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!

Karl Dorrell - WR coach Miami Dolphins

manhattanbuf said:
You have nothing resembling facts. You keep spouting a national ranking from Rivals that doesn’t matter because the P10 recruited better as a whole during that period.

Everyone in the country was competing with USC. That’s not a good argument. UCLA sucked at recruiting compared to the P10 conference (and even to CU at the time). KD got fired because they were slightly above mediocre in terms of record. You keep repeating your opinion doesn’t make it any more true.
Click to expand...

The nationally ranked classes are objective facts not an opinion.

You’re trying to explain away those facts but are actually harming you opinion that Tucker is an elite recruiter in the process.

Alabama and Georgia were destination schools for elite prospects before he went to those schools and have continued to be after he left.

The 35th ranked class is good for CU it was 44 the previous year, so it was an improvement. But relative to the PAC 12, it’s 7th, which based on your arguments against KD isn’t good enough relative to the PAC 12.

And competing with a school for hometown kids is different than just competing nationally. Also, USC cheating in the recruiting process obviously impacted the PAC 10 rankings which you’re using against him.

Tucker did a good job with this recruiting class and I like how he emulated what the SEC schools did with the dedicated recruiting staff but you claimed he was elite and there is actually no evidence of that. Alabama and UGA had great recruiting classes before him, continued after him, and his one class here relative to the PAC 12 is in the same range relative to the PAC 10 that KDs was at UCLA.
 
NuggNinja said:
The nationally ranked classes are objective facts not an opinion.

You’re trying to explain away those facts but are actually harming you opinion that Tucker is an elite recruiter in the process.

Alabama and Georgia were destination schools for elite prospects before he went to those schools and have continued to be after he left.

The 35th ranked class is good for CU it was 44 the previous year, so it was an improvement. But relative to the PAC 12, it’s 7th, which based on your arguments against KD isn’t good enough relative to the PAC 12.

And competing with a school for hometown kids is different than just competing nationally. Also, USC cheating in the recruiting process obviously impacted the PAC 10 rankings which you’re using against him.

Tucker did a good job with this recruiting class and I like how he emulated what the SEC schools did with the dedicated recruiting staff but you claimed he was elite and there is actually no evidence of that. Alabama and UGA had great recruiting classes before him, continued after him, and his one class here relative to the PAC 12 is in the same range relative to the PAC 10 that KDs was at UCLA.
Click to expand...
1. The national ranking is irrelevant. The P10 as a whole was a better conference on the field and in recruiting. You can be the 10th best poker player in the world. If your regular game is against the 9 best poker players in the world, you’re still going to be a loser.
2. In the early-mid 2000s, EVERYONE in the P10 and schools like CU were vying for kids out of California. Somehow, many programs (including Colorado) were able to out recruit UCLA. UCLA did not have bottom third of conference recruiting for all years but one because of USC.
3. MT’s improvement here was vast. It was not yet up to his standard, but it was a marked improvement. This is especially true given the infrastructure items he implemented.
4. He was hired to work at Bama and UGA because he’s an elite recruiter. They are elite because they only hire beast, a-plus recruiters. You’re confused about the direction of causation.
5. I am not explaining away anything. I am analyzing your surface level approach to this hire. To say KD is even in MT’s zone for current college football coaching/recruiting is proof of your cluelessness.
 
manhattanbuf said:
1. The national ranking is irrelevant. The P10 as a whole was a better conference on the field and in recruiting. You can be the 10th best poker player in the world. If your regular game is against the 9 best poker players in the world, you’re still going to be a loser.
2. In the early-mid 2000s, EVERYONE in the P10 and schools like CU were vying for kids out of California. Somehow, many programs (including Colorado) were able to out recruit UCLA. UCLA did not have bottom third of conference recruiting for all years but one because of USC.
3. MT’s improvement here was vast. It was not yet up to his standard, but it was a marked improvement. This is especially true given the infrastructure items he implemented.
4. He was hired to work at Bama and UGA because he’s an elite recruiter. They are elite because they only hire beast, a-plus recruiters. You’re confused about the direction of causation.
5. I am not explaining away anything. I am analyzing your surface level approach to this hire. To say KD is even in MT’s zone for current college football coaching/recruiting is proof of your cluelessness.
Click to expand...

The national ranking isn’t irrelevant it’s a fact. It’s inconvenient to your narrative that Tucker is an elite recruiter and KD was terrible.

