What's new
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!

Tad Boyle Contract Extension

My bad..... You're right. All the great players we were able to recruit the last 2 years were watching Tad's contract situation before they committed! I'm confident that DeRon Davis is doing the same.

i just saw that Zimmerman committed to UNLV...... UNLV coach has to win next year to keep his job! I respect the fact that Boyle received extensions after his great seasons ...... Seems out of whack to reward him for poor seasons! I'm just saying....... Last year we were worried about losing him to Kansas or Texas. I'm not sure he was on the list this season.
you didn't answer the question, but nice rant.
 
The contract is a 4 year contract that they renew every year. It costs no extra. The terms don't change except for the date. The only thing it does is allow Tad to tell recruits he is signed for the entire length of their time at CU. They have done this every year since Tad was hired. Its fine. Its no news really.

Guys this bears repeating....

This is a procedural extension that is common place int he new CU world. The same story will come out about McIntyre at some point in the near future as well, it will also be procedural and not reflective of his job performance. This is not the same thing as the full contract renegotiation that accompanied the Hawkins extension.
 
BTW, Brandon Spano reported that he got a raise as well. Couldn't find the link with exact details

"raise" is probably a strong term here, typically the regents can address things around APR and grad rates in these procedural extensions. Prior to Boyle's previous renegotiation they had increase the earn-able bonuses tied to academic metrics which are in their prerogative.
 
Guys this bears repeating....

This is a procedural extension that is common place int he new CU world. The same story will come out about McIntyre at some point in the near future as well, it will also be procedural and not reflective of his job performance. This is not the same thing as the full contract renegotiation that accompanied the Hawkins extension.

Why do we have a procedure in place that calls for perpetual extensions that are not reflective of job performance?
 
I guess I'm just bothered by this because I think I am far less enamored with Tad's performance over the full course of his career than most on this board. I'm very uncertain about Tad being a long-term solution and while I'm definitely not calling for anything at this point and am willing to give him some time to prove he can get us back to a contender in conference, I don't think it is particularly smart to tie our hands four years into the future.
 
I guess I'm just bothered by this because I think I am far less enamored with Tad's performance over the full course of his career than most on this board. I'm very uncertain about Tad being a long-term solution and while I'm definitely not calling for anything at this point and am willing to give him some time to prove he can get us back to a contender in conference, I don't think it is particularly smart to tie our hands four years into the future.

I think you're still just pissed you went to that game in San Fran and they lost. :smile2:

I'm ok with it. Same thing he's gotten every other year.
 
I guess I'm just bothered by this because I think I am far less enamored with Tad's performance over the full course of his career than most on this board. I'm very uncertain about Tad being a long-term solution and while I'm definitely not calling for anything at this point and am willing to give him some time to prove he can get us back to a contender in conference, I don't think it is particularly smart to tie our hands four years into the future.

I am not saying it is the right or wrong move, just that this is how under the current set of circumstances the regents are dealing with our long-term contract. Not sure if this is Tabor mandated, or really how it would even affect a buy-out as it relates to firing the coaches. Just that this is the procedure today and the extension is a reflection of nothing else.


As for your "less enamored than some" I don't know what more you can reasonably ask for out of a coach when you compare Tad's performance to our historical record.

In his 5 years:
- Boyle is the fastest to 100 wins
- Has half our 20 win seasons
- Longest streak of NCAA appearances
- Longest streak of post season experience
- Highest home winning % of any CU coach in history
- First league title in ~40 years
- Half our NCAA appearances in the past ~40 years
- Highest Win % opf an coach in CU history
- Attendance has more than quadrupled under Boyle

What else, relative to history should he have achieved?
 
I am not saying it is the right or wrong move, just that this is how under the current set of circumstances the regents are dealing with our long-term contract. Not sure if this is Tabor mandated, or really how it would even affect a buy-out as it relates to firing the coaches. Just that this is the procedure today and the extension is a reflection of nothing else.


As for your "less enamored than some" I don't know what more you can reasonably ask for out of a coach when you compare Tad's performance to our historical record.

In his 5 years:
- Boyle is the fastest to 100 wins
- Has half our 20 win seasons
- Longest streak of NCAA appearances
- Longest streak of post season experience
- Highest home winning % of any CU coach in history
- First league title in ~40 years
- Half our NCAA appearances in the past ~40 years
- Highest Win % opf an coach in CU history
- Attendance has more than quadrupled under Boyle

What else, relative to history should he have achieved?

