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!

NEW: Regents Meeting, Benson Decision, Investigation Report -- Monday, 6/12

Status
Not open for further replies.
Buffnik said:
There are definitely some who are looking for an excuse to defund the football program. That is not the majority of the BoR, though. Just a badly misguided apple or two.
Click to expand...
I really worry, as I've said before, about the law firm hired to find wrong doing. They are fresh off the Baylor investigation and I can't help but to believe investigating that cesspool affects there ability to be objective. I dont believe the Regents will have the guts to publically challenge them.
 
Last edited:
DBT said:
I really worry, as I've said before, about the law firm hired to find wrong doing. They are fresh off the Baylor investigation and I can't help but to believe investigating that chess pool affects there ability to be objective. I dont believe the Regents will have the guts to publically challenge them.
Click to expand...
100% correct
 
I'm even willing to admit that it would have been horribly bad optics to vote on and approve the contract extension right after the SI story broke.

So I'm cool that the BoR commissioned a thorough investigation and plans to be transparent about it.

Because I'm supremely confident that Mike MacIntyre is a man of greater integrity than I even think I have, I fully expect that the result will be approval of his contract.
 
DBT said:
I really worry, as I've said before, about the law firm hired to find wrong doing. They are fresh off the Baylor investigation and I can't help but to believe investigating that chess pool affects there ability to be objective. I dont believe the Regents will have the guts to publically challenge them.
Click to expand...
Of course there will be some wrongdoing. You put a law firm on retainer with the resources they were given and let them investigate any one of us in any aspect of our lives... and I guarantee they'll find some questionable decisions. The question is: if, as expected, the wrongdoing amounts to procedural errors (jaywaliking type mistakes), whether we have Regents who will act like those things amount to a capital crime?

I don't think we do. Certainly not 5 out of the 9.
 
One of the most significant academic advancements in the last 25 yrs at CU was joining the PAC 12. CU now has as its peers Stanford, UC Berkeley, UCLA, Washington and USC, all top 20 institutions worldwide. Without a solid football program over the last 30 yrs, that was an invitation that would not have happened. With the likely conference alignment shakeup in the future, why would anyone with a brain jeopardize that relationship with the PAC 12 by gutting the football program? Also, the logic of damaging the program because, when it was damaged previously, it didn't make money also seems very obtuse. A strong program makes money which keeps the athletic department viable and free of infusions from outside sources. How do you keep a strong program? A good coach and AD. How do you keep a good AD and coach? Pay them and support them. Logic and intelligence seem to be wanting in Mr Knoll. Or is he delusional, thinking he can change the academic and athletic universe by cutting off CU's nose to spite its face?
 
CVBuff said:
One of the most significant academic advancements in the last 25 yrs at CU was joining the PAC 12. CU now has as its peers Stanford, UC Berkeley, UCLA, Washington and USC, all top 20 institutions worldwide. Without a solid football program over the last 30 yrs, that was an invitation that would not have happened. With the likely conference alignment shakeup in the future, why would anyone with a brain jeopardize that relationship with the PAC 12 by gutting the football program? Also, the logic of damaging the program because, when it was damaged previously, it didn't make money also seems very obtuse. A strong program makes money which keeps the athletic department viable and free of infusions from outside sources. How do you keep a strong program? A good coach and AD. How do you keep a good AD and coach? Pay them and support them. Logic and intelligence seem to be wanting in Mr Knoll. Or is he delusional, thinking he can change the academic and athletic universe by cutting off CU's nose to spite its face?
Click to expand...
He believes that if no money is invested in football that all of the people who donated to football would give the money to CU academics. He resents the salaries paid to coaches. And he believes that somehow the revenues from football would magically increase to levels that support Title IX obligations to women's sports even if we have antiquated facilities and D3 level coaching salaries. I'm not exaggerating. From his public statements, I absolutely believe that this is what he thinks.
 
Buffnik said:
Of course there will be some wrongdoing. You put a law firm on retainer with the resources they were given and let them investigate any one of us in any aspect of our lives... and I guarantee they'll find some questionable decisions. The question is: if, as expected, the wrongdoing amounts to procedural errors (jaywaliking type mistakes), whether we have Regents who will act like those things amount to a capital crime?

I don't think we do. Certainly not 5 out of the 9.
Click to expand...
I have more faith in MM's integrity then I do in any of these regents. Who would you trust to take your wife or daughter or son to dinner?
 
One of the most significant academic advancements in the last 25 yrs at CU was joining the PAC 12. CU now has as its peers Stanford, UC Berkeley, UCLA, Washington and USC, all top 20 institutions worldwide. Without a solid football program over the last 30 yrs, that was an invitation that would not have happened. With the likely conference alignment shakeup in the future, why would anyone with a brain jeopardize that relationship with the PAC 12 by gutting the football program? Also, the logic of damaging the program because, when it was damaged previously, it didn't make money also seems very obtuse. A strong program makes money which keeps the athletic department viable and free of infusions from outside sources. How do you keep a strong program? A good coach and AD. How do you keep a good AD and coach? Pay them and support them. Logic and intelligence seem to be wanting in Mr Knoll. Or is he delusional, thinking he can change the academic and athletic universe by cutting off CU's nose to spite its face?
 
pcbuff said:
I have more faith in MM's integrity then I do in any of these regents. Who would you trust to take your wife or daughter or son to dinner?
Click to expand...

I think what really hit home with me on MM being a good person was his relationship with and legitimate happiness he had for Ken Crawley and his success and growth as a person, athlete, and student. I can't imagine the workload of a P5 head football coach, but he still prioritizes in making a personal investment in these guys' lives and development as young men. But, screw all that, we need to make an example out of him because reasons?

