It's harder to get into a G rated movie than ASU
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!
What's your pain threshold?
- Thread starter sackman
- Start date
Been through this before. As bad as Embree was, for me Fairbanks was worse. When I was a kid going to games with my dad the program was still recovering from the days of Sonny Grandelious almost killing the program completely. CU was truly not far from joining DU in closing down the football program at that time and it was years before the program recovered.
CU is one of those strange situations where the quality of the program is in direct relation to the level of support from the administration. I have no question at all that if DiStephano is replaced with someone who understands and supports the football program we will not only be back but will be an upper level program again.
It isn't going to happen instantly but I have no question that it will happen eventually, the only question is how long will it take to get there.
Fairbanks came in in 1979 and was gone in 1981. He was only here three years. Mac's first three years were all losing seasons. That's a span of six years where we had to endure crappy football, and it did almost kill the program. We are now in the midst of year eight of the new era of crappy football and there really isn't any end in sight. We have had our share of "Drakes" with Montana State, Toledo, and Sacramento State. Make no mistake, we are as low as we have ever been. The optimist in me says that we are making slow progress and that there is light at the end of the tunnel. Te pessimist in me says that's just the headlights of an oncoming train.
It's harder to get into a G rated movie than ASU
There is nothing g rated about America's Stripper University but on to our poor Buffs.
As far as my pain threshold, I'm way less passionate than I used to be about CU football. I haven't been to a home game in 4 seasons and that's my longest stretch since I started going to games decades ago.
I barely donate anymore and I used to donate at a pretty good clip. They don't owe me anything in terms of success but I have come to realize I don't owe them anything either.
The ROI just isn't there, financially or emotionally.
I hope they get it turned around. I no longer really believe they will.
I'm at mine. Still following the team, but I can't imagine I'd want to go to games if I still lived there. I might still go, but it would be because of guilt.
Things are so bad, I can't enjoy college football at all. I used to enjoy watching random Thursday night football games. I can't anymore.
Things are so bad, I can't enjoy college football at all. I used to enjoy watching random Thursday night football games. I can't anymore.
Same here. I havent been to a game since the CSU last year.
Lt.Col.FrankSlade
Well-Known Member
I am just the opposite. The fact that the Buffs stink so bad just makes me follow the remainder of college football 10x more.
I don't go to games much anymore. Only attend one fundraiser a year. Barely care if I see the games, and often do not.
I wholeheartedly do not think the administration is supporting this program for success. I believe they plan to do the bare minimum and milk the program for all it's worth to pay off fictitious, unnecessary, self imposed debt. We cannot win consistently when we do not compete on an equal playing field.
Nonetheless, if we ever get our act together and start putting a good product on the field, I will probably come back.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
I wholeheartedly do not think the administration is supporting this program for success. I believe they plan to do the bare minimum and milk the program for all it's worth to pay off fictitious, unnecessary, self imposed debt. We cannot win consistently when we do not compete on an equal playing field.
Nonetheless, if we ever get our act together and start putting a good product on the field, I will probably come back.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Numb to it now. I do not have bad Sunday's when we lose. It used to be that my family did not like to be around me when the Buffs lost a football game. Hell, even my friends come in now and laugh and say, well at least bball season is here. I nod my head and agree.
Unfortunately, I am getting pissed writing this, so yea, I ****in care. I really ****in care.
Unfortunately, I am getting pissed writing this, so yea, I ****in care. I really ****in care.
Rraalph 3000
Well-Known Member
I still go to the games and still plan on doing the same for the foreseeable future....but my passion is non-existent. It shows with my activity on this site as well.
Even 2-3 years ago I still had the passion and belief that no matter what we could still put up a fight and have a chance to win at home....but now that it's essentially a guarantee we'll not only lose but get slaughtered Home or Away, it's tough to invest anything emotionally anymore
I legitimately am saddened by this...and sometimes worry if I'll ever just throw in the towel...I sure hope it never gets that far
Even 2-3 years ago I still had the passion and belief that no matter what we could still put up a fight and have a chance to win at home....but now that it's essentially a guarantee we'll not only lose but get slaughtered Home or Away, it's tough to invest anything emotionally anymore
I legitimately am saddened by this...and sometimes worry if I'll ever just throw in the towel...I sure hope it never gets that far
Lt.Col.FrankSlade
Well-Known Member
What is "fictitious" debt? What do you mean "unnecessary" debt? Would you rather they just let Hawkins finish out his contract, and thereby not have to pay him off? Likewise would you rather they just let Embree and Bieniemy finish out their contracts, rather than pay them off? Would you rather they let Bohn finish out his contract, rather than pay him off? Would you rather stay in the Big 12, so there is no direct loss of income? The debt is most certainly "self imposed!" Leaving one conference for another means a huge loss of income. Firing coaches and athletic directors who are still under significant contracts means a big payment as well, particularly difficult to bear when dealing with the aforementioned loss of income.