Good points above, but "we'll see."
 
Human nature is funny. One down year and doubt seeps in. Such is the life of a sports fan.
 
I am not saying it is the right or wrong move, just that this is how under the current set of circumstances the regents are dealing with our long-term contract. Not sure if this is Tabor mandated, or really how it would even affect a buy-out as it relates to firing the coaches. Just that this is the procedure today and the extension is a reflection of nothing else.


As for your "less enamored than some" I don't know what more you can reasonably ask for out of a coach when you compare Tad's performance to our historical record.

In his 5 years:
- Boyle is the fastest to 100 wins
- Has half our 20 win seasons
- Longest streak of NCAA appearances
- Longest streak of post season experience
- Highest home winning % of any CU coach in history
- First league title in ~40 years
- Half our NCAA appearances in the past ~40 years
- Highest Win % opf an coach in CU history
- Attendance has more than quadrupled under Boyle

What else, relative to history should he have achieved?

If we're going to compare Tad's performance to our historical record, why should we not do the same for Mike Mac in football? I don't see him meeting the standards of our history. I think the argument that what we should consider "success" for Tad be based on our history is as flawed as saying we should do the same for MacIntyre.

I'm not saying he shouldn't have been extended or hasn't done a good job for the most part, but I just don't like the "based on our history" argument. It should be based on his paycheck and the support he has from administration in terms of things that help him be successful. At this point he's set a new standard for Colorado Basketball, just like there's a different standard in Football despite our history there.
 
Last edited:
No, they don't. He's signed through 2019, has a terrible year, loses two players, signs two complete unknowns, recruiting has been questionable since Abatemarco left and can't close the deal on top prospects. Yet, he gets an extension. All signs point to illogical.

Don't be so hard on yourself.

AB'ers disrepect all manner of illogical opinions, even yours!
 
Why do we have a procedure in place that calls for perpetual extensions that are not reflective of job performance?[/QUOTE]


I heard that last spring during his job review, he told RG and the Regents that his goals were to just under hit .500 in W/L, since he had no leaders and was likely to suffer strange unforeseeable injuries to key players throught the season. He also told them the DOW would hit 18,000 ,so they should invest in mutual funds.


He got the extension because he was prescient and certain Regents made a bundle in the stock market!

Mods can you change his moniker to "D'oh!" or "Duuuuuh" ?
 
Last edited:
I think we all are fans of Tad. its important that Tad win with a team in which he recruited every player. The wheels came off last season and it wasn't because of basketball. The players didn't seem to understand the need to be a team and abide by Tad's expectations. looks like that will change next year. I'm not a fan of rewarding poor performance. We can't tie our wagon to how bad we use to be. Have to think about how good we should be and shoot for that goal. Hope I'm wrong, but next year could be very telling. I've heard that we have a 7'1" kid coming in as a preferred walk on. Isaiah Martin.
 
Taking into account his full body of work, it's a good move. He still is underpaid probably for what he has been able to accomplish. I'm fine with it.

Obviously if the team has a couple more down years in a row, an extension might not be appropriate.
 
If we're going to compare Tad's performance to our historical record, why should we not do the same for Mike Mac in football? I don't see him meeting the standards of our history. I think the argument that what we should consider "success" for Tad be based on our history is as flawed as saying we should do the same for MacIntyre.

I'm not saying he shouldn't have been extended or hasn't done a good job for the most part, but I just don't like the "based on our history" argument. It should be based on his paycheck and the support he has from administration in terms of things that help him be successful. At this point he's set a new standard for Colorado Basketball, just like there's a different standard in Football despite our history there.

Tad Boyle has reset the bar for what CU basketball Can be.

Mike MacIntyre will never reset the bar of CU football.
 
I don't see it as a big deal, but I do find these yearly one-year extensions a little strange. Not sure I buy the justification.
 
I am not saying it is the right or wrong move, just that this is how under the current set of circumstances the regents are dealing with our long-term contract. Not sure if this is Tabor mandated, or really how it would even affect a buy-out as it relates to firing the coaches. Just that this is the procedure today and the extension is a reflection of nothing else.


As for your "less enamored than some" I don't know what more you can reasonably ask for out of a coach when you compare Tad's performance to our historical record.

