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!

Can you win consistently in Boulder?

TDforTD said:
This is the exact type of whiny thread that I laugh at on other team’s message boards after their meltdowns. Get this soft ass thread off of Luke’s board and over to Ramnation where it belongs.

giphy-downsized-large.gif
Click to expand...
Post of the year in the worst thread of the year?
4DemBuffs said:
Why can one win in Morgantown, West Virginia and not in Boulder?

This question is not an endorsement of Holgerson as HC at CU. Just a... how come? You tell me what they have that is better
Click to expand...

A better coach.

This whole thread is asinine and the doom and gloom is mired in recency bias. Good coaching is the main factor in a winning program. History/campus/college life/academics in some order a distant 2nd-5th.

Out of curiosity, I looked at records of three different "blue blood" programs the last 20-25 years and bad stretches they've had. As well as their record under their coaches now (not even including playoffs/bowls/conference championship games this season).

Michigan: 10 year stretch averaging 7 wins. Averaging just under 10 wins in 4 seasons under Harbaugh.
Alabama: 11 year stretch averaging 6 wins. Averaging 12 wins over 12 seasons under Saban.
Clemson: 19 year stretch averaging 7 wins. Averaging over 11 wins in 10 seasons under Dabo Sweeney.

My point is, we consider these programs three of the best in the country, and historically some of the best all time, and they've had mediocre to bad stretches. They've had to find the right coaches to get them winning again. It wasn't some magical combination of fan support and/or perfect socioeconomic campus/city make-up to win games again. We've had three coaches in a row that weren't the right fit. That'll cause a bad stretch. If we find the right guy and start a winning decade, the national public will forget the losing and remember the recent winning record, the 1990 championship, the Heisman trophy, and the support and recruiting will continue to snowball. But, it all starts with hitting a homerun of a hire. And from all the reports, Rick George has dug up the money and support to make that a reality.
 
Darth Snow said:
This thread is dumb and started by a guy who only comes here when CU is losing something. Only worse poster is bwalk
Click to expand...
Simply not true ... I started a thread earlier this year about how great Laviska is and where he fits in our all-time greats talent-wise. Last year, I raved about Kin and where fits in our history. When we beat Nebraska this year, I posted about how there's no better feeling than beating those ****ers. Many, many other posts that would be considered "positive" by the fan police on here.

Try again.
 
seattlebuff said:
Simply not true ... I started a thread earlier this year about how great Laviska is and where he fits in our all-time greats talent-wise. Last year, I raved about Kin and where fits in our history. When we beat Nebraska this year, I posted about how there's no better feeling than beating those ****ers. Many, many other posts that would be considered "positive" by the fan police on here.

Try again.
Click to expand...
my mistake. A poster who comes here almost exclusively when CU is losing something.
 
DrunkRalphie said:
"Can you consistently win in Boulder?"

Top 25 in wins and number 10 in conference Championships says yes.
Click to expand...
For the record, Wisconsin and Mich State are 1 and 4 wins behind us respectively ... so this will be our last year in the top 25 in all-time wins.

We're 42nd in win percentage all-time, a much more relevant gauge.

We are 109th since 2003 at 75-124 ... Illinois is the only P5 team below us.
 
Last edited:
seattlebuff said:
For the record, Wisconsin and Mich State are 1 and 4 wins behind us respectively ... so this will be our last year in the top 25 in all-time wins.

We are 109th since 2003 at 75-124 ... Illinois is the only P5 team below us.
Click to expand...
I suggest you go to the Wisconsin boards. I'm sure they would love you.
 
Where was Seattle the week after the Nebraska win when we were all feeling good about ourselves? Snow is right-he only shows up here when we're losing or when we're playing Washington in Seattle and needs tickets.
 
seattlebuff said:
Completely agree ... and as I said in my post and subsequent follow ups, getting to a minor bowl consistently is attainable even with a “good” coach. But IMO given all the football culture things I mention, it will take a Peterson-level coach to get anything above that.
Click to expand...

That's where I disagree with you-Neuheisel (who did it with the godfather's players) had two 10 win seasons. Barnett had 2001 and followed that up with 9 wins in 2002. FHCMM won ten games (you can argue that he did it with Embree's players too-Sefo and Phil both committed before JE was fired) in 2016. Those types of seasons are possible here every so often with the right guy in charge.
 
