The future of this program

[Crash Davis]

People keep saying we don't have money, however, we play in the Big 12, and correct me if I'm wrong, didn't the Big 12 make something like $120 million last season? Didn't we earn around $9 million for just being apart of this conference? Where is all this money going?

The Big 12 is on tract to probably make the same amount this season. We could have both the football and basketball champions this season. Big 12 will be the best all around basketball conference, and we will benefit from that despite being the bottom in basketball. How is it that we don't have any money?

The money generated by athletics pretty much goes right back into covering operational costs for the programs. CU's athletic budget is something like $45 million and that's one of the smaller budgets in the conference. The profit from football is used to cover costs for all the other sports at CU, most of which lose money.

Our AD was actually running in the red earlier this decade. The last few years I think it has turned a (modest) profit, but the AD still owes money to the University for a "loan" they got a few years ago to cover those shortcomings.

 

[somebody]

all this optimism for what? holding an extremely overrated and unemotional texas to 38? please catch a clue. im glad your pulling for hawk but people that misconstrue that first half for something other than dumb luck don't know ****.when we finish with 1 or 2 wins please jump back on the fire this dumbass bandwagon!

The first half was not dumb luck. This was a good McCoy threading needles at times, but the D slowed him way down. I'd personally have to see a lot more to back Hawkins, but that was a very good defensive effort. 21 of those 38 points were special teams and offense miscues, so give the defense the credit they deserve. You can be negative when it's true, but on this point, you are simply wrong.

 

[Buffarino]

Is it just me or does is seem for the first time under Hawk, CU has been improving each week?

Maybe, although I don't think you can say they improved from week 1 to week 2. And they arguably got worse from week 3 to week 4 as well. But at the end of the day, they started out the season SOOOOO poorly that they had nowhere to go but up.:sad1:

I hate moral victories. I want some real victories!

 

[Chilly]

Hey all you sunshine pumpers in this thread. Get off my damn wagon, we don't have room.

:smile::smile2::lol:

 

[leftybuff]

I still haven't called for Hawk to be fired. I am, for the most part, a "give the new guy five years" thinker. Having said that, that time can be shortened if there are no rays of sunshine coming out of the program. Losing 2 out of every three? Not much sunshine there and four years may be the limit and time to pull the ripcord. I'm not there yet, but I'm not that far away either....

 

[NW Buff]

We are now 1-4. People sound happy about tonights effort compared to the complete implosion against CSU and Toledo, but it doesn't matter, there is no moral victory in being 1-4. Hawkins is embarrassing a very proud program. He is simply not suited to be here.

We need to make changes at the end of the season. We very well may not win another game, based on the way ISU played today. KSU could be a win, but its on the road, and last year we only won because Hansen somehow outran a VERYYYY bad KSU defense. They actually have a good coach this season, I will not pencil in any game as a given for CU the rest of the season.

Even if we beat both KSU and ISU, a likely finish will be 3-9 or 4-8. I don't care if it costs us $5 million to buyout Hawkins contract, it must be done. The humiliation he has brought this program since he arrived is pathetic.

I see our situation very similar to that of Washington's. They brought in a high profiled coach (Willingham) who did not fit whatsoever, and drove the program down to the bottom of 0-12. As seen this year, they obviously are much more talented than a typical 0-12 team would be. Sarkasian just coaching good talent the way it is supposed to be coached has made them likely an upper half of the Pac-10 team this season.

The same can be done here with a decent coach. Hell, if we had a guy like Sarkasian, we could be competing for the Big 12 North. This program has talent. However if we wait out Hawkins contract even one more season, we will not be able to attract talent as nobody is going to want to play for a guy who has shown absolute incompetence since he arrived. He simply is not a coach for a BCS school. People sometimes give him the benefit of the doubt for 2006, as he had to clean up the mess from the previous regime, however I am in the camp that say a good coach can make even mediocre talent good on the field. Look at the numerous surprise teams every year, a great coach with mediocre talent is better than an awful coach with pretty good talent, which is what we are at now.

I feel with the right hire we could be a rebounding program like Washington is this year by next season. However hiring the right guy isn't a given considering the two hirings Bohn has had have been flops (though the basketball program was pathetic from the beginning).

