AllStarBuffs
Member
his time at CU has expired
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!
Should Dan Hawkins Return Next Season?
- Thread starter BuffInDC
- Start date
I voted for one more year. And "everyone" is not "30%."
****ing froks! I hate those mother ****ers. I hit one the other day and was glad. ****ing frock.
Doubt we win even 2 of the last 3, but if we do that may cause Bohn to let him stick around another year.
I don't think he should even if he wins out because frankly, too little too late. I don't think the little things he has done outweighs what very little he has done on the football field.
I don't think he should even if he wins out because frankly, too little too late. I don't think the little things he has done outweighs what very little he has done on the football field.
ScottyBuff
Well-Known Member
Curious why you would choose to keep Brown over Hagan and/or Bandison?
SuperiorBuff
Well-Known Member
I agree with FIM, Brown has a very long history of producing excellent DBs. He isn't the DC and doesn't get to determine how much of an island his DBs get stuck on. We have some absolute horses at RB but have seen very little improvement. I realize the DL is young, but they are the weak link on D.
calibuff81
New Member
A "DREAM" scenerio for Hawkins would be for us to some how some way get into the BIG 12 title game, Tyler falls ill the morning of the BIG 12 title game, Hawk Jr comes in and leads us to an upset up against Texas, we go to a BCS game, plays TCU/Bosie State in the Fiesta Bowl we win that game and he tells all of us nay sayers that he knew what he was doing all along. Is that too much too ask for??? :lol:
ScottyBuff
Well-Known Member
That is one of those points that is hard to assign blame to either Collins or Brown I guess.
For a position coach to have such little impact on recruiting (going by Rivals) is a letdown from my perspective. I agree that he is better at developing DB's but I would think we could get that from another coach plus better recruiting results.
I like that he has been around CU off and on for awhile.
I'd like to give Bandison some more time, I think the players he has brought in are very good and they have shown improvement. Definitely we should have had more DL recruits during Hawk's first years but that can't be fixed now. With Cunningham, Bonsu, Kasa, Forrest West, and Uzo-Diribe all Romeo's recruits, plus Pericak and the upper-classmen we should have a much better unit next season and I think Romeo is the man to do it.
Hagan has been our best recuiter (at alot of positions) by far and is a great link to CU's past as a spokesman for the program. He might still need some help with the RB's but I think the struggles there are attributable to the OL and the lack of a downfield passing game.
Hey, I had to do a lot of analysis on it. I weighed the good with the bad and it was almost dead even. If we end up sh**ing the bed the last three, I'll weight it the other way. But, like I've been saying most of the year, you have to judge him by the entire season.What A Shocker .....
77buff
Well-Known Member
I don't buy any of this - it's a great job in one of the most beautiful cities in the world. A great university, and a member of one of the better conferences in football. There are alot of good young coaches out there who would jump at this opportunity. Good coaches find ways to motivate their players to win. Proof, 70 year old geezer named Bill Snyder. Doesn't have near the talent Juicebox has, but when he looked across the field and saw Dan Hawkins instead of Mac, Nue, or GB, he had to think - "this is gonna be easy."
As far as Hawkins salary, he's grossly overpaid. Snyder, did it after being out for years, and Pelini did it in his 1st year. 5 years is BS. Hell, Snyder has a damn good chance to win the North, and he should be in a hospital bed in an old folks home.
Last edited:
KSU is a perfect example of my point. They fired Prince after 3 mediocre years and the only legitimate coach they could bring in was Snyder. Who else was gonna take that job? Wait until Granpa Snyder is finished and see who they hire--it won't be anyone you've ever heard of.
Of course, there will always be candidates who want to coach at CU, but if CU wants to maximize the pool of candidates to include current head coaches at non-BCS schools and respected coordinators at BCS schools [i.e.: coaches who will have more than one offer] it must be seen as treating its coaches fairly--which usually means 5 years.
All that being said, hiring a coach is a crapshoot. Hell, Hawkins was a good hire going by all objective measures. So maybe it doesn't matter so much if CU has to go with someone below the radar.
