Then we disagree.
Then we disagree.
The only way I see this as the case, is if they are assured it won't be a one year gig. Similar to my speculation as to why Leavitt and Tumpkin both agreed to come here (They were assured the staff would get 2016 regardless).You are speculating and stating it as a fact. He landed 2 extraordinary assistants last off-season; If the money and positions are right, there will be plenty of takers.
IDK. The program has a lot to offer...new facilities, greatest venue, great town, committed admin. We have a large pool of $ for assistants...I'm tired of paying for a Benz and getting a Yugo (young posters...look it up )I think he'll have trouble landing quality assistants this offseason, depending on how the season finishes out. Year 4 would definitely be the make or break year and most assistants with options won't want to take that risk.
Absolutely. CU is 10x more attractive of a job now than it was 3 years ago. Look at Oregon State, they went out and got Gary Andersen. I think CU has more to offer than OSU, and Andersen is certainly a much better coach then HCMM. He is certainly more accomplished and recognizable than MM.IDK. The program has a lot to offer...new facilities, greatest venue, great town, committed admin. We have a large pool of $ for assistants...I'm tired of paying for a Benz and getting a Yugo (young posters...look it up )
I have been a pretty big critic of Mac from early on. But, I do not want RG to make a change just for the sake of it. Only if he feels like we can hire a substantial upgrade.The ONLY way I see a change happening is if RG, for whatever reason, knows he can hit a home run with the next hire. And he would have to know that in advance.
I think he'll have trouble landing quality assistants this offseason, depending on how the season finishes out. Year 4 would definitely be the make or break year and most assistants with options won't want to take that risk.
This program really needs some continuity. Although I'm not happy with many things, I think it is important that we bite the bullet and give Mac a full 5 years. Bad coaching has killed us, for sure. But the constant changes in coaching staffs has been at least as damaging.
I see your point. But using only that logic, then we should have given Hawk another 2-3 years, or Embree another 3 years.I can't compare MM to Bill McCartney, but I will for playing devil's advocate.
In the first three years of McCartney's reign after the horrid tenure of Chuck Fairbanks, the CU buffs went:
7-25-1 and didn't show dominance until his 8th season.
Right now, MM is 9-21 in his third season.
Not saying this is a good thing, just saying that there COULD be a future here if he has teh support staff he needs
and the recruiting to do that.
If he does or will has yet to be seen, though.
I can't compare MM to Bill McCartney, but I will for playing devil's advocate.
In the first three years of McCartney's reign after the horrid tenure of Chuck Fairbanks, the CU buffs went:
7-25-1 and didn't show dominance until his 8th season.
Right now, MM is 9-21 in his third season.
Not saying this is a good thing, just saying that there COULD be a future here if he has teh support staff he needs
and the recruiting to do that.
If he does or will has yet to be seen, though.
Since they already extended him after the first year it would seem an extension would be talked about after next season.
I can't compare MM to Bill McCartney, but I will for playing devil's advocate.
In the first three years of McCartney's reign after the horrid tenure of Chuck Fairbanks, the CU buffs went:
7-25-1 and didn't show dominance until his 8th season.
Right now, MM is 9-21 in his third season.
Not saying this is a good thing, just saying that there COULD be a future here if he has teh support staff he needs
and the recruiting to do that.
If he does or will has yet to be seen, though.
Head coaching contracts at CU are given a one year bump every year. Yes technically its an extension, but its more procedural than anything.
I thought Tad was the only one to get that after last season. Mac was extended the first year but not the second. Maybe I am wrong.
I wouldn't say 3 more conference wins over almost another full conference slate is considered "glaring".One glaring difference between the two, Bill McCartney went 4-16-1 in conference play in his first 3 seasons. Coach MacIntyre, has gone 1-19 in conference in his first 2+ seasons. Bill never had a winless conference slate. HCMM has already had one and I don't think will survive another. He needs to win Pac-12 games. Period.
I wouldn't say 3 more conference wins over almost another full conference slate is considered "glaring".
scary thing is, in the article about the player only mtg., we might be close to rock bottom... I thought we were already down into the Mantle and reaching the core already?? Damn this is a huge hole.This is kind of where I am at as well. This could be a really long term project and we clearly reached those depths of despair as we did with Fairbanks.
But you're making it about the number. Two of BM's first three seasons were 1 win conference records. When you're that bad (as we are currently), what's the difference between 0 conference wins and 1?Its not the number, its the method. HCBM never went winless in conference.
Its perception among your fans. Its perception among your peers. Its perception among your players. Its perception among the media.But you're making it about the number. Two of BM's first three seasons were 1 win conference records. When you're that bad (as we are currently), what's the difference between 0 conference wins and 1?
scary thing is, in the article about the player only mtg., we might be close to rock bottom... I thought we were already down into the Mantle and reaching the core already?? Damn this is a huge hole.
Understandable; I just think this program is well beyond worrying about fan, peer or media perception. We're essentially at rock bottom for all three.Its perception among your fans. Its perception among your peers. Its perception among your players. Its perception among the media.
Understandable; I just think this program is well beyond worrying about fan, peer or media perception. We're essentially at rock bottom for all three.
so how many conference wins are NEEDED this year to be able to say that things are going in the right direction?
I would LOVE three conference wins, but at this point, I'd take 2....WSU and OSU are prime pickin' right now.
I'm thinking maybe USC as well.
He NEEDS at least 1. Thats an improvement over last year. That doubles the win total from last year. That shows we can compete with these teams. For me, personally, to say it is going in the right direction, HCMM needs 2 PAC-12 wins.
This is so true. The new guys have brought in higher profile talent in a few months than the rest of the staff in 3 years. Get some new damn assistants already.Recruiting has picked up since the defensive staff remake. With a good set of hires on the other side of the ball we may be better off. A complete staff change may compromise all that too and cost us the recruits.
0 x 2 = 0
I mean the overall win total.
2-10 last year vs 4-9 this year.