Here is the problem...

[leftybuff]

I had the opportunity to spend a long weekend in Tampa this past weekend. Sitting down to breakfast I read the Tampa Tribune. Front page of the sports section I see this:


http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/bulls/content/trustees-chair-usf-football-we-have-major-problems


Until the idea that athletics needs a long term plan and resources necessary to show the University is interested in assuring that every aspect of it's appearance is top notch, nothing changes. Athletics, and more obviously, football, is your first impression of most any University. Ever since Bitsy and her lap dog Byyny rolled over and sold GB, the AD and particularly the FB team down the river, the administration has been reactive, half-assed, ad hoc, "put a band-aid on it" in their thinking. Athletics is seen as something that you pretend to care about. That attitude is obvious. The results are showing. Glaringly.

The administration wants donations and they want the alumni to believe they are doing something, but they keep serving up the same baloney sandwiches and acting shocked that anyone would say no to the filet mignon price attached to it. The only thing left to do is to close the wallet and stop showing up. I have tried to make every home game, and a few roadies, when I could, even during this monumental, and unprecedented, exhibition of historically bad CU FB. I see nothing to convince me that has done any good. The administration has to rebuild the good faith they have squandered over the last six years through their complete mismanagement of the AD. JMO.

 

[krom]

This admin sees the FB program as a necessary evil. It brings in money to fund the bare minimum of varsity sports that keep it eligible for a BCS conference with a TV deal. Keep the players out of trouble, keep the program out of the press, and collect your check. There is absolutely no interest in fielding a competitive team. They don't see the incentive. They are in a big conference. They will collect a big TV check. All while not giving a **** about the sport that made it all possible. CU striving for mediocrity got it to where it is today so they figure it isn't broken so why fix it.

 

[RalphieSpeaks]

I had the opportunity to spend a long weekend in Tampa this past weekend. Sitting down to breakfast I read the Tampa Tribune. Front page of the sports section I see this:


http://www.tampabay.com/blogs/bulls/content/trustees-chair-usf-football-we-have-major-problems


Until the idea that athletics needs a long term plan and resources necessary to show the University is interested in assuring that every aspect of it's appearance is top notch, nothing changes. Athletics, and more obviously, football, is your first impression of most any University. Ever since Bitsy and her lap dog Byyny rolled over and sold GB, the AD and particularly the FB team down the river, the administration has been reactive, half-assed, ad hoc, "put a band-aid on it" in their thinking. Athletics is seen as something that you pretend to care about. That attitude is obvious. The results are showing. Glaringly.

The administration wants donations and they want the alumni to believe they are doing something, but they keep serving up the same baloney sandwiches and acting shocked that anyone would say no to the filet mignon price attached to it. The only thing left to do is to close the wallet and stop showing up. I have tried to make every home game, and a few roadies, when I could, even during this monumental, and unprecedented, exhibition of historically bad CU FB. I see nothing to convince me that has done any good. The administration has to rebuild the good faith they have squandered over the last six years through their complete mismanagement of the AD. JMO.

I remember that Benson said something (this is not word for word): That right or wrong the football team is the lens through which the University is viewed.

If that is the case and he believes this then either he just doesn't care or maybe our Admin is so bad they just don't know how?

Either way our University has missed a golden opportunity with the move to the Pac 12. Instead a being able to rally our Alumni around Cali games all we do is show up and embarrass anyone wearing black and gold.

I live in Indianapolis and cannot make it back as often but have generally made it out for a game every year but that is done for me as well. Not showing up is about the last thing we as fans are able to do.

 

[buffalo30]

I believe Benson realizes that football and athletics are what the public first sees and sees more of than anything else a university does. He is president of the entire university operation. Right or wrong a good football program creates positive visibilty to the entire university. Donations increase to the university in general, good students are excited to enroll because they identify with winning football, parents are happy, everyone is happy.

The big problem is that the chancellor of University of Colorado at Boulder doesn't give a damn. He flat out doesn't care. He gave a coach a fifth year because he felt sorry for a guy who wouldn't be able to coach his son during his son's senior year. You all know what the result of that was. And DiStefano still doesn't care. I have pointed this out several times and will contine to do so until there is finally someone in the administration who shows he or she does care.

 

[Dark Bohner]

I believe Benson realizes that football and athletics are what the public first sees and sees more of than anything else a university does. He is president of the entire university operation. Right or wrong a good football program creates positive visibilty to the entire university. Donations increase to the university in general, good students are excited to enroll because they identify with winning football, parents are happy, everyone is happy.

