Flasback to 2005; Dan Hawkins Named Colorado Head Football Coach

[MiamiBuffs]

Dan Hawkins Named Colorado Head Football Coach
Courtesy: David Plati, Associate AD/Sports Information
Release: 12/16/2005


BOULDER — Dan Hawkins, the winningest active coach in NCAA Division I-A football, has been named the 23rd head coach in University of Colorado history, athletic director Mike Bohn announced Friday.

Hawkins, 45, comes to Colorado from Boise State University, where he has guided the Broncos to a 53-10 record in five seasons and to four consecutive Western Athletic Conference championships. His 84.1 winning percentage is the best among all active coaches, with the 53 wins :rofl2: What is it now??? :rofl2: the fourth most all-time for a coach in their first five seasons as a major college head coach (and the second most in Division I-A since the NCAA went to current classifications in 1978).

 

[calibuff81]

Dan Hawkins Named Colorado Head Football Coach
Courtesy: David Plati, Associate AD/Sports Information
Release: 12/16/2005


BOULDER — Dan Hawkins, the winningest active coach in NCAA Division I-A football, has been named the 23rd head coach in University of Colorado history, athletic director Mike Bohn announced Friday.

Hawkins, 45, comes to Colorado from Boise State University, where he has guided the Broncos to a 53-10 record in five seasons and to four consecutive Western Athletic Conference championships. His 84.1 winning percentage is the best among all active coaches, with the 53 wins :rofl2: Where is he now??? :rofl2: the fourth most all-time for a coach in their first five seasons as a major college head coach (and the second most in Division I-A since the NCAA went to current classifications in 1978).

He left his Offensive Coordinator and playbook back at Boise State :lol:

 

[chipwich]

and Cody was 59–0 from 6th grade through high school.

I guess the law of averages is catching up with us

 

[SpacemanSpiff]

All this tells me is that, depite what I see in John Cusack movies, there is no such thing as a Sure Thing.

 

[leftybuff]

:rofl2: what is it now??? :rofl2:

.644, 67-37

 

[calibuff81]

All this tells me is that, depite what I see in John Cusack movies, there is no such thing as a Sure Thing.

It's a sure thing so far that Hawks Tenure here at Colorado has been an Epic Failure.

Brian Kelly - 4 years at Cincy current record 27-6 one BCS game 5-0 on his way to a 10 win season :lol:

 

[SpacemanSpiff]

I know I'm in the minority here, and I'm not sure why I waste my breath on stuff like this when the faint glow of torches tells that the angry mob is headed this way, but...even if Hawk is fired at the end of this year, I don't see the Hawk hire as an epic failure. Failure to win enough games? Yes. Epic Failure? No. There are things that are better now, than they were when he got here. Sucks that they don't seem to be showing up the Win column.

 

[Kameltosis]

I know I'm in the minority here, and I'm not sure why I waste my breath on stuff like this when the faint glow of torches tells that the angry mob is headed this way, but...even if Hawk is fired at the end of this year, I don't see the Hawk hire as an epic failure. Failure to win enough games? Yes. Epic Failure? No. There are things that are better now, than they were when he got here. Sucks that they don't seem to be showing up the Win column.

All that counts is the win column bud, the rest is noise

 

[Chilly]

i know i'm in the minority here, and i'm not sure why i waste my breath on stuff like this when the faint glow of torches tells that the angry mob is headed this way, but...even if hawk is fired at the end of this year, i don't see the hawk hire as an epic failure. Failure to win enough games? Yes. Epic failure? No. There are things that are better now, than they were when he got here. Sucks that they don't seem to be showing up the win column.

rep

 

[SpacemanSpiff]

All that counts is the win column bud, the rest is noise

Not sure if I agree with that. Don't get me wrong, I want to win as bad as the next guy (I've got an entire family tree full of bugeaters), but seriously, would you be happy with a Barrry Switzer-OU, or Jimmy Johnson-Miami team, that is constantly in the news for all the wrong reasons and finds new ways to peg the Thug meter every year? I'm not sure I would.

 

[Mick Ronson]

i agree with space to a degree and i still think knowing what we knew then, hawk was the right hire. but, i don't agree with some others that he came in with a mandate that did not include winning and the admin is OK with it.

