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!

Wow. Just wow.

BuffMania said:
You don't know if they're good enough to get as much attention from their instate school as they're getting from Top25 teams like kNU and Stanford?
Click to expand...

I agree. Kids getting offers from multiple BCS schools are probably worthy of our interest, from an athletic standpoint. Again, I don't know these kids at all. My point is that maybe they were evaluated and determined, for any number of reasons, not to be a good fit for CU. Maybe we just flat out missed on them. Guess we'll find out over the next 4-5 years. My point is that some of the people on here accuse Hawk of being lazy in recruiting. I would contend that work ethic has not been Hawk's problem.
 
Junction said:
I wondered how long it would take before the issue somehow became why the kids weren't contacting Hawk rather than why Hawk wasn't contacting the kids.

It is Hawk's job to contact recruits, not to somehow get them to contact him. It is called recruiting, not telephone answering, for a reason...
Click to expand...

Dude - that is not what I'm saying, and you know it. Do you think Florida/Alabama/Texas have some advantages over CU when it comes to recruiting, thanks to their success on the field?
 
SpacemanSpiff said:
. My point is that some of the people on here accuse Hawk of being lazy in recruiting. I would contend that work ethic has not been Hawk's problem.
Click to expand...

I used to agree, but I have some serious concerns now. My previous idea of Hawk was that he was a pretty tireless worker and recruiter. I'd imagine that he knew pretty much every recruit we were seriously after. I gave him every benefit of the doubt when people were joking that he's in Hawaii on vacation. Now he doesn't even know Kyle Slavins actual first name? I mean, maybe it's just stress and I have it all wrong and I hope so, but it doesn't sound good.
 
It's Slavin, not Slavins, Rabbit! Now, who's the one with name problems? RELAX, JUST KIDDING! I know you just missed an apostrophe.

I guess I missed the Slavin name thing. Everything I've heard says that work ethic isn't his problem. Ability to succeed at this level has been, so far.
 
Funny how CU is getting ripped for not recruiting Colorado better yet CSU is getting praised for abandoning Colorado to pull in the hidden gems from Florida and Texas.

Up until this year, this CU staff recruited the state very well. Frankly, the in-state guys CU was pretty high on this cycle were Martin, Hinder, Spond, Jones, Hemschoot, Slavin, Kip and Castor (and maybe Colter but not at QB). I didn't include Bonnell because I honestly believe they liked Munyer and Crabb (plus a number of other out-of-state prospects we went after) better than him. They went hard after the in-state guys they wanted and simply whiffed on most of them. Effort was not the problem. Execution was. We went 1/6 on the positional players and got our kicker. I believe the staff was a bit higher on Kip Smith, but that it was very close and that he and Castor weren't separated by much.
 
Buffnik said:
Funny how CU is getting ripped for not recruiting Colorado better yet CSU is getting praised for abandoning Colorado to pull in the hidden gems from Florida and Texas.

Up until this year, this CU staff recruited the state very well. Frankly, the in-state guys CU was pretty high on this cycle were Martin, Hinder, Spond, Jones, Hemschoot, Slavin, Kip and Castor (and maybe Colter but not at QB). I didn't include Bonnell because I honestly believe they liked Munyer and Crabb (plus a number of other out-of-state prospects we went after) better than him. They went hard after the in-state guys they wanted and simply whiffed on most of them. Effort was not the problem. Execution was. We went 1/6 on the positional players and got our kicker. I believe the staff was a bit higher on Kip Smith, but that it was very close and that he and Castor weren't separated by much.
Click to expand...

Rep...ah crap! YMSSR!
 
Buffnik said:
Funny how CU is getting ripped for not recruiting Colorado better yet CSU is getting praised for abandoning Colorado to pull in the hidden gems from Florida and Texas.
Click to expand...

The problem is the drop-off from in-state commits this year from the past few. I'm sure you also want us to get the top in-state commits as well as some players from the recruiting lands of Texas and Florida. Also, CU will be ripped by CU fans for the same thing CSU will be praised for because we expect better of CU. We are supposed to be on a higher level and this year we weren't. We were arguably below their level. That is where the complaints come from. Get the best players from under your nose, get some good players from the best recruit fields and step on the head of the drowning puppy CSU should be.
 
