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.
Duff Man said:
Then there is a disconnect in how MM is viewed on this board with regard to the defense. Either his role has been exaggerated or he should have been a legitimate option to call plays.
Click to expand...
How so? I don't think people think MacIntyre is micromanaging. He's a CEO. He's got general schemes and game strategies he likes. He'll jump in with some specifics, particularly with DBs. But I don't think anyone believes he's inside the defensive rotations, play progressions and schemes to anywhere near the level of detail that Lindgren is with the offense. Did people think that?
 
hawg1 said:
Being fired is the least of his worries if the allegations are true.
Click to expand...
The question was when will the person responsible for all this mess have his feet put to the fire. The answer is that he was fired months ago.

Anybody who tries to make the argument that this situation was created by anybody other than Tumpkin has an agenda.
 
Buffnik said:
How so? I don't think people think MacIntyre is micromanaging. He's a CEO. He's got general schemes and game strategies he likes. He'll jump in with some specifics, particularly with DBs. But I don't think anyone believes he's inside the defensive rotations, play progressions and schemes to anywhere near the level of detail that Lindgren is with the offense. Did people think that?
Click to expand...

That was my impression, given how the 2014 season unfolded. Was I mistaken in there being friction between MacIntyre and Baer over how the defense was being run?
 
sackman said:
The question was when will the person responsible for all this mess have his feet put to the fire. The answer is that he was fired months ago.

Anybody who tries to make the argument that this situation was created by anybody other than Tumpkin has an agenda.
Click to expand...
Personally, I think the Longmont Housing Authority should be held responsible.....
 
How many accusatory calls does an athletic department deal with daily that we never hear about, not because of cover-up, because the accusations had no basis? Many. The job of professional assistants are to filter what is actionable from all the noise. If this whole thing makes CU look oily, it only does so because we have all the knowledge in hindsight. Imagine getting a call like that from someone you barely met once, accusing someone you have known professionally for two years...all while preparing for a bowl game with a short-handed staff and trying to finish up recruiting. If there is a victim who is it going to turn out to be: the caller, the assistant coach, very possibly yourself. Hard to say. You have two seconds to decide what to do. Since the caller is safe, you decide to wait and see if more data emerges. It quickly does and then you make your decisions promptly based on that data.

If you see the admins perspective, while they were in the moment, I think you have to admit they did an admirable job. Though the whole thing is sad, I don't even think 'mistakes' were really made.
 
Doesn't it seem like Mac will be hands off if you are going a good job but if you are not he has no problem intervening? Similar to taking over some responsibility from Clark to being all over Lindgren two years ago in terms of play calls.
 
sackman said:
The question was when will the person responsible for all this mess have his feet put to the fire. The answer is that he was fired months ago.

Anybody who tries to make the argument that this situation was created by anybody other than Tumpkin has an agenda.
Click to expand...
Fully agree. As noted, his court date is June 22.
 
Duff Man said:
That was my impression, given how the 2014 season unfolded. Was I mistaken in there being friction between MacIntyre and Baer over how the defense was being run?
Click to expand...
Good point. MacIntyre did, according to chatter around the program, lose confidence in Baer and his scheme... deciding to micromanage the last part of the season and then to install a 3-4 or 5-2 under in order to better deal with Pac-12 offenses. But I don't believe he ever took playcalling onto himself. MacIntyre seems to like his systems/protocols/chain-of-command to be buttoned up a certain way that he believes is most efficient. I see a Parcells approach to how MacIntyre manages the operation. Parcells was going to say what he wanted, but give responsibility and authority within job roles to make that happen. Micromanaging only happens in an emergency of failure -- like with Clark on his CB position coaching one year and Baer on his coordination another year.

In the case of the bowl game, I believe it's as simple as something worked all year with the logistics of game planning and game day. Tumpkin is a former DC who was the primary guy on in-game adjustments to plan/scheme for halftime all year. HCMM thought that the least disruption and the best opportunity to win was to have Tumpkin call plays instead of taking that over himself. My biggest complaint is that it didn't work. If the defense had played great in the Alamo Bowl, the complaints today would be a lot quieter.
 
Buffnik said:
Good point. MacIntyre did, according to chatter around the program, lose confidence in Baer and his scheme... deciding to micromanage the last part of the season and then to install a 3-4 or 5-2 under in order to better deal with Pac-12 offenses. But I don't believe he ever took playcalling onto himself. MacIntyre seems to like his systems/protocols/chain-of-command to be buttoned up a certain way that he believes is most efficient. I see a Parcells approach to how MacIntyre manages the operation. Parcells was going to say what he wanted, but give responsibility and authority within job roles to make that happen. Micromanaging only happens in an emergency of failure -- like with Clark on his CB position coaching one year and Baer on his coordination another year.

