Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
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!

Assistant Coaches TABOR and Amendment S

Not sure..... Sounds like this basically creates an exemption for 325 positions but does actually change the rules about state personnel contracts. And I am guessing that the govenor will not be giving exemptions to CU football to officially hire assistant coaches. If they were gonna give anything it would be to head coaches of other CU sports like skiing, track, cross country etc. You know how much the state supports college stuff (ie none).
 
It's not often mentioned, but one could argue that CU's football program started its long decline right around the time that TABOR was passed. When you consider the ridiculous restrictions on state employees limiting our ability to attract and keep assistant coaches and the slow strangulation of the university's state funding, it makes sense that TABOR reduces the program's ability to compete on a level playing ground with other programs in states more friendly to public higher ed.

Does it place higher than dumbass appointments to President like Albino and Buffalo Betsy and bad hires for coaches, probably not, but perhaps behind the scenes, TABOR has affected those hires.
 
Alfred91 said:
It's not often mentioned, but one could argue that CU's football program started its long decline right around the time that TABOR was passed. When you consider the ridiculous restrictions on state employees limiting our ability to attract and keep assistant coaches and the slow strangulation of the university's state funding, it makes sense that TABOR reduces the program's ability to compete on a level playing ground with other programs in states more friendly to public higher ed.

Does it place higher than dumbass appointments to President like Albino and Buffalo Betsy and bad hires for coaches, probably not, but perhaps behind the scenes, TABOR has affected those hires.
Click to expand...

I dont know how much it relates to the football program but I feel like Tabor did have a real significant impact on the university as an educational institution. I graduated in 02 and came back for grad school in 07 and while there were new builidings literally nothing else had been replaced or upgraded since 02. It was quite obvious that budgets were really tight and behind the nice exterior some things were begining to crumble.
 
I'm reasonably certain that the classification of CU as a enterprise allows them to dole out as many multi-year contracts as they want to. I know there are 4-5 coaches that have multi-year contracts now. EB, Marshall, Embree and Brown I think all do, as well as Bohn, Lappe and Boyle. I don't think the contract issue is an issue any longer. This was all part of the deal that the school struck with the legislature a couple years ago, when we were lamenting the fact that we had to keep Hawkins. Benson & crew were trying to get this done.
 
sackman said:
I'm reasonably certain that the classification of CU as a enterprise allows them to dole out as many multi-year contracts as they want to. I know there are 4-5 coaches that have multi-year contracts now. EB, Marshall, Embree and Brown I think all do, as well as Bohn, Lappe and Boyle. I don't think the contract issue is an issue any longer. This was all part of the deal that the school struck with the legislature a couple years ago, when we were lamenting the fact that we had to keep Hawkins. Benson & crew were trying to get this done.
Click to expand...
The way I understand it is that the AD gets something like 6 exemptions now. It used to only get, like, 3. But most assistants other than the cooridinators are still on year by year contracts. I believe this really hurts us in retaining good assistants. I suppose it helps if you cut a coach loose before his/her contract expires. In that case, you don't have to buy out the assistants.
 
DBT said:
The way I understand it is that the AD gets something like 6 exemptions now. It used to only get, like, 3. But most assistants other than the cooridinators are still on year by year contracts. I believe this really hurts us in retaining good assistants. I suppose it helps if you cut a coach loose before his/her contract expires. In that case, you don't have to buy out the assistants.
Click to expand...
this is correct
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top