Point is, in the long term we will suffer more by continuing with Hawkins. I see no way we hold onto a coach who is regressing. This has to be a purely business move. There is nothing smart from a business perspective by keeping a lame duck coach at the helm. We will just continue to deteriorate, and by the time we let go of Hawkins and bring in a coach with some competence, we will have imploded so far it will take significantly longer to be successful.

By the end of the season, unless things miraculously turn around in the next few weeks, Hawkins has to be let go, no matter the cost.

This is a well written post but it's full of holes. You make two huge assumptions to make this argument.

1. That the Buffs won't be able to do better the rest of the year, winning games.
2. That UW has actually turned the corner.

I said many times I want evidence that things are headed in the right direction. The defense was very good and I see more effort to get the right players in the right position to make plays. The change at QB, while very late, is the right one. Let's hope Hansen can show that he can carry the team. So, I'm willing to look at the rest of the season and see if this continues.

As far as UW goes... Please explain why you think they've really turned the corner. Two years ago, it appeared that the Buffs had turned the corner (bowl game, beating OU). I think you are way too quick to call UW's program turned around. Give them another year or two before you claim Sarkasian is doing everything right. They are 3-3 and have a lot of tough games left (OU, OSU, UCLA, Cal).

So, your post may be very visionary but we won't have any clue until the end of the season it is right or not. I'd like to see how the year plays out first.

 

[Chilly]

This is a well written post but it's full of holes. You make two huge assumptions to make this argument.

1. That the Buffs won't be able to do better the rest of the year, winning games.
2. That UW has actually turned the corner.

I said many times I want evidence that things are headed in the right direction. The defense was very good and I see more effort to get the right players in the right position to make plays. The change at QB, while very late, is the right one. Let's hope Hansen can show that he can carry the team. So, I'm willing to look at the rest of the season and see if this continues.

As far as UW goes... Please explain why you think they've really turned the corner. Two years ago, it appeared that the Buffs had turned the corner (bowl game, beating OU). I think you are way too quick to call UW's program turned around. Give them another year or two before you claim Sarkasian is doing everything right. They are 3-3 and have a lot of tough games left (OU, OSU, UCLA, Cal).

So, your post may be very visionary but we won't have any clue until the end of the season it is right or not. I'd like to see how the year plays out first.

When you went 0fer in the win column the year before, Even 1 win is turning the corner.

 

[NW Buff]

When you went 0fer in the win column the year before, Even 1 win is turning the corner.

Not too much different than going 2-10 and then beating OU the following year. I'm not saying UW has not turned the corner, just pointing out that we saw exactly the same thing with the Buffs and yet here we are.

 

[PurifydatA$$]

Let me ask everyone a question: What are your honest expectations of this program?

I know there are those who expect and think we can and should be able to compete with the likes of Texas and Ohio State year-in-and-year-out. There are others who seem complacent with a .500 record, or worse, those that don't even care.

I find myself in the middle. For the following reasons:

1) Living in Florida now, I can clearly see how much benefit there is in having an abundance of in-state talent. Even the lower tier directional schools here like South Florida and Central Florida consistently have great speed and talent - let alone the top tier schools like UF and Miami.

2) Factor in that we don't have a T. Boone Pickens/Phil Knight booster who can personally finance our team.

3) We take academics seriously (Arizona State/Florida State, ahem, on the other hand) and apparently aren't willing to make 'exceptions' at nearly the rate that other strong academic schools do (Florida, USC and Cal come immediately to mind), which again limits the talent we can get in.

My point is that our University is inherently at a disadvantage - and for that reason, I expect that CU be a contender to play (but not often win) the BIG XII championship year-in-and-year-out, and maybe win one here and there. I expect that the Corn*uckers and us fight it out to be the best team in the north and restore some meaning to the rivalry.

These expectations seem reasonable to me for the flagship university of a talent-and-funds-limited state.

With those expectations in mind, regardless of the 2 quarters of respectable play this Saturday at Texas, I am still fully off the Dan Hawkins bandwagon and have lost all faith in his ability to put a complete team together. Hawkins was thought to be an offensive genius at Boise State. What has he managed to put together at CU with more money and more talent? Nothing! I hate to say it, but our offense has been laughable since Hawkins arrived. Player attrition has been awful and the management and development of our true talent has been frightful (Espy playing over Simas, Jefferson, Wright, etc?) Next, where is the consistency? How do we go from 2-10 to 6-7 to 5-7 to a probable 2-10 and say that "we're so close"?

