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!
Who's our next coach
- Thread starter Jdubb1028
- Start date
Don't let his Bio confuse you. Chuck is widely respected as one of the best defensive coaches in the game. Why hasn't he became a coordinator yet? I don't know. Maybe Brian Cabral can answer that question.
I think you are right.......
Asked to compare the environments at Nebraska and Colorado — for which he coached from 1999 to 2005 — Watson described it as “night and day.”
The coaching situation at Colorado has grown into a hot topic as Dan Hawkins struggles early in his fourth season.
“It's not even close,” Watson said. “The experience is real simple. Nebraska loves their team. Nebraska appreciates football. That's it. I mean, really, it's that simple. It's a passion. It's a love. It's not a convenience thing. There's a difference. There's a huge difference.”
Idot Buff
Guest
He is tired of playing second fiddle to UT, OU, A&M, Tech, and (dare-I-say) Baylor for top recruits, attention from the media, etc. Not sure if coming to Boulder would be satisfactory for him, but I think he would jump at a new opportunity that will push him to the next level. Even if TCU plays in a BCS game this year, I don't think it changes that. But how do we know?
Plus the DFW area's going to get crowded again. TCU has had its run of dominating the local scene (behind the Cowboys, UT and 5A of course), but June Jones is now 2-0 at SMU. Jones will build a winner and SMU has a more deep-rooted following in the DFW area. I have a strong feeling that he's looking at the situation he's in and saying to himself that he's taken it as far as he can and it is only going to go down hill from here.
Recruits in the lucrative SE as well. Coached at The U for awhile when they were strong.
Your reaching, imho. In case you forgot Butch inherited and guided a UM team that was put on academic probation. He cleaned up shop and quickly and still managed to win. With his hands tied behind his back. He has a reputation for running a clean and disciplined program.
But if your right then we should just bulldoze Folsom and and cancel athletics becuase we will likely never be very good again. There were players on Mac's teams that had one foot in prison. Now the standard is so much higher that were hosed on admissions and the PC front. Its easier to root for USC or The U or Notre Dame.
If I can find that kind of detail on Wikipedia I would think Chuck Neinas should have known it as well for $150k.
Last edited:
ScottyBuff
Well-Known Member
It seems that there are two kinds of coaches out there in college football. The Big Time Recruiter types that use every tool at their disposal to get the best talent on their team, provide a "face" to the program, make the donation rounds doing the "celebrity coach" type thing to bring in bucks to the programs. But all of that HAS to take away from their X's and O's so they recruit and hire game day coordinators that actually call plays and run practices (basically the Lieutenants to his General). At times he might even let well established coordinators decide the schemes that the school will run. In short he is the CEO and needs talented Vice Presidents to run a successful program, as long as the buy into his overall vision and mission statement.
The other type is the "Mastermind" type coach that knows his schemes X's and O's better than anyone and knows the types of players he needs, he is a decent recruiter but really focuses on specific types of players and probably falls in love with the "hard worker" types more than the elite athlete primadonna types. His focus is on game-day execution, practices and repetition; he is the professor who needs students. He delegates a greater share of the recruiting to his assistants to bring in the players that the program needs to run its schemes. This type of coach is a Micromanager and needs Drill Sargeant type assistants to enforce his scheme's discipline and principles.
Now, I understand that coaches work EXTREMELY hard, are football experts beyond the imagination of mere fans, and all have elements of both types at different times and maybe used to be one type and have changed into the other.
Dan Hawkins seems more to be the Micromanager type of coach, which means that the issues with the scheme, the implementation, the discipline, the execution of the gameplan are all primarily on his shoulders, especially when it comes to the offense.
I have always favored an "X's and O's" type coach, it just feels more like what we expect in a blue-collar, smash-mouth, work hard type mentality.
But, I think that in the current college football environment that type of coach can be most successful at smaller programs, while a CEO type is needed for long-term success at BCS level programs.
We do need more of a "CEO" type coach that will give free reign to his assistants to execute the day-to-day details appropriately, and replace them when they can't. This type of coach is the Bowden, Paterno, Carroll, Meyer type coach and when you find the right guy, you find a program-building persona. Hot shot coordinators love to work for this guy, and that is why "Mastermind" type coaches usually were assistants under "CEO" type coaches.
So that is why the most important element to being successful long-term is that the University and the State of Colorado allow for better contracts for assistant coaches. Otherwise we will have to go through so much upheaval every time a new "Mastermind" becomes the new coach and has to implement his patented scheme while the existing players are left stranded.
I think Hawkins hasn't done enough yet to turn the corner and it will take a monumental turnaround for me to change my mind (evidence rules decision-making in my life, not blind faith). So, if we do look for a new coach maybe we should get the "CEO" type coach next time, as long as we can allow him to bring in top-notch assistants.
The other type is the "Mastermind" type coach that knows his schemes X's and O's better than anyone and knows the types of players he needs, he is a decent recruiter but really focuses on specific types of players and probably falls in love with the "hard worker" types more than the elite athlete primadonna types. His focus is on game-day execution, practices and repetition; he is the professor who needs students. He delegates a greater share of the recruiting to his assistants to bring in the players that the program needs to run its schemes. This type of coach is a Micromanager and needs Drill Sargeant type assistants to enforce his scheme's discipline and principles.
Now, I understand that coaches work EXTREMELY hard, are football experts beyond the imagination of mere fans, and all have elements of both types at different times and maybe used to be one type and have changed into the other.
Dan Hawkins seems more to be the Micromanager type of coach, which means that the issues with the scheme, the implementation, the discipline, the execution of the gameplan are all primarily on his shoulders, especially when it comes to the offense.
I have always favored an "X's and O's" type coach, it just feels more like what we expect in a blue-collar, smash-mouth, work hard type mentality.
But, I think that in the current college football environment that type of coach can be most successful at smaller programs, while a CEO type is needed for long-term success at BCS level programs.
We do need more of a "CEO" type coach that will give free reign to his assistants to execute the day-to-day details appropriately, and replace them when they can't. This type of coach is the Bowden, Paterno, Carroll, Meyer type coach and when you find the right guy, you find a program-building persona. Hot shot coordinators love to work for this guy, and that is why "Mastermind" type coaches usually were assistants under "CEO" type coaches.
So that is why the most important element to being successful long-term is that the University and the State of Colorado allow for better contracts for assistant coaches. Otherwise we will have to go through so much upheaval every time a new "Mastermind" becomes the new coach and has to implement his patented scheme while the existing players are left stranded.
I think Hawkins hasn't done enough yet to turn the corner and it will take a monumental turnaround for me to change my mind (evidence rules decision-making in my life, not blind faith). So, if we do look for a new coach maybe we should get the "CEO" type coach next time, as long as we can allow him to bring in top-notch assistants.
You seriously think Hawkins is a micromanager? You think he has major responsibilities with the offense and gameday coaching?
I think it is the exact opposite. I think he delegates a lot of work to his assistants. He is much closer to the CEO type you describe than the micromanager type. I really do not think he is making too many decisions on gameday.
I think it is the exact opposite. I think he delegates a lot of work to his assistants. He is much closer to the CEO type you describe than the micromanager type. I really do not think he is making too many decisions on gameday.
Good post. I agree with your opinion on Hawkins.
ScottyBuff
Well-Known Member
You seriously think Hawkins is a micromanager? You think he has major responsibilities with the offense and gameday coaching?
I think it is the exact opposite. I think he delegates a lot of work to his assistants. He is much closer to the CEO type you describe than the micromanager type. I really do not think he is making too many decisions on gameday.
Well he certainly doesn't fit the role of a "CEO" type coach. I don't see him providing leadership and accountability for the program.
Just because he isn't directly calling in the plays doesn't mean he is not a "Micromanager". Delegating the duty of implementing a specific scheme is still a trademark of a Micromanager type coach. Delegating the decision making of what type of scheme is a "CEO" type delegation.
Anyway, it's just a generalized basis for the types of coaches that seem to be prevalent in NCAA, not a scientific breakdown.
How about this?
Maybe Coach Hawkins is neither and that's why he's failing.
Maybe he's the "Philosopher" type and sees his role as hiring good people, ensuring that we recruit good kids, setting a high example of personal behavior and self-motivation, giving everyone a lot of love, passing on bits of wisdom gained over the course of his life and his readings, coaching players and coaches on both fundamentals and nuances... and then getting out of the way and having trust in his coaches and players to be successful.
Fair enough. I think Buffnik is right. He may not fit neatly into either category and that is why it is not working right now.
I think many here will agree with you. I'd love to see Turner Gill come here. If anyone is mad at hiring a Husker, they should be mad a Mac for hiring Ben Gregory. He was a fantastic RB coach.
TexasHusker
New Member
Turner Gill will be an amazing coach, and he would probably do some great things if he came to CU. I was really hoping that he might get hired as OC in NU since it seems like Watson will be leaving given his number of suitors.
This might sound crazy given recent history, but how about hiring the Boise St. HC? He seems to be doing pretty well up there, and he wouldn't completely tear down the system if he was hired.
This might sound crazy given recent history, but how about hiring the Boise St. HC? He seems to be doing pretty well up there, and he wouldn't completely tear down the system if he was hired.
I don't see Turner taking a step down to become a OC. He's destined for some bigger things. Like becoming a HC at a BCS school. It's going to happen.
ScottyBuff
Well-Known Member
That could be it, which would be even more disturbing.
I had originally slammed the thought of getting a "recruiter" coach like Heater, but now I'm thinking that if he had two stud coordinators and the program was run more "business-like" that we would have more success than the secretive Hawk love style.
Accountability to the customers (fans) is what is missing, hopefully it is there for management (coaches) and employees (players).
I agree with most of your points. They are all pretty much spot on. I just think you underestimate Heater a bit. jmho.
I don't think Hawk is much of a X's and O's type of coach, I could be completely wrong. I also don't think Carroll or Meyer don't have absolutely everything to do with what their teams do on gameday. Carroll is pretty much the defensive coordinator for USC I think? He leaves the offense to be run by Chow, Sarkisian or Bates. I'm sure he has a hand in what kind of offense he'd prefer too. I'm pretty sure Meyer is about the same except his specialty is offense. They just happen to be great faces of their programs and excellent recruiters. I'd say Dan is the type to delegate duties to his assistant coaches, which is why I think he'd be a good coach so long as he surrounds himself with assistants that can really coach. He simply didn't do this with Helfrich or Collins.
TexasHusker
New Member
I hear ya. I wasnt trying to slam Nebraska either. Normally a OC position there is a pretty good job. But not in Turner's case.No arguments from me, I just have my scarlet colored glasses on.
Maybe when Bo leaves for the tOSU spot, Turner will be available. :smile2: