Where Colorado Buffalo alumni, fans and friends come to chat all things CU. Go Buffs!

Football Message Board


Joined: 08/12/2010 Posts: 2193
Likes: 1035

You're onto something

I get that research fundraising and grant money are more important to a university than athletics, and they dwarf the athletics budget. But other better universities (Stanford, for example) are able to do both successfully. There are plenty of other examples of that.

Lack of admin leadership dug a huge hole. Facilities upgrades were catch up. Increasing assistant coaching salaries was another catch up move that put is in the middle of the pack, if that. Paying MM $2.5 million was considered a big step forward, but let's face it - that was necessary just to get the attention of non-P5 candidates. Does hiring RG take the focus off of their previous decade of leadership and give CU athletics credibility? I'm not sure it's enough. My guess is that he's the only well-respected one in the chain of command in the view of coaches around the country. For athletics, it might take a change at the top to get it turned around, and then the question is whether the Regents want to get involved in that.

(In response to this post by eastside Buff)

Posted: 12/17/2015 at 1:18PM


Insert a Link

Enter the title of the link here:

Enter the full web address of the link here -- include the "http://" part:

Current Thread:
  You're onto something -- Gonzo 12/17/2015 1:18PM
  Good post, east. ** -- hawg1 12/17/2015 12:12AM
  That about sums it up** -- IdaBuff 12/16/2015 9:41PM
  Test** -- IdaBuff 09/26/2018 11:25AM
  Re: Yep, it's not even worth discussing ** -- CUKev 12/16/2015 6:48PM