The big problem is that the chancellor of University of Colorado at Boulder doesn't give a damn. He flat out doesn't care. He gave a coach a fifth year because he felt sorry for a guy who wouldn't be able to coach his son during his son's senior year. You all know what the result of that was. And DiStefano still doesn't care. I have pointed this out several times and will contine to do so until there is finally someone in the administration who shows he or she does care.

Check your news, Benson is the bigger issue. He was the one that "recommended" that Hawk stay another year, this is a confirmed quote. He also said recently that he doesn't have a problem with the direction of the football program. If Benson was unhappy, then it wouldn't matter what Distefano thinks because Benson would "recommend" that changes be made.

As for this thread in general...:dead-horse-fast2:

 

[Deleted member 807]

DiStephano is a lapdog of Benson.

Somehow I don't think athletic success is a priority on DiStephano's evaluation. Athletics fall below showing fiscal responsibility, landing research grants, drawing good students who pay their tuition, plus attracting and retaining quality professors.

Wineland's Nobel is physics practically guarantees DiStephano's 39th year at CU.

 

[buffalo30]

Check your news, Benson is the bigger issue. He was the one that "recommended" that Hawk stay another year, this is a confirmed quote. He also said recently that he doesn't have a problem with the direction of the football program. If Benson was unhappy, then it wouldn't matter what Distefano thinks because Benson would "recommend" that changes be made.

As for this thread in general...:dead-horse-fast2:

DiStefano admitted in the BDC that he was responsible for the 5th year. I don't have the link, but you can look it up. I'm not exonerating Benson. They are both a big problem. Benson's recent comments suggest he is also a big problem. DiStefano is chancellor of the Boulder campus and is directly responsible for athletics. Bohn reports to Distefano. It might be a dead horse, but a live one won't be around until both of those guys are gone.

 

[RalphieSpeaks]

DiStefano admitted in the BDC that he was responsible for the 5th year. I don't have the link, but you can look it up. I'm not exonerating Benson. They are both a big problem. Benson's recent comments suggest he is also a big problem. DiStefano is chancellor of the Boulder campus and is directly responsible for athletics. Bohn reports to Distefano. It might be a dead horse, but a live one won't be around until both of those guys are gone.

Agree but what are we going to discuss? The impending three week beat down coming?

 

[BuffNut99]

Bohn reports to Distefano.

Bohn technically reports to the CFO, fyi

 

[Dark Bohner]

DiStefano admitted in the BDC that he was responsible for the 5th year. I don't have the link, but you can look it up. I'm not exonerating Benson. They are both a big problem. Benson's recent comments suggest he is also a big problem. DiStefano is chancellor of the Boulder campus and is directly responsible for athletics. Bohn reports to Distefano. It might be a dead horse, but a live one won't be around until both of those guys are gone.

Wrong. It was Benson. Check article under Hawkins didn't get job done. Distefano was not going to impede Mike Bohn from firing Hawkins. Benson was the reason that Hawkins was saved at the 11th hour.

Hawkins didn't get job done

Benson acknowledged that he informally recommended bringing back Dan Hawkins for a fifth year as head coach in 2010 before he was fired late last season, leading to the hiring of Jon Embree.
"I have been misrepresented on this," Benson said. "I never discussed it with (athletic director) Mike Bohn. I said to (Boulder chancellor) Phil Di- Stefano, 'Phil, I'm leaning toward keeping this guy.' And Phil said, 'I am too.' And next thing I know he was staying.
"There may have been another conversation with Phil, but I believe in a management structure. . . . I've never called Mike Bohn on the phone. Ever. Now I see him and talk with him, but I'm very much a person who believes in a management structure."

Read more: CU: Benson wants school to be best in everything - The Denver Post http://www.denverpost.com/colleges/ci_19527336#ixzz29bTk4peh
Read The Denver Post's Terms of Use of its content: http://www.denverpost.com/termsofuse
​

 

[hefdub]

This is a little off topic, but I recently was in Grand Junction for work. I had some time and wandered around campus and was amazed at the work they have done there with athletic facilities. It's not just the upgrades of the football stadium and Suplizio. There are lacrosse fields, new pools, soccer fields etc. Through work I met with the president and AD. They said something very interesting. I wondered why they put all the money into the facilities. They said for every athlete that comes to play a sport, no matter whether it's Colorado or California, they likely bring at least one student with them. It could be a football player's girlfriend following them. A friend following them. Essentially they understood that investing in facilities and sports had a direct correlation with increased enrollment of in state and out of state students.