Tucker wasn’t hired as DB coach at Alabama because he was an elite recruiter, he had been in the NFL for a decade. He was hired because he was friends with Saban and his coaching career needed rehabilitation after his disastrous run as defensive coordinator in Chicago.

What a surprise that rumblings are coming out that CU’s defense improved the less Tucker was involved in the game day coaching.

Everyone is always competing for California recruits but when one of the local schools establishes itself as King by breaking the rules that is going to impact recruiting and rankings.

And still relative to the PAC (except for his last class) his classes were in the same range as the “elite” Mel Tucker—-who was recruiting in the PAC when USC is a dumpster fire.

You have a view that Tucker is an elite recruiter while KD is a horrible but the factual evidence both in terms of national and PAC recruiting doesn’t support your view.

Rather than accept that your snap judgment might not have been completely accurate, you’re now claiming third party rankings of classes is irrelevant and resorting to personal insults.
 
NuggNinja said:
The national ranking isn’t irrelevant it’s a fact. It’s inconvenient to your narrative that Tucker is an elite recruiter and KD was terrible.

Tucker wasn’t hired as DB coach at Alabama because he was an elite recruiter, he had been in the NFL for a decade. He was hired because he was friends with Saban and his coaching career needed rehabilitation after his disastrous run as defensive coordinator in Chicago.

What a surprise that rumblings are coming out that CU’s defense improved the less Tucker was involved in the game day coaching.

Everyone is always competing for California recruits but when one of the local schools establishes itself as King by breaking the rules that is going to impact recruiting and rankings.

And still relative to the PAC (except for his last class) his classes were in the same range as the “elite” Mel Tucker—-who was recruiting in the PAC when USC is a dumpster fire.

You have a view that Tucker is an elite recruiter while KD is a horrible but the factual evidence both in terms of national and PAC recruiting doesn’t support your view.

Rather than accept that your snap judgment might not have been completely accurate, you’re now claiming third party rankings of classes is irrelevant and resorting to personal insults.
Click to expand...
You keep repeating yourself and fail to engage my arguments. I’ve already refuted your arguments. Good luck.
 
I don't mind that Dorrell's UCLA team lost recruiting battles to Carroll's USC teams. That's really not a problem.

I kind of don't mind that his UCLA team lost recruiting battles to Oregon. I'd like to see him win that, but it's not a huge problem that he didn't.

What I do mind is that his teams lost recruiting battles to:
a Colorado team mired in (non) scandal at the time
a Washington team that was averaging 3 win seasons
Arizona State
Cal
Washington State
Oregon State

We're not talking about him losing to Ohio State, Michigan, Alabama, Florida, Miami, etc, etc.

He's going to have to out-recruit the exact same schools that he failed to out-recruit last time.

I hope he does, but to act like this isn't a serious question mark is wishful thinking at its finest.
 
skibum said:
I don't mind that Dorrell's UCLA team lost recruiting battles to Carroll's USC teams. That's really not a problem.

I kind of don't mind that his UCLA team lost recruiting battles to Oregon. I'd like to see him win that, but it's not a huge problem that he didn't.

What I do mind is that his teams lost recruiting battles to:
a Colorado team mired in (non) scandal at the time
a Washington team that was averaging 3 win seasons
Arizona State
Cal
Washington State
Oregon State

We're not talking about him losing to Ohio State, Michigan, Alabama, Florida, Miami, etc, etc.

He's going to have to out-recruit the exact same schools that he failed to out-recruit last time.

I hope he does, but to act like this isn't a serious question mark is wishful thinking at its finest.
Click to expand...
I don’t feel like digging into the specifics, but when he recruited in the 20s nationally, how was he losing out to CU and those other programs?
 
skibum said:
I don't mind that Dorrell's UCLA team lost recruiting battles to Carroll's USC teams. That's really not a problem.

I kind of don't mind that his UCLA team lost recruiting battles to Oregon. I'd like to see him win that, but it's not a huge problem that he didn't.

What I do mind is that his teams lost recruiting battles to:
a Colorado team mired in (non) scandal at the time
a Washington team that was averaging 3 win seasons
Arizona State
Cal
Washington State
Oregon State

We're not talking about him losing to Ohio State, Michigan, Alabama, Florida, Miami, etc, etc.

He's going to have to out-recruit the exact same schools that he failed to out-recruit last time.

