Recruiting the right kind of dogs

[99'Buff]

I don't look at ratings...I look at who is recruiting them. The offer list is GOOD for a coach that can take a player and make them better.....not sure that is Tad's forte.

I assume you were thrilled with the Tre'shaun (offers from UCLA, Gonzaga), Hopkins (Arizona, USC), Thomas (Oklahoma) class? Want to wager that this incoming class with fewer big-time offers ends up significantly better than that class did? As Buffnik said, there are translatable skills that Schwartz and Bey bring to the table, and Battey is a very unique prospect who is definitely worth taking a chance on. All the athleticism that Thomas, Hopkins and Tre'shaun brought couldn't make up for limited basketball skills and poor attitudes.

 

[OsideBuff]

Your player development focus is confusing. By what measure are players not improving over the course of their time at CU? Why do you think it's better at other places?

Xavier Johnson never progressed. Dominic Collier has not gotten better. King regressed.

I guess I am not buying into the analogy. The elite teams recruit great talent and mold that talent into basketball players, they also develop leadership. You can develop leadership (the military does it all the time) but coach Boyle seems to have trouble doing that. It is funny (or ironic) that some are saying that we need to look for a different type of talent and then talk about the incoming talent and how highly it is rated. Ratings mean little if you don't develop the talent. Boyle never seems to develop talent nor leadership. I don't want to knock Boyle because he has done a decent job at CU but he is pretty much a coach that will get you to the middle of the conference, 18 to 22 wins a year and an NCAA bid every other year. He is not going higher than that. If you are not happy with that you need to get someone else.

To get to the top level in college basketball you have to recruit talent and then mold it. Dean Smith always talked about the Carolina Way - Play Hard, Play Smart and Play Together. Smith's books focus a lot on developing leadership as does John Wooden's which is why they are used in business sometimes. I think that is the area that Tad Boyle needs help - his recruiting is okay but development is lacking.

Bingo...I think you nailed it. Tad is a good coach. He has made CU relevant. But he has peaked. He will NEVER get this team to a sweet 16....unless he shows that his teams can play with fire, determination, discipline... I just don't see it....

 

[OsideBuff]

I assume you were thrilled with the Tre'shaun (offers from UCLA, Gonzaga), Hopkins (Arizona, USC), Thomas (Oklahoma) class? Want to wager that this incoming class with fewer big-time offers ends up significantly better than that class did? As Buffnik said, there are translatable skills that Schwartz and Bey bring to the table, and Battey is a very unique prospect who is definitely worth taking a chance on. All the athleticism that Thomas, Hopkins and Tre'shaun brought couldn't make up for limited basketball skills and poor attitudes.

Thomas and Hopkins are starters on other teams....Hopkins averaged 6 boards and 13 points...Thomas 5 points and 4 boards for a tournament team....... Hopkins scored 18 each game against CSU.....50% shooting. Could have used that. Fletcher sat out this year for Toledo...

 

[Buffnik]

I guess I am not buying into the analogy. The elite teams recruit great talent and mold that talent into basketball players, they also develop leadership. You can develop leadership (the military does it all the time) but coach Boyle seems to have trouble doing that. It is funny (or ironic) that some are saying that we need to look for a different type of talent and then talk about the incoming talent and how highly it is rated. Ratings mean little if you don't develop the talent. Boyle never seems to develop talent nor leadership. I don't want to knock Boyle because he has done a decent job at CU but he is pretty much a coach that will get you to the middle of the conference, 18 to 22 wins a year and an NCAA bid every other year. He is not going higher than that. If you are not happy with that you need to get someone else.

To get to the top level in college basketball you have to recruit talent and then mold it. Dean Smith always talked about the Carolina Way - Play Hard, Play Smart and Play Together. Smith's books focus a lot on developing leadership as does John Wooden's which is why they are used in business sometimes. I think that is the area that Tad Boyle needs help - his recruiting is okay but development is lacking.

I don't think you're understanding the analogy if you think that there's some logical inconsistency with saying that we want the highest rated players we can get within a unbreakable rule that you don't compromise on program culture & competitive character.

Regarding Smith and Wooden, that was perfect for their era. But when you are coaching in an era where freshman weren't even allowed to play and guys stayed for 4 years, it's quite a bit different with developing character and the expectations players have when they join your program. Recruiting character is at more of a premium than ever. And the military is a horrible example. They own your ass. In college basketball, the number of transfers every year is off the hook. Guys don't stick around to pay their dues and if you didn't recruit for character, the guys who stuck around may not be the best influence on your team.

Here's an excellent 2014 article on this, followed by some excerpts. http://www.indystar.com/story/sport...ransfers-proliferate-various-reasons/8150561/

"They transfer high schools. They transfer AAU teams," [S Illinois Coach Barry] Hinson said. "The numbers are skewed somewhat, but the highest majority of the numbers are those guys, I honestly believe, that are going for greener grass."

Jeff Goodman, a national college basketball reporter for ESPN, tracks transfers on an annual basis. In 2011, his list included 291 names. In 2013, it reached 455.

That uptick, while noticeable, requires context. If all 351 Division I men's basketball programs handed out 13 scholarships, then 455 player transfers would represent about 10 percent of all scholarship players in Division I.

****************************

On that note, I would hope we all agree that Mark Few is among the best in the business at teaching a system and developing players. He's in the Final Four for the first time this year. Why? He pulled in Jordan Mathewes from the transfer market (Cal), a very high character guy who couldn't stand Cuonzo Martin so he graduated and skipped town (CU's most painful recruiting battle loss, imho, when he was deciding out of HS). He pulled in Nigel Williams-Goss from the transfer market (Washington), another high character guy who was All-Pac-12 as a frosh & UW's leading scorer as a soph... but was frustrated with the program's direction and wanted to play for a winner. He pulled in Johnathan Williams from the transfer market (Missouri) who had led that team in scoring but was sick of the bad situation and losing there (much like Namon Wright to CU from Mizzou). The foundation of a great team culture, character within the program, and consistent winning made that possible. Like attracts like.

And that's where CU needs to get. With the transfers we have landed, it does seem like the program and Tad have a good rep in the basketball community. But we have not consistently recruited to the program's DNA in the way we've vetted transfers for that same sort of character (Chen, Carlon, Fortune, White, Namon -- all competitors). Tad needs to recruit high school players the same way and it looks like that has become the rule again. You don't change the spots on a leopard and absolutely must recruit for character.

 

[99'Buff]

Thomas and Hopkins are starters on other teams....Hopkins averaged 6 boards and 13 points...Thomas 5 points and 4 boards for a tournament team....... Hopkins scored 18 each game against CSU.....50% shooting. Could have used that. Fletcher sat out this year for Toledo...

I know what those guys did this year, decent seasons but how would they have improved CU this past season? Did they play with fire, determination and discipline?

 

[Darth Snow]

A careful analysis of ............ leads me to believe we've got our new favorite troll.

 

[CitizenKane]

Interesting discussion going on here. We all know about the recruiting problems Tad has had so I won't discuss those except to say I actually liked last years class (if we can keep them together) and I think this class looks solid (Don't get me started on the three classes prior to that though). I think the big struggle that Tad is facing today is that how he intends to build a winning program doesn't fit well with today's culture. Tad would like nothing more than to recruit solid players that he can develop and work with for four or five years. To be successful with this you have to do the following:
1. Recruit at least two very solid players every recruiting cycle.
2. Develop those solid players.
3. Be able to red-shirt players even though they could play in a given year.
4. Retain those players.
5. Develop a solid team identity through guys being in the program year after year.

The problem with Tad's building plan is that very few players who are solid are now willing to red-shirt. Finding a player that will do that and continue to grow in today's hoops culture is a major exception. Plus an astonishingly high percent of players now transfer and or leave early. This has really hindered Tad's ability to grow the program how he would like and create his particularly team hoops identity. Development of this team identity isn't about whether the transfers you lost are better or worse than the transfers you've brought in (Tad has been fairly successful on that front). Instead it is about having guys in your program for four or five years that live, eat and breath what your team is about.

Tad has done a decent job of adapting his plan when it comes to getting as good a transfer as he loses, what Tad needs to adapt to now, is how to instill that team identity. He has definitely not found a way to do this as of right now.

 

[OsideBuff]

A careful analysis of ............ leads me to believe we've got our new favorite troll.

I love this board.....truly. As long as you jump on the bandwagon and say all is well....well gosh darn it...then you are a great poster. Identify facts about our BBALL coach and the direction of the program...and you are branded a troll..... Okey dokey...!!!!! The AD is a smart man....as are recruits and potential transfers....they probably see what I see....a team that one game can thoroughly whip a final four team....that same team that started out the P12 season o-fer Seven with fifth year seniors leading the way....drop games that they should have won.... As good old Coach Hawk used to say..."This aint intramurals"..... Bball is big business....coaches paid millions...expectations high...

Yep....everyone or anyone who is critical of Tad....the savior of CU basketball....is a troll.....got it. Facts be damned...Tad is a great coach...great recruiter....great mentor....great leader....great molder of young men.... Double his salary dammit!!!!!

 

[Darth Snow]

I'm sorry, I'm unable to translate .... into coherent thought. You've been unable to state a consistent and logical position with any clarity that I've seen. Your criticisms of Tad are over the top and often based on factual inaccuracies. You constantly use straw men or fantasies as the counter arguments you rail against. Basically, you are putting forward a strange stream of consciousness without any basis for it. What got you the troll tag is your seeming desperation to hate on all things Tad without any ability to propose legitimate solutions to the alleged issues.

 

[OsideBuff]

I'm sorry, I'm unable to translate .... into coherent thought. You've been unable to state a consistent and logical position with any clarity that I've seen. Your criticisms of Tad are over the top and often based on factual inaccuracies. You constantly use straw men or fantasies as the counter arguments you rail against. Basically, you are putting forward a strange stream of consciousness without any basis for it. What got you the troll tag is your seeming desperation to hate on all things Tad without any ability to propose legitimate solutions to the alleged issues.

What is factually inaccurate? That Tad has a .55 winning percentage the last three years...and has one tourney appearance? That he is in the top 40 paid coaches in the country and finished in the top 32 EXACTLY once? That the team is 64-62 in Pac 12 play in seven years? Seems pretty over paid to me....

I love that you attack the person and not the facts....but then again....that seems to be the way to counter an argument when you cannot win on facts....attack him/her personally!!!!! Nice work.....well done....Bravo!!!!

 

[Buffnik]

I love this board.....truly. As long as you jump on the bandwagon and say all is well....well gosh darn it...then you are a great poster. Identify facts about our BBALL coach and the direction of the program...and you are branded a troll..... Okey dokey...!!!!! The AD is a smart man....as are recruits and potential transfers....they probably see what I see....a team that one game can thoroughly whip a final four team....that same team that started out the P12 season o-fer Seven with fifth year seniors leading the way....drop games that they should have won.... As good old Coach Hawk used to say..."This aint intramurals"..... Bball is big business....coaches paid millions...expectations high...

Yep....everyone or anyone who is critical of Tad....the savior of CU basketball....is a troll.....got it. Facts be damned...Tad is a great coach...great recruiter....great mentor....great leader....great molder of young men.... Double his salary dammit!!!!!

Except for the tiny, inconvenient fact that this entire thread is a criticism of Tad and a call to change a problem that developed within the program 2 of the past 3 seasons.

 

[Darth Snow]

Except for the tiny, inconvenient fact that this entire thread is a criticism of Tad and a call to change a problem that developed within the program 2 of the past 3 seasons.

I'd say the problem developed earlier, but dead on.

 

[OsideBuff]

Except for the tiny, inconvenient fact that this entire thread is a criticism of Tad and a call to change a problem that developed within the program 2 of the past 3 seasons.

Never said he should be fired today......but another mediocre season....no tourney appearance....no visible improvements....continuing falling attendance...yepper...dude should be given an ultimatum....make the tourney in 2018-19 or we will look elsewhere....as I stated...Sendek was fired after 21, 21, and 18 win seasons....why? Downward trend.....wait too long and it becomes even more difficult to rebuild.

 

[MtnBuff]

I'm wondering if SBD is the basketball version of AZ.

Based on his arguments with a coach as bad as Tad and a motley group of untalented and under performing players who nobody else wants it is truly surprising that we win any games at all.

 

[Buffnik]

What is factually inaccurate? That Tad has a .55 winning percentage the last three years...and has one tourney appearance? That he is in the top 40 paid coaches in the country and finished in the top 32 EXACTLY once? That the team is 64-62 in Pac 12 play in seven years? Seems pretty over paid to me....

I love that you attack the person and not the facts....but then again....that seems to be the way to counter an argument when you cannot win on facts....attack him/her personally!!!!! Nice work.....well done....Bravo!!!!

You do realize that Ricardo Patton was 77-99 in Big 12 play and inflated his record with cupcake non-conference schedules, right?
Or that Jeff Bzdelik was 10-38 in conference play?

