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!

Grade the 1st 1,000 Days of Rick George's Tenure

What grade do you give Rick George's first 1,000 days on the job?

  • A

  • B

  • C

  • D

  • F

Results are only viewable after voting.
Buffnik

Buffnik

Real name isn't Nik
Club Member
Junta Member


The main thing has obviously been the facilities project at Folsom along with the increased endowment through his fundraising efforts.

He has also made coaching hires for volleyball and women's basketball.

From the article, it sounds like his focus is still on facilities with the priority on football: west side, Balch, speakers, etc. He also mentions "rails" for Folsom and Coors, which I think has to do with the new regulations about storming the field or court. There is also a new sound system gong into CEC, which will not only enhance game experience but better monetize the facility since it will make it usable as a concert venue.

Much of the criticism I have heard related to George is on how focused his strategy is. Bohn had tried to work within the budget to do what he could afford to do where he could improve things and he spread it around. Football got a bubble and permanent lights, basketball/volleyball got a practice facility, WLAX was added to increase spring activities and Title IX compliance, student fans, the band, etc. were given more resources.

George's strategy has been to focus on revenue generation by improving fundraising efforts, opting to avoid discounting of tickets for revenue sports, and putting the financial resources he has into building football since its financial health changes all budget numbers and drives funding for everything else. It's a longer game that has some growing pains for every other sport and spirit squad. But within that, he has also shown that while focusing on football there is crossover such as T&F getting a huge boost from the IPF track, all coaches being able to have offices in the same building, and football's move to a new weight room turned over that old weight room to olympic sports.

What grade would you give RG's first 1,000 days on the job?
 
Last edited:
If I could award a B+, I would do so. The one thing he has lacked is student engagement. It's an area he really needs to work on.
 
Without knowing all the inner workings of the AD, I would give him an A. I don't see why there would/should be any criticism of his revenue sports focus. That's where 90% of his focus should be, and the rest will fall into place once those two are healthy.
 
B based solely on the lack of progress or apparent plan for progress by the football team. A+ if you look only at the fundraising and new facilities.
 
Can't believe it's already been 1,000 days. I give him an A. He's not a lapdog for Benson and DiStephano and as a result good things are happening within the department.
 
Oh sure, new dream facility, yada yada yada.
But does the head coach have to bring water bottles for their meetings? Does Cecil still have them carpooling for recruiting visits and driving around toll roads?

I jest. A- (small ding for student involvement compared to earlier AD. But, priority was probably on big $$ where it needed to be at first. Hopefully it will improve now)
 
Buff_nc said:
Oh sure, new dream facility, yada yada yada.
But does the head coach have to bring water bottles for their meetings? Does Cecil still have them carpooling for recruiting visits and driving around toll roads?

I jest. A- (small ding for student involvement compared to earlier AD. But, priority was probably on big $$ where it needed to be at first. Hopefully it will improve now)
Click to expand...
If this really happened on air, I am so happy I didn't have to listen to it.
 
I understand he can't prioritize everything, and that his priorities have largely been in the right place. Maybe if they had somebody on staff whose sole purpose was student engagement, I might be inclined to give him that last little bump to an "A". For the time being, student involvement is an afterthought.
 
A+++++++ Rick George is the man!!!! No other AD in the history of CU Athletics has even come close to what he has done in 3 years. Raised over 100 million in contributions, new indoor football practice field, Champion's Center. Holy smoke, now he is going to rebuild the west side of Folsom. Maybe even do away and upgrade the restrooms. Can't wait for that.
 
I gave him a B. He gets an A+ for the facilities and getting that done. I don't know about his 2 hires to date but until we have more data it is incomplete. His outreach to the average fan is a C at best and that is an area that is lacking with the drop in attendance in both BB and FB. Financial transparency has diminished which is concerning. - they no longer report performance just the NCAA report and it appears the CU pumped another $8 to 10 million into the AD for FY 2015. The AD is $30+ million in Debt and no report on progress of paying it off ( a huge dark cloud over the AD).
 
