Never imagined I would ever see it.

[BuffWarHog]

I don't like this thread anymore.

However, to the original intent - being from Davis, I love seeing them do well. They are listed in my "Favorites" in all my sports apps. Don't mind that it's Hawkins...but I it'd be better if was someone else

 

[Denver_sc]

You keep citing the Freeh Report in all of your posts on this thread, which perfectly illustrates your ignorance. You haven't read the Freeh Report, have you? It doesn't have a lot of pictures, so probably not. The preamble of that report has some very damning conclusions. But the body of the report clearly shows that there was absolutely no factual basis for those conclusions, and the report has been thoroughly debunked. Of course, that should be expected from someone like Freeh, the architect of Ruby Ridge, Waco, and the Atlanta Olympic bombing investigations. Strike one, MtnBuff.

Curley and Schultz pled guilty to child endangerment. Spanier was found guilty of child endangerment. No one at Penn State was found guilty of any of the conspiracy charges brought against them. You know, the charges that would have involved Joe Paterno. Strike two, MtnBuff.

Frank Fina, the prosecutor of the case, had this to say about Paterno's involvement:
Another key figure in the Jerry Sandusky child sex abuse case weighed in Tuesday with his take on whether former Penn State head football coach Joe Paterno was an active participant in efforts to cover up Sandusky's sex crimes. In an interview recorded for CBS 60 Minutes Sports, former Chief Deputy Attorney General Frank Fina said flatly: "I did not find that evidence." Strike three, MtnBuff.

You are wrong, and you have been wrong about this for years. You aren't very smart, but at least you are absolutely sure of yourself. Have a nice day.

Quality MTN roasts aside (bolded), this is a weird ****ing hill to die on. It seems less like you're using MTN's positions on Penn State as an example of hypocricy than you are defending Penn State.

Either way, the better analog to PSU (and for that matter, MSU and OSU- what the **** is up with coverups in the B1G?) is the Tumpkin issue. What went on at PSU (regardless of who was precisely culpable) was wrong, what went on with Larry Nassar at MSU was wrong, what went on with at OSU with Richard Strauss and Zach Smith was wrong. I'm sure I'll get shouted down for this, but what went on with the CU football program and Tumpkin was wrong. One has to intellectually contort one's self pretty hard to come to a different conclusion.

Barnett got railroaded and recieved little to no support from the admin, but he also did himself no favors. I believe the saying is "those in glass houses should not cast stones."

 

[DBT]

GB would have had a stellar career here if not for the bad timing. He, unfortunately, was HC when, possibly, the least athletics friendly administration in CU history was in place. Either that or the most incompetent administrations in CU history, period, was in place.

Living through that debacle is why I’m really nervous at the prospect of a new President coming in.

And please don’t interpret my post to be arguing that athletics should be placed on some sort of high pedestal. A university’s top priority is education. And when athletic success at all costs becomes a priority, you become a Baylor. So there should be a balance.

 

[Highlander]

GB would have had a stellar career here if not for the bad timing. He, unfortunately, was HC when, possibly, the least athletics friendly administration in CU history was in place. Either that or the most incompetent administrations in CU history, period, was in place.

Living through that debacle is why I’m really nervous at the prospect of a new President coming in.

And please don’t interpret my post to be arguing that athletics should be placed on some sort of high pedestal. A university’s top priority is education. And when athletic success at all costs becomes a priority, you become a Baylor. So there should be a balance.

I guess you do not recall that after the debacles with Marcus Houston and Craig Ochs, if GB sniffed a helicopter parent or an arrogant recruit, he ran the other direction. GB embraced the recruiting sanctions because it gave him cover to go after a different sort of recruit. Even after the sanctions were over, he continued to only have recruits in town for a single night and have them spend that evening at the UMC bowling alley.

The culmination of his recruiting tactic change was the 70-3 loss to Texas.

 

[SuperiorBuff]

Prunes?

Seriously, GB would have built a very good program, absent the scandal that wasn't. Probably a perennial 9-10 win team, occasionally challenging for all the marbles. He was a very good HC.

D II Danny was a disaster. Cody compounded it. No QB was going to come here, and the ones who did magically developed TE or S skills. It was so obvious, and so pathetic, it annoys me to this day. Cody was not a DI QB and it showed, over and over. The day D II was fired was a good one for CU FB.