Hawk was going to get a big-time job that year that year or next. he was the hot candidate to make the step. it could be argued some due diligence might have uncovered the Buddha swinging, big talking, whatever it is we have now....but, i thought it was a great hire at the time. was the right hire, sucks for us it maybe wasn't a good hire in terms of W-L. i think a better, MUCH more experienced staff in year one rather than trying to re-invent the wheel might have been a good idea.

 

[calibuff81]

All that counts is the win column bud, the rest is noise

That's right they get paid to win football games, not predict 10 win seasons

 

[leftybuff]

I know I'm in the minority here, and I'm not sure why I waste my breath on stuff like this when the faint glow of torches tells that the angry mob is headed this way, but...even if Hawk is fired at the end of this year, I don't see the Hawk hire as an epic failure. Failure to win enough games? Yes. Epic Failure? No. There are things that are better now, than they were when he got here. Sucks that they don't seem to be showing up the Win column.

I hear you. The thing that gets me is that there is talent on the roster, most of it recruited by Hawk. Is it UT/OU talent? Certainly not in quantity, but there is talent there. More than enough to have come out of the OOC 3-1 and be competitive in the B12, which is about all most were looking for. Is he a complete disaster? no. Has he given any reason to think he's the guy to take talent to it's potential and maybe even beyond? No.

I still haven't fully joined the Fire Hawk crowd. Generally, you give a guy five years, but it is getting so lackluster I'm not sure that can be done here.

 

[Kameltosis]

Not sure if I agree with that. Don't get me wrong, I want to win as bad as the next guy (I've got an entire family tree full of bugeaters), but seriously, would you be happy with a Barrry Switzer-OU, or Jimmy Johnson-Miami team, that is constantly in the news for all the wrong reasons and finds new ways to peg the Thug meter every year? I'm not sure I would.

CU has never had a notorious problem with bad players. We're talking coaching fundamentals and getting dubs instead of L's on the board. A win is all that matters.....keep the warm fuzzys at home....I want my coach to produce wins and fire up his team which is the one thing Callywacker didn't ...he didn't make the boys WANT to win and I think hawk has that same problem. That's why I like the intensity with Bo. He's not afraid to let the mouth run...although sometimes it bites us in our ass (VT last year)

 

[sackman]

I'm coming around to the idea that Hawk was a great hire for what we needed at the time, which was a guy who would run a clean program and keep bad stuff from hitting the papers. At the time he was brought in, not only were we losing, but we had an awful PR problem. Perhaps it was too much to expect a coach to correct both issues. He corrected one of them, and it was probably the most important one. Now we need to move on and get the other problem corrected.

 

[Kameltosis]

I'm coming around to the idea that Hawk was a great hire for what we needed at the time, which was a guy who would run a clean program and keep bad stuff from hitting the papers. At the time he was brought in, not only were we losing, but we had an awful PR problem. Perhaps it was too much to expect a coach to correct both issues. He corrected one of them, and it was probably the most important one. Now we need to move on and get the other problem corrected.

Oh come on sack you're killing me. Your coach was hired to win football games dude. Plain and simple. Did Hawk have some PhD in collegiate athlete behavior?? Come monnnnnnnnn'

 

[sackman]

Oh come on sack you're killing me. Your coach was hired to win football games dude. Plain and simple. Did Hawk have some PhD in collegiate athlete behavior?? Come monnnnnnnnn'

You don't understand the sh*tstorm that took place around here during Barnett's last couple years. From the President of the University on down to the majority of the coaching staff, everybody lost their job. The local media was having a field day piling on with as much crap as they could. Most of it totally bogus, but who cared? It was a ratings bonanza, facts be damned. When you're stuck in that situation, the first priority is to make the bleeding stop. That's what Hawk has done. He's made the bleeding stop.

 

[Kameltosis]

You don't understand the sh*tstorm that took place around here during Barnett's last couple years. From the President of the University on down to the majority of the coaching staff, everybody lost their job. The local media was having a field day piling on with as much crap as they could. Most of it totally bogus, but who cared? It was a ratings bonanza, facts be damned. When you're stuck in that situation, the first priority is to make the bleeding stop. That's what Hawk has done. He's made the bleeding stop.

I don't think it was Hawk that made it stop...it was the absense of the old staff. No matter who you put there, it would have helped.

 

[The Guest]

I don't think it was Hawk that made it stop...it was the absense of the old staff. No matter who you put there, it would have helped.

A quick review of the DP's (that's Denver Post, you sick ****) reader responses suggests the ****-storm isn't completely over. I think that DH and staff actually helped, however. They did a nice job of dealing with the public, until they couldn't deliver what you aptly assert they were hired to do--win games.