Winning football in Boulder is possible if the administration really cares. The next coach will be very telling.
 
ahoelsken said:
Where was Seattle the week after the Nebraska win when we were all feeling good about ourselves? Snow is right-he only shows up here when we're losing or when we're playing Washington in Seattle and needs tickets.
Click to expand...
Dead wrong, try again. I was on this board after the Nebraska win, ecstatic and hopeful ... my last post in that thread:

"It doesn’t matter if Nebraska is rebuilding. Beating a P5 conference team on the road is ****ing huge for this program. Great adjustments after halftime, which is what we all were bitching about in the 2nd quarter. Huge win Buffs!!!"

And I've never once said a single word about needing tickets ... every Buffs football and basketball game in the last 5 years in Seattle I've bought tix well in advance.

Get your facts straight, a-hole skin.
 
seattlebuff said:
Dead wrong, try again. I was on this board after the Nebraska win, ecstatic and hopeful ... my last post in that thread:

"It doesn’t matter if Nebraska is rebuilding. Beating a P5 conference team on the road is ****ing huge for this program. Great adjustments after halftime, which is what we all were bitching about in the 2nd quarter. Huge win Buffs!!!"

And I've never once said a single word about needing tickets ... every Buffs football and basketball game in the last 5 years in Seattle I've bought tix well in advance.

Get your facts straight, a-hole skin.
Click to expand...

You sound like Surveyor.
 
seattlebuff said:
There’s a lot of talk on this board about RG needing to find a coach who can win P12 championships ... RG says it himself. That is a total joke. We have to start facing facts in Buffland. At best, we are the Iowa State of the Pac 12. (Some might say more like the Kansas.) A team that will occasionally have a good run in a down year for the league and get close (like 2016). But more likely, this program’s ceiling is about 7-5 or 8-4. And most years we’ll wallow in the 3-9 to 5-7 area. Why is that?

Support ... I’ve always said, if Boulder was 30 minutes further from Denver, we’d draw 10k a game at most. Not enough people at CU care about football ... least of which is the administration. That’s a fact. Boulder is a GREAT college town, but first and foremost an ultra progressive crunchy outdoor adventure town - meaning it is simply not a supportive environment for conventional sports. Why would any top-tier coach come here, knowing that (and its widely known in football circles)? People talking about Holgerson coming are completely delusional.

When I hear RG talk about the beauty of Folsom and Boulder as being factors in drawing players and coaches, I just laugh. I love those things ... but most football people don’t give a **** about that stuff. That might draw skiers, lacrosse and cross country and soccer players here, but not football coaches and players. All most football players see is a lilly white hippie town that doesn't give a **** about football.

Convince me I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

"Can you win consistently in Boulder?" <------ I think the answer to that is now no. Consider the history....

  • Bill McCartney - (unlimited recruiting) Hired during the Gordon Gee Bill Marolt era. Gee was an ambitious career minded president. Marolt knew his stuff. McCartney was a Big 10 Asst under Bo Schembechler. McCartney apparently has a deal to "get in" one kid per class that wouldnt normally qualify. At time when Texas and USC were weak McCartney builds his1990 mNC team with some of those states best players. But not without a price as the police blotter at CU attracts the attention of national media. It's not clear wether restrictions were imposed following this or if McCartney became more careful about who he recruited. But after winning an NC you have the luxury of being selective.
  • Rick Neuheisel - (unlimited) Judith Albino Bill Marolt. Albino was complaining about expensive assistant pay in Mac's last years. Neu (Big12 Assistant) was both cheap and an up and comer compared to Spurrier making him an easy choice at $400k (Bolted for UDubs million dollar pay day). Neu was all over the place as a HC but he could recruit.
  • Gary Barnett - (from unlimited to extremely limited) John Buechner, Dick Tharp. A high profile hire; After being spurned by the Broncos OC Tharp settled on Big 10 head coach Barnett. GB Knew how to coach, knew how to recruit to an academic school. Following a series of PR scandals around the Ath Dept recruiting restrictions are put in place and take their toll on coaches and win loss column. Barnetts last season saw very soft and uncompetitive teams.
  • Dan Hawkins - (extremely limited to limited) Hank Brown, Mike Bohn. By some appearances a high profile hire (the hot name at the time). The hire was however from an inferior conference and the school was very cautious. Recruiting restrictions are allgedly slowly lifted but admissions issues plague the program. Recruiting experiences extreme highs and lows. Team is divided by coaches son being starting QB.
  • John Embree - (likely less limited) Bruce Benson, Mike Bohn. A university in transition; The Presidents office moves from Boulder to Denver. The AD leaves the Big 12 for the Pac 12 and is money starved. Embree the former player is a position coach in the NFL is an inexpensive hire booster favorite with little college coaching experience. Recruiting under JE has more extreme highs and lows as depth gaps are created. Game day performance is terrible.
  • Mike MacIntyre - (likely less limited) Bruce Benson, Mike Bohn. MM, another hot name from an inferior conference, brings balance back to the program in terms of recruiting. The team has depth again at positions that were lean under Embree. Mike has success with some of Jon's players. Recruiting is largely underwhelming though and the team struggles to win in conference or against ranked teams.