77buff
Well-Known Member
That makes no sense at all, are you telling me working and living in Boulder is the same as living in Manhattan, KS? Have you ever been there? It's hours away from civilization in the $hitty little Flint hills - not exactly the Rocky Mountains. If you take KSU away from Manhattan, the only thing left is prairie dogs. Do you know anything about the history of the KSU football program? Until they won the Big 12 title with Snyder, they had not won a conference title in something like 60 years. They never won a Big 8 Championship. For years and years, they were the worst football program in major college football. So your'e telling me the KSU job and the CU are the same? Come on man!
They had a good shot at getting Gary Patterson, but the KSU media screwed up the whole thing by implying he was going to be the next coach before they even contacted him. When Patterson heard about it, he was pissed and called a news conference to say he was staying at TCU.
The thing that bugs me about Hawkins supporters is all they do is manufacture excuses for his failures. What I would like to hear is what he has produced to justify keeping him another year?
If Hawkins had a job at a football program that was serious about winning, they would pay him off, because next year's road schedule is much harder than this year's - and you are well aware of what that means.
Last edited:
hazerhusker
New Member
I hope he stays a really long time.
So you're saying that KSU could not get Patterson to come coach there. Thanks, that's the point I was making.
Sure KSU is a worse job than CU--harder to recruit to, in the middle of nowhere--but a coach at KSU knows that he'll get administration support and any qualifier will be admitted, so in terms of winning football games, it's not that far off from CU.
I think you misunderstand my, and many others', position. Nobody's arguing that Hawk deserves more time, or in your words "has produced enough to justify" more time. It's not about him, it's about CU football and what, over the long term, is best for the program, and I think the program is best served by giving [almost] any coach 5 years. It's best financially and it puts CU in a better position if and when a new coach has to be hired next Winter.
77buff
Well-Known Member
Stop making up bull $hit, I said they had a good chance at getting him, but their AD media blew the whole thing by leaking rumors to the effect that he would be the next coach. In fact - they never contacted Patterson about the job. He's from KSU, and if they had handled the situation correctly, he would probably be the coach there now. KSU was indirectly speaking for him without even contacting him. That was my post - stick to the facts. In the long run it's going to cost CU alot more than a few million by keeping Hawkins.
Stick to the facts?
" . . . if they had handled the situation correctly, he would probably be the coach there now." I can't find any facts in this statement.
I still say the KSU/Prince fiasco screwed KSU even more than they already were in the coach-getting realm. They're lucky to have Grandpa, and when he leaves they won't be in the game for any up and coming coaches.
"In the long run it's going to cost CU alot more than a few million by keeping Hawkins." Can't find any facts in here, either--we simply have different opinions on this matter.
Talked to a major donor last night. Six-Figure donor type who's been around here for along time. Talks to the Chancellor often type of donor. Said it's not being discussed and that old geezers like him should have less patience than us young guys, but they have more patience. Building it right takes some time. Hawkins will be back in 2010 and here's why:
1. State funding is being cut and it is NOT politically possible to discuss paying Hawkins >$3M to not coach. The state doesn't run businesses and the mere suggestion of doing this is a non-starter. Doesn't matter if not firing Hawkins costs the state way more. The average voter who doesn't follow football doesn't care nor ever will. Contrary to "the Rivals posters" there is no donors stepping up with anything near that sum in aggregrate to fund such a thing. Pure internet legend I guess.
2. They are happy with everything Hawkins has accomplished except the W/L record.
3. reasons for not performing on the field - failure to coach them up. Hawkins is the general, but most of the coaching is done by coordinators on down. Hawk is responsible for his staff and coaching at all levels. Plenty of head coaches have had bad hires and had to make changes. Coordinators have been replaced at several top-10 programs in the last few years. Unlike OSU and UT, Hawk doesn't have big $$$ to throw around. Still his staff is his responsibility. FIX IT.