All of that aside, Hawkins is a good coach at the right place...he just is not a D I caliber coach.

Very good coaches do not lose the majority of their season openers. GB didn't just lose the media battle, he lost the team. Multiple upper classmen intentionally tanked in an effort to get him fired.

 

[Liver]

this thread now officially sucks.

pedo state can burn in hell.

gb is gone and ain't coming back, except as our color commentator (which he is good at).

hawkins can eat dead green donkey phalluses.

it is game day. let's get a win. please.

 

[Buffnik]

I remember when I first met Dan Hawkins, it was at the recruiting luncheon after he had been hired and they had a little reception before the luncheon. Hawkins was talking to a group of people and he kept referring to himself in the third person - "The Hawk is going to do this..." "The Hawk said this..." Right away I was wondering what the hell was going on. Bill McCartney gave the keynote at the luncheon and said that Hawkins was going to be successful because he was motivated and humble.

After the luncheon I was able to coral coach Mac and I asked him did he really believe Hawkins was humble. He gave me a smile and clapped me on the shoulder and changed the subject. I always believe the humble part of the keynote was for Hawkins benefit not the audience.

Coach Mac raised about $50000 at that luncheon for recruiting - he was auctioning off helmets, paintings, etc.

On that note, the moment I realized Hawk was an egocentric ass was when he branded his mentoring of young men as “Hawk Love”. If it’s sincere and coming from the right place, it’s not about you but about those you are leading.

 

[GawainBuff]

On that note, the moment I realized Hawk was an egocentric ass was when he branded his mentoring of young men as “Hawk Love”. If it’s sincere and coming from the right place, it’s not about you but about those you are leading.

I admit I was excited when we first hired Hawk. I was under the mistaken impression that he was responsible for Boise State’s remarkable success and really interesting offensive schemes. But, as Buffnik points out, it didn’t take long, listening to him talk, to get a really creepy vibe from him.

I can only imagine how his Hawk-centric approach to everything went over with his players and recruits. But the result was unquestionably one of the worst programs in football and a long, grinding climb to present mediocrity. All of which is a huge improvement. Amazingly.

Our present plateau is annoying and frustrating but better.

 

[MtnBuff]

At the time most people considered Hawk an excellent hire.

His record as a head coach at Boise was outstanding, they were looked at as innovative and fan friendly, the media and the boosters liked him.

Had CU not hired him he would have gotten a job at another major conference school.

What nobody (or at least very few) saw was that his success was in large part due to the system and the staff that he inherited at Boise when he took the job.

When you hire a new coach you can look at his past success but until he does it at your school you can never be sure.

 

[Bufffan68]

Prunes?

Seriously, GB would have built a very good program, absent the scandal that wasn't. Probably a perennial 9-10 win team, occasionally challenging for all the marbles. He was a very good HC.

D II Danny was a disaster. Cody compounded it. No QB was going to come here, and the ones who did magically developed TE or S skills. It was so obvious, and so pathetic, it annoys me to this day. Cody was not a DI QB and it showed, over and over. The day D II was fired was a good one for CU FB.

All of that aside, Hawkins is a good coach at the right place...he just is not a D I caliber coach.

Same could be said about WACIntyre.

 

[DBT]

I guess you do not recall that after the debacles with Marcus Houston and Craig Ochs, if GB sniffed a helicopter parent or an arrogant recruit, he ran the other direction. GB embraced the recruiting sanctions because it gave him cover to go after a different sort of recruit. Even after the sanctions were over, he continued to only have recruits in town for a single night and have them spend that evening at the UMC bowling alley.

The culmination of his recruiting tactic change was the 70-3 loss to Texas.

But all of that was a result of “The Scandal” thing and my impression was always not that GB embraced the restrictions but accepted them to save his job. He “publically” embraced them but I highly doubt he privately did. But maybe I’m wrong.

 

[pcbuff]

I actually believe Hawk could have succeeded if he didn’t go daddy ball. Cody had no fault, but his fathers need to defend him and his choice became centric to every fan and press interaction. Ironically, Cody could have been very good at Boise.

My worst memory, leap frog. What a demonstration of leadership. But of course all of us “just don’t get it.” His freakin son was playing leap frog on the side line during a nationally televised game.

 

[Duff Man]

Same could be said about WACIntyre.

No.

 

[leftybuff]

Very good coaches do not lose the majority of their season openers. GB didn't just lose the media battle, he lost the team. Multiple upper classmen intentionally tanked in an effort to get him fired.

At CU, 7 years, 5 bowl games, 1 Conference championship, 4 division championships and a .560 win percentage. He is miles better than anybody who has followed him.

Given another conference championship in the Big 10, and 2 Rose Bowl at Northwestern for cryin' out loud, that makes him a very good coach.

Losing openers with those kind of results would be a godsend now, and for the last 12 years. D II, Embo and MikMac aren't even in the same zip code.

 

[WarBuff]

At CU, 7 years, 5 bowl games, 1 Conference championship, 4 division championships and a .560 win percentage. He is miles better than anybody who has followed him.

Given another conference championship in the Big 10, and 2 Rose Bowl at Northwestern for cryin' out loud, that makes him a very good coach.

Losing openers with those kind of results would be a godsend now, and for the last 12 years. D II, Embo and MikMac aren't even in the same zip code.

62-36 That's all that needs to be said.

 

[MtnBuff]

Quality MTN roasts aside (bolded), this is a weird ****ing hill to die on. It seems less like you're using MTN's positions on Penn State as an example of hypocricy than you are defending Penn State.

Either way, the better analog to PSU (and for that matter, MSU and OSU- what the **** is up with coverups in the B1G?) is the Tumpkin issue. What went on at PSU (regardless of who was precisely culpable) was wrong, what went on with Larry Nassar at MSU was wrong, what went on with at OSU with Richard Strauss and Zach Smith was wrong. I'm sure I'll get shouted down for this, but what went on with the CU football program and Tumpkin was wrong. One has to intellectually contort one's self pretty hard to come to a different conclusion.

Barnett got railroaded and recieved little to no support from the admin, but he also did himself no favors. I believe the saying is "those in glass houses should not cast stones."

CU both under Barnett and under other coaches has had it's issues. Every school with a football program has some. It is the nature of what you get when you combine a large number of young men who are selected for their football abilities and a group of coaches who are highly competitive and who have incentive to place a priority on winning.

CU like every other school I know of has had players commit crimes, in a few cases crimes of violence or of a sexual nature. CU has recruited some players who in hindsight we should have looked at and said that isn't the kind of kid we want representing our school.

There is a huge difference though between these individuals and knowingly supporting a culture which allows for repeated horrible crimes against innocent individuals and covers for those crimes because to deal with them would cost some wins.

We have in hindsight seen how much of an overreaction the sanctions against Barnett were, how the administration actually took responsibility for things that didn't happen, and how they essentially destroyed the football program as a result.

Contrast this to Michigan State who allowed Nasser to be a team physician for over a decade because of the star power of his name, Baylor who covered for multiple rapist multiple times and who till public pressure forced them wanted to keep their coach, the same one who took a rapist as a transfer even after the prior coach warned him. Other schools have done similar compromises of morals and values in the name of winning.

It's hard though to find a worse example than Penn State. At least some of the other schools admit their motivations. Penn State acts offended that anyone would call them on it. They continue to defend their coach like he was some kind of innocent saint and pretend like the administration didn't compromise their morals and values by letting that coach act without accountability, all because he won games.

Yes CU has it's faults and has had plenty of times when it could have done better but to in any way compare it to these schools is ridiculous. Almost as ridiculous as it is to say that those schools should be excused for their actions because well, "other schools aren't perfect either."

 

[Mick Ronson]

we got a bit unlucky with Hawkins. somehow, he was going to get a big time job...national opinion was incredibly high.....seems bizarre now but it's absolutely true.....and due to vagaries in the coaching carousel CU slotted a little higher than maybe we should have. and we got him.....due diligence or not. i liked Gary a lot but i was excited.....

it was the right hire at the time.....but turns out not a good one. extended him was a terrible idea....and i agree with others about Hanson. was a big fan of the kid.

i still think Hawk's first season coaching show "all access" was some of the most surreal TV i've ever seen. it was weird, "creepy" to use the word above.......but my memory of it is longish segments of him giving motivational speeches in the locker-room pregame.....slaying dragons, going through the crucible, big dog's gotta eat.....nonsensical stuff..........

...and quite a lot of players staring at their shoes or the overhead fluorescent lights. not even paying attention.

that's when i thought we might have a problem.

 

[MtnBuff]

But all of that was a result of “The Scandal” thing and my impression was always not that GB embraced the restrictions but accepted them to save his job. He “publically” embraced them but I highly doubt he privately did. But maybe I’m wrong.

Gary knew the sanctions as well as the general attitude of the administration towards football was going to make success impossible.

He quit aiming high in his recruiting instead taking the easy guys he could get without having to compete with the big boys.

By the time Hawkins took over the roster was substantially lower quality than it had been earlier when GB was working at recruiting.

That wasn't why Hawkins failed but it didn't help.

 

[GawainBuff]

...and quite a lot of players staring at their shoes or the overhead fluorescent lights. not even paying attention.

I’d forgotten these lost bits of CU history, perhaps, by force of self-preservation. That awful, stale taste of kool-aide gulping comes back to me. Thanks for that.

 

[SuperiorBuff]

At CU, 7 years, 5 bowl games, 1 Conference championship, 4 division championships and a .560 win percentage. He is miles better than anybody who has followed him.

Given another conference championship in the Big 10, and 2 Rose Bowl at Northwestern for cryin' out loud, that makes him a very good coach.

Losing openers with those kind of results would be a godsend now, and for the last 12 years. D II, Embo and MikMac aren't even in the same zip code.

Very good coaches do not have a 92 94 + 2 overall coaching record. Very good coaches do not peek and then have their team slide the next five years. Very good coaches do not lose 70 to 3. Very good coaches do not have upperclassmen attempts to have them fired. Very good coaches do not keep a player on the team after he threatens to kill them.

Was he a good coach, yes, absolutely better than anything we've had since. Was it time for him to leave? Absolutely. They were very few people in Buff Nation that thought otherwise.

Gary Barnett was the beneficiary of quite possibly the worst conglomeration of Big 12 North / Big 8 teams in modern history.

 

[leftybuff]

Very good coaches do not have a 92 94 + 2 overall coaching record. Very good coaches do not peek and then have their team slide the next five years. Very good coaches do not lose 70 to 3. Very good coaches do not have upperclassmen attempts to have them fired. Very good coaches do not keep a player on the team after he threatens to kill them.

Was he a good coach, yes, absolutely better than anything we've had since. Was it time for him to leave? Absolutely. They were very few people in Buff Nation that thought otherwise.

Gary Barnett was the beneficiary of quite possibly the worst conglomeration of Big 12 North / Big 8 teams in modern history.

By that logic LSU screwed up hiring Saban from Mich. St. Virtually the same win percentage as GB at CU, blowout losses 40 points x2 to NU, 38 point blowout to Stanford, no bowl wins etc.

We can agree to disagree. GB, without admin. incompetence, won, and won a lot, at places where winning isn't all that easy. But yeah,he wasn't very good. Let me know when we get any HC that comes near what he did. I suspect we'll be waiting quite a while...

 

[SuperiorBuff]

By that logic LSU screwed up hiring Saban from Mich. St. Virtually the same win percentage as GB at CU, blowout losses 40 points x2 to NU, 38 point blowout to Stanford, no bowl wins etc.

We can agree to disagree. GB, without admin. incompetence, won, and won a lot, at places where winning isn't all that easy. But yeah,he wasn't very good. Let me know when we get any HC that comes near what he did. I suspect we'll be waiting quite a while...

He was a better than average coach, not a "very good" coach.

 

[SpacemanSpiff]

He was a better than average coach, not a "very good" coach.

Not a "Superior" coach, obviously.

 

[SuperiorBuff]

Not a "Superior" coach, obviously.

Obviously.

 

[SpacemanSpiff]

Obviously.

very good.

 

[MtnBuff]

Just to clear things up what is the difference between an outstanding coach, an excellent coach, a superior coach, a very good coach, and a better than average coach.

Do we need some sabermetrics and a spreadsheet or two?

Not that we have had anyone since GB that qualifies for any of those so far.

 

[GawainBuff]

Just to clear things up what is the difference between an outstanding coach, an excellent coach, a superior coach, a very good coach, and a better than average coach.

A million dollars a year, each

 

[MtnBuff]

A million dollars a year, each

So Charlie Weiss was an amazing coach?

 

[ZandiBuff]

Just to clear things up what is the difference between an outstanding coach, an excellent coach, a superior coach, a very good coach, and a better than average coach.

Do we need some sabenmetrics and a spreadsheet or two?

Not that we have had anyone since GB that qualifies for any of those so far.

fify