Are there still restrictions of some kind? This is an important question. And I'd say so; CUs seems to struggle attracting successful coaches and assistant coaches that can make big time recruiting wins since GB era. Did the coaches before GB have a freer hand to recruit than those since? No contracts for assistants certainly didnt help either.

While CU is certainly a top notch spot in a big conference coaches could be staying away for some of the above reasons. To say it another way, there are probably 75 other schools in worse settings and a few that are not that pose little to no restrictions on recruiting (non AAU conferences, most all of the G5, nearly all SEC and ACC schools).

It's difficult to CONSISTENTLY produce a regular winner without any restrictions (NU, Bama, etc). With them its even harder.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
"Can you win consistently in Boulder?" <------ I think the answer to that is now no. Consider the history....

  • Bill McCartney - (unlimited recruiting) Hired during the Gordon Gee Bill Marolt era. Gee was an ambitious career minded president. Marolt knew his stuff. McCartney was a Big 10 Asst under Bo Schembechler. McCartney apparently has a deal to "get in" one kid per class that wouldnt normally qualify. At time when Texas and USC were weak McCartney builds his1990 mNC team with some of those states best players. But not without a price as the police blotter at CU attracts the attention of national media. It's not clear wether restrictions were imposed following this or if McCartney became more careful about who he recruited. But after winning an NC you have the luxury of being selective.
  • Rick Neuheisel - (unlimited) Judith Albino Bill Marolt. Albino was complaining about expensive assistant pay in Mac's last years. Neu (Big12 Assistant) was both cheap and an up and comer compared to Spurrier making him an easy choice at $400k (Bolted for UDubs million dollar pay day). Neu was all over the place as a HC but he could recruit.
  • Gary Barnett - (from unlimited to extremely limited) John Buechner, Dick Tharp. A high profile hire; After being spurned by the Broncos OC Tharp settled on Big 10 head coach Barnett. GB Knew how to coach, knew how to recruit to an academic school. Following a series of PR scandals around the Ath Dept recruiting restrictions are put in place and take their toll on coaches and win loss column. Barnetts last season saw very soft and uncompetitive teams.
  • Dan Hawkins - (extremely limited to limited) Hank Brown, Mike Bohn. By some appearances a high profile hire (the hot name at the time). The hire was however from an inferior conference and the school was very cautious. Recruiting restrictions are allgedly slowly lifted but admissions issues plague the program. Recruiting experiences extreme highs and lows. Team is divided by coaches son being starting QB.
  • John Embree - (likely less limited) Bruce Benson, Mike Bohn. A university in transition; The Presidents office moves from Boulder to Denver. The AD leaves the Big 12 for the Pac 12 and is money starved. Embree the former player is a position coach in the NFL is an inexpensive hire booster favorite with little college coaching experience. Recruiting under JE has more extreme highs and lows as depth gaps are created. Game day performance is terrible.
  • Mike MacIntyre - (likely less limited) Bruce Benson, Mike Bohn. MM, another hot name from an inferior conference, brings balance back to the program in terms of recruiting. The team has depth again at positions that were lean under Embree. Mike has success with some of Jon's players. Recruiting is largely underwhelming though and the team struggles to win in conference or against ranked teams.

Are there still restrictions of some kind? This is an important question. And I'd say so; CUs seems to struggle attracting successful coaches and assistant coaches that can make big time recruiting wins since GB era. Did the coaches before GB have a freer hand to recruit than those since? No contracts for assistants certainly didnt help either.

While CU is certainly a top notch spot in a big conference coaches could be staying away for some of the above reasons. To say it another way, there are probably 75 other schools in worse settings and a few that are not that pose little to no restrictions on recruiting (non AAU conferences, most all of the G5, nearly all SEC and ACC schools).

It's difficult to CONSISTENTLY produce a regular winner without any restrictions (NU, Bama, etc). With them its even harder.
Click to expand...
The AD is in the best shape it's been since early Barnett. What do Hawkins, Embree and MacIntyre have in common?
 
MiamiBuffs said:
"Can you win consistently in Boulder?" <------ I think the answer to that is now no. Consider the history....

