Buffalewd
Well-Known Member
Disturbing/concerning is a better word.
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!
Mel Tucker leaves CU for Michigan State
- Thread starter ElCunado
- Start date
hawg1
Well-Known Member
Scoop breaks very little news. Except Art Briles
JWP303
Well-Known Member
I mean, we all know this is a stepping-stone job -- we knew it from Day 1 with Tucker. We all know the realities of the business...
But at some point as a coach, don't you have to put some parameters on which jobs you'll entertain and at what point in your contract you're willing to entertain them? Especially when you've used the kind of rhetoric he's used recently... Interviewing for a middling job, very much on par with his current one, in year 2 of a 5 year contract -- sends a very clear message and you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.
This sucks, and we shouldn't pretend that it doesn't.
But at some point as a coach, don't you have to put some parameters on which jobs you'll entertain and at what point in your contract you're willing to entertain them? Especially when you've used the kind of rhetoric he's used recently... Interviewing for a middling job, very much on par with his current one, in year 2 of a 5 year contract -- sends a very clear message and you can't put the toothpaste back in the tube.
This sucks, and we shouldn't pretend that it doesn't.
After writing the below post, I realized I buried the most important part:
Short term focus needs to be on the June 30 Democratic primary in District 2 between Gross and Rennison. I don't live in Colorado, let alone in D2 - those of you that do really need to start figuring out which of those two we need to support, and we should make a concerted effort on their behalf.
If you don't read any further, that's fine. Here's the rest of who needs to go:
1. Jack Kroll
2. Jack Kroll
3. Jack Kroll
4. Linda Shoemaker
5. Irene Greigo
Those are the three that reportedly voted against MT's contract.
Shoemaker's term is up this year and she's not running again, so that slot is open. We need to make certain that an anti-athletic regent doesn't fill that slot. It's District 2 (Joe Neguse is the US Rep - Boulder, Ft Collins, a lot of ski country), the partisan lean is +9 Democrat, so the real election for this spot is going to be the Democratic primary on June 30. There are two declared candidates, David Gross and Callie Rennison. I know nothing about them, but allbuffs should do some due diligence.
Greigo is running this year as well. She's in District 7 (Perlmutter's the US Rep, Lakewood, Arvada, Westminster, Thornton. +6 Democratic lean). So far she is running entirely unopposed in both the primary and general (Republicans not even putting up a candidate) - I don't think it's technically too late for someone to jump into the primary election, but it may be too late actually be competitive
.Kroll isn't up again until '22. He's in District 1 (DeGette, Denver, +21 D lean). He really needs to be taken down in the primary. Probably going to take someone dialed into the Denver county Democratic party to do it - they really need to hammer the conflict-of-interest angle and not let it go. I donated to his primary opponent last time (as did other Allbuffs members) and got every person I know who lives in D1 to vote; our candidate came up a few hundred votes short.
Every job is a stepping stone job. Even Alabama had to fight off Texas a few years ago to keep Saban.
Big Jim
WTF?
Just by his flirting with Texas, Saban doomed Bama to lose their recruiting power and that explains why they are no longer a college football powerhouse.
jizzrag85
Well-Known Member
After writing the below post, I realized I buried the most important part:
Short term focus needs to be on the June 30 Democratic primary in District 2 between Gross and Rennison. I don't live in Colorado, let alone in D2 - those of you that do really need to start figuring out which of those two we need to support, and we should make a concerted effort on their behalf.
If you don't read any further, that's fine. Here's the rest of who needs to go:
1. Jack Kroll
2. Jack Kroll
3. Jack Kroll
4. Linda Shoemaker
5. Irene Greigo
Those are the three that reportedly voted against MT's contract.
Shoemaker's term is up this year and she's not running again, so that slot is open. We need to make certain that an anti-athletic regent doesn't fill that slot. It's District 2 (Joe Neguse is the US Rep - Boulder, Ft Collins, a lot of ski country), the partisan lean is +9 Democrat, so the real election for this spot is going to be the Democratic primary on June 30. There are two declared candidates, David Gross and Callie Rennison. I know nothing about them, but allbuffs should do some due diligence.
Greigo is running this year as well. She's in District 7 (Perlmutter's the US Rep, Lakewood, Arvada, Westminster, Thornton. +6 Democratic lean). So far she is running entirely unopposed in both the primary and general (Republicans not even putting up a candidate) - I don't think it's technically too late for someone to jump into the primary election, but it may be too late actually be competitive
Kroll isn't up again until '22. He's in District 1 (DeGette, Denver, +21 D lean). He really needs to be taken down in the primary. Probably going to take someone dialed into the Denver county Democratic party to do it - they really need to hammer the conflict-of-interest angle and not let it go. I donated to his primary opponent last time (as did other Allbuffs members) and got every person I know who lives in D1 to vote; our candidate came up a few hundred votes short.
You should make this a new thread. If someone can compile a list of the people to vote for/against, count me in.
After writing the below post, I realized I buried the most important part:
Short term focus needs to be on the June 30 Democratic primary in District 2 between Gross and Rennison. I don't live in Colorado, let alone in D2 - those of you that do really need to start figuring out which of those two we need to support, and we should make a concerted effort on their behalf.
If you don't read any further, that's fine. Here's the rest of who needs to go:
1. Jack Kroll
2. Jack Kroll
3. Jack Kroll
4. Linda Shoemaker
5. Irene Greigo
Those are the three that reportedly voted against MT's contract.