It is fictitious, unnecessary and self imposed because the school has been forcing the AD to pay way more than its fair share for years (in terms of out of state tuition and not assisting the AD at all with the conference transition or facilities upgrades). When you neglect your primary asset for more than a decade by not investing in said asset you are going to get a crumbling, underperforming asset. This is not all the ADs fault. The school is hanging a noose around the AD with debt they forced on the AD. It should be a debt obligation, at a minimum, of both. Directly attributing the debt to contract buyouts is just plain bad accounting. Contract buyouts happen and should be part of budgets. Furthermore, the money all comes from the same sources, hence the debt is directly attributable to general underperformance of athletics not just contracts.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Another major part of the problem is the schools inability to recognize what good athletics can do for enrollment and the school on the whole. If Rick George can get then to understand that ROI, then maybe the school will actually invest in the AD rather than saddling it with debt.
For all intents and purposes the AD is bankrupt. There is little chance they can repay everything while consistently reinvesting in the program (as they should be). They need an effective bankruptcy and current lenders (school) need to take part in the reorganization (ie severe haircut). I expect Rick understands this, hence his discussions with the school to forgive the debt. I suspect that is simply his first step in his plan to eventually get the school to agree to a major financial reorganization.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
For all intents and purposes the AD is bankrupt. There is little chance they can repay everything while consistently reinvesting in the program (as they should be). They need an effective bankruptcy and current lenders (school) need to take part in the reorganization (ie severe haircut). I expect Rick understands this, hence his discussions with the school to forgive the debt. I suspect that is simply his first step in his plan to eventually get the school to agree to a major financial reorganization.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Lt.Col.FrankSlade
Well-Known Member
Is the University of Colorado hurting for students?
Walter White
Member
Permanent State?
What is more likely in the next five years? CU develops into a contender or CUcements its position at the bottom of the conference? It’s a zero sum game, so if CU rises, whowill fall in the Pac 12?
How do you feel about the following schools: Wake Forest, Virginia, Duke, Iowa State,Kansas, Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky, Mississippi State, etc. Do you think they’re likely to be competingfor conference championships and major bowls, or do you think it’s more of thesame for them?
What is more likely in the next five years? CU develops into a contender or CUcements its position at the bottom of the conference? It’s a zero sum game, so if CU rises, whowill fall in the Pac 12?
How do you feel about the following schools: Wake Forest, Virginia, Duke, Iowa State,Kansas, Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, Kentucky, Mississippi State, etc. Do you think they’re likely to be competingfor conference championships and major bowls, or do you think it’s more of thesame for them?
I doubt they are hurting for students at the moment, but like any university they need to continue to grow to flourish. Furthermore, I have heard from different university sources that competition for students is slated to increase quite a bit over the next 10 years plus. It's just like building the new workout center for students. All schools are making a huge effort to attract students on an ongoing basis and CU is no different.
But you are also correct from another perspective. The University could always make the choice to invest in other things to attract students (not athletics). In that case the shutdown of the AD becomes inevitable (if even a long time from now). One could argue the University is currently proceeding down this path.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Lt.Col.FrankSlade
Well-Known Member
The University isn't going to shut down the athletic department. But they aren't going to break the bank, either. CU's athletic department is $20+ million IN THE NEGATIVE. Nothing is going to happen from a growth/improvement standpoint until that number is gone.
You could argue that CU is on the path of shutting the AD down?
:rofl: what kind of **** did you smoke this morning? If we were on that path why are we paying well above market rate for both our AD and coaching staff salary? Why did Boyle get another pay raise this past summer? Benson understands the importance, and he showed that by making a AD donation, RG did the same.
:rofl: what kind of **** did you smoke this morning? If we were on that path why are we paying well above market rate for both our AD and coaching staff salary? Why did Boyle get another pay raise this past summer? Benson understands the importance, and he showed that by making a AD donation, RG did the same.
SECOBuffsFan
Active Member
As bad as things are...there is no way an AD shutdown will ever happen
The AD is insolvent. There are two things you do in insolvency:
1. Shutdown, or
2. Reorganize.
I very much doubt they will shutdown just like you all pointed out. It seems to me they are in the very beginnings of a reorganization that should have started years ago. Reorgs include operation changes (P&L), and financial changes (balance sheet). Like I wrote before, I think Rick. George understands this, but the University doesn't see it yet. They'll have to one day or this program will languish forever.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
1. Shutdown, or
2. Reorganize.
I very much doubt they will shutdown just like you all pointed out. It seems to me they are in the very beginnings of a reorganization that should have started years ago. Reorgs include operation changes (P&L), and financial changes (balance sheet). Like I wrote before, I think Rick. George understands this, but the University doesn't see it yet. They'll have to one day or this program will languish forever.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Lt.Col.FrankSlade
Well-Known Member
Who said they were unable to pay their debts? Just because they have $20 million in debt, doesn't mean they aren't able to pay it back. The debt will all be paid. It will just take some time for that to happen.