SpacemanSpiff said:
It's Slavin, not Slavins, Rabbit! Now, who's the one with name problems? RELAX, JUST KIDDING! I know you just missed an apostrophe.

I guess I missed the Slavin name thing. Everything I've heard says that work ethic isn't his problem. Ability to succeed at this level has been, so far.
Click to expand...

lol, like I said I used to agree, but I'm just wondering now. Then again I'm probably just overreacting and it'll end up in the pile of things that Hawk has done in the last year that annoy me for a day or two only for me to forget about. I just hate that I'm even considering the possibility now.
 
I'm the one who is holding CU to a higher standard than CSU. If they aren't using in-state prospects as their foundation, CU certainly shouldn't be. There are a group of 6-10 Colorado preps each year that CU should recruit hard. After that, it's about getting some PWOs from Colorado. This year we only got a couple of the target group. Failure. But CU is not and should not be pulling out all the stops for every Colorado kid that Rivals gives 3 or 4 stars to.
 
A couple of points on those critical of Hawk's recruitment of Hindler:

1) The kid was a Cal lean, if not a lock, from the get go. I never really thought we had much of a shot.

2) Hindler went from a 4-star member of the Rivals 150, to a 3-star not in the Rivals 250. This drop in recruiting status occurred after a poor showing at a national combine. Perhaps the coaches saw this before the recruiting "gurus." I personally like Hirshman better.
 
Buffnik said:
But CU is not and should not be pulling out all the stops for every Colorado kid that Rivals gives 3 or 4 stars to.
Click to expand...

Respectfully disagree. I think, especially after a year like what we had, they should have been pulling out all of the stops for the 4* players in the state. Granted, the in state class was pretty weak this year, but I mean if they're good enough to play at Stanford, Nebraska, Cal, ND, NW, and UCLA, then they should be good enough to play at CU.

Maybe I'm wrong on this, but I think it pisses the people off locally as well. I mean, Hawk is supposed to stroll into Mullen this year and tell Logan he wants all of his players now, but last year he didn't want his sack machine?
 
SpacemanSpiff said:
Dude - that is not what I'm saying, and you know it. Do you think Florida/Alabama/Texas have some advantages over CU when it comes to recruiting, thanks to their success on the field?
Click to expand...

I know that's not exactly what you were saying, but my point is that if you don't have the advantage of being a program that kids are beating down the doors to get into, you have to be even more active and more in touch with them. In Hawk's situation you REALLY can't afford to sit back and wait for them to come to you. You can't have a top in-state kid, let alone a group of them, coming away after signing day saying that CU wasn't interested in them at all and they never got a single chance to meet Hawk. He needed to be getting down 36 to the Denver area schools with the blue chip kids every time it's legally possible. As Rabbit points out, when those kids come along that you really do want, you want to have a good relationship with the area coaches, if nothing else.

And frankly, when you look at this class, I can't see a position where a 4* prospect would have been a bad thing. Aside from maybe QB, where I was never a Hinder fan (talk to somebody with contact with that Steamboat program and coaching staff sometime and you'll probably come away relieved he isn't coming to CU) and I think Hirschman was the far better "get"...
 
White_Rabbit said:
Respectfully disagree. I think, especially after a year like what we had, they should have been pulling out all of the stops for the 4* players in the state. Granted, the in state class was pretty weak this year, but I mean if they're good enough to play at Stanford, Nebraska, Cal, ND, NW, and UCLA, then they should be good enough to play at CU.

Maybe I'm wrong on this, but I think it pisses the people off locally as well. I mean, Hawk is supposed to stroll into Mullen this year and tell Logan he wants all of his players now, but last year he didn't want his sack machine?
Click to expand...

The thing is, the staff has already made evaluations for the 2011 class based on evaluations of sophomore and junior tape (where available), personally seeing a prospect play (where applicable), and based on what high school coaches are telling them. They have known who their top in-state targets are for several months now, but Rivals won't start putting stars on 2011 prospects for another couple months.

If the early evaluations by CU don't result in the kid being a top target, are you saying that CU should change its mind based on what the Rivals scouts think? In the case of someone like Bonnell, what is CU supposed to do when they like him but aren't totally sold based on his sophomore and junior footage. Without getting an offer first, Bonnell refused to come to the CU camp so they could see first hand how he did in their full contact drills. CU gave him a May offer. Camp was in June. Bonnell didn't come. Seems to me that if he really wanted CU to recruit him hard he would have been at that camp. CU tried. To make that statement for the article about Hawkins not even knowing his face kind of pissed me off.