I hope he does, but to act like this isn't a serious question mark is wishful thinking at its finest.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I'm basically on the same page as you from your posts in this thread. Hoping he's learned from those shortcomings since then and hires assistants that recruit. I have to imagine RG and LC want recruiting emphasized.
 
You have to look at recruiting relative to your conference. That conference represents your peers and who you have to beat.

For example, in 2020 Ole Miss brought in the #34 recruiting class nationally. That looks pretty good. However, it's not a class that they can win with. It is ranked #12 in the SEC and last in its division of the SEC.
 
TSchekler said:
I don’t feel like digging into the specifics, but when he recruited in the 20s nationally, how was he losing out to CU and those other programs?
Click to expand...
He had one class ranked #21 - which translated to #3 in the conference (behind USC and, checks notes..., Cal).

But more specifically, he lost out to CU and those other programs, because they had higher nationally ranked recruiting classes than he did. I mean this sort of feels like a "they scored more points, so they won the game, you do understand that's how this works, right?" answer, but it seems like a question that needs this sort of response.

You can take a glass-half-full approach, and say "his recruiting classes were ranked in the 20s-30s nationally - if he repeats that, we'll be ok."

You can also take the glass-half-empty approach, and say "his recruiting classes were ranked in the bottom of the conference (oh, and BTW, it's the same conference this time as last) - if he repeats that, we'll be ****ed."

Either way, the glass has 50% of the water it could have in it, and if you want to be successful in this conference, you can't lose recruiting battles to Oregon ****ing State.

I assume that RG and LC, when they interviewed him asked the question: what did you do wrong, and what will you do to do better this time?

I hope someone asks him that question at his press conference; I'm really interested to hear his response. If that answer is focused on recruiting, it will be good.
 
skibum said:
He had one class ranked #21 - which translated the #3 in the conference (behind USC and, checks notes..., Cal).

But more specifically, he lost out to CU and those other programs, because they had higher nationally ranked recruiting classes than he did.

You can take a glass-half-full approach, and say "his recruiting classes were ranked in the 20s-30s nationally - if he repeats that, we'll be ok."

You can also take the glass-half-empty approach, and say "his recruiting classes were ranked in the bottom of the conference (oh, and BTW, it's the same conference this time as last) - if he repeats that, we'll be ****ed."

Either way, the glass has 50% of the water it could have in it, and if you want to be successful in this conference, you can't lose recruiting battles to Oregon ****ing State.

I assume that RG and LC, when they interviewed him asked the question: what did you do wrong, and what will you do to do better this time?

I hope someone asks him that question at his press conference; I'm really interested to hear his response. If that answer is focused on recruiting, it will be good.
Click to expand...
Agree that would be a great question. Send it to Brian Howell. Still struggling overall with this hire, praying he is an Ed Oregon and got better with age. Loses a few games early and he loses the fan base. Just the facts of being a Colorado fan. With Mel he was a first time HC building momentum so people filled the seats. My fear is that people give up early on this guy. Also one fact... CSU Coach age 60, CU coach 56 Broncos coach 61. Why doesn't this state put some energy in it and hire a young gun?
 
manhattanbuf said:
You keep repeating yourself and fail to engage my arguments. I’ve already refuted your arguments. Good luck.
Click to expand...

You actually haven’t made any coherent arguments, you’ve made declarations: “national ranking is irrelevant” “Tucker is an elite recruiter.”

All I’m repeating is the data which is that his one class here ranked 35th nationally and 7th in the PAC. And that puts him in the same range of recruiting classes as KD when he coached in the PAC. Only USC wasn’t a dynasty cheating in the recruiting process when Tucker was recruiting.

There are valid reasons to be critical and skeptical of KD as a hire but propping up Mel Tucker to beat him down is not valid one because it’s not supported by actual data.

Making ridiculous declarations like Mel Tucker was hired as db coach at Alabama because he is an elite recruiter, when he had been in the NFL for a decade and flamed out so badly as DC in Chicago that his name was too toxic to get a job with another team, isn’t convincing anyone.
 
NuggNinja said:
You actually haven’t made any coherent arguments, you’ve made declarations: “national ranking is irrelevant” “Tucker is an elite recruiter.”

All I’m repeating is the data which is that his one class here ranked 35th nationally and 7th in the PAC. And that puts him in the same range of recruiting classes as KD when he coached in the PAC. Only USC wasn’t a dynasty cheating in the recruiting process when Tucker was recruiting.