I am not an alumni of CU, but I've poured my heart into this team since I was bawling after every loss when I was 6 years old. I've poured money into season tickets. If these dick heads **** this up because of political horse **** pissing match, I'm out.
 
I am recalling a dire situation several years ago involving our coaching plight. There is a man among us who rallied the troops and turned the Buff ship away from the hurricane. This man is a hero.

We need our hero to step up again to save Buffnation. NIk, will you do it?
 
Duff Man said:
Your last post seemed to imply something different in an attempt to bash liberalism.
Click to expand...
I was. I believe what I said to be true that it is more of a liberal mindset to take something like this and have to make an example of someone when nothing really happened.

And if the info in the email is correct I am proven right.
 
letsgoavs192 said:
I was. I believe what I said to be true that it is more of a liberal mindset to take something like this and have to make an example of someone when nothing really happened.

And if the info in the email is correct I am proven right.
Click to expand...
I take exception to the broad brush of liberalism. There's a certain faction of liberalism that has somehow become authoritarian. It's a large enough faction to make a lot of noise and sometimes get its way. But liberalism, in the classic sense and in the sense that most people believe in this country, has a foundational belief that everyone's rights need to be protected -- including both the accused and those who some try to impugn through "guilt by association". Some liberals have drifted to the dark side on issues they champion, particularly the cause of how the less empowered are treated in our society. And we see them behaving like McCarthyists toward anyone they think might be a bit questionable and wanting to destroy them without having enough facts, let alone proof against them. True liberals will fight that faction at every turn.
 
Last edited:
Not gonna bash liberals or anybody for that matter. Just bring some closure to the matter already. It doesn't help anybody dragging this along.
 
Buffnik said:
I take exception to the broad brush of liberalism. There's a certain faction of liberalism that has somehow become authoritarian. It's a large enough faction to make a lot of noise and sometimes get its way. But liberalism, in the classic sense and in the sense that most people believe in this country, has a foundational belief that everyone's rights need to be protected -- including both the accused and those who some try to impugn through "guilt by association". Some liberals have drifted to the dark side on issues they champion, particularly the cause of how the less empowered are treated in our society. And we see them behaving like McCarthyists toward anyone they think might be a bit questionable and wanting to destroy them without having enough facts, let alone proof against them. True liberals will fight that faction at every turn.
Click to expand...

Except I don't see anyone fighting them. And 'they' are the media, or in cahoots with the media. Truth need not apply; dirt sells, and if there isn't real dirt, we will lie our asses off and make some up! Someone has to burn to make a headline!

I'm more conservative. But both the ultra liberals and ultra conservatives are a complete pain in the ass. I don't want anyone to infringe on my rights, or me on theirs, but this issue is stupid. I can't see this happening anywhere but CU and a small handful of colleges. I keep hoping CU can be a big dog one day again, but it will never happen if CU doesn't keep self flagellating itself over and over in front of the public eye.
 
Buffnik said:
I take exception to the broad brush of liberalism. There's a certain faction of liberalism that has somehow become authoritarian. It's a large enough faction to make a lot of noise and sometimes get its way. But liberalism, in the classic sense and in the sense that most people believe in this country, has a foundational belief that everyone's rights need to be protected -- including both the accused and those who some try to impugn through "guilt by association". Some liberals have drifted to the dark side on issues they champion, particularly the cause of how the less empowered are treated in our society. And we see them behaving like McCarthyists toward anyone they think might be a bit questionable and wanting to destroy them without having enough facts, let alone proof against them. True liberals will fight that faction at every turn.
Click to expand...
I think the term now is "leftism." There are liberals and there are leftists. There are conservatives right wingers or whatever one calls the extreme right.
 
Buffnik said:
I take exception to the broad brush of liberalism. There's a certain faction of liberalism that has somehow become authoritarian. It's a large enough faction to make a lot of noise and sometimes get its way. But liberalism, in the classic sense and in the sense that most people believe in this country, has a foundational belief that everyone's rights need to be protected -- including both the accused and those who some try to impugn through "guilt by association". Some liberals have drifted to the dark side on issues they champion, particularly the cause of how the less empowered are treated in our society. And we see them behaving like McCarthyists toward anyone they think might be a bit questionable and wanting to destroy them without having enough facts, let alone proof against them. True liberals will fight that faction at every turn.
Click to expand...

To the bolded, modern and classical liberals are nearly polar opposites. Adam Smith, John Locke, Ed Burke and the like championed small government, free markets, and individual rights to things like property, speech, and religion.

It will be interesting to see how this shakes out, but if it doesn't shake soon... how the hell could CU let this happen this year?
 
The Ogre said:
To the bolded, modern and classical liberals are nearly polar opposites. Adam Smith, John Locke, Ed Burke and the like championed small government, free markets, and individual rights to things like property, speech, and religion.

It will be interesting to see how this shakes out, but if it doesn't shake soon... how the hell could CU let this happen this year?
Click to expand...
PC Regents. With an axe to grind.
 
The Ogre said:
It will be interesting to see how this shakes out, but if it doesn't shake soon... how the hell could CU let this happen this year?
Click to expand...

CU Regent material.
giphy.gif
 
Here's what I am hearing.

MacIntyre and RG have largely been cleared in the Tumpkin review. Both are safe but very unhappy with the sequence of events. The problem is when MacIntyre's contract was put on-hold, it emboldened the age old academics vs athletics debate.

Rick George has been undermined by the BOR.

On one side favoring an extension are Hybl, Ganahl, Sharkey and Carson - (all republicans.) Against an extension are Kroll (a little dip****), Ludwig, Shoemaker (a vintage Boulder liberal) and Griego - all democrats. Gallegos (republican) is squishy and the swing vote.

As I said before, liberalism strikes again!!!!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top