 

[Burrito]

This is a little off topic, but I recently was in Grand Junction for work. I had some time and wandered around campus and was amazed at the work they have done there with athletic facilities. It's not just the upgrades of the football stadium and Suplizio. There are lacrosse fields, new pools, soccer fields etc. Through work I met with the president and AD. They said something very interesting. I wondered why they put all the money into the facilities. They said for every athlete that comes to play a sport, no matter whether it's Colorado or California, they likely bring at least one student with them. It could be a football player's girlfriend following them. A friend following them. Essentially they understood that investing in facilities and sports had a direct correlation with increased enrollment of in state and out of state students.

Did you see Junc?

 

[AeroBuff99]

This is a little off topic, but I recently was in Grand Junction for work. I had some time and wandered around campus and was amazed at the work they have done there with athletic facilities. It's not just the upgrades of the football stadium and Suplizio. There are lacrosse fields, new pools, soccer fields etc. Through work I met with the president and AD. They said something very interesting. I wondered why they put all the money into the facilities. They said for every athlete that comes to play a sport, no matter whether it's Colorado or California, they likely bring at least one student with them. It could be a football player's girlfriend following them. A friend following them. Essentially they understood that investing in facilities and sports had a direct correlation with increased enrollment of in state and out of state students.

Butch has been a really good AD for them despite his health issues. Graduated from HS with his sister. Understands the importance of a good athletic program.

 

[buffalo30]

Wrong. It was Benson. Check article under Hawkins didn't get job done. Distefano was not going to impede Mike Bohn from firing Hawkins. Benson was the reason that Hawkins was saved at the 11th hour.

It is not wrong that DiStefano was just as involved as Benson. I don't believe either one should be off the hook. It appears to me that there won't be anyone in the administration who truly cares about a successful football program until both of those guys are gone. The following is taken from an article in the BDC:
[Sources have told the Camera in the years since that Benson forced the school
to keep Hawkins because CU was gearing up for a push for more funding from the
state legislature in the spring of 2010, and Benson believed a multi-million
dollar buyout paid to a football coach would sabotage the plea for greater
funding.
Perhaps the closest anyone in a leadership position has come to taking
responsibility for the decision to hang on to a lame duck coach for an extra
year came when Embree was hired in December 2010. DiStefano told the Camera he
supported the idea of keeping Hawkins after the 2009 season.
"I believe in second chances and wanted to give coach Hawkins a second chance
to see with a more experienced team what he could do," DiStefano said.]

http://www.dailycamera.com/cu-colle...earch-www.dailycamera.com-www.dailycamera.com

 

[BinaryBuff]

It is not wrong that DiStefano was just as involved as Benson. I don't believe either one should be off the hook. It appears to me that there won't be anyone in the administration who truly cares about a successful football program until both of those guys are gone. The following is taken from an article in the BDC:
[Sources have told the Camera in the years since that Benson forced the school
to keep Hawkins because CU was gearing up for a push for more funding from the
state legislature in the spring of 2010, and Benson believed a multi-million
dollar buyout paid to a football coach would sabotage the plea for greater
funding.
Perhaps the closest anyone in a leadership position has come to taking
responsibility for the decision to hang on to a lame duck coach for an extra
year came when Embree was hired in December 2010. DiStefano told the Camera he
supported the idea of keeping Hawkins after the 2009 season.
"I believe in second chances and wanted to give coach Hawkins a second chance
to see with a more experienced team what he could do," DiStefano said.]

http://www.dailycamera.com/cu-colle...earch-www.dailycamera.com-www.dailycamera.com

For any of you that think Embree will be gone after this year, or even after next year, I think that quote tells you all you need to know. It will not happen as long as DiStefano is around. Embree will be here for at least another year, but probably at least two years, no matter what the on-field performance & W/L record look like.

 

[Dark Bohner]

For any of you that think Embree will be gone after this year, or even after next year, I think that quote tells you all you need to know. It will not happen as long as DiStefano is around. Embree will be here for at least another year, but probably at least two years, no matter what the on-field performance & W/L record look like.

Unless, I see a dramatic turnaround this year (not necessarily wins, but being competitive and playing improved football), then I will pull my support for next year just like I did for 2010 with Hawkins 5th year. At this time, I have absolutely zero confidence in this staff. If it comes down to a simple business decision, like it did with Hawkins then they will be making a huge mistake by keeping Embree and staff because the tickets/concessions revenue loss from next year will be in the millions if the staff stays and the losing continues, and the buyout is quite minimal for Embree.

 

[Quattro]

For any of you that think Embree will be gone after this year, or even after next year, I think that quote tells you all you need to know. It will not happen as long as DiStefano is around. Embree will be here for at least another year, but probably at least two years, no matter what the on-field performance & W/L record look like.