  • Bill McCartney - (unlimited recruiting) Hired during the Gordon Gee Bill Marolt era. Gee was an ambitious career minded president. Marolt knew his stuff. McCartney was a Big 10 Asst under Bo Schembechler. McCartney apparently has a deal to "get in" one kid per class that wouldnt normally qualify. At time when Texas and USC were weak McCartney builds his1990 mNC team with some of those states best players. But not without a price as the police blotter at CU attracts the attention of national media. It's not clear wether restrictions were imposed following this or if McCartney became more careful about who he recruited. But after winning an NC you have the luxury of being selective.
  • Rick Neuheisel - (unlimited) Judith Albino Bill Marolt. Albino was complaining about expensive assistant pay in Mac's last years. Neu (Big12 Assistant) was both cheap and an up and comer compared to Spurrier making him an easy choice at $400k (Bolted for UDubs million dollar pay day). Neu was all over the place as a HC but he could recruit.
  • Gary Barnett - (from unlimited to extremely limited) John Buechner, Dick Tharp. A high profile hire; After being spurned by the Broncos OC Tharp settled on Big 10 head coach Barnett. GB Knew how to coach, knew how to recruit to an academic school. Following a series of PR scandals around the Ath Dept recruiting restrictions are put in place and take their toll on coaches and win loss column. Barnetts last season saw very soft and uncompetitive teams.
  • Dan Hawkins - (extremely limited to limited) Hank Brown, Mike Bohn. By some appearances a high profile hire (the hot name at the time). The hire was however from an inferior conference and the school was very cautious. Recruiting restrictions are allgedly slowly lifted but admissions issues plague the program. Recruiting experiences extreme highs and lows. Team is divided by coaches son being starting QB.
  • John Embree - (likely less limited) Bruce Benson, Mike Bohn. A university in transition; The Presidents office moves from Boulder to Denver. The AD leaves the Big 12 for the Pac 12 and is money starved. Embree the former player is a position coach in the NFL is an inexpensive hire booster favorite with little college coaching experience. Recruiting under JE has more extreme highs and lows as depth gaps are created. Game day performance is terrible.
  • Mike MacIntyre - (likely less limited) Bruce Benson, Mike Bohn. MM, another hot name from an inferior conference, brings balance back to the program in terms of recruiting. The team has depth again at positions that were lean under Embree. Mike has success with some of Jon's players. Recruiting is largely underwhelming though and the team struggles to win in conference or against ranked teams.

Are there still restrictions of some kind? This is an important question. And I'd say so; CUs seems to struggle attracting successful coaches and assistant coaches that can make big time recruiting wins since GB era. Did the coaches before GB have a freer hand to recruit than those since? No contracts for assistants certainly didnt help either.

While CU is certainly a top notch spot in a big conference coaches could be staying away for some of the above reasons. To say it another way, there are probably 75 other schools in worse settings and a few that are not that pose little to no restrictions on recruiting (non AAU conferences, most all of the G5, nearly all SEC and ACC schools).

It's difficult to CONSISTENTLY produce a regular winner without any restrictions (NU, Bama, etc). With them its even harder.
Click to expand...
MM is the first coach to recruit with either no or very limited restrictions - and he didn't get the new facilities until 2 years into his tenure.

Let's see what a real coach, with a real batch of assistant coaches (with long term contracts), with some of the best facilities around, can do with regards to recruiting. None of the previous coaches since New-Weasel have had that option for more than 2 years (beginning of GB, end of MM). I'd be willing to bet the recruiting improves significantly with a staff that emphasizes it.
 
Even in a season with a historically bad collapse our attendance numbers are not bad compared to our Pac-12 peers. If we can put together three bowl seasons in a row Folsom will be sold out for just about every game that isn't against an FCS opponent. As others have said, this area will support winners.

 
Tatanka™ said:
Even in a season with a historically bad collapse our attendance numbers are not bad compared to our Pac-12 peers. If we can put together three bowl seasons in a row Folsom will be sold out for just about every game that isn't against an FCS opponent. As others have said, this area will support winners.

Click to expand...


Nice, thanks for posting this!
 
skibum said:
I'm already looking forward to bumping this thread and making fun of these assholes when we pull off a couple 10 win seasons in a row.
Click to expand...
You’ll never find them, skibum. They’ll probably be watching NASCAR waiting for an injury wreck or looking for live executions on the Deep Web.
 
seattlebuff said:
My point, ****head, is that if you just had Boulder residents and the students to draw from (and not a major metropolis just down the road), we’d have very low attendance. Maybe 10k is too low. How about 20k, then? The point is ... the support from Boulder residents and students is much lower than most P5 schools. If you can’t recognize that, you’re blind. And how many people do you see walking around Boulder and Denver in CU gear? In Seattle, you see UW and WSU gear everywhere.
Click to expand...

Who gives a **** about Seattle? Couldn’t even keep their NBA team.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top