So while I understand the limitations that CU faces when achieving to be the best, I still think that Hawkins performance is well below what we deserve. We haven't trended in the right direction, and more time with Hawkins will only further set our program back until we are no longer even considered by better coaches and recruits. We DO NOT want to become the Vanderbilt or Northwestern of the BIG XII.

 

[GoBuffs08]

Let me ask everyone a question: What are your honest expectations of this program?

I know there are those who expect and think we can and should be able to compete with the likes of Texas and Ohio State year-in-and-year-out. There are others who seem complacent with a .500 record, or worse, those that don't even care.

I find myself in the middle. For the following reasons:

1) Living in Florida now, I can clearly see how much benefit there is in having an abundance of in-state talent. Even the lower tier directional schools here like South Florida and Central Florida consistently have great speed and talent - let alone the top tier schools like UF and Miami.

2) Factor in that we don't have a T. Boone Pickens/Phil Knight booster who can personally finance our team.

3) We take academics seriously (Arizona State/Florida State, ahem, on the other hand) and apparently aren't willing to make 'exceptions' at nearly the rate that other strong academic schools do (Florida, USC and Cal come immediately to mind), which again limits the talent we can get in.

My point is that our University is inherently at a disadvantage - and for that reason, I expect that CU be a contender to play (but not often win) the BIG XII championship year-in-and-year-out, and maybe win one here and there. I expect that the Corn*uckers and us fight it out to be the best team in the north and restore some meaning to the rivalry.

These expectations seem reasonable to me for the flagship university of a talent-and-funds-limited state.

With those expectations in mind, regardless of the 2 quarters of respectable play this Saturday at Texas, I am still fully off the Dan Hawkins bandwagon and have lost all faith in his ability to put a complete team together. Hawkins was thought to be an offensive genius at Boise State. What has he managed to put together at CU with more money and more talent? Nothing! I hate to say it, but our offense has been laughable since Hawkins arrived. Player attrition has been awful and the management and development of our true talent has been frightful (Espy playing over Simas, Jefferson, Wright, etc?) Next, where is the consistency? How do we go from 2-10 to 6-7 to 5-7 to a probable 2-10 and say that "we're so close"?

So while I understand the limitations that CU faces when achieving to be the best, I still think that Hawkins performance is well below what we deserve. We haven't trended in the right direction, and more time with Hawkins will only further set our program back until we are no longer even considered by better coaches and recruits. We DO NOT want to become the Vanderbilt or Northwestern of the BIG XII.

I expect a bowl game every year. Getting 6 W's to qualify should not be that hard.
I expect to challenge for the North title every few years.
I expect the team to be top 25 or at least in the "others getting vote" section of the top 25 every year.
I expect us to finish in the top 15 at least a few times a decade.
I expect us to finish in the top 10 at least once a decade.

Bottom line I expect CU to win 8-9 games a year minimum. I also expect them to also have 2-3 years out of 10 where they win 10-11 games. Most important, I want teams to have to worry about playing CU! Even in a down year I want teams we play to talk about how tough CU is, how well coached we are, and how if you make mistakes playing against CU you are gonna lose the game!

I will never expect us to be a UT, USC, or any SEC team. We will probably never have the $ to make that happen.

 

[AlferdJasper]

Most important, I want teams to have to worry about playing CU!

There you go.

Like.

 

[BuffSurveyor]

I expect a bowl game every year. Getting 6 W's to qualify should not be that hard.
I expect to challenge for the North title every few years.
I expect the team to be top 25 or at least in the "others getting vote" section of the top 25 every year.
I expect us to finish in the top 15 at least a few times a decade.
I expect us to finish in the top 10 at least once a decade.

Bottom line I expect CU to win 8-9 games a year minimum. I also expect them to also have 2-3 years out of 10 where they win 10-11 games. Most important, I want teams to have to worry about playing CU! Even in a down year I want teams we play to talk about how tough CU is, how well coached we are, and how if you make mistakes playing against CU you are gonna lose the game!

I will never expect us to be a UT, USC, or any SEC team. We will probably never have the $ to make that happen.

Your expectations are all good, but when you consider the last statement it seems as have you just shot yourself in the foot. Either you go for it, or you don't! I say be deliberate with your expectations of the CU Football program!

 

[buffs04]

I will say that outside of the very top teams - Texas, USC, Florida, Oklahoma, etc - there have been some fairly incomplete teams rounding out the top 10-15 since about 2005. Especially the last few years, we have seen a LOT of teams make it to even the top 5 that have been exposed as having terrible flaws.