Being a .500 or better team in a major conference with a historically bad program is not failing. It's a hell of a coaching job. btw, Tad's conference record is 64-60 plus 12-6 in Big 12/ Pac-12 tourneys and 5-6 in post-season tourneys. When guys like Cuonzo Martin are getting $3MM a year, the bitching about Tad Boyle $1.5MM and earning one-year extensions to maintain the length of his deal is completely insane to me.

 

[Buffnik]

I'd say the problem developed earlier, but dead on.

Maybe a problem that's been there since the beginning but didn't show up on the court until 3 years ago when the leadership torch was passed.

 

[OsideBuff]

I'm wondering if SBD is the basketball version of AZ.

Based on his arguments with a coach as bad as Tad and a motley group of untalented and under performing players who nobody else wants it is truly surprising that we win any games at all.

Never ever said he was a bad coach...ever. What I did say is that he is paid as an ELITE coach.....and he is under performing. If he were making 500K per year..I would applaud him and his overachievement. He is not. And show me ONE place where I ever said the players were BAD!!!! Never. As a matter of fact.I did say that this group of players SMOKED a final four team....a representation that....when things are right....are VERY good....but that is that same team that laid eggs early in the season against the mighty WSU, ASU, OSU...etal. As it relates to the recruits...I just said that they were NOT pursued by many tournament teams....you can analyze that any way you want....I tend to think that this means they were not worthy of an offer from those teams..that there were players that better fit their team....you can come to your own conclusions. You obviously are missing the point....expectations are high due to the fact that Boyle is compensated at a level of a perennial tournament team that should expect to win at least one tournament game every few years. This was the year we were supposed to get over the top...experienced team....all the parts in place.....

 

[Darth Snow]

Maybe a problem that's been there since the beginning but didn't show up on the court until 3 years ago when the leadership torch was passed.

Complex issue that I think you've correctly identified as coming from the coaching staff post Coach A. In a way, it's a reflection of Tad's witchery that he kept the program at the level it was considering the recruiting black hole we were in for a few years.

 

[Buffnik]

Never ever said he was a bad coach...ever. What I did say is that he is paid as an ELITE coach.....and he is under performing. If he were making 500K per year..I would applaud him and his overachievement. He is not. And show me ONE place where I ever said the players were BAD!!!! Never. As a matter of fact.I did say that this group of players SMOKED a final four team....a representation that....when things are right....are VERY good....but that is that same team that laid eggs early in the season against the mighty WSU, ASU, OSU...etal. As it relates to the recruits...I just said that they were NOT pursued by many tournament teams....you can analyze that any way you want....I tend to think that this means they were not worthy of an offer from those teams..that there were players that better fit their team....you can come to your own conclusions. You obviously are missing the point....expectations are high due to the fact that Boyle is compensated at a level of a perennial tournament team that should expect to win at least one tournament game every few years. This was the year we were supposed to get over the top...experienced team....all the parts in place.....

He isn't paid as an elite coach. Where did you get that idea?

Here were the salaries of the coaches who made the tournament in 2016. Tad's at #32 out of 68, with almost everyone behind him from a mid-major or small conference rather than P5. Within the Pac-12, his salary is equal to Ernie Kent at Wazzu.

You're under a very mistaken impression. Probably because CU paid its coaches like a 2nd tier G5 school until very recently so what Boyle, MacIntyre and others are making now seems like a lot even though it's low-end P5.

 

[Buffnik]

Complex issue that I think you've correctly identified as coming from the coaching staff post Coach A. In a way, it's a reflection of Tad's witchery that he kept the program at the level it was considering the recruiting black hole we were in for a few years.

As I've posted before, I think that bringing on Bill Grier to the staff has made and will continue to make a huge difference.

 

[Buffs Basketball Fan]

Lively chatter.
People still passionate about hoops.
How do you get better with the available pieces instead of pointing at what went wrong

 

[OsideBuff]

He isn't paid as an elite coach. Where did you get that idea?

Here were the salaries of the coaches who made the tournament in 2016. Tad's at #32 out of 68, with almost everyone behind him from a mid-major or small conference rather than P5. Within the Pac-12, his salary is equal to Ernie Kent at Wazzu.

You're under a very mistaken impression. Probably because CU paid its coaches like a 2nd tier G5 school until very recently so what Boyle, MacIntyre and others are making now seems like a lot even though it's low-end P5.

