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!

Mike Bohn to head UC AD

Terry Frei is a good guy, but OLD school in his view of college athletics. Coaches should never be fired, it should be about purity of the sport, recruiting should be toned down, etc. etc.

It takes a lot to convince him that any coach or manager should be let go.
 
dio said:
Terry Frei is a good guy, but OLD school in his view of college athletics. Coaches should never be fired, it should be about purity of the sport, recruiting should be toned down, etc. etc.

It takes a lot to convince him that any coach or manager should be let go.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that Terry is wrong.

How often does a coaching change result in a big improvement? The stats pretty much say that it's a waste of millions of dollars for no better result. And college sports isn't pure. It might be nice if it was.

But when millions of people are watching and the dollars for franchise valuations or conference media contracts are big enough that we're often saying "billions", then I also think you have to live in reality. There's a ton of pressure to find lightening in a bottle with a new coach or by finding the best possible talent or whatever. Too much is now on the line to accept mediocrity in the win/loss columns even if the coach is doing everything else well or he's saddled with circumstances beyond his control.
 
Duff Man said:
All George did was re-submit?:lol:
Click to expand...

Cute.
Yes. all he did was re-submit a plan. It was a different plan, true. But people are acting like Bohn never submitted a plan to begin with. That's false. I'm going to point out these falsehoods when they're reported as fact.
 
'Tini said:
Did Bohn have the medical facility stuff in his? I can't remember if he did or not, but if he didn't that's a pretty big change that will really help out going forward. Come to think of it, did we ever get real plans from Bohn, or along the lines of what we've seen from RG?
Click to expand...

What we've gotten from RG is nothing substantially different than what we got from Bohn. It's all conceptual at this point. The stuff about the collaboration with the medical school is all new. The locations of the proposed facilities is all new, and the overall cost is a lot less than what Bohn was proposing. In terms of specifics, though, there's no difference. Both Bohn and RG took a proposal to the Regents for improvements to the athletic facilities. Both were approved, by the way, pending acquisition of adequate funding.
 
The location of the IPF and the overall cost are mere minor details.:lol:

Mike Bohn FTMFW!
 
Duff Man said:
The location of the IPF and the overall cost are mere minor details.:lol:

Mike Bohn FTMFW!
Click to expand...


You really like to twist things, don't you?

The location is all speculative right now. Everything they've submitted, and yes I mean EVERYTHING, is subject to change.

But go on with your laughy smiley self righteous self there. You don't know squat.
 
I know everything is subject to change. I also know the project was STAGNANT with Mike Bohn at the helm. Like it was going nowhere.

Your admiration of Bohn clouds your judgement.
 
Duff Man said:
I know everything is subject to change. I also know the project was STAGNANT with Mike Bohn at the helm. Like it was going nowhere.

Your admiration of Bohn clouds your judgement.
Click to expand...


And your disdain for Bohn clouds yours. I'm perfectly willing to admit Mike Bohn had a lot of shortcomings. Failing to provide a facilities plan was not one of them.
 
Buffnik said:
I'm not sure that Terry is wrong.

How often does a coaching change result in a big improvement? The stats pretty much say that it's a waste of millions of dollars for no better result. And college sports isn't pure. It might be nice if it was.

But when millions of people are watching and the dollars for franchise valuations or conference media contracts are big enough that we're often saying "billions", then I also think you have to live in reality. There's a ton of pressure to find lightening in a bottle with a new coach or by finding the best possible talent or whatever. Too much is now on the line to accept mediocrity in the win/loss columns even if the coach is doing everything else well or he's saddled with circumstances beyond his control.
Click to expand...
College sports doesn't resemble anything close to what it was originally intended to be. It has become too big for it's own good IMO. But there's no going back at this point.
 
sackman said:
And your disdain for Bohn clouds yours. I'm perfectly willing to admit Mike Bohn had a lot of shortcomings. Failing to provide a facilities plan was not one of them.
Click to expand...

Mike Bohn waas an average AD saddled with piss poor administrative support. Not sure he had any idea of what makes a successful football program at the BCS level and he had no real advisors to lean on. If that makes me a hater, so be it.
 
Duff Man said:
Mike Bohn waas an average AD saddled with piss poor administrative support. Not sure he had any idea of what makes a successful football program at the BCS level and he had no real advisors to lean on. If that makes me a hater, so be it.
Click to expand...


You're choosing to concentrate on his weaknesses. I prefer to concentrate on his strengths. I will not argue the fact that he had piss poor administrative support or that he had no idea of what it takes to produce a successfull football program. In the end, it was his inability to produce a successfull football program that did him in. In the meantime, our men's basketball program is as strong as it's ever been. Our cross country and skiing programs are nationally recognized, we have a new women's lacrosse program, new facilities for golf, volleyball and basketball, and we aren't embroiled in any pissing fights with the City of Boulder.
I think we can both agree that MB did a lot of good things here. I also hope we can agree that where he had weaknesses, RG will hopefully have strengths. I prefer to view this as a transitional progression. We needed MB to take us from where we were (dumpster fire) to where we are. We need RG to take us from where we are to where we want to be. I'm able to do that without crapping all over Mike Bohn in the process.
 
  • Like
Reactions: aik
sackman said:
You're choosing to concentrate on his weaknesses. I prefer to concentrate on his strengths. I will not argue the fact that he had piss poor administrative support or that he had no idea of what it takes to produce a successfull football program. In the end, it was his inability to produce a successfull football program that did him in. In the meantime, our men's basketball program is as strong as it's ever been. Our cross country and skiing programs are nationally recognized, we have a new women's lacrosse program, new facilities for golf, volleyball and basketball, and we aren't embroiled in any pissing fights with the City of Boulder.
I think we can both agree that MB did a lot of good things here. I also hope we can agree that where he had weaknesses, RG will hopefully have strengths. I prefer to view this as a transitional progression. We needed MB to take us from where we were (dumpster fire) to where we are. We need RG to take us from where we are to where we want to be.
Click to expand...
The problem is an AD who can't run a successful football program can't succeed at CU. Even if CU hits the ceiling basketball-wise at CU, it will never bring in the revenue football will in the current state of it's program (no luxury suites and a relatively old building).
 
cubuffs85 said:
The problem is an AD who can't run a successful football program can't succeed at CU. Even if CU hits the ceiling basketball-wise at CU, it will never bring in the revenue football will in the current state of it's program (no luxury suites and a relatively old building).
Click to expand...

How is it that you're able to quote my post and not understand what I said?:bang:
 
The main fact is that Bohn's decisions split the fan base and that is why fundrasing struggled during his tenure. I don't care about all the other sports, football hit its lowest point ever during his watch. Obviously it is not entirely his fault but his coaching decisons severly hurt the program.
 
Any analysis of Bohn should probably include mention of his relationship with Phil DiStefano.

Was Bohn a lapdog to a Chancellor that prioritized team GPA, balanced budgets, and an absence of scandal above facilities and football titles?

Has the Chancellor had a change of heart following the futility and mismanagement under Hawkins and Embree? Now that Football has Benson's attention, is DiStefano giving support to George that wasn't previously forthcoming?

I cannot say with certainty that Bohn was a bad AD or if he was just resource constrained under a bad boss.

The Chancellor and President are now making an effort to support the program in ways that were absent during the eight years under Bohn. For this I am greatful. Benson's generous gift and the recent participation with football recruiting are great ways of showing leadership. But is this behavior atonement for years of neglect? Or is this something attributable to Rick George's ability to manage up?

Is the relationship with Solich any better or worse under George? Would George be even more effective or less effective if he no longer reported to this Chancellor?

A case could be made that Bohn was dealt some bad cards and played the hand he was dealt the best he could.

Regardless of the past, Bohn's lack of vision, the poor FB hiring decisions, and Embree's ugly final press conference, I remain sympathetic to MB and openly wonder if he might have just been DiStefano's fall guy.

Now that he's gone, I wish him no ill will for his time at dear old CU. He was an ardent CU supporter despite his shortcomings. And he did a great job with the conference switch. He built a Basketball program, and he enjoyed sustaining success in skiing and running. And he always managed to put butts in seats in Folsom or on the road in LA, Vegas, and Albuquerque.

Maybe, just maybe, we'll all see a man in Cincinnati who is unrecognizable when out from under DiStefano's calloused and double jointed thumb.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Skidmark said:
Any analysis of Bohn should probably include mention of his relationship with Phil DiStefano.

Was Bohn a lapdog to a Chancellor that prioritized team GPA, balanced budgets, and an absence of scandal above facilities and football titles?

Has the Chancellor had a change of heart following the futility and mismanagement under Hawkins and Embree? Now that Football has Benson's attention, is DiStefano giving support to George that wasn't previously forthcoming?

I cannot say with certainty that Bohn was a bad AD or if he was just resource constrained under a bad boss.

