More impressive, MM or Tad?

[sackman]

MM has done an incredible job of resurrecting a program that has been left for dead. However, he managed to pull it off once the admin got on board.
Tad turned around a program that was a perennial doormat. CU hoops was dog meat before he got here. Two trips to the tournament in 40 or so years. Tad has gone to four tournaments in six years. The Admin was oblivious to CU athletics when he was hired, which is probably why he was hired in the first place. He did benefit from a new facility within a couple years of starting. However, it's easier to turn around a basketball program than it is a football program. Fewer players, fewer positions.

Both are miracle workers, IMO. Both will be in the CU athletics hall of fame someday.

Which one has pulled off a more improbable feat, though?

Although I put this in the football thread, I'm going with Tad. Dude did something that had never been done at CU - ever. At least MM had some history to work with. Tad had Chauncey.

 

[4DemBuffs]

Tad came in with some good to very good players. Mac had nothing. I choose Mac.

Both have been fantastic.

 

[Shldr2Shldr]

For the reason you stated, it has to go to Tad. He has built a legitimate program out of nothing. Mac has resurrected something that once was great.

 

[InTheBuff]

well ...we all know what program was burnt to the ground

 

[BuffLuke80]

I'd say it's a tie.

 

[4DemBuffs]

For the reason you stated, it has to go to Tad. He has built a legitimate program out of nothing. Mac has resurrected something that once was great.

CU football was nothing when Mac was hired. Tossing that out there.

 

[4DemBuffs]

I really don't think there's a wrong answer.

 

[sackman]

I really don't think there's a wrong answer.

This.

I'm just asking peoples opinions. I'm not going to argue with somebody who disagrees with me. There are good arguments to be made for both.

 

[J.R. Ewing]

I really don't think there's a wrong answer.

Anything other than this ^^^ is the wrong answer.

 

[Shldr2Shldr]

CU football was nothing when Mac was hired. Tossing that out there.

I meant historically. Obviously MM had a deeper hole to dig out of than Tad did, but the blue prints and the tools were there for him.

 

[Buffskier]

I voted MacIntyre. The depths that this program was in when he came in and the strength of the P12 for football over these past 4 years has made #TheRise even that much more special. It appears to be much more difficult to get momentum rolling in football, especially in the division that we played in and the schedule that we drew early on (getting Oregon and Stanford when they were at the top of their game, missing Wazzu and Oregon State).

Tad inherited facilities already being constructed and a team that had some NBA talent. He did an incredible job, I just think that it was a much more improbable climb for MM than Tad

 

[SerenityBuff]

It's a lot easier to turn around a basketball program than a football program. It can literally be one or two guys that come in and change everything. Football, especially a program in the state ours was in (not Colorado, smart asses), takes dozens of people years to turn around. What Mac has done is damn near a miracle.

 

[Buffnik]

This thread is like picking your favorite kid. I mean, everyone has a favorite but you don't say it.

 

[SerenityBuff]

I meant historically. Obviously MM had a deeper hole to dig out of than Tad did, but the blue prints and the tools were there for him.

That can be a burden, too. For Mac II to shoulder those expectations of what fans saw under Mac I can be a challenge unto itself. Especially when you're recruiting kids who have no recollection of that time whatsoever.

 

[jizzrag85]

Mac. Tad has done a great job and built a very good program. But the football team was ****ing atrocious, historically **** bad. You need tons of players to win in football. In basketball you only need 1 very good and some good role players.

 

[unionbuff]

I would go for MM because of the dumpster fire the program was when he came. The basketball program was not a dumpster fire and was on a somewhat upward trajectory when Bz left Boulder.

I would say that both have been lucky to have ADs who are focused on improving their product. Rick George is awesome at helping improve football & facilities. And say what you want about Bohn & football but he had a vision for CU basketball and helped foster an improved atmosphere & product at the CEC.

 

[CUBuff98]

MM.

 

[Darian3Hagan]

Mac because football.

 

[CitizenKane]

I am going with Tad because he has sustained excellence for a few years now. That being said, CU hoops actually was a borderline hoops powerhouse from 1940 until 1969 (The next 28 years were rough with a couple minor exceptions). Going to the Elite 8 in 1962 and 1963 and the final four in 1940, 1942, 1946, 1954, 1955 and 1969. They finished 3rd in three of those final four appearances. So there is SOME history with hoops, just none of us remember it.

I could easily change my mind on this if Mac sustains football excellence for several years in a row. As someone mentioned turning a basketball program around is a little easier than a football program.

We are fortunate to be witnessing something that CU hasn't really experienced since the 1950's and 60's. A good football and a good basketball program. I imagine 1954-57 were good years to be CU sports fans (Final four in hoops twice and a win over Clemson in the Orange bowl). 1969 had to be a good year too, another final four in hoops and beating up on Alabama in the Liberty bowl...No wonder my parents conceived me.

 

[Jeric]

Individually, it's probably Tad, but from a program standpoint, the turnaround MM and his crew along with RG did is as impressive of a job you'll see in sports.

 

[Bufffan68]

I say Mac...harder to build a competitive football program IMO.

 

[DenverBuff77]

Mac because he's beating teams stacked with talent and we barely have any four star recruits on the team.

 

[Big Jim]

I'm going with Tad. Dude did something that had never been done at CU - ever. .

Lots of young sprouts don't have a sense of history. CU football has seen a couple more of these same cycles in the past 40 years. What Boyle has done is unprecedented at one of the worst basketball schools in D1 history.

 

[DeNiro]

Tad because he has sustained the success. Tad also because we are a football school and he had us asking is it November yet? Tad has won a conference title. With that said Tad also had a head start and Mac could pass him up with a couple more great seasons.

 

[CUBUFF80]

I voted for MM, CU was probably the worst team in D1 when he took over the program. NOBODY saw this miraculous turnaround, a lot of people (on this board) were not sure if he would last the season. Not to downplay what Tad has done, because it has been great, but CU is not and will never be a BB school, so the pressure on him has been nothing like MM. Furthermore, the investment that was made on the new FB facilities makes MM's job even more amazing because the pressure to produce a winner was astronomical. Personally, I highly doubt Buff hoops will ever crack the top ten.

 

[seattlebuff]

Love Tad, and he's established CU now as a legit program. But that said, 1-2 guys can be the difference in getting to the Dance (see Burks, Higgins), and then recruiting starts getting that much easier. In football, you need at minimum half of your guys winning their positional battle game in, game out before you even turn the corner toward winning. So what Mac has done is pretty astonishing.

But it remains to be seen if he can sustain this. I don't recall seeing a more senior-dominated team. We have a TON of playmakers to replace next year.

 

[96 Buff]

This thread is like picking your favorite kid. I mean, everyone has a favorite but you don't say it.

Yes I do.

 

[ko_leos]

In football terms, I seen Tad as having taken a historically irrelevant team to having a string of 8-4 /9-3 seasons and losing nearly all mid-level bowl games (think Utah in football). We are now a school to be taken seriously but not a powerhouse. Considering basketball is easier to build, Tad has kinda plateaued. I will gladly eat crow the day we get into sweet 16.

Another view is if we had hired Coach K for basketball and Saban for football, we would probably have been a regular elite 8 program from year 2, but a CFP contender from year 3. Coach Mac has made us a CFP contender by year 4, without the name brand benefits of a Saban.

Finally, both coaches can recruit talent, are great at developing young atheletes and have better than average game plans. However, Mac has built a team unity that Tad has not been able to come close to.

Even though Coach Mac hasn't demonstrated sustainability yet, he gets my vote for now. But much love to Coach Boyle for what he has brought to Bball as well.

 

[PhillyBuff]

Is there an option to vote both?

 

[PhillyBuff]

actually.... when I analyzed the metrics.... I went with Harbaugh.....