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!

Rumors of Certain Regents Potentially Voting Against MT Contract

@Wyo Buff for Regent. of course I would accept a position as the power behind the throne.

brain-trust.jpg
 
DrunkRalphie said:
Ok. Let's say it's true. How is the AD been negatively affected in tangible ways you can point to?
Click to expand...

I take a forward looking approach. Benson is gonzo next summer and the regents are on the hunt for a new prez. Hopefully the new prez will be CUAD friendly and aspire that excellence at CU includes the football program being ranked, going to bowl games, and competing for championships. I’ll call this the Gordon Gee model in honor of the pro athletics president who presided over CU during the glory days, before moving on tOSU where football reigns supreme.

The risk is that the regents discount the importance of football or are hostile. I’ll call this the Judith Albino model, as she presided over the University and did little to stand by Gary Barnett during the media circus that plunged CU into a self-imposed near death penalty that lingers to this day.

Do you think Kroll, Griego and Shoemaker will be looking for a Gee model or an Albino model? Or do you have some other probable best and worst case model you’d like to share?

When answering, please reference their concerns regarding the cure for cancer, safety of the sport, and deception about how CUAD funds don’t compete with from tax receipts, tuition, or proceeds earmarked for athletics.

Kthanx
 
Liver said:
that was bitsy hoffman.
Click to expand...
We had a bad spell of presidents.

Correct me if I’m off, but Betsy attempted to defend Barney with the tone deaf “term of endearment” comment in reference to Chaucer’s use of C*NT. Albino was post scandal and didn’t give much thought to bringing CU football back. Then we had former senator Brown who was more of an interim steady hand who liked to glad hand at the games, but wasn’t invested into a rebuild. Benson followed that.
 
Wouldn't CU Chancellor be a bigger concern than CU President in this case? If DiStef becomes CU President, that means we have a new person making decisions on the AD and head coaches if I'm not mistaken.
 
Jalapeno said:
Wouldn't CU Chancellor be a bigger concern than CU President in this case? If DiStef becomes CU President, that means we have a new person making decisions on the AD and head coaches if I'm not mistaken.
Click to expand...

I am assuming that DiSteph will retire sometime after Benson goes. He has 40+ years with CU and not enough gas in the tank to do much more than transition to whomever the new Pres appoints as his replacement.

Not even Kroll would be so stupid to consider PDiS as a candidate to be the next president.
 
Clean Undies said:
I am assuming that DiSteph will retire sometime after Benson goes. He has 40+ years with CU and not enough gas in the tank to do much more than transition to whomever the new Pres appoints as his replacement.

Not even Kroll would be so stupid to consider PDiS as a candidate to be the next president.
Click to expand...
Considering Phil D's new role with the Pac-12, I would expect him to remain as Chancellor through the next Pac-12 media deal. Current deal expires at the end of 2023-24 academic year but the push is to have the new media deal in place by the spring of 2023 (a year or more ahead of expiration). So I'm putting my money on another 4 or 5 years before Phil D retires.
 
Shldr2Shldr said:
The perception nationally that CU and the CU administration are not serious about creating a top tier football program. That is what is preventing Tucker from making hires. The preception that the CU administration will turn on the CU football program at the first sign of trouble, that is what is preventing Tucker from making hires.

The regents had an opportunity to change the narrative. To push their agendas in a positive light. Instead they didn't. Instead they decided to make statements, that true or not, will be published in the Gazette and the Denver Post. Statements that will be discussed on Denver sports radio and local news shows. Programs that get distributed nationally by IHeartRadio and YouTube.

Most of this board is upset because it was simply stupid and pointless and a wasted opportunity.
Click to expand...
Dollars to donuts not a single assistant Tucker is attempting to hire is any more than vaguely aware of the vote. Money talks, bull**** walks.
 
Clean Undies said:
I take a forward looking approach. Benson is gonzo next summer and the regents are on the hunt for a new prez. Hopefully the new prez will be CUAD friendly and aspire that excellence at CU includes the football program being ranked, going to bowl games, and competing for championships. I’ll call this the Gordon Gee model in honor of the pro athletics president who presided over CU during the glory days, before moving on tOSU where football reigns supreme.

The risk is that the regents discount the importance of football or are hostile. I’ll call this the Judith Albino model, as she presided over the University and did little to stand by Gary Barnett during the media circus that plunged CU into a self-imposed near death penalty that lingers to this day.

Do you think Kroll, Griego and Shoemaker will be looking for a Gee model or an Albino model? Or do you have some other probable best and worst case model you’d like to share?

When answering, please reference their concerns regarding the cure for cancer, safety of the sport, and deception about how CUAD funds don’t compete with from tax receipts, tuition, or proceeds earmarked for athletics.

Kthanx
Click to expand...
They don't have the votes to dictate the hire at 3-6.
 
What is Phil's role with the Pac12?

If he somehow became President.... wow, that would be awful
 
Buffnik said:
Considering Phil D's new role with the Pac-12, I would expect him to remain as Chancellor through the next Pac-12 media deal. Current deal expires at the end of 2023-24 academic year but the push is to have the new media deal in place by the spring of 2023 (a year or more ahead of expiration). So I'm putting my money on another 4 or 5 years before Phil D retires.
Click to expand...

He is currently 71 years old with 44 years service. Is another 4 year even possible?

Seems like a stretch considering that the new Pres will get a say in how CU Boulder should be run.

Chair of the Pac-12 CEOs is his role with the conference.
 
DrunkRalphie said:
They don't have the votes to dictate the hire at 3-6.
Click to expand...

Approving a vote for a coach contract and conducting a search for the president of one of the largest employers in the State of Colorado are two different things.

Do you believe the other 6 regents have a pro athletics box to check as a criteria for Benson’s replacement?

I’d love it if you can convince me of that.
 
Jalapeno said:
Wouldn't CU Chancellor be a bigger concern than CU President in this case? If DiStef becomes CU President, that means we have a new person making decisions on the AD and head coaches if I'm not mistaken.
Click to expand...
YOU TAKE THOSE WORDS BACK

NEVER, EVER suggest that ass-hat gets anywhere NEAR that much power.

A pox on your house if this comes to be!!!!
 
On a serious note, I'm having a debate with a family member.

Can anyone link hard data on the budget is a net zero from the athletics dept side?
 
ZandiBuff said:
On a serious note, I'm having a debate with a family member.

Can anyone link hard data on the budget is a net zero from the athletics dept side?
Click to expand...
Budget has balanced for the last 3 fiscal years reported: 2015, 2016 and 2017 after being $2.2M in the red in 2014.

From 2014 to 2017, athletic department revenue has increased from $58.9M to $86.5M.
https://www.denverpost.com/2018/01/12/cu-buffs-athletics-financial-report/

Not in the article, but the reason there isn't a reported profit now with all that revenue increase is that the AD has been increasing the endowment/ rainy day funds. It does not have to do so and there is money to work with.
 
buffs233 said:
Dead wrong when considering Rick George - I know for a fact he is and has been very unhappy with Kroll and Shoemaker, and now Griego. All Dems, of course. Don't fit the facts to justify idiot behavior by democrats on the BOR.

Also, a new lefty Board member, Lesley Smith, an environmental prof at CU will not be a friend to football. She beat a far more qualified candidate Ken Montera in a state wide race because she has D behind her name.

The best hope is Sue Sharkey guides the 4 Dem idiots to make a good choice on the next President.
Click to expand...
So there are 2 CU employees on the BOR? That's a real problem.
 
I always thought I could be a just a loyal fan to everything CU. I'm realizing now that part of being a loyal fan is doing my part to keep these aholes away from CU.
 
Wow, this actually really pisses me off.

How much does the University put into “marketing”? Is there any better way to market your institution and keep alumni connected than a team to root for? A common cause to which you belong? Who cares if it’s just a silly game that doesn’t matter in the grand scheme of things. Your patrons want it as a way to keep connected to and support your school. These jackanapes either don’t get it (concerning) or don’t care (even worse).

This literally makes me never want to donate a penny to CU, I don’t want to reward this kind of political grandstanding bull****. Jack Kroll’s website says he wants education to be affordable and accessible to all. You seen your out of state tuition rates, kiddo? **** you for bilking your out of state students and families to the hilt to subsidize your “affordable” educations. I went to CU out of state because I have a strong family history there and I was proud of it. They’ll never get a dime from me again, which is too bad, because I’m pretty rich.

Great plan - alienate your donors, deflate your biggest publicity presence, in honor of your desire to virtue signal how much you “care”, the implication of which is that people who disagree don’t care about others. Or cancer research. I actually DO cancer research. The answer to getting funding isn’t to whine about how much money entertainers make for what they do based on the monetary value of their contribution while cancer patients “unfairly” don’t get a cut of those dollars, it’s to make a truly compelling case for philanthropy.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top