RG said they turned a profit two years in a row so I would assume the subsidy the NCAA reports would be student ticket sales and/or the sports fee students pay each semester, not an increased debt load.
 
BlackNGold said:
I gave him a B. He gets an A+ for the facilities and getting that done. I don't know about his 2 hires to date but until we have more data it is incomplete. His outreach to the average fan is a C at best and that is an area that is lacking with the drop in attendance in both BB and FB. Financial transparency has diminished which is concerning. - they no longer report performance just the NCAA report and it appears the CU pumped another $8 to 10 million into the AD for FY 2015. The AD is $30+ million in Debt and no report on progress of paying it off ( a huge dark cloud over the AD).
Click to expand...

I think that less transparency with financial reporting is a good thing. Bohn was constantly making statements to the media about financial constraints, budget shortfalls, etc. The national perception became that CU was broken down and bankrupt... and he just kept feeding that message. That absolutely had to stop.
 
RG gets an A+ for the facilities upgrades and fund raising. He gets an incomplete for coaching decisions and ability to negotiate with big business, a solid C for his efforts in basketball and a big fat F for student engagement. I think that the facilities should be weighed more than basketball and more than student engagement. So I would give him a B for now, recognizing that he can now focus on one of those incomplete items and pay more attention to basketball and student engagement.
 
Last edited:
TSchekler said:
The students need to take ownership of their support (lack thereof). Get to the ****ing games assholes!
Click to expand...

The students have taken ownership of their support. The football program has sucked so bad for a dozen years that the students are not wasting their Saturday's, they have taken ownership of their Saturday's. CU hasn't even tried to put a winning team on the field over this time, why should the student's be held to a standard that the team is not held to?
 
Big Jim said:
The students have taken ownership of their support. The football program has sucked so bad for a dozen years that the students are not wasting their Saturday's, they have taken ownership of their Saturday's. CU hasn't even tried to put a winning team on the field over this time, why should the student's be held to a standard that the team is not held to?
Click to expand...

You mean the same students who didnt show up when they were winning? How about basketball?
 
I said B.

He loses some points for:

1) Not getting a new sound system at Folsom. I know this is coming soon, but it seems like such a minor project that would greatly impact the stadium.
2) Not fixing the entry issue to Folsom for the students.
3) Not fostering a culture of student involvement. CUnit members here will agree that is has not been easy to get the funds and the AD backing that they need
4) His hiring of coaches has been unproven at this point. The names/backgrounds alone don't inspire much confidence, but we will see.
 
Sykobuff said:
You mean the same students who didnt show up when they were winning? How about basketball?
Click to expand...

Not the same students. The students that were not showing up to Folsom Field on Saturday's when the Buffs were winning football games are all in their mid 30's and have either graduated or dropped out of CU since then. CU never broke any records for student attendance to football games, but the student section at the turn of the century when CU was last relevant had a lot more people in it than it has the past decade. The CU students that are not showing up to Folsom Field on Saturday's now were roughly between the ages of 6-10 when CU last had a winning season. Very few 6-10 year old kids watch football so the current generation of students grew up in an environment of CU football that nobody cared except for message board denizens.

As to basketball, CU doesn't play many games on Saturday and certainly not many at Folsom Field.
 
A-. Can't understate the importance of the facilities. He's doing things to keep tad happy, even if he isn't giving him all the money. (Sorry @Goose). Student support issues in all sports plus sucking in football mean that despite the facilities win, it's not a perfect resume.
 
onealcd said:
RG said they turned a profit two years in a row so I would assume the subsidy the NCAA reports would be student ticket sales and/or the sports fee students pay each semester, not an increased debt load.
Click to expand...

Well I know they did not turn a profit in 2014 and these are not student fees - those are a different line item and would never add up to almost $9 million. I have never heard them say the AD would make a profit.

This is why transparency is important.
 
To be accurate, I believe RG said they balanced the budget two years in a row and turned a small profit this last year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top