No

Unless Embree shows a lot if improvement next year, he's gone. Attendance will be way down and the admin will notice that because there's a big difference in profit with 32K and 50K people at the games.

 

[BinaryBuff]

Unless, I see a dramatic turnaround this year (not necessarily wins, but being competitive and playing improved football), then I will pull my support for next year just like I did for 2010 with Hawkins 5th year. At this time, I have absolutely zero confidence in this staff. If it comes down to a simple business decision, like it did with Hawkins then they will be making a huge mistake by keeping Embree and staff because the tickets/concessions revenue loss from next year will be in the millions if the staff stays and the losing continues, and the buyout is quite minimal for Embree.

I don't think you're in the minority with that thought either. If the losing continues and the admin doesn't act, I think the damage to the fanbase and program will be very severe.

No

Unless Embree shows a lot if improvement next year, he's gone. Attendance will be way down and the admin will notice that because there's a big difference in profit with 32K and 50K people at the games.

They might notice, will they care enough to fire Embree? The precident has been set that DiStephano doesn't give a rats ass about winning and that they react well after (semi?) permanent damage has already been done. I again present Hawkins & keeping him around to start his 5th (hell, 4th) year.

 

[leftybuff]

The competent, success-oriented approach would be to take a very hard look at canning Embo if the team finishes 1-11. A fair case could be made to let him have a third year. A lot could change between Turkey Day +1. I suspect CU, howeer, will follow the line of thinking that has gotten us here.

MB: Gee guys, I just presided over the first 7 year losing streak in CU FB history, can I hire a third coach? I have been the good soldier.

BB: Quiet, the adults are talking. So Phil, as I understand it, we can buy out Embree, but it will cost money? That simply won't do. Go craft some BS about being competitive and honoring contracts and second chances and give it to Mike to use when goes and falls on his sword for us.

Phil: Yes sir!


Of course, the above is in jest. But the parody might be a little closer to home than any of us would like.

IF, Embo cannot pull CU out of the death spiral, and IF there is a viable, dare I say it "home run" candidate out there, and IF it is clear keeping Embo another year does more harm, then I could see dropping him this year. Having said that, I sincerely doubt that will happen.

 

[Lt.Col.FrankSlade]

Some big differences between firing Hawkins and firing Embree.

Hawkins was still owed $2+ million when he was terminated.

CU can fire Embree today for $500,000. Or if they are especially cheap they can fire him next year for $250,000.

When you can fire your coach for cheaper than the revenue lost in season ticket sales - it makes too much sense to terminate.

 

[BinaryBuff]

Some big differences between firing Hawkins and firing Embree.

Hawkins was still owed $2+ million when he was terminated.

CU can fire Embree today for $500,000. Or if they are especially cheap they can fire him next year for $250,000.

When you can fire your coach for cheaper than the revenue lost in season ticket sales - it makes too much sense to terminate.

I don't think any of us disagree. I think the real question is, does Benson/DiStephano/Bohn agree? That's where I'm skeptical based on past behavior.

 

[Lt.Col.FrankSlade]

I don't think any of us disagree. I think the real question is, does Benson/DiStephano/Bohn agree? That's where I'm skeptical based on past behavior.

I'm not saying that Embree will be fired, or even that he should be fired. I'm just saying the two situations (retaining Hawkins in 2009 v. retaining Embree in 2012) are not at all the same. The particulars are much much much different today than they were in November 2009.

For one thing, the athletic department is receiving roughly $15 million MORE in conference distribution TODAY than they did in 2009.
Also, the cost to fire Hawkins in 2009 would have been more than $3 million. The cost to fire Embree today is $500,000.

 

[leftybuff]

I'm not saying that Embree will be fired, or even that he should be fired. I'm just saying the two situations (retaining Hawkins in 2009 v. retaining Embree in 2012) are not at all the same. The particulars are much much much different today than they were in November 2009.

For one thing, the athletic department is receiving roughly $15 million MORE in conference distribution TODAY than they did in 2009.
Also, the cost to fire Hawkins in 2009 would have been more than $3 million. The cost to fire Embree today is $500,000.

All good points which would lead one to conclude that the firing of Embree is a distinct possibility. Since we are dealing with CU, however, factors which make such a move practical probably mean CU will do the opposite.

 

[TDbuff]

Seems like politics play a role in both instances.

With Hawk it was the money, but also how it would look to the state legislature while they were lobbying to hold onto their percentage of state funding or whatever that deal was.

This time it'll probably be whether or not firing Embree will piss off the boosters they need to build the facilities expansion.