Some of these kids act like CU is beneath them, that they're somehow entitled to expect an automatic CU offer since they are from Colorado, and then they act butt hurt when CU doesn't come running to them kissing their asses and begging them to come to CU.
 
SpacemanSpiff said:
I can't figure out why people don't think Hawk is trying to get the best kids he can? His job depends on it.
Click to expand...

He's not doing much to win games, either, something else his job should depend on. Apparently not, though, with this administration.
 
Okay so he wasn't being very factual in the article. That somewhat crossed my mind that some of these guys might be feeling a little pressure from the locals for ditching, so they just throw some blame on Hawk and have it all go away.

As for the rivals rankings I don't think the coaches should be into that at all, my thing is offers from other big time schools. I mean Bonnell is hauling in 20 offers or something, how do all of those far more successful coaches miss on Bonnell, but our staff have the real lowdown on him? Like some have said, Hinder was ranked pretty high, but I really didn't see it. He was a camp allstar, so I wasn't too bummed about him. But guys like Onyeali and Bell? Playmakers, versatile, local, positions of need, what's more to like? Instead Hawk and crew are halfway across the country offering sketchy qualifiers.

I just got a really bad vibe from Hawk today between this article and him calling Slavin "Tyler" more than once apparently. Like you said they're after these guys for years. I would think I'd know all of my recruits by first name. I'm sure he was just stressed, but ugh that's pretty bad form. After not speaking for months, Hawaiigate, closing weekend fail, Tyler Slavin, it was just all bad.

edit: I just remembered we were after a guy that was actually named TYLER Slavin, no relation to Kyle. Hawk probably just mixed the two up, or wishful thinking? :lol:
 
Dan Hawkins is getting back at C.U. fans for bashing Cody and picking on his Dumb ass. He is trying to fail. This is just a gut feeling.
 
Tadploe said:
Dan Hawkins is getting back at C.U. fans for bashing Cody and picking on his Dumb ass. He is trying to fail. This is just a gut feeling.
Click to expand...

Unless the guy is out of his mind, your theory makes no sense. Why would he try to fail, and screw his career?
 
Tadploe said:
Dan Hawkins is getting back at C.U. fans for bashing Cody and picking on his Dumb ass. He is trying to fail. This is just a gut feeling.
Click to expand...

One of the stupidest things ever said on this site...and that's saying something.
 
I read the post news clipping and the some of the kids said they had never seen Hawkins in person, or felt like C.U. was really after them. Did I miss something?
 
Tadploe said:
I read the post news clipping and the some of the kids said they had never seen Hawkins in person, or felt like C.U. was really after them. Did I miss something?
Click to expand...

Maybe because CU wasn't that interested in them.
 
Well Buffnik I suppose C.U. signed some of the kids they wanted, but has not made the fans happy. The fans seemed to want some top rated kids from Colorado and you could be right the Buffs don't want them.
 
Jimmy your right it makes no sense. I gave my gut feeling and thats more than some people do. Also it was not the dumbest post ever. I have posted stupider stuff than that,and so have others.
 
JimmyBuff said:
But schools like Nebraska, UCLA and ARizona State are? That makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Let's see if it makes sense. Here's a case study:

Should we have made Jonny Miller our QB target over Nick Hirschman? Syracuse did. We didn't offer.

Miller was on ESPN's preseason 150 Watch List. Hirschman wasn't. Miller ended up as ESPN's #18 QB with a 79 grade. Hirschman was their #26 with a 78 grade. Scout had them both as 3* prospects, but rated Miller #63 and Hirschman #42. Rivals, though, had Miller as a 2* with a 5.2 rating (unranked), while they had Hirschman as a 3* with a 5.6 rating and their 48th ranked QB.

Not a lot of difference according to the scouting services (other than at Rivals). And Miller brought the benefit of being an in-state guy, so it would have been a good PR move. Also, Miller's a Mullen product so it would have made in-roads there if we had landed him.

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

Given the above, who here thinks we should have offered Miller and tried to get him instead of Hirschman?
 
So Buffnick after reading the Denver post sports clipping what grade do you give Hawkins on landing instate kids ? I gave him an Incompleat as I dont think he gave it his all, and quit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top