They are unable to pay their debts while reinvesting in the program at the same time. We've seen this for more than a decade. If things are different now, then I'd love to start seeing them invest.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
The AD is in the negative but a huge part of that is because of the way the school looks at athletics and accounts for the money. They are treating it like a cash cow rather than the way most schools see athletics which is as the most visible public relations arm of the school.
Rather than try to squeeze every penny out of athletics in the form of charging out of state tuition and billing for regular sevices like facilities maintainence and even non-athletic administrator travel to athletic events they could try to look at athletics as an opportunity to build strong relations with alumni and other potential donors and persons of influence.
Experience at other schools has shown that when the football team is winning it is much easier to generate donations, not only to athletics but also to non-athletic purposes. Those with the money like to be associated with a winner, like to be able to wear the school emblem with a sense of pride and belonging, not with a sense of embarassment and being a target for ridicule.
It is true as well that CU is not suffering for students but it is also true that many schools have found a direct corellation between successful athletics, especially football and the number of applicants they recieve. It simply follows that the more applicants you have the more selective you can be. The more selective you are the more likely you are to have a higher quality student body and more successful graduates. Those same graduates who in the future create your donor base.
Nobody is asking (well most aren't) asking for CU to become a Miami or Baylor and sell it's soul for athletic success. All that is being ask is that the administration get down of it's ivory tower fantasy and recognize that a successful football team means much more to the school than just those extra dollars they are able to squeeze out each year while pretending they are something that they are not academically.
Some of that 20 million did come from the Hawk buyout, the JE buyout, etc. A lot more of it came from the department being nickeled and dimed at every corner by Dr Phil and his merry band of clowns. I could stomach them much more easily for doing this if they could point to some outstanding accomplishments in academic or research areas that justify their priorities but I just don't see those.
Tell me one area where the reputation of CU has made a significant step forward under Dr. Phil, show me some significant area of national recognition for CU that wouldn't exist if not for his leadership. Show me how CU is better off for having him at the helm of the Boulder campus. I don't see any. I see a school who's academic reputation is the same or declining compared to our peers, who's research reputation is stagnant or declining, who's quality of student body the same.
They may think that they are protecting the academic reputation of the school by not being a "football factory." What they fail to see is that having a successful football program tends to highlight academic and reseach achievements, not degrade them. Having successful teams has certainly not damaged the academic reputations of schools like Stanford, Michigan, Texas, USC, etc.
Rather than try to squeeze every penny out of athletics in the form of charging out of state tuition and billing for regular sevices like facilities maintainence and even non-athletic administrator travel to athletic events they could try to look at athletics as an opportunity to build strong relations with alumni and other potential donors and persons of influence.
Experience at other schools has shown that when the football team is winning it is much easier to generate donations, not only to athletics but also to non-athletic purposes. Those with the money like to be associated with a winner, like to be able to wear the school emblem with a sense of pride and belonging, not with a sense of embarassment and being a target for ridicule.
It is true as well that CU is not suffering for students but it is also true that many schools have found a direct corellation between successful athletics, especially football and the number of applicants they recieve. It simply follows that the more applicants you have the more selective you can be. The more selective you are the more likely you are to have a higher quality student body and more successful graduates. Those same graduates who in the future create your donor base.
Nobody is asking (well most aren't) asking for CU to become a Miami or Baylor and sell it's soul for athletic success. All that is being ask is that the administration get down of it's ivory tower fantasy and recognize that a successful football team means much more to the school than just those extra dollars they are able to squeeze out each year while pretending they are something that they are not academically.
Some of that 20 million did come from the Hawk buyout, the JE buyout, etc. A lot more of it came from the department being nickeled and dimed at every corner by Dr Phil and his merry band of clowns. I could stomach them much more easily for doing this if they could point to some outstanding accomplishments in academic or research areas that justify their priorities but I just don't see those.
Tell me one area where the reputation of CU has made a significant step forward under Dr. Phil, show me some significant area of national recognition for CU that wouldn't exist if not for his leadership. Show me how CU is better off for having him at the helm of the Boulder campus. I don't see any. I see a school who's academic reputation is the same or declining compared to our peers, who's research reputation is stagnant or declining, who's quality of student body the same.
They may think that they are protecting the academic reputation of the school by not being a "football factory." What they fail to see is that having a successful football program tends to highlight academic and reseach achievements, not degrade them. Having successful teams has certainly not damaged the academic reputations of schools like Stanford, Michigan, Texas, USC, etc.
Lt.Col.FrankSlade
Well-Known Member
Your information is just plain wrong. In 2003, CU spent $44 million to construct suites and club seats on the east side of the stadium. That project was entirely financed (i.e. no big private donations). CU is still paying $4 million per year for that construction, I believe. In 2012, CU spent $7 million to purchase / install new video boards on the North/South sides of the stadium. In 2011, CU spent $12 million on renovations / improvement to the basketball facility, to build new coaches' offices, practice facilities, etc. (I believe this was paid for via private donations, believe it or not.) Unfortunately, they have not stepped up with a significant, major "investment" to date. Hopefully that will happen sooner, rather than later.