While I agree that this is very unlikely a race issue, these are politicians. I have no problem with it being brought to their attention that such a perception could exist and blow up in their faces.
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
- Thread starter Wyo Buff
- Start date
While I agree that this is very unlikely a race issue, these are politicians. I have no problem with it being brought to their attention that such a perception could exist and blow up in their faces.
its gonna end up being 7-0-2 or 8-1-1 this is nothing to be worried about other than a lack of unanimous support
This is a matter where I had to educate my wife. She hates sports. But, when she brought up this same tired “that’s so much money” argument, we discussed the work RG has done to create financial independence of the AD. This is the norm of the schools we compete against in P5 football. As long as the AD is solvent, let them spend the dough to better market the University of Colorado.
Regarding race... I don’t think it is a per se issue of race either. However, it seems awfully convenient that these folks are willing to be louder than they were before with a white coach.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
It’s a bad look. If the media gets ahold of it and decides to create stories they’re all going to look dumb. Even if they didn’t mean anything!
I think you are making the mistake of assuming these people believe in any form of capitalism or rational economic theory for that matter. No one should control the money (and the people) but them.
Pretty much sums up half of Congress too....
BUFFjunkie
Well-Known Member
God bless you since I try to sound so articulate sometimes that I end up writing like Joey in the episode of FRIENDS where he uses a thesaurus to create his recommendation letter for Monica and Chandler to adopt a baby. This saves me from most likely coming off as a full-blown idot.
go ahead and vote no. it will demonstrate that you do not understand how the CUAD is funded, nor the economics involved with the funding. but, remember that i understand this, very well: your campaign to get elected costs a pittance compared to what we donate to athletics. pick your spot. make a bad choice. we'll simply fund your opponents at a level you couldn't possibly match. then, you can go back to your ignorant, ill-informed, and intellectually dishonest grandstanding in a non-elected position. regents who don't take the time to understand how the funding works and who provides the funding do not deserve to be regents.
You are going a bit off the rails here. Just because they are liberals doesn't make them communists. Don't be that guy.
Also, going full maga on a group of liberals isn't going to win you anything but scorn
Last edited:
Maybe a little passive aggressive.
As someone who enjoys time alone, time away from wife with friends, and time posting about games with strangers on Allbuffs.com, this is a good thing.
I think it is both possible and appropriate to be direct while still being respectful. No need to sugarcoat it. A "no" vote sends a clear message that you, as a Regent, are either ignorant of the realities of major college athletics or that you choose to tilt at windmills instead of working within that reality for the betterment of CU.
It's the old "Water vs. diamonds" analogy. Water, like educators, are essential but relatively plentiful and cheap. Diamonds, like entertainers and athletes, do not sustain life, but are rare and expensive as hell. Grandstanding is stupid, but it's what ambitious politicians do.
the core message probably needs to include a reminder that this isn't funded by taxpayer or other university funds. the CUAD is self-funding from contract revenue and donations. any regent who doesn't understand this basic economic fact shouldn't be a regent. it may bother them that college sports are funded at this level and it may bother them that a football coach can make this much money instead of a chemistry professor, but their butt-hurt feelings have nothing to do with whose money it is and how it works. vote them out.
Its sad we have racists regents.
**** off, Snow. I didn't say anything about liberals or conservatives. There is plenty of ignorance and/or intellectual dishonesty on both sides of this argument.
I read the "**** off, Snow" in Ser Alliser's voice there for some reason... carry on.
Ha! I just hate being classified. Liberal/Conservative doesn't mean a whole lot to me anymore. In fact, I'm what you would call Austrian School, Classical Liberal when it comes to economics. Believe me, Trump would not qualify given his strange approach to trade. D.C. is really just a lot Kibuki Theater right now anyway. I guarantee 3/4 (at least) of our elected officials believe whatever they need to in order to maintain or gain power and office.
It's sad, but what do you expect from a University that has its flagship campus in lily white Boulder.
In reality, it would be a bad look on many fronts. But they believe that this is the best way for them to pander to their base in an era where the loudest and most ridiculous positions are taken in order to gain attention in a social media driven world. It's not lost on them that by doing this, it will make their name more memorable the next time they are up for re-election....or running for a different office....while most people won't remember why that name even sounds familiar. It is a strategy being employed by politicians consistently from local politics all the way up to the POTUS.....and it's a reason that we have become much more tribal and ready for social battle within our country. Point is, this is going to happen....and while annoying, it's a dynamic that isn't going to change (anytime soon, anyway). While it irritates me as much as the next guy, we shouldn't be wasting our time (as a fanbase, or an AD) complaining about what is. If we are really wanting to bring support for the program up a notch or three, we should be focusing the same energy into how we can politically take advantage of this social/political dynamic. It's like the guy that yells at the wind, while his buddy is flying
WarBuff
Club Member
Be careful with that von Mises thinking, making sense is not popular with economists. Especially when it reigns in their Keynesian desires for really stupid short term solutions to long term systemic issues.
Your behavior isn't helpful, is the point. It fits with the worst of our political discourse. I didn't label you, you slandered others. Sounds like you would get owned in the politics forum though.
Dear Sir/Madam:
Regarding the vote to approve the contract for the head coach of the University of Colorado, I am simply wondering why you are considering voting against approving a contract to pay a black man the same rate as you voted for approving a contract to pay a white man for the same position?
Respectfully,
Regarding the vote to approve the contract for the head coach of the University of Colorado, I am simply wondering why you are considering voting against approving a contract to pay a black man the same rate as you voted for approving a contract to pay a white man for the same position?
Respectfully,
Benson had to have authorized RG, and Benson can sell this smucks. They just need to act like they are doing a service to their electorate here.
BorrachoBuff
Well-Known Member
That may be true. But in reality, the three Regents that consistently oppose the best interests of the Athletic Department are all Democrats. Coincidence?