In his 5 years:
- Boyle is the fastest to 100 wins
- Has half our 20 win seasons
- Longest streak of NCAA appearances
- Longest streak of post season experience
- Highest home winning % of any CU coach in history
- First league title in ~40 years
- Half our NCAA appearances in the past ~40 years
- Highest Win % opf an coach in CU history
- Attendance has more than quadrupled under Boyle

What else, relative to history should he have achieved?


Thanks. Of all of the things he's accomplished, the attendance issue tends to get lost. Quadrupled. That's terrific.
 
Tad Boyle has reset the bar for what CU basketball Can be.

Mike MacIntyre will never reset the bar of CU football.

That's not the point, I realize Mike's situation isn't very comparable. But are we holding Tad to the new bar or the old one? Because you risk going back to the old one and getting stuck there again if that's the standard, and I don't know about you but I don't want to go back to that. As long as the new standard is set, we'd have the paycheck and the support to give the next guy the tools to meet or raise that standard. This is all hypothetical of course, I don't believe (right now) Tad is at risk of destroying the program he built.
 
That's not the point, I realize Mike's situation isn't very comparable. But are we holding Tad to the new bar or the old one? Because you risk going back to the old one and getting stuck there again if that's the standard, and I don't know about you but I don't want to go back to that. As long as the new standard is set, we'd have the paycheck and the support to give the next guy the tools to meet or raise that standard. This is all hypothetical of course, I don't believe (right now) Tad is at risk of destroying the program he built.

There is a new standard for CU Basketball. Tad wants us to have a higher standard than in the past.

We need to balance that with not freaking out on a single bad season, though. We are seeing a lot of opinions that take a tone of this thing being broken and Tad not being the guy to fix it. More than a slight over-reaction. Especially when Tad recognizes the same core problem we have -- poor shooting and a lot of misses in guard recruiting. Well, he signed a top PG in last year's class, brought in shooters this year, and has reloaded the guard position by 1 (likely 2) guard transfers along with going outside the box to find a guard from the international ranks. What we're really missing is an ability to close on players to beat Cal, Washington and Oregon in recruiting battles.
 
I will say I love Tad so this has nothing to do with him, but I am not a fan of the annual extension as being procedural. Let the contract run and then negotiate another one as you get close. If the guy/lady wins, they will get paid. The whole idea of it helps with recruiting is crap.
 
Tad Boyle has reset the bar for what CU basketball Can be.

Mike MacIntyre will never reset the bar of CU football.
Tad didn't "reset" the bar. He "set" the bar. For me, the jury is still out on Mac. But if "the bar is perrinial Top 10 and a NC, then you are probably correct.
 
I will say I love Tad so this has nothing to do with him, but I am not a fan of the annual extension as being procedural. Let the contract run and then negotiate another one as you get close. If the guy/lady wins, they will get paid. The whole idea of it helps with recruiting is crap.

i 10000000000% agree.

I have also learned that getting mad at the government for well behaving like government is a waste of time and effort.
 
I am not saying it is the right or wrong move, just that this is how under the current set of circumstances the regents are dealing with our long-term contract. Not sure if this is Tabor mandated, or really how it would even affect a buy-out as it relates to firing the coaches. Just that this is the procedure today and the extension is a reflection of nothing else.


As for your "less enamored than some" I don't know what more you can reasonably ask for out of a coach when you compare Tad's performance to our historical record.

In his 5 years:
- Boyle is the fastest to 100 wins
- Has half our 20 win seasons
- Longest streak of NCAA appearances
- Longest streak of post season experience
- Highest home winning % of any CU coach in history
- First league title in ~40 years
- Half our NCAA appearances in the past ~40 years
- Highest Win % opf an coach in CU history
- Attendance has more than quadrupled under Boyle

What else, relative to history should he have achieved?

Doesn't even mention the continued success in meeting academic and graduation standards. Recall Patton had them so far down it cost CU schollies.
 
I will say I love Tad so this has nothing to do with him, but I am not a fan of the annual extension as being procedural. Let the contract run and then negotiate another one as you get close. If the guy/lady wins, they will get paid. The whole idea of it helps with recruiting is crap.

Just because CU has extended the contract each year, I don't believe it is purely "procedural" - the administration and athletic director believe he is a great coach (correctly).

Also, they know the importance of stability in an athletic program. Not extending and then renegotiating entails higher risks of either losing arguably the best ever coach in CU basketball history, or negotiating a much more expensive contract.
 
Back
Top