The Chancellor and President are now making an effort to support the program in ways that were absent during the eight years under Bohn. For this I am greatful. Benson's generous gift and the recent participation with football recruiting are great ways of showing leadership. But is this behavior atonement for years of neglect? Or is this something attributable to Rick George's ability to manage up?

Is the relationship with Solich any better or worse under George? Would George be even more effective or less effective if he no longer reported to this Chancellor?

A case could be made that Bohn was dealt some bad cards and played the hand he was dealt the best he could.

Regardless of the past, Bohn's lack of vision, the poor FB hiring decisions, and Embree's ugly final press conference, I remain sympathetic to MB and openly wonder if he might have just been DiStefano's fall guy.

Now that he's gone, I wish him no ill will for his time at dear old CU. He was an ardent CU supporter despite his shortcomings. And he did a great job with the conference switch. He built a Basketball program, and he enjoyed sustaining success in skiing and running. And he always managed to put butts in seats in Folsom or on the road in LA, Vegas, and Albuquerque.

Maybe, just maybe, we'll all see a man in Cincinnati who is unrecognizable when out from under DiStefano's calloused and double jointed thumb.
Click to expand...

Bohn's mistake was listening to the PC job description and constant reinforcement of that in what he was told.

Now that he's been fired, hopefully he has realized what he should have always known:

While the school administrators may say that the job is as much or more about academic performance of student athletes and a bunch of other stuff that sounds good at faculty dinners, what they're really doing is winking at you. What they mean is "win a ton of football games, win basketball games too, raise a boatload of money, and make sure nothing that goes on embarrasses the university too badly".
 
Buffnik said:
Bohn's mistake was listening to the PC job description and constant reinforcement of that in what he was told.

Now that he's been fired, hopefully he has realized what he should have always known:

While the school administrators may say that the job is as much or more about academic performance of student athletes and a bunch of other stuff that sounds good at faculty dinners, what they're really doing is winking at you. What they mean is "win a ton of football games, win basketball games too, raise a boatload of money, and make sure nothing that goes on embarrasses the university too badly".
Click to expand...

The bolded is all they cared about when they hired him. Over time (especially when Bensen started paying attention) the other 2 requirements started coming into play.
 
Buffnik said:
Bohn's mistake was listening to the PC job description and constant reinforcement of that in what he was told.

Now that he's been fired, hopefully he has realized what he should have always known:

While the school administrators may say that the job is as much or more about academic performance of student athletes and a bunch of other stuff that sounds good at faculty dinners, what they're really doing is winking at you. What they mean is "win a ton of football games, win basketball games too, raise a boatload of money, and make sure nothing that goes on embarrasses the university too badly".
Click to expand...

There is more than a kernel of truth here.

But I can't help but wonder if Solich and Bohn might have had a big money deal that involved relinquishing some authority that Phil wouldn't give up. I also don't get why Hawkins got a year five unless it involved some of Benson's political maneuvering down at the Capitol. I do not think Bohn was not being winked at during several critical junctures.
 
sackman said:
Oh for the love of Christ. You gotta be kidding me. Stop. Just stop.
Click to expand...

I am dead serious here.

Did he suddenly make the XC team a national power under Wetmore? Of course not. The guy has been coaching at CU for two decades and won several national titles before Bohn ever became AD. The facilities have not dramatically improved in that time frame. So again, what did Mike Bohn do to make CU a national power in XC?

In skiing, he inherited another longtime coach in Richard Rokos who had won multiple national championships at the school before Bohn ever arrived. What did Mike Bohn do to make CU a national power in skiing?

Your admiration is getting in the way of viewing his tenure at CU objectively.
 
Duff Man said:
I am dead serious here.

Did he suddenly make the XC team a national power under Wetmore? Of course not. The guy has been coaching at CU for two decades and won several national titles before Bohn ever became AD. The facilities have not dramatically improved in that time frame. So again, what did Mike Bohn do to make CU a national power in XC?

In skiing, he inherited another longtime coach in Richard Rokos who had won multiple national championships at the school before Bohn ever arrived. What did Mike Bohn do to make CU a national power in skiing?

Your admiration is getting in the way of viewing his tenure at CU objectively.
Click to expand...

He didn't screw up a good thing.
Bohn did lead the way for the B12 Track Championship to be held in Boulder. This involved a facilities investment.
And he left Wetmore alone when it came to fundraising. Mark got to coach his way, and not be forced to glad hand alumni for cash.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top