expand...

Gard makes $2 million a year and Tad is at $1.5
 
torerobuff said:
Yeah, this post. Mid-Major, sort of Mid-Major in the big east, and a guy in Gard who was going to get paid but was in a weird situation from the season that data is from because of the Bo Ryan retirement. Gard got bumped to $1.75 million once the interim tag was taken off. http://www.foxsports.com/college-ba...gard-bo-ryan-replacement-interim-label-030716. I am curious to see if the big east schools will be able to keep up in an arms race without football revenue. Guys like Mack and Few seem content though. Both terrific coaches, no doubt. (Spokane is also a lot cheaper to live in then Boulder)

The troll will keep trolling though, and moves on to his next talking point when his BS gets shot down.

Back to constructive criticism though, I'm of the opinion that at least one of Prileau and Rohn need to move on. Not saying they're bad, but that it's gotten stale, and a new voice next to Tad a la Grier would be constructive. Thoughts?
Click to expand...

Agreed that we could use some changeover in the assistants - nothing against either one...but we could use some better scouting/recruiting imo.
 
SDB said:
You my friend are entitled to your opinion... And no.....as a matter of fact....I think Tad is a good coach....great? Not sure ...these upcoming seasons will be the true test of his coaching abilities....
Click to expand...

I disagree with a few things you say, but cool - I feel you made this thread fun. Thanks for posting; mind the people calling you troll.
 
Buffnik said:
The foundation of a great team culture, character within the program, and consistent winning made that possible.
Click to expand...

I have interpreted your original post as saying that you want CU to recruit players that already have leadership and competitiveness baked into them. That is really difficult since you are recruiting many of these young men when they are 17 and far from a finished product. I would argue the more successful programs define a culture and nurture it. I would also argue the one and done situation along with transfer rules make it more imperative to have your culture defined.
 
BlackNGold said:
I have interpreted your original post as saying that you want CU to recruit players that already have leadership and competitiveness baked into them. That is really difficult since you are recruiting many of these young men when they are 17 and far from a finished product. I would argue the more successful programs define a culture and nurture it. I would also argue the one and done situation along with transfer rules make it more imperative to have your culture defined.
Click to expand...

It's both. Sure, you need the culture and nurture it. But when vetting recruits, you have to talk to the coach, opposing coaches, people around the recruit. Does he exhibit good body language? How does he respond to adversity? How does he relate to younger players and benchwarmers on the team? How does he treat others when no one is looking? Does he put in extra work? Is he responsible in the classroom, a job, etc.? Is he respectful to his parents and other adults? How does he treat women? How did he handle it when he wasn't the 1st option on a team or in a situation?

You absolutely must build that character profile and if it doesn't fit your program's culture, you stop recruiting no matter what the talent level might be.

Not only do you need that for your program culture with how a guy is mentally built, but it's a disservice to the kid you're recruiting if you bring him into a culture that doesn't fit him and put expectations on him that don't align with who he is. You don't change the spots on a leopard. And if you make concessions, that person who doesn't fit your culture will change your culture to something you don't want.
 
Not fair to make this comparison but some kids to you can tell have an extra level of drive from a young age and some show that they have leadership characteristics that influence others on the team as well.

You don't go turn up HOF players under every rock but I saw Chauncey when he was still in eighth grade. He was a very polite kid and very respectful but it was clear that he was out there to win and was going to do what it took to do so. His coaches didn't have to tell him when to crank up the intensity but he didn't mind telling his teammates, and his personality made it so they listened to him.

16-17 year old kids are far from a finished product but very early in this thread @Buffnik mentioned the coaches paying more attention to kids characters. Just like with physical talent you are going to be projecting but that doesn't mean you can't look for those things.
 
Tad tried to further 'breed' this into the players with the Navy Seal(?) camps a couple years in a row. I don't know and it would be hard to quantify, but I didn't see that type of spirit in the team or individual play consistently. The player still has to want it and hard to change a person's character.
 
With the ever changing recruiting climate, is it a disadvantage to sign your complete class in November/December?
So many transfers at end of the year.
You almost have to expect some top talent being available.
 
SDB said:
Never ever said he was a bad coach...ever. What I did say is that he is paid as an ELITE coach.....and he is under performing. If he were making 500K per year..I would applaud him and his overachievement. He is not. And show me ONE place where I ever said the players were BAD!!!! Never. As a matter of fact.I did say that this group of players SMOKED a final four team....a representation that....when things are right....are VERY good....but that is that same team that laid eggs early in the season against the mighty WSU, ASU, OSU...etal. As it relates to the recruits...I just said that they were NOT pursued by many tournament teams....you can analyze that any way you want....I tend to think that this means they were not worthy of an offer from those teams..that there were players that better fit their team....you can come to your own conclusions. You obviously are missing the point....expectations are high due to the fact that Boyle is compensated at a level of a perennial tournament team that should expect to win at least one tournament game every few years. This was the year we were supposed to get over the top...experienced team....all the parts in place.....
Click to expand...

Your posts will definitely seem less like rants if you opt to use paragraph breaks, commas, semicolons, and periods instead of ellipses.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top