Shoemaker's term is up this year and she's not running again, so that slot is open. We need to make certain that an anti-athletic regent doesn't fill that slot. It's District 2 (Joe Neguse is the US Rep - Boulder, Ft Collins, a lot of ski country), the partisan lean is +9 Democrat, so the real election for this spot is going to be the Democratic primary on June 30. There are two declared candidates, David Gross and Callie Rennison. I know nothing about them, but allbuffs should do some due diligence.
Greigo is running this year as well. She's in District 7 (Perlmutter's the US Rep, Lakewood, Arvada, Westminster, Thornton. +6 Democratic lean). So far she is running entirely unopposed in both the primary and general (Republicans not even putting up a candidate) - I don't think it's technically too late for someone to jump into the primary election, but it may be too late actually be competitive
Kroll isn't up again until '22. He's in District 1 (DeGette, Denver, +21 D lean). He really needs to be taken down in the primary. Probably going to take someone dialed into the Denver county Democratic party to do it - they really need to hammer the conflict-of-interest angle and not let it go. I donated to his primary opponent last time (as did other Allbuffs members) and got every person I know who lives in D1 to vote; our candidate came up a few hundred votes short.
Rennison is really really really bad for CU athletics and she’s being primed as the heir apparent to shoemaker.
The biggest district in the upcoming election is CD6 (Aurora). This is the race to replace John Carson (pro athletics).
Richard Murray is so far the pro athletic candidate running in that district. He’s running against Illana Spiegel, an education activist. Another republican ,Priscilla Rahn, is running as well, but not sure of her standing with athletics
If not handled correctly/seriously , this above district could sway the regent board to be majority anti athletics
...above info I gathered fromArgentumEtAurum. So shout out to him on that
I'm not opposed to a dedicated thread, but...
A vote for/against list and few allbuffs guys voting by that list ain't gonna change nothing.
Donating time and/or money to the preferred candidate's election campaign is what is needed <<full stop>>.
If folks are willing to actually volunteer for the campaign, donate money to the campaign, and actively push a bunch of relevant voters to vote, then maybe we got a chance to have an effect.
Bubblebuff
Bubble buff
Let us all take some solace in msu losing at Big Blue in bball right now. Suck it Sparty!
JWP303
Well-Known Member
Yes, and my point is that even if we know that's the reality, and that the nature of the business means high turnover & Tucker is not long for this job -- we can and should expect a coach to make more of a good faith commitment than to be interviewing at the beginning of year 2 after going 5-7 and just signing his first recruiting class.
Maybe that's naive in today's NCAA landscape, but it doesn't seem like it's asking too much.
I agree. I won't like it if Tucker interviews. Would raise a lot of red flags (mostly about the CU situation). I'm just trying to avoid going down the rabbit hole today since all I've seen is a column that said that Tucker would be on MSU's list and then a newspaper columnist in Detroit who said that he's expected to interview. There's not a lot of meat on that bone.
Deleted member 807
Guest
Any allbuffers willing to jump into the regents race has my support.
Tucker is relatively young, and the longer you stay somewhere and show and prove your worth, the better the image, and myth grow to the point that you are a top candidate for anything you want. I really like how Matt Campbell is playing it. Not happy that the report says he is interviewing, cause that takes it one step too far. Just having interest is enough.
Slurpeee
It's only a gambling problem if you don't win.
No denial from CU to a story that is all over the internet and on a local TV news station's evening report. Esp a story they'd be heavily incentivized to deny for all kinds of reasons if it wasn't true..... Smells like meat.
It is everyone quoting said Detroit Free Press reporter and taking it as fact. No corroboration, no second source, no meat
Because CU has such a consistent history of quickly responding to unconfirmed media scoop and internet speculation?
DrunkRalphie
Well-Known Member
On a Saturday.
AllStarBuffs
Member
those journalists in Detroit must be really bored to make up a story like this, guess they gotta get clicks from somewhere
Plati probably has not even seen the info on the internet yet. It is his strong suit
1 journalist reported. Not multiple. Smoke yes, meat no.
Slurpeee
It's only a gambling problem if you don't win.
touche' tough to argue with that. Still feels like meat city to me.
SINKRATZ
PhD in Analogy
Big difference between confirming media scoop that they may not be ready to confirm publicly and issuing a denial of made up BS. This could have been handled in 30 seconds with one tweet.
When have we dealt with this situation recently?
Slurpeee
It's only a gambling problem if you don't win.
The point though isn't how many journalists have reported it. (We live in an era where actual true journalism barely even exists)... but rather the sheer ubiquity of the rumor. Given that, it'd be highly logical to assume CU would quickly issue a denial for damage control. The absence of one would be very telling... But as others as pointed out, given CU's historical PR acumen (or lack there of), maybe this isn't such a good theory.
So the very reasonable assumption is that MSU is interested, has reached out, would like Mel Tucker to interview, and Tucker is in the process of deciding whether he should take the interview.
Under that assumption, CU should not be making any comments at this time.
Slurpeee
It's only a gambling problem if you don't win.
While I agree while those who have corrected me about CU's lack of PR common sense. Still, if there was a bet at a sports book on whether or not Mel Tucker is about to interview with Michigan St, I'd but withdrawing my entire 401k and jumping on that "yes" as fast as i could.
Slurpeee
It's only a gambling problem if you don't win.
In the words of Gary Kubiak, "We're fixin' to find out."
SINKRATZ
PhD in Analogy
That’s the wishful thinking assumption. The article said he is “set to interview” this weekend not that MSU has reached out and would like to interview him. The reasonable assumption (until denied by MT/CU or new reporting contradicts the DFP) is the article is accurate.