4. Not completely clear that Hawk won't get it done. Worst case is he doesn't, and not much more is lost. Still some possibility that Hawkins CAN get it done with the pieces in place with some staff changes or improvements. The worst case here is far better than making an expensive change that 4 years from now yields nothing. That is expensive in many ways. The university really needs Hawkins to get this thing going in the right direction.
Other notes:
1. State funding is being cut and it is NOT politically possible to discuss paying Hawkins >$3M to not coach. The state doesn't run businesses and the mere suggestion of doing this is a non-starter. Doesn't matter if not firing Hawkins costs the state way more. The average voter who doesn't follow football doesn't care nor ever will. Contrary to "the Rivals posters" there is no donors stepping up with anything near that sum in aggregrate to fund such a thing. Pure internet legend I guess.
2. They are happy with everything Hawkins has accomplished except the W/L record.
3. reasons for not performing on the field - failure to coach them up. Hawkins is the general, but most of the coaching is done by coordinators on down. Hawk is responsible for his staff and coaching at all levels. Plenty of head coaches have had bad hires and had to make changes. Coordinators have been replaced at several top-10 programs in the last few years. Unlike OSU and UT, Hawk doesn't have big $$$ to throw around. Still his staff is his responsibility. FIX IT.
4. Not completely clear that Hawk won't get it done. Worst case is he doesn't, and not much more is lost. Still some possibility that Hawkins CAN get it done with the pieces in place with some staff changes or improvements. The worst case here is far better than making an expensive change that 4 years from now yields nothing. That is expensive in many ways. The university really needs Hawkins to get this thing going in the right direction.
Other notes:
- -Optimistic about Hansen and Kiesau getting offense straightened out and being on the upslope. next 3 games will tell a lot.
- -Bewildered about O-Line issues.
- -Completely supportive of coaching style that includes "you must practice well, be on time, go to your workouts, go to class, to play". Any coach who rewards natural talent without the above will have mutiny and discipline issues on and off the field.
- -Also noted that team hasn't given up and hasn't been out of any games, including Texas.
except of course for the fact that the "state" isn't going to fund ONE DOLLAR of any buyout. the CUAD is self-sufficient. that means it is expected to sustain itself on the revenue IT generates. there are no taxpayer dollars involved at all. when the combination of the crappy bb team, the gb buyout, and tharp's clubseats all came to a head, the CUAD was forced to BORROW a few million from the school to get through the tough spot. the CUAD is currently paying that money back over time. there is no taxpayer dollar waste at all in any case.
furthermore, it has been said that the CU Fund/ CU Foundation (which is also NOT taxpayer funded-- it is a private endowment) is willing to knock out the school loan and lend some more to the CUAD for the purpose of effectuating a coaching change if necessary. i have no idea if this is the truth or not, however.
i do know FOR A FACT that this whole "ooooh, the state won't like it, bluto" argument is a red herring. this is a PERCEPTION and messaging issue, NOT a FUNDING issue.
Good info. thanks. As far as the above quote, were any of these big time donors watching the last three Mizzou games or the Toledo game? CU was never in any of those games. Sounds like wishful thinking to me....
77buff
Well-Known Member
You want some facts - try these
As a coach, you are only as good or bad as your record? What is he now 15 wins in almost 4 years - are you kidding me?
Every fan poll asking if Hawkins shoul be fired has had about 67% in favor of getting rid of him. Consult the poll at this site, and there are others.
About 16% are undecided and about 16% are in favor of keeping him. With those overwhelming percentages, I think even you would admit - he has lost the support of the great majority of fans. That being said, are you expecting an increase in ticket sales for next year? Are you expecting increased contributions from boosters and fans? Do you in your wildest dreams think the major networks are going to save slots to televise CU football games? Do you think the sale of fan merchandise will increase by keeping Hawkins? Do you expect increased hotel, restaurant, and bar business when there are less people attending the games? That's a major concern to the Boulder economy. My last question - are you one of Bohn's or Plati's assistant's?:lol:
Last edited: