C'mon. People are going overboard here. There are a few places where it is *structurally* hard to build a great football program, such as Indiana (where football is truly a placeholder until basketball season and the competition is massive in the Big Ten East). Colorado isn't one of them - they're like 90% of programs that are basically up-and-down with how their current coach is performing. If anything, Colorado has a ton to offer - a great college town with a flagship university and excellent academics. The "Colorado just likes pro sports" excuse is bunk - I abhor that excuse for college teams because every market that is worth anything is a pro sports town. No one anywhere loves a pro sports team more than Wisconsin natives love the Packers, yet the University of Wisconsin, where Madison has as much of a leftist hippy quotient as Boulder, has managed to find great success in football (and basketball, for that matter).

Colorado can absolutely win again. They have made bad hiring decisions, but there is nothing structurally holding them back and they offer quite a bit more in terms of location compared to most other P5 programs.

Colorado just needs to get a recruiting pipeline from Southern California like they did during the Bill McCartney days.

Colorado also use to get a lot of Texas kids. That pipeline is now non-existent. They have a very long way to go. Of course the right coach can do wonders.

(09-07-2015 10:37 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  C'mon. People are going overboard here. There are a few places where it is *structurally* hard to build a great football program, such as Indiana (where football is truly a placeholder until basketball season and the competition is massive in the Big Ten East). Colorado isn't one of them - they're like 90% of programs that are basically up-and-down with how their current coach is performing. If anything, Colorado has a ton to offer - a great college town with a flagship university and excellent academics. The "Colorado just likes pro sports" excuse is bunk - I abhor that excuse for college teams because every market that is worth anything is a pro sports town. No one anywhere loves a pro sports team more than Wisconsin natives love the Packers, yet the University of Wisconsin, where Madison has as much of a leftist hippy quotient as Boulder, has managed to find great success in football (and basketball, for that matter).

Colorado can absolutely win again. They have made bad hiring decisions, but there is nothing structurally holding them back and they offer quite a bit more in terms of location compared to most other P5 programs.

I have great respect for you, put the pro sport effect is not an excuse and is 100% legit. There is no city that has an NFL team that puts its college ahead of the pro team. None.

Colorado is already in a power conference and it's a flagship university. They're already afforded the budget and status necessary to get back on track, so it's only a matter of actually using it. They'll be back in a big way eventually.

(09-07-2015 11:05 AM)Section 200 Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 10:37 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  C'mon. People are going overboard here. There are a few places where it is *structurally* hard to build a great football program, such as Indiana (where football is truly a placeholder until basketball season and the competition is massive in the Big Ten East). Colorado isn't one of them - they're like 90% of programs that are basically up-and-down with how their current coach is performing. If anything, Colorado has a ton to offer - a great college town with a flagship university and excellent academics. The "Colorado just likes pro sports" excuse is bunk - I abhor that excuse for college teams because every market that is worth anything is a pro sports town. No one anywhere loves a pro sports team more than Wisconsin natives love the Packers, yet the University of Wisconsin, where Madison has as much of a leftist hippy quotient as Boulder, has managed to find great success in football (and basketball, for that matter).

Colorado can absolutely win again. They have made bad hiring decisions, but there is nothing structurally holding them back and they offer quite a bit more in terms of location compared to most other P5 programs.

I have great respect for you, put the pro sport effect is not an excuse and is 100% legit. There is no city that has an NFL team that puts its college ahead of the pro team. None.

I don't disagree with your statement - the NFL is king everywhere. However, my whole point is that NFL success and college football fandom aren't mutually exclusive. See my Wisconsin example. Look at Miami in the past. The state of Texas manages to love the Cowboys plus its college and high school teams. Ohio State draws most of its students from 3 hardcore NFL areas (Cleveland, Cincinnati and the area west of Pittsburgh). Atlanta has the NFL but is still a massive college football town. Detroit amazingly still sells out every Lions game and then also sends over 100,000 to Ann Arbor and 80,000 to East Lansing every week.

Large markets have the ability to have multiple allegiances to different teams and sports. They absolutely shouldn't be used as an excuse because those pro markets are where most alums live.

(09-04-2015 03:29 PM)Okielite Wrote:  Fanbase is disinterested. Little financial support. State that is more concerned with Peyton Manning then the CU program. Lack of Football focus by the administration.

I really don't see any reason to think they will turn it around anytime soon.

The kids in Colorado are more concerned with looking like a hipster than going to CU games. They need more overweight lazy dumb trailer trash t-shirt fans. Like the ones who carry the Southern schools.

Colorado people are out hiking and drinking gluten free organic water while they hump bunnies in the back of their subaru. Not concerned with football. I can't really think of many CU fans I've ever seen on forums either.

Another example of a nice big state with lots of population but no support for the program.

great point. I used to visit my cousin in Boulder in the 90's when Colorado was still good and he and his buddies never went to games and actually seemed irritated by it more than not interested. Boulder is not your typical liberal college campus. Boulder is too the left of Stalin. Cheers!

(09-07-2015 11:05 AM)Section 200 Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 10:37 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  C'mon. People are going overboard here. There are a few places where it is *structurally* hard to build a great football program, such as Indiana (where football is truly a placeholder until basketball season and the competition is massive in the Big Ten East). Colorado isn't one of them - they're like 90% of programs that are basically up-and-down with how their current coach is performing. If anything, Colorado has a ton to offer - a great college town with a flagship university and excellent academics. The "Colorado just likes pro sports" excuse is bunk - I abhor that excuse for college teams because every market that is worth anything is a pro sports town. No one anywhere loves a pro sports team more than Wisconsin natives love the Packers, yet the University of Wisconsin, where Madison has as much of a leftist hippy quotient as Boulder, has managed to find great success in football (and basketball, for that matter).

Colorado can absolutely win again. They have made bad hiring decisions, but there is nothing structurally holding them back and they offer quite a bit more in terms of location compared to most other P5 programs.

I have great respect for you, put the pro sport effect is not an excuse and is 100% legit. There is no city that has an NFL team that puts its college ahead of the pro team. None.

I agree. Frank the tank is off on this one. The SEC, Oklahoma, Nebraska, UCLA, USC, Oregon, Utah, BYU, Iowa etc benefit greatly by not having NFL teams. Houston, San Diego St, Miami, Pitt, BC etc suffer because of the NFL. No question. Cheers!

(09-07-2015 11:05 AM)Section 200 Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 10:37 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  C'mon. People are going overboard here. There are a few places where it is *structurally* hard to build a great football program, such as Indiana (where football is truly a placeholder until basketball season and the competition is massive in the Big Ten East). Colorado isn't one of them - they're like 90% of programs that are basically up-and-down with how their current coach is performing. If anything, Colorado has a ton to offer - a great college town with a flagship university and excellent academics. The "Colorado just likes pro sports" excuse is bunk - I abhor that excuse for college teams because every market that is worth anything is a pro sports town. No one anywhere loves a pro sports team more than Wisconsin natives love the Packers, yet the University of Wisconsin, where Madison has as much of a leftist hippy quotient as Boulder, has managed to find great success in football (and basketball, for that matter).

Colorado can absolutely win again. They have made bad hiring decisions, but there is nothing structurally holding them back and they offer quite a bit more in terms of location compared to most other P5 programs.

I have great respect for you, put the pro sport effect is not an excuse and is 100% legit. There is no city that has an NFL team that puts its college ahead of the pro team. None.

Do you know where Tempe, Arizona is?

(09-08-2015 07:37 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 11:05 AM)Section 200 Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 10:37 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  C'mon. People are going overboard here. There are a few places where it is *structurally* hard to build a great football program, such as Indiana (where football is truly a placeholder until basketball season and the competition is massive in the Big Ten East). Colorado isn't one of them - they're like 90% of programs that are basically up-and-down with how their current coach is performing. If anything, Colorado has a ton to offer - a great college town with a flagship university and excellent academics. The "Colorado just likes pro sports" excuse is bunk - I abhor that excuse for college teams because every market that is worth anything is a pro sports town. No one anywhere loves a pro sports team more than Wisconsin natives love the Packers, yet the University of Wisconsin, where Madison has as much of a leftist hippy quotient as Boulder, has managed to find great success in football (and basketball, for that matter).

Colorado can absolutely win again. They have made bad hiring decisions, but there is nothing structurally holding them back and they offer quite a bit more in terms of location compared to most other P5 programs.

I have great respect for you, put the pro sport effect is not an excuse and is 100% legit. There is no city that has an NFL team that puts its college ahead of the pro team. None.

Do you know where Tempe, Arizona is?

Yes, why?

(09-08-2015 08:34 PM)Section 200 Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 07:37 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 11:05 AM)Section 200 Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 10:37 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  C'mon. People are going overboard here. There are a few places where it is *structurally* hard to build a great football program, such as Indiana (where football is truly a placeholder until basketball season and the competition is massive in the Big Ten East). Colorado isn't one of them - they're like 90% of programs that are basically up-and-down with how their current coach is performing. If anything, Colorado has a ton to offer - a great college town with a flagship university and excellent academics. The "Colorado just likes pro sports" excuse is bunk - I abhor that excuse for college teams because every market that is worth anything is a pro sports town. No one anywhere loves a pro sports team more than Wisconsin natives love the Packers, yet the University of Wisconsin, where Madison has as much of a leftist hippy quotient as Boulder, has managed to find great success in football (and basketball, for that matter).

Colorado can absolutely win again. They have made bad hiring decisions, but there is nothing structurally holding them back and they offer quite a bit more in terms of location compared to most other P5 programs.

I have great respect for you, put the pro sport effect is not an excuse and is 100% legit. There is no city that has an NFL team that puts its college ahead of the pro team. None.

Do you know where Tempe, Arizona is?

Yes, why?

Because by your rules, Arizona State should never have been able to get themselves out of the basement of college football like they have. Yet, they have.

(09-07-2015 10:41 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  Colorado just needs to get a recruiting pipeline from Southern California like they did during the Bill McCartney days.

As a member of the PAC12, CU has plenty of exposure to California and should be getting at least some leftovers from that state, but it seems like Boise is beating them to the punch. Nothing, apparently, breeds success like success. McCartney used to recruit a lot of street toughs from Houston and big, athletic kids from American Samoa, but many of them couldn't maintain an adequate GPA. Maybe what CU needs to become competitive is a coach without any scruples.

Get all visiting teams stoned.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

(09-04-2015 02:04 PM)All Rams All The Time Wrote:  Same as any other successful program:
- athletic department support
- administration support
- student support
- alumni/booster support

They've made a splash hire with the new athletic director. Don't know how effective he is at managing a department; he's a helluva fundraiser supposedly. Been investing in facilities (finally).

The jury is still out (!) on the administrative support. That whole scenario from 15 years ago (lotsa sex with recruits, slush funds, allegations of rape) still haunts the collective memory of the board of regents. New president since then, and the head of the board says all the right things...and one never gets the sense they're giving full rein to the AD. Whether provable or not, those allegations were awful for the school. Those types of activities may occur at many schools where they don't get caught, and CU has taken a beating from them.

Students seem to be into basketball more than football. CU has traditionally had passionate fans who aren't very bright in terms of sports. Their favorite chant: (Eff) em up! (Eff) em up! Go CU! About the same time of that Nebraska game you mention, the student section had to be emptied because the students disapproved of an official's call and wouldn't stop throwing things on the field. Think of that: the STUDENT section had to be emptied. Plus, imagine the average 18-22 year old kid -- when's the last time CU was kickin' butt in football? Fifteen years ago when Barnett was the coach? And look how he was run off....

Most alumni are more than 15 years out of school, and their expectations are unrealistic. They expect CU to return to 5th-down/Orange Bowl levels of success, without considering the Hawkins era (7 years of painful in-over-his-head ball), the Embree era (2 years of in-over-his-head, on-the-job training as head coach), and now the 3rd year of MacIntyre, who may be a decent coach but has inherited a mess, to put it politely. Boosters and alumni forget that Barnett had to be paid most of his existing contract...Hawkins had to be paid his existing contract...Embree had to be paid his existing contract. that's a LOT of athletic department funds appropriated for salaries of coaches no longer at the school.

I'm not crazy about the alumni of CU, and I respect the hell out of the institution. I want CU to get better -- much better -- in football. Their success is good for my school's program, and the reverse is true, tho most alumni from both schools would disagree. CU is looking at another few years of their current condition while all the players I've noted above start pulling the same direction.

One Ram's opinion.

My wife is a Ram and I'm 100% sure that this post would make her vomit.

Sent from my VS980 4G using Tapatalk

(09-08-2015 08:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 08:34 PM)Section 200 Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 07:37 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 11:05 AM)Section 200 Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 10:37 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  C'mon. People are going overboard here. There are a few places where it is *structurally* hard to build a great football program, such as Indiana (where football is truly a placeholder until basketball season and the competition is massive in the Big Ten East). Colorado isn't one of them - they're like 90% of programs that are basically up-and-down with how their current coach is performing. If anything, Colorado has a ton to offer - a great college town with a flagship university and excellent academics. The "Colorado just likes pro sports" excuse is bunk - I abhor that excuse for college teams because every market that is worth anything is a pro sports town. No one anywhere loves a pro sports team more than Wisconsin natives love the Packers, yet the University of Wisconsin, where Madison has as much of a leftist hippy quotient as Boulder, has managed to find great success in football (and basketball, for that matter).

Colorado can absolutely win again. They have made bad hiring decisions, but there is nothing structurally holding them back and they offer quite a bit more in terms of location compared to most other P5 programs.

I have great respect for you, put the pro sport effect is not an excuse and is 100% legit. There is no city that has an NFL team that puts its college ahead of the pro team. None.

Do you know where Tempe, Arizona is?

Yes, why?

Because by your rules, Arizona State should never have been able to get themselves out of the basement of college football like they have. Yet, they have.

first off, I lived in Phoenix for awhile like every good Iowan has. i still have "snow bird" family in Phoenix and Scottsdale. I've been to the fiesta bowl (ASU's Sun Devil stadium in Tempe) a dozen times at least.... Maybe you aren't aware, but ASU was good at football BEFORE the Cardinals came to play in their stadium. The Cardinals played in ASU's stadium for most their history. They "were out of the basement" long before the NFL came to Phoenix. Since University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale opened up I've noticed a bit of an uptick in the NFL to the detriment of ASU though. I work out there a lot, but haven't lived there since 2004. I see ASU football decreasing in popularity in football over the past 10, 15 years since Jake the Snake in 96. Cheers!

Great post. My distaste for CU football made me a huge Bradlee Van Pelt fan - I lived in Colorado for most of two decades and adopted the Rams as my team.

CU can be a solid program. They don't face the hurdles that schools like Wazzu and Oregon State do in terms of relative isolation and being in states without a ton of high school talent. CU is close to a major market, they have a history of success, good fan support (although that has wavered the last few years), and Colorado is improving dramatically in its high school football talent. As it stands, most of the top talent is leaving the state. The comments about Boulder being unwelcoming to college football is silly. Boulder isn't what it was in the 1970s (unfortunately, in my opinion). It's expensive, with lots of tech workers, and a good chunk of the student body are wealthy east coast and California kids.

I'll continue to root like hell against the Buffs when they play CSU, but I would love to see CU relevant again. It makes all the sweeter when CSU knocks them off.

(09-04-2015 02:04 PM)All Rams All The Time Wrote:  Same as any other successful program:
- athletic department support
- administration support
- student support
- alumni/booster support

They've made a splash hire with the new athletic director. Don't know how effective he is at managing a department; he's a helluva fundraiser supposedly. Been investing in facilities (finally).

The jury is still out (!) on the administrative support. That whole scenario from 15 years ago (lotsa sex with recruits, slush funds, allegations of rape) still haunts the collective memory of the board of regents. New president since then, and the head of the board says all the right things...and one never gets the sense they're giving full rein to the AD. Whether provable or not, those allegations were awful for the school. Those types of activities may occur at many schools where they don't get caught, and CU has taken a beating from them.

Students seem to be into basketball more than football. CU has traditionally had passionate fans who aren't very bright in terms of sports. Their favorite chant: (Eff) em up! (Eff) em up! Go CU! About the same time of that Nebraska game you mention, the student section had to be emptied because the students disapproved of an official's call and wouldn't stop throwing things on the field. Think of that: the STUDENT section had to be emptied. Plus, imagine the average 18-22 year old kid -- when's the last time CU was kickin' butt in football? Fifteen years ago when Barnett was the coach? And look how he was run off....

Most alumni are more than 15 years out of school, and their expectations are unrealistic. They expect CU to return to 5th-down/Orange Bowl levels of success, without considering the Hawkins era (7 years of painful in-over-his-head ball), the Embree era (2 years of in-over-his-head, on-the-job training as head coach), and now the 3rd year of MacIntyre, who may be a decent coach but has inherited a mess, to put it politely. Boosters and alumni forget that Barnett had to be paid most of his existing contract...Hawkins had to be paid his existing contract...Embree had to be paid his existing contract. that's a LOT of athletic department funds appropriated for salaries of coaches no longer at the school.

I'm not crazy about the alumni of CU, and I respect the hell out of the institution. I want CU to get better -- much better -- in football. Their success is good for my school's program, and the reverse is true, tho most alumni from both schools would disagree. CU is looking at another few years of their current condition while all the players I've noted above start pulling the same direction.

One Ram's opinion.

(09-08-2015 09:17 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 08:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 08:34 PM)Section 200 Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 07:37 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-07-2015 11:05 AM)Section 200 Wrote:  I have great respect for you, put the pro sport effect is not an excuse and is 100% legit. There is no city that has an NFL team that puts its college ahead of the pro team. None.

Do you know where Tempe, Arizona is?

Yes, why?

Because by your rules, Arizona State should never have been able to get themselves out of the basement of college football like they have. Yet, they have.

first off, I lived in Phoenix for awhile like every good Iowan has. i still have "snow bird" family in Phoenix and Scottsdale. I've been to the fiesta bowl (ASU's Sun Devil stadium in Tempe) a dozen times at least.... Maybe you aren't aware, but ASU was good at football BEFORE the Cardinals came to play in their stadium. The Cardinals played in ASU's stadium for most their history. They "were out of the basement" long before the NFL came to Phoenix. Since University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale opened up I've noticed a bit of an uptick in the NFL to the detriment of ASU though. I work out there a lot, but haven't lived there since 2004. I see ASU football decreasing in popularity in football over the past 10, 15 years since Jake the Snake in 96. Cheers!

And yet the success of Sun Devil football has risen. The slow decrease of popularity that you saw was due to the decreasing quality of the Stadium. It was old and badly needed renovations, which it received and is continuing to receive.

We are talking about how Colorado could be a successful program and how being in a large market keeps it from happening. Arizona State is a perfect example of how that theory is false.

(09-08-2015 11:20 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 09:17 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 08:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 08:34 PM)Section 200 Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 07:37 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Do you know where Tempe, Arizona is?

Yes, why?

Because by your rules, Arizona State should never have been able to get themselves out of the basement of college football like they have. Yet, they have.

first off, I lived in Phoenix for awhile like every good Iowan has. i still have "snow bird" family in Phoenix and Scottsdale. I've been to the fiesta bowl (ASU's Sun Devil stadium in Tempe) a dozen times at least.... Maybe you aren't aware, but ASU was good at football BEFORE the Cardinals came to play in their stadium. The Cardinals played in ASU's stadium for most their history. They "were out of the basement" long before the NFL came to Phoenix. Since University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale opened up I've noticed a bit of an uptick in the NFL to the detriment of ASU though. I work out there a lot, but haven't lived there since 2004. I see ASU football decreasing in popularity in football over the past 10, 15 years since Jake the Snake in 96. Cheers!

And yet the success of Sun Devil football has risen. The slow decrease of popularity that you saw was due to the decreasing quality of the Stadium. It was old and badly needed renovations, which it received and is continuing to receive.

We are talking about how Colorado could be a successful program and how being in a large market keeps it from happening. Arizona State is a perfect example of how that theory is false.

What exactly has Arizona State accomplished?

(09-09-2015 01:57 AM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 11:20 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 09:17 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 08:55 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 08:34 PM)Section 200 Wrote:  Yes, why?

Because by your rules, Arizona State should never have been able to get themselves out of the basement of college football like they have. Yet, they have.

first off, I lived in Phoenix for awhile like every good Iowan has. i still have "snow bird" family in Phoenix and Scottsdale. I've been to the fiesta bowl (ASU's Sun Devil stadium in Tempe) a dozen times at least.... Maybe you aren't aware, but ASU was good at football BEFORE the Cardinals came to play in their stadium. The Cardinals played in ASU's stadium for most their history. They "were out of the basement" long before the NFL came to Phoenix. Since University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale opened up I've noticed a bit of an uptick in the NFL to the detriment of ASU though. I work out there a lot, but haven't lived there since 2004. I see ASU football decreasing in popularity in football over the past 10, 15 years since Jake the Snake in 96. Cheers!

And yet the success of Sun Devil football has risen. The slow decrease of popularity that you saw was due to the decreasing quality of the Stadium. It was old and badly needed renovations, which it received and is continuing to receive.

We are talking about how Colorado could be a successful program and how being in a large market keeps it from happening. Arizona State is a perfect example of how that theory is false.

What exactly has Arizona State accomplished?

Oh here we go. Look here troll, would you like to say that the Colorado football program and Arizona State football program are at the same point right now? You aren't even following what the thread is about are you?

I keep hearing that Illinois will go after George to become their athletic director, assume he would take it..