 

[sackman]

I think they hired Hawk with the idea that he would help immensely on the PR front, and they *hoped* he would win. Ultimately, it's every coaches job to win games, that will never change. However, there are times when that's not the #1 priority at that particular point in time.

 

[buffalo30]

Speaking of winning percentages. Look at what happened to Hawkins at Colorado. He has obviously not been up to the job of coaching a Big 12 program. His problems started with his coordinator hires right off the bat. His ridiculous concepts such as player groupings and HIS perception of hustle and hard work in practice as far as earning playing time have been flawed. Not to mention essentially eliminating competition for at least one position on the team compared to the other positions.


Out of the 23 coaches in over 100 years of Colorado football
history, there have been only 4 with less than a 0.500 winning
percentage. Only 4!

Joe Mills 1918-19
2 seasons, 4/6/1, 0.409

Chuck Fairbanks 1979-81
3 seasons, 7/26/0, 0.212

Bud Davis 1962
1 season, 2/8/0, 0.200
(Davis took over the team when no one else wanted the job after Sonny Grandelius was fired for NCAA violations. A large number of players also lost scholarships or left. Davis basically took over a ship that had sunk and it is difficult to be critical of his one season as "volunteer" coach.)

And now Hawkins 2006-part of 2009
3+ seasons, 14/27/0, 0.341

Get this! In 1890-93, the program had NO coach. The record in
those 4 seasons was 7/13/0 with a 0.350 winning percentage. Hey,
at one time the Buffs did better without a coach!!
Very sad.

 

[buffs04]

I would like to point out the fallacy of someone a few posts above me implying that we are losing now in a manner that is similar to the way we were "losing" under Barnett. I am not sure what your definition of losing is but Barnett won significantly more games than he lost.

 

[chipwich]

Speaking of winning percentages. Look at what happened to Hawkins at Colorado. He has obviously not been up to the job of coaching a Big 12 program. His problems started with his coordinator hires right off the bat.

One of his biggest mistakes was not retaining Hankwitz. I thought that was a mistake from the beginning.

 

[Chilly]

One of his biggest mistakes was not retaining Hankwitz. I thought that was a mistake from the beginning.

Absolutely. D has been a problem for this team for a long time. Getting rid of one of the better D coordinators in the business was a big mistake.

 

[The Guest]

One of his biggest mistakes was not retaining Hankwitz. I thought that was a mistake from the beginning.

I thought so as well.

Would he have settled for DC, or demanded HC? In the end, it would have been difficult to justify his retention after the 30-3 and 70-3 schellackings.

 

[White_Rabbit]

Hawk would've found a way to justify it if it was Collins.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

I would like to point out the fallacy of someone a few posts above me implying that we are losing now in a manner that is similar to the way we were "losing" under Barnett. I am not sure what your definition of losing is but Barnett won significantly more games than he lost.

Yeeeah. I am beginning to even think that firing Barnett was also a bad decision. I have to believe there was some political will behind that. Afterall, a period of time went by with he and Bohn working together and the scandal was fading in the rear view mirror. Apart from some poorly chosen words and bad timing in regards to Katie Hnida it appears that Barnett did little if anything wrong.

Was losing to Texas after turning in a mediocre season really such a grave sin?

I thought so as well.

Would he have settled for DC, or demanded HC? In the end, it would have been difficult to justify his retention after the 30-3 and 70-3 schellackings.

And the Walrus proves my point; If 70-3 was the standard then where does losing to Montana State fall in that criteria? Or turning in 3 going on 4 losing seasons?

Its BULL$HIT is what it is.

 

[MiamiBuffs]

One of his biggest mistakes was not retaining Hankwitz. I thought that was a mistake from the beginning.

^^^^ This

 

[Waldo]

Not sure if I agree with that. Don't get me wrong, I want to win as bad as the next guy (I've got an entire family tree full of bugeaters), but seriously, would you be happy with a Barrry Switzer-OU, or Jimmy Johnson-Miami team, that is constantly in the news for all the wrong reasons and finds new ways to peg the Thug meter every year? I'm not sure I would.

You attribute the scandals of recent past to

players
coaches
bad luck
vast left wing conspiracy
Bade taste in hos and kickers

Just curious

 

[96 Buff]

You attribute the scandals of recent past to

players
coaches
bad luck
muckraking by enemies of CU?

Yes.