In the case of the bowl game, I believe it's as simple as something worked all year with the logistics of game planning and game day. Tumpkin is a former DC who was the primary guy on in-game adjustments to plan/scheme for halftime all year. HCMM thought that the least disruption and the best opportunity to win was to have Tumpkin call plays instead of taking that over himself. My biggest complaint is that it didn't work. If the defense had played great in the Alamo Bowl, the complaints today would be a lot quieter.
Click to expand...
unrelated to the main topic, but that defense probably performs way better in that game if the DB's weren't injured.
 
8Jah said:
How many accusatory calls does an athletic department deal with daily that we never hear about, not because of cover-up, because the accusations had no basis? Many. The job of professional assistants are to filter what is actionable from all the noise. If this whole thing makes CU look oily, it only does so because we have all the knowledge in hindsight. Imagine getting a call like that from someone you barely met once, accusing someone you have known professionally for two years...all while preparing for a bowl game with a short-handed staff and trying to finish up recruiting. If there is a victim who is it going to turn out to be: the caller, the assistant coach, very possibly yourself. Hard to say. You have two seconds to decide what to do. Since the caller is safe, you decide to wait and see if more data emerges. It quickly does and then you make your decisions promptly based on that data.

If you see the admins perspective, while they were in the moment, I think you have to admit they did an admirable job. Though the whole thing is sad, I don't even think 'mistakes' were really made.
Click to expand...
They did a lot right. But at least the report, Benson and the Regent think mistakes were made. As do the three involved.

The remorse is there. Creates a foundation to move forward.
 
8Jah said:
How many accusatory calls does an athletic department deal with daily that we never hear about, not because of cover-up, because the accusations had no basis? Many. The job of professional assistants are to filter what is actionable from all the noise. If this whole thing makes CU look oily, it only does so because we have all the knowledge in hindsight. Imagine getting a call like that from someone you barely met once, accusing someone you have known professionally for two years...all while preparing for a bowl game with a short-handed staff and trying to finish up recruiting. If there is a victim who is it going to turn out to be: the caller, the assistant coach, very possibly yourself. Hard to say. You have two seconds to decide what to do. Since the caller is safe, you decide to wait and see if more data emerges. It quickly does and then you make your decisions promptly based on that data.

If you see the admins perspective, while they were in the moment, I think you have to admit they did an admirable job. Though the whole thing is sad, I don't even think 'mistakes' were really made.
Click to expand...
Yep. I wish he'd known that all he had to do was report it to RG and to OIEC so he could put it out of his mind and focus on the game.

But within this, there's another side that we don't like to talk about and you brought up. Coaches hear all the time about a player possibly getting in a fight or smoking some weed or whatever. Do we really expect every coach in the country to report every one of these things to an OIEC and/or law enforcement? If a coach did that, no one would want to play for him or work for him. And if they did, they certainly wouldn't share anything personal with him.
 
Shldr2Shldr said:
unrelated to the main topic, but that defense probably performs way better in that game if the DB's weren't injured.
Click to expand...
For sure. OSU's run game was shut down but Chido and Spoon couldn't cover anyone. Where I believe Leavitt would have adjusted better is that he would have gone riverboat gambler and sold out by blitzing from all angles. JL is elite at that aspect of being a DC.
 
Buffnik said:
Yep. I wish he'd known that all he had to do was report it to RG and to OIEC so he could put it out of his mind and focus on the game.

But within this, there's another side that we don't like to talk about and you brought up. Coaches hear all the time about a player possibly getting in a fight or smoking some weed or whatever. Do we really expect every coach in the country to report every one of these things to an OIEC and/or law enforcement? If a coach did that, no one would want to play for him or work for him. And if they did, they certainly wouldn't share anything personal with him.
Click to expand...

Two distinctions:

1. Coaches are held to a higher standard.

2. Difference between smoking weed and charges of domestic violence.
 
Duff Man said:
So coaches and athletes should be treated in the exact same way?
Click to expand...
I didn't say that.

I agree with the distinction.

MacIntyre's contract does not make that distinction. What is in that contract and what he was told this week is that he better report anything and everything because if he does not it is cause for termination.
 
Buffnik said:
I didn't say that.

I agree with the distinction.

MacIntyre's contract does not make that distinction. What is in that contract and what he was told this week is that he better report anything and everything because if he does not it is cause for termination.
Click to expand...

He won't report weed smokers and no one will care.
 
Coaches should be held to a higher standard but they can't be held to an impossible standard. As they say, if you expect leaders to win the game of kobayashi maru, then you aren't going to wanna ask how. That is not what we want.

The 'right path' for MM/RG was only clear in hindsight and they did a good job with what they had.
 
8Jah said:
Coaches should be held to a higher standard but they can't be held to an impossible standard. As they say, if you expect leaders to win the game of kobayashi maru, then you aren't going to wanna ask how. That is not what we want.

The 'right path' for MM/RG was only clear in hindsight and they did a good job with what they had.
Click to expand...
And that's why I'm bringing up things like weed or underage drinking.

It's fine to say that no one expects MM or RG to report that stuff.

But when the sh!t hits the fan and we start Monday morning quarterbacking someone hurting people while driving under the influence, the non-reporting of those things will cause termination and lawsuits. Often, when we put people in positions of great responsibility we also put them in an impossible situation. Supposedly a father figure, but no one better find out that you're looking out for those for whom you're responsible instead of reporting them to authorities. I'm not even sure where the line is. Baylor and Penn State crossed the gray area line. Back in the day, Osborn did by hiding a gun in his safe. Barnett did by turning a blind eye to the parties. But I don't always want suspicion of a law being broken or even knowledge of a law being broken to be turned in. It's a balancing act. I suppose that RG/MM/PD miscalculated on this being one of the situations that should have been reported.

I'm sure that coaches know all this, though. Those in charge will pat you on the back, have you meet all the donors and throw life changing money at you for winning while you're avoiding scandal to hit the media. However, those same folks will throw you under the bus in their shock and outrage if something is unable to be kept in-house and becomes a big media story. That's the game. We are all guilty of that same shock & outrage b.s. -- whether we're talking about a sports program, a business or up to the level of the CIA or military actions. Get it done. We don't expect you to be a total Dudley Do-right, but don't ever let us know how the sausage is made.
 
There is absolutely no way MikMac will not be reporting anything and everything from here on in. No one in there right mind would do anything else when their seven figure a year paycheck depends on it. Nik is absolutely right. MikMac has had any latitude as HC removed, he has no discretion at all to handle infractions by his players or staff. He has to toe the line....that is just one of the really stupid outcomes of this matter.
 
Buffnik said:
And that's why I'm bringing up things like weed or underage drinking.

It's fine to say that no one expects MM or RG to report that stuff.

But when the sh!t hits the fan and we start Monday morning quarterbacking someone hurting people while driving under the influence, the non-reporting of those things will cause termination and lawsuits. Often, when we put people in positions of great responsibility we also put them in an impossible situation. Supposedly a father figure, but no one better find out that you're looking out for those for whom you're responsible instead of reporting them to authorities. I'm not even sure where the line is. Baylor and Penn State crossed the gray area line. Back in the day, Osborn did by hiding a gun in his safe. Barnett did by turning a blind eye to the parties. But I don't always want suspicion of a law being broken or even knowledge of a law being broken to be turned in. It's a balancing act. I suppose that RG/MM/PD miscalculated on this being one of the situations that should have been reported.

I'm sure that coaches know all this, though. Those in charge will pat you on the back, have you meet all the donors and throw life changing money at you for winning while you're avoiding scandal to hit the media. However, those same folks will throw you under the bus in their shock and outrage if something is unable to be kept in-house and becomes a big media story. That's the game. We are all guilty of that same shock & outrage b.s. -- whether we're talking about a sports program, a business or up to the level of the CIA or military actions. Get it done. We don't expect you to be a total Dudley Do-right, but don't ever let us know how the sausage is made.
Click to expand...

I think you are exaggerating here. The severity of the allegations will always matter.

If a player comes into MM's office and tells him he got drunk last night and pissed into Boulder Creek, no one is going to care if MM did not report it. Now if a player comes into MM's office and tells him he was drunk driving and hit some parked cars on his way home, there should be a reasonable expectation that MM does something proactive with that information.
 
Duff Man said:
I think you are exaggerating here. The severity of the allegations will always matter.

If a player comes into MM's office and tells him he got drunk last night and pissed into Boulder Creek, no one is going to care if MM did not report it. Now if a player comes into MM's office and tells him he was drunk driving and hit some parked cars on his way home, there should be a reasonable expectation that MM does something proactive with that information.
Click to expand...
And what if someone send him an email alleging that a player did something? Like maybe a hit & run on some parked cars after a party. Should MM interview the player and maybe decide guilt/innocence/punishment on his own... or should he immediately forward that email to CUPD? Because I believe that a number of the regents and faculty would say that he should immediately go to the police.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top