What's new
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!

George's BHAG for FB by 2016

boydbuff

Club Member
We have another thread on the whole plan being presented but this one seems worthy of its own thread:
FB to play in at least one Pac-12 championship (i.e. winning the Pac 12 South) at least once by 2016.

OK, HCMM, your turn now :)
 
It starts with the 2014 class being better than advertised. 2015 must be an unexpected level of talent at key areas. The recruiting boost from the facilities announcement will help and if we can get to a bowl game that will also help. Winning the south in 2016 would be a huge upset of the current power structure in the Pac-12
 
I say no ****ing way this happens.
I agree it is not likely but I do believe in the concept of BHAGs (big hair audacious goals) b/c it sets a stretch goal for everyone. Players, coaches, fans, recruits and donors. He is saying we are aiming very high and we should.

If we come just short not too many people will be calling for anyone's head on a platter. But if we don't even sniff it than things need to change.
 
They are stretch goals, but not exactly shocking. You can't go to big money donors and expect they would be happy with finishing 10-12 in the conference on the field and in recruiting.
 
It's a fine line, for sure. I tend to agree with the Colonel on this subject, though. I don't think it's terribly realistic to expect an appearance in the CCG by 2016. It would basically require USC, UCLA, ASU and UA to all go on probation.
 
Just sets the coach up for failure, IMO.

If this team is 6-6 and going to a bowl game by 2016, fans should be thrilled.

holy god, we've fallen and we can't get up.

thrilled with .500 and the weedwacker bowl...

that used to be a hugely disappointing season for us.

not saying you are wrong, but i hate setting expectations this low.
 
holy god, we've fallen and we can't get up.

I think it's more accurate to say we've fallen, and there are 11 other people who keep pushing us down. We have to tick them off one or two at a time.
 
holy god, we've fallen and we can't get up.

thrilled with .500 and the weedwacker bowl...

that used to be a hugely disappointing season for us.

not saying you are wrong, but i hate setting expectations this low.


It's about REALISTIC expectations. Expecting this team to compete for the conference championship in the next 3 years is unrealistic right now. It will hopefully happen again someday soon. Just extremely questionable expecting it in the next three years. This team has only won 4 conference games over the past three years.

MacIntyre quickly turned around SJSU but they weren't play USC, UCLA, Arizona, Arizona State, Oregon, Stanford, Washington, etc. every year.
 
I think a solid goal this year is to have at least a .500 record at home and to sweep our Non-con. That puts us at 5-7. Win one on the road and boom bowl game.
 
Did you guys honestly expect the AD to keep putting out mediocre goals like they have done in the past?
 
"Hey, we need your money... just don't expect many wins until 2018 or us to finish above 10th in recruiting either. Thanks for your support!"
 
So the complaint before was that we didn't think big? And now that we do the complaint is that it is unrealistic?
 
Did you guys honestly expect the AD to keep putting out mediocre goals like they have done in the past?

No. I don't. I don't think any of the other goals are unreasonable. I wouldn't change a thing about them. It's a fine line, to be sure. I don't think I'd be quite so specific about the goals for the football team at this juncture, though. It sounds an awful lot like "10 wins, no excuses". It may be splitting hairs, but I would have preferred he word it a little more softly. Something like "contending for a spot in the CCG by 2016". I know that takes a lot of the teeth out of the goals, but it also doesn't put him in a position to have to make a change if we're showing real improvement, but not actually playing in the CCG in 2016.
 
"Hey, we need your money... just don't expect many wins until 2018 or us to finish above 10th in recruiting either. Thanks for your support!"


You're right. Why stop at 2016? Why not 2015? Why not next year? To do otherwise doesn't show an adequate commitment to winning, IMO.
 
No. I don't. I don't think any of the other goals are unreasonable. I wouldn't change a thing about them. It's a fine line, to be sure. I don't think I'd be quite so specific about the goals for the football team at this juncture, though. It sounds an awful lot like "10 wins, no excuses". It may be splitting hairs, but I would have preferred he word it a little more softly. Something like "contending for a spot in the CCG by 2016". I know that takes a lot of the teeth out of the goals, but it also doesn't put him in a position to have to make a change if we're showing real improvement, but not actually playing in the CCG in 2016.

IMO I love the goals that RG has laid out. He is raising the bar and letting it be known that the basement is no longer an option. Also, I am sure that HCMM will be graded based off the goals on an A-F scale. If by 2016 we are around third in the conference HCMM would receive a B/B-, if we are still in the basement an F, and so on. I don't think it is as drastic as "do this or fail".
 
Who says he has to make a change though? Most reasonable fans are going to understand why MacIntyre would be staying beyond 2016, provided there is clear, discernable progress.
 
Who says he has to make a change though? Most reasonable fans are going to understand why MacIntyre would be staying beyond 2016, provided there is clear, discernable progress.

You and I both know that there are a lot of unreasonable fans. Many of them on this site. 2016 rolls around and we're 6-6, going to the weedwacker bowl and have a recruiting class ranked somewhere in the 20's or 30's, and there will be people who say that we didn't hit that goal, MM has to go. I would spare RG that headache.
 
Any serious doner is a football fan and a fan of CU and likely not an idot. That individual knows damn well that CU is NOT going to be winning the Pac-12 by 2016. Set realistic goals. Setting a goal of a championship by the end of the decade, fine. The next three season, stupid.
 
Who says he has to make a change though? Most reasonable fans are going to understand why MacIntyre would be staying beyond 2016, provided there is clear, discernable progress.

While the buck stops with the head coach, this goal may pressure changes to other staff members if it isn't met.
 
They're not going to fire MacIntyre if we're not in the Pac-12 championship game by 2016. These expectations are fine
 
Lofty goals and realistic expectations can coexist. They're rarely the same, and shouldn't be for the CU football program right now.
 
Why put a specific timetable on it? Why 2016?

Why not come out and say, "We expect all of our athletic programs to compete for the Pac-12 championship every year"?

To me- this is putting a fork in Mike MacIntyre before he's even had a chance to show what he can do. Like sacky said - if the Buffs aren't in the conference championship game by 2016, RG's comments are going to bring out all the people who never wanted MacIntyre in the first place (AZ and his ilk - including some on this board) and they are going to start demanding changes, even if there is progress.
 
Why not 2016? Should CU football have goals ever again?
Why put a specific timetable on it? Why 2016?

Why not come out and say, "We expect all of our athletic programs to compete for the Pac-12 championship every year"?

To me- this is putting a fork in Mike MacIntyre before he's even had a chance to show what he can do. Like sacky said - if the Buffs aren't in the conference championship game by 2016, RG's comments are going to bring out all the people who never wanted MacIntyre in the first place (AZ and his ilk - including some on this board) and they are going to start demanding changes, even if there is progress.
 
Back
Top