There are valid reasons to be critical and skeptical of KD as a hire but propping up Mel Tucker to beat him down is not valid one because it’s not supported by actual by the data.

Making ridiculous declarations like Mel Tucker was hired as db coach at Alabama because he is an elite recruiter, when he had been in the NFL for a decade and flamed out so badly as DC in Chicago that his name was too toxic to get a job with another team, isn’t convincing anyone.
Click to expand...
Answer the argument: KD’s recruiting sucked compared to the P10 and even Colorado during that era.

Until then, please stop regurgitating national rankings that don’t matter in the context of the conference.

The dude has a mediocre record as a coach and a mediocre to terrible record as a coach. You keep deflecting by saying “look at the national ranking” when the competition had better national rankings.

That is not engagement.
 
So.......


How's everyone doing this morning?



giphy.gif
 
manhattanbuf said:
Answer the argument: KD’s recruiting sucked compared to the P10 and even Colorado during that era.

Until then, please stop regurgitating national rankings that don’t matter in the context of the conference.

The dude has a mediocre record as a coach and a mediocre to terrible record as a coach. You keep deflecting by saying “look at the national ranking” when the competition had better national rankings.

That is not engagement.
Click to expand...

Ignoring national ranking, Mel Tucker’s only class ranked 7th in the PAC 12. I’m not deflecting, I’m pointing out that his class ranking was in the same range as KD’s when he recruited in the PAC 12.

If KDs recruiting sucked relative to the PAC 12, so did Tucker’s. Yet, you claim Tucker is an elite recruiter?

KD recruited at the Mel Tucker at CU level which I’m okay with given where they’ve been since the Barnett era.
 
NuggNinja said:
Ignoring national ranking, Mel Tucker’s only class ranked 7th in the PAC 12. I’m not deflecting, I’m pointing out that his class ranking was in the same range as KD’s when he recruited in the PAC 12.

If KDs recruiting sucked relative to the PAC 12, so did Tucker’s. Yet, you claim Tucker is an elite recruiter?

KD recruited at the Mel Tucker at CU level which I’m okay with given where they’ve been since the Barnett era.
Click to expand...
7th in the P12 is not good enough no matter the coach. Having been in the bottom 3-4 in the P12 is where we were with macintyre consistently. He made a marked improvement (best class in a decade). KD’s classes got worse over time. MT’s classes were on a different trajectory.
 
manhattanbuf said:
7th in the P12 is not good enough no matter the coach. Having been in the bottom 3-4 in the P12 is where we were with macintyre consistently. He made a marked improvement (best class in a decade). KD’s classes got worse over time. MT’s classes were on a different trajectory.
Click to expand...

There really isn’t a trajectory when you only have one year. There’s just hope.
 
manhattanbuf said:
1. The national ranking is irrelevant. The P10 as a whole was a better conference on the field and in recruiting. You can be the 10th best poker player in the world. If your regular game is against the 9 best poker players in the world, you’re still going to be a loser.
2. In the early-mid 2000s, EVERYONE in the P10 and schools like CU were vying for kids out of California. Somehow, many programs (including Colorado) were able to out recruit UCLA. UCLA did not have bottom third of conference recruiting for all years but one because of USC.
3. MT’s improvement here was vast. It was not yet up to his standard, but it was a marked improvement. This is especially true given the infrastructure items he implemented.
4. He was hired to work at Bama and UGA because he’s an elite recruiter. They are elite because they only hire beast, a-plus recruiters. You’re confused about the direction of causation.
5. I am not explaining away anything. I am analyzing your surface level approach to this hire. To say KD is even in MT’s zone for current college football coaching/recruiting is proof of your cluelessness.
Click to expand...

This is continuing to age well.
 
patebuff said:
I guess I am the only one who doesn't think this is terrible. Karl has a ton of contacts in the coaching world and must have put something together to convince Rick and Lance.

What was his recruiting like at UCLA?
Click to expand...
The question has obviously made me change some of this initial thought but will see how this evolves over the next few years.
 
ahoelsken said:
We're not the team who lost to Rutgers or has lost two games to the likes of Indiana (who is going to pummeled by Ohio State) and Iowa 73-7
Click to expand...
Spiking football 2 games into the 2020 covid season. Bad. Idea. I hope it works out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top