Tad makes more money than Mark Few, Chris Mack, Greg Gard.....Gonzaga, Xavier and Wisconsin....to name a few...lol. and oh yeah...average attendance has PLUMMETED that past four years...from well over 10,800 a game to a paltry 7700 this season...about the same as Tads first year...so he is now making four times or so the money he made when he came to CU...and the attendance is back where it was when he started. So...attendance down by over 3K per game from the high...wins went from an average of 22 to about 19....yeah...ALL IS WELL...give the man a raise...!!!!!

 

[Buffnik]

Lively chatter.
People still passionate about hoops.
How do you get better with the available pieces instead of pointing at what went wrong

I think it starts with the trio of King, Dom & Miller maturing. It's their team now and they'll set the tone as seniors.

Next is that Siewert and Brown, who got limited minutes, need to be ready for prime time as they move into expanded roles.

We also need Namon Wright to have a Carlon Brown type impact on the team in terms of production and aggressiveness.

And we're going to need newcomers to contribute immediately.

That's a lot.

Beyond that, though, Tad's got to continue to evolve his offense as we've been seeing with more emphasis on 3pt shooting, continue to work in zone and press to his defensive philosophy, and get back to some fundamentals on defensive rebounding/ no easy baskets that built his program.

What's fun for me with the upcoming season is that I have no idea what this team will be. It's a roster that could finish toward the bottom of the conference. It's a roster that could gel and be in the Dance. And we've got a whole new group of guys to get to know and start watching develop. I'm excited.

 

[99'Buff]

Never ever said he was a bad coach...ever. What I did say is that he is paid as an ELITE coach.....and he is under performing. If he were making 500K per year..I would applaud him and his overachievement. He is not. And show me ONE place where I ever said the players were BAD!!!! Never. As a matter of fact.I did say that this group of players SMOKED a final four team....a representation that....when things are right....are VERY good....but that is that same team that laid eggs early in the season against the mighty WSU, ASU, OSU...etal. As it relates to the recruits...I just said that they were NOT pursued by many tournament teams....you can analyze that any way you want....I tend to think that this means they were not worthy of an offer from those teams..that there were players that better fit their team....you can come to your own conclusions. You obviously are missing the point....expectations are high due to the fact that Boyle is compensated at a level of a perennial tournament team that should expect to win at least one tournament game every few years. This was the year we were supposed to get over the top...experienced team....all the parts in place.....

I call serious BS on that point. You would rip into Tad if he was volunteering instead of being paid.

 

[OsideBuff]

I think it starts with the trio of King, Dom & Miller maturing. It's their team now and they'll set the tone as seniors.

Next is that Siewert and Brown, who got limited minutes, need to be ready for prime time as they move into expanded roles.

We also need Namon Wright to have a Carlon Brown type impact on the team in terms of production and aggressiveness.

And we're going to need newcomers to contribute immediately.

That's a lot.

Beyond that, though, Tad's got to continue to evolve his offense as we've been seeing with more emphasis on 3pt shooting, continue to work in zone and press to his defensive philosophy, and get back to some fundamentals on defensive rebounding/ no easy baskets that built his program.

What's fun for me with the upcoming season is that I have no idea what this team will be. It's a roster that could finish toward the bottom of the conference. It's a roster that could get and be in the Dance. And we've got a whole new group of guys to get to know and start watching develop. I'm excited.

It would be great to have a real leader emerge....I am not sure why none has in the past few years. Is it problems with the players? Or problems with the coach? This team with all its new found youth will rely heavily on chemistry and leadership.

 

[Buffnik]

Tad makes more money than Mark Few, Chris Mack, Greg Gard.....Gonzaga, Xavier and Wisconsin....to name a few...lol. and oh yeah...average attendance has PLUMMETED that past four years...from well over 10,800 a game to a paltry 7700 this season...about the same as Tads first year...so he is now making four times or so the money he made when he came to CU...and the attendance is back where it was when he started. So...attendance down by over 3K per game from the high...wins went from an average of 22 to about 19....yeah...ALL IS WELL...give the man a raise...!!!!!

Gard was an interim that year. He makes about $2MM. Few is underpaid, but seems cool with it and Gonzaga is not a P5 program. Mack is also not at a P5 program (and like Gonzaga, no football media revenue) in a Xavier job that's been a stepping stone. He's a legacy, though, so I could see him being like a Few and coaching long-term for below his market value.

Anyway, Tad is not overpaid. If we brought in anyone else of Tad's level in the basketball coaching world it would probably cost in the $2.5MM range.

Did you want to talk attendance and why that changed? Because it had almost everything to do with a change in C-Unit leadership, a change in the AD, increased ticket prices, and a Pac-12 scheduling scheme for tv friendliness instead of live fan attendance. You're blaming Tad?

 

[OsideBuff]

I call serious BS on that point. You would rip into Tad if he was volunteering instead of being paid.

You my friend are entitled to your opinion... And no.....as a matter of fact....I think Tad is a good coach....great? Not sure ...these upcoming seasons will be the true test of his coaching abilities....

 

[OsideBuff]

Gard was an interim that year. He makes about $2MM. Few is underpaid, but seems cool with it and Gonzaga is not a P5 program. Mack is also not at a P5 program (and like Gonzaga, no football media revenue) in a Xavier job that's been a stepping stone. He's a legacy, though, so I could see him being like a Few and coaching long-term for below his market value.

Anyway, Tad is not overpaid. If we brought in anyone else of Tad's level in the basketball coaching world it would probably cost in the $2.5MM range.

Did you want to talk attendance and why that changed? Because it had almost everything to do with a change in C-Unit leadership, a change in the AD, increased ticket prices, and a Pac-12 scheduling scheme for tv friendliness instead of live fan attendance. You're blaming Tad?

Most season ticket holders I talked to said the quality of the product on the court was the reason they stopped going....as well as the horrendous opponents scheduled during non-conf...but getting whipped by your cross town rival at home is not good...... We can agree to disagree....the AD tried to fix some of it with the $99 student tickets...but when you start out the Pac12 season 0-7....no one is going to go to the games because the season was essentially over...sorry....but people like to see teams win and compete for championships....that was out the door in January. The loss of 3000 per game cost the AD over a million in revenue....no Bueno.

 

[Buffnik]

Most season ticket holders I talked to said the quality of the product on the court was the reason they stopped going....as well as the horrendous opponents scheduled during non-conf...but getting whipped by your cross town rival at home is not good...... We can agree to disagree....the AD tried to fix some of it with the $99 student tickets...but when you start out the Pac12 season 0-7....no one is going to go to the games because the season was essentially over...sorry....but people like to see teams win and compete for championships....that was out the door in January.

No one is going to argue that attendance doesn't dip during a down season. It does. Schedule matters, too, and because I see a low basketball IQ fanbase that doesn't appreciate it as a big game when a BYU or Xavier come to town, I've been lobbying for more of a local non-conference schedule. I was very happy to see UNM and DU added for this reason. But the schedule wasn't any worse than previous years under Tad (except for the Pac-12 blip of not getting UA/ASU at home last season) and I still saw weaker crowds the last couple seasons in the early part of the season. We've got a fickle, bandwagon fan base for basketball. With that, yeah, got to win, got to draw fans with local scheduling. Got to schedule the non-con at good times for local fans (Pac-12 games aren't something CU can control). And the AD has to do a much better job of working with C-Unit than it has under RG. All pieces to the puzzle.

P.S. I think this year was a bit of an anomaly, too, because of how we'd been starving for football and that unexpected P12S championship run ate up all of our attention as fans. Then, by the time we were ready to turn our attention to hoops the team came out and laid an egg in that CSU game. Fan interest never recovered from that last season.

 

[OsideBuff]

No one is going to argue that attendance doesn't dip during a down season. It does. Schedule matters, too, and because I see a low basketball IQ fanbase that doesn't appreciate it as a big game when a BYU or Xavier come to town, I've been lobbying for more of a local non-conference schedule. I was very happy to see UNM and DU added for this reason. But the schedule wasn't any worse than previous years under Tad (except for the Pac-12 blip of not getting UA/ASU at home last season) and I still saw weaker crowds the last couple seasons in the early part of the season. We've got a fickle, bandwagon fan base for basketball. With that, yeah, got to win, got to draw fans with local scheduling. Got to schedule the non-con at good times for local fans (Pac-12 games aren't something CU can control). And the AD has to do a much better job of working with C-Unit than it has under RG. All pieces to the puzzle.

P.S. I think this year was a bit of an anomaly, too, because of how we'd been starving for football and that unexpected P12S championship run ate up all of our attention as fans. Then, by the time we were ready to turn our attention to hoops the team came out and laid an egg in that CSU game. Fan interest never recovered from that last season.

Agree with all ..plus the ofer start put the nail in the coffin...