What does this mean to CU? It means that, if this trend continues, there is no reason this team can't push to make regular appearances in the top 25 over the next few years if we get our act together and the coaching staff performs a bit better.

 

[dabuffffs]

This is a well written post but it's full of holes. You make two huge assumptions to make this argument.

1. That the Buffs won't be able to do better the rest of the year, winning games.
2. That UW has actually turned the corner.

I said many times I want evidence that things are headed in the right direction. The defense was very good and I see more effort to get the right players in the right position to make plays. The change at QB, while very late, is the right one. Let's hope Hansen can show that he can carry the team. So, I'm willing to look at the rest of the season and see if this continues.

As far as UW goes... Please explain why you think they've really turned the corner. Two years ago, it appeared that the Buffs had turned the corner (bowl game, beating OU). I think you are way too quick to call UW's program turned around. Give them another year or two before you claim Sarkasian is doing everything right. They are 3-3 and have a lot of tough games left (OU, OSU, UCLA, Cal).

So, your post may be very visionary but we won't have any clue until the end of the season it is right or not. I'd like to see how the year plays out first.

Sarkasian is definitely making Washington turn the corner. In his first season he has:

1. Already made them competitive in every game, with exception to the Stanford game. They played LSU very tough at home, should have knocked off Notre Dame, and defeated USC. Say what you want about USC and their "off day", but how many times have a team previously defeated been able to knock off the perennial powerhouse of their conference? That loss very well could derail USC's Rose Bowl hopes.
2. Quietly built the 2nd best recruiting class in the Pac-10 behind USC. He missed out on Heaps but still got Montana. Oh and majority of his recruits were before he stepped foot on the field.
3. Kept most of the top talent in Washington. Again, he missed out on Heaps, but not an easy thing to do to keep most of the top players for a first year coach in the Northwest with Boise State, Oregon, and Oregon State, among all the California schools targeting the top talent.
4. Put them on track to go to a bowl game a year after a complete implosion. They'll almost surely beat Washington State, so two more wins should get them into a bowl game.

Sarkasian also has one of the best NFL QB prospects for 2011 draft to work with, which will increase Sarkasian's ability to return their program to sustainable success. By next season they could be the 2nd or 3rd best team in the Pac-10.

My reference to Washington was in the respect that Hawkins was very similar to Willingham, as in he was a high profiled coach with high expectations, taking over a program with good football history, who has thus far been a failure. Talk to any Washington fans. Willingham had the support of most of the fanbase when he started and slowly alienated the fans. By the end of his 4th season, he was done; he had not done anything but regress the program (which is exactly what is occurring here). Now he's a very hated figure in Seattle sports (just below Clay Bennett and Howard Shultz).

Its actually amazing how much we have in common with the University of Washington, both within the athletics programs, the culture of the school, and academics.

 

[dabuffffs]

I will say that outside of the very top teams - Texas, USC, Florida, Oklahoma, etc - there have been some fairly incomplete teams rounding out the top 10-15 since about 2005. Especially the last few years, we have seen a LOT of teams make it to even the top 5 that have been exposed as having terrible flaws.

What does this mean to CU? It means that, if this trend continues, there is no reason this team can't push to make regular appearances in the top 25 over the next few years if we get our act together and the coaching staff performs a bit better.

Not only that but we have the unique position of being able to recruit California, Texas, the Midwest, mountain region and occasionally the Northwest. Our recruiting pipeline extends further than the other Big 12 North schools, with Nebraska being an exception. In the long term our school is in much better position to compete year in and year out in the Big 12 North. Does anyone really think Missouri and Kansas can sustainably be atop the North in the long run? KU will always be hoops first, and Missouri has risen this decade while Colorado and Nebraska have declined. Before then they were very mediocre.

 

[somebody]

Not being USC, UT, or the top SEC teams does not mean not competing for the occasional MNC.

 

[stampy]

Not being USC, UT, or the top SEC teams does not mean not competing for the occasional MNC.

I would argue that it kind of does. It's been 7yrs since the national champion was not USC, UT, or the top SEC team, and that was Ohio State in 02. Since then the only team even playing in the BCS championship other than those listed above was OU.

Looking at the MNC teams, the last time the NC had a football budget as small as CU's was in 1990, which was us.:huh: