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!
-
There has been an ongoing bug where club membership subscriptions have not been expiring. We have fixed this bug, and on October 7 users who do not have an active subscription will have their membership revoked, and you will be given the opportunity to renew. Please visit this post for details: https://allbuffs.com/threads/club-membership-privileges-not-being-revoked-when-yearly-subscription-ends.160161/
Hypothetical - Coaching Changes
- Thread starter BatBuff
- Start date
- Status
This thread is a good topic, but it is going to be policed.
To play the hypothetical:
My take on this is that it would be important to hire quickly with that early signing period while making sure that guys on staff who bleed black & gold (Chev & Hagan) are tasked with keeping the class together until a new HC was introduced.
We do have several current commits who are less than solid, so it could really impact them. Also, anything that looks like an opening will always cause competitors to try to poach.
So we'd probably lose some guys. With good hires, we'd also gain some guys.
The big unanswerable question is how a new HC would handle the honoring of current commits. MacIntyre honored all commits and then added about a half dozen guys to that. That isn't how every coach does things.
To play the hypothetical:
My take on this is that it would be important to hire quickly with that early signing period while making sure that guys on staff who bleed black & gold (Chev & Hagan) are tasked with keeping the class together until a new HC was introduced.
We do have several current commits who are less than solid, so it could really impact them. Also, anything that looks like an opening will always cause competitors to try to poach.
So we'd probably lose some guys. With good hires, we'd also gain some guys.
The big unanswerable question is how a new HC would handle the honoring of current commits. MacIntyre honored all commits and then added about a half dozen guys to that. That isn't how every coach does things.
fify.
Given the circumstance at the time, I understood it. It was going to be a locker room with players signed by 3 different coaches. Made some sense to make a strong statement that they were all going to be treated as "his guys" and that he would be loyal to the players.
I'm not sure that it worked that well. It's hard when systems change and promises made by a previous staff cannot be kept. But I got what he was doing and I'm not sure that it was a bad thing at the time.
It actually worked out well for CU in that instance. 2013 class punched well above its weight.
Maybe you and nik are right...I am just pissed.
Honestly, it is astonishing how much better that class was than the 2014 class. MM had time to put that class together and it was mostly horrible.
For all of their faults, the embo/eb staff did have pretty good recruiters on the staff. They were decent at IDing talent.
I loved the position coaches on that staff. Embo did a great job with those hires, especially given the budget limitations and the lack of multi-year contracts at the time. The mistake that should have never been allowed to happen (and wouldn't have been allowed by an AD who had more gravitas) is to allow an inexperienced new HC to hire first time coordinators. But those coordinators were also great position coaches who had excellent eyes for talent.
Deleted member 807
Guest
Would not want CU to drag its feet and hire someone in late January folllowing the last bowl game.
It would be nice to be one of the earlier teams to jump on the carousel and get some recruiting work done before the December quiet period.
It would be nice to be one of the earlier teams to jump on the carousel and get some recruiting work done before the December quiet period.
Which means of course CU will bumble around until 1/15....
I'd be very surprised if RG handled things that way.
After watching the rest of the conference play, I expect to win 1-2 games out of the last three. Utah is hurting, Cal is a mess. WSU has trouble on the road. I actually think we go to a bowl game and MM keeps his job. RG won’t fire a guy who gets us to a bowl game.
6-6 is the best of both worlds. Buffs make a bowl and RG can sell a change is needed with little effort.
You don’t think 6-6 is purgatory for RG?
Assuming that RG does end up firing him despite getting to a bowl, then yes that would be the best of both worlds. Hope I'm wrong.
Nope. 1-6 over the last seven will be good cover.
Heh... forgot about that 1-6 part. Sorry.
We've got plenty of threads speculating on MacIntyre's future. We don't need to do it in this thread.
Idea was to keep this one to the hypothetical of a coaching change and what that might mean for recruiting.
I'm just going to close this instead of having the same conversation in 9 different places.
Idea was to keep this one to the hypothetical of a coaching change and what that might mean for recruiting.
I'm just going to close this instead of having the same conversation in 9 different places.
- Status