Tag: CU Buffs

Academic Arrogance – Take II

horvath Leave a comment

In 2010, the University of Colorado made a business decision to leave the Big 12 Athletic Conference and accept an invitation to join the PAC-12, a move that became official in July 2011. At the time, even the sharpest critics of CU Athletics expressed limited opposition to the move.

In their inaugural PAC-12 season the Buff athletes held their own on and off the field. In light of comments made by CU’s top brass last fall, it is fair to raise the question, “Have the CU administrators delivered the goods on the academic side?”

When CU and Nebraska jumped ship in 2010, other schools entered discussions about joining or starting new conferences. Those discussions included bringing other Big 12 schools into the PAC-12 and making it the PAC-16.

The Denver Post published an article, “CU President Leery of PAC-12 Adding More Teams”. The article stated…

University of Colorado president Bruce Benson said this morning he is wary of further Pac-12 expansion, particularly if Colorado is placed in an “East” division with former rivals from the Big 12 such as Oklahoma and Texas.

The real issue is money. Many Buff fans (and administrators) were tired of losing to the Sooners and Longhorns. The Buffs were in the same athletic conference as these schools, but they are in a much different league when it comes to funding athletics.

The same holds true on the academic side. What has CU done to improve the financial status of the university other than demand double digit tuition increases and beg for greater funding from the state legislature? Have they reduced academic programs that are not financially viable? Have they forced schools and colleges to become financially responsible? What is CU doing to produce better academic programs in a more efficient manner?

Later in the article Benson added…
“One of the reasons – and there are a lot of reasons – we got in the Pac 12 is to play regularly on the West Coast,” Benson said. “When I hear things like East-West divisions, we’re going back to the Big 12 again. I don’t know who’s possibly going, but I sure don’t want to get shorted out of the West Coast.”

Benson is a sharp businessman and knows that CU has many wealthy alumni on the West Coast. Hopefully, they will feel a closer tie to CU because of the PAC-12 football and basketball games played in their backyard. Benson in counting on that presence to increase support and donations for the university.

How much additional funding from donors can be attributed to the Buffs being in the PAC-12? How many new partnerships with the private sector have been developed? How many new patents have resulted from the Buffs being in the PAC-12?

The Post article went on to say..
Benson and DiStefano always maintained a major reason for CU joining the Pac-12 was that the schools matched Colorado’s academic mission. While Oklahoma and Texas are on a par with CU academically, Texas Tech and Oklahoma State may not be. “I believe that we should have a robust academic atmosphere among all schools in the league,” Benson said. “What schools have cinch courses or gut courses? We don’t have any and never will. The Pac-12 doesn’t. Some Big 12 schools do.”

At best, Benson’s comments were arrogant.

His comments were made at a time when CU was ranked as the #1 party school in the U.S. by Playboy Magazine. In December 2011 CU received further “honors” by being named the druggiest college in the U.S. In 2012, rankings for Businessweek showed that the Leeds School of Business was ranked 92 out of 124 schools. The Leeds School was ranked in the bottom quadrant for its core business classes. The rankings showed that CU finished ahead of former Big 12 schools Kansas State, Kansas, and Nebraska and ahead of PAC-12 schools Oregon and Utah. (Note: 16 schools from the two conferences received ratings and 7 did not. The group of 7 schools without rankings included colleges that would be ranked above and below CU). In other words, the Leeds School is an academic bottom feeder.

In some areas it is debatable whether CU is worthy of being in the PAC-12 from an academic perspective.

It is time for the CU administration to put their money where their mouth is. It seems appropriate for Benson and DiStefano to revisit their comments of a year ago about “robust academic environments”, “cinch courses”, and “joining a conference that matches CU’s academic mission”.

What has CU done during the past year to benefit from being in the PAC 12? A fact-filled evaluation, sans the spin, would help increase the credibility of the CU system.

From an athletic perspective, the move to the PAC-12 has been a positive move for the Buffs… It is easy to measure their performance on the field, in the classroom, and in fund raising. Have facilities been improved? Have current teams received better support? Have new programs been added? Have existing initiatives been support (Read with the Buffs, Green Stampede-Zero Waste, etc.)

A similar evaluation should be made for academics. Over the past year have Benson and DiStefano taken steps to deliver the goods? How many cinch courses have they eliminated? What have they done to provide CU with a more robust academic environment? What have they done to ensure that CU meets the academic standards of the conference? The list goes on.

From an athletic perspective, has Mike Bohn’s department delivered the goods?

From an academic perspective, have Benson and DiStefano provided leadership to support the arrogance demonstrated a year ago?

 

Incentives for the Coach

horvath Leave a comment

It’s a bummer to hear that Coach Tad Boyle’s salary for taking the Buffs to the Big Dance this past season was only $165,830. That is only three times as much as the average for Colorado wage earner, but it is a pittance compared to coaches at the country’s top programs.

After his first season at CU, Boyle was recruited to coach elsewhere, but declined to stay at CU – for a meager salary of $165,000. There is more to the story – his total compensation package includes incentives.

According to the Daily Camera (March 15, 2012) there are six people on the Boulder campus who have multi-year contracts. Tad Boyle is one of the six.

The Board of Regents has directed campus officials to structure these six contracts in a manner that focuses on incentives, rather than large salaries. This is similar to salesmen who are paid commissions or executives who receive other types of performance incentives. In other words, the coach gets a cut of incremental revenue he/she is able to generate for the school. When viewed from that perspective, most will find the concept of his total compensation package to be more palatable.

The breakdown of Boyle’s salary follows:
Base – $165,830
Public relations – $180,000
Fundraising – $96,000
Sponsorship support – $108,000
Summer camps – $35,000
Country club – $6,480
Academic performance incentive – $34,000 in 2012 ($68,000 other years)
Welfare and development incentive – $33,000 in 2012 ($66,000 other years)
Outreach and reputation incentive – $33,000 in 2012 ($66,000 in other years).
The total package is worth $691,310.
This is a lot more than $165,000, but still well below the total for coaches at other major programs.

The breakdown of Boyle’s incentives follows:
15 regular season wins – $30,000
17 regular season wins – $20,000
19 regular season wins – $30,000
Pac-12 tournament semifinals – $75,000
Pac-12 tournament win – $30,000
NCAA tournament appearance $105,000.
These incentives, totaling $290,000, were earned by Boyle this past season.

Other incentives that were available included:
NCAA second round appearance – $30,000
NCAA third round appearance – $30,000
NCAA fourth round appearance – $30,000
Final four appearance – $105,000
National championship – $750,000.

A lackluster season, with 15 wins, will result in a $2,000 bonus per game won. If two additional games can be won, or 17 wins, then $10,000 is awarded for each of those two wins. The value of a game won in the Big Dance is $30,000 per game.

If you were the coach, how would you deal with the pressure of coaching a game that included a $2,000 bonus if you won? $10,000 for each game won? $30,000 for each game won? or $750,000 to win the national championships?

By offering incentives, colleges are able to contain and manage their costs. At the same time, the likelihood of transgressions is much greater when results are tied too closely to incentives. For additional information take a look at USA Today. They typically prepare a database of coach’s salaries and incentives in conjunction with March Madness.

 

Ralphie Violated Again – This Time by Campus Units

horvath Leave a comment

“I truly think Ralphie belongs to academics as much as it does sports.” – quote from a Daily Camera Facebook fan who commented about an article discussing Ralphie’s use and misuse.

On February 12 the headlines of the Daily Camera Local section read, “CU corrals use of the Ralphie logo” – Tightening reins on mascot’s image is a result of branding campaign.

Over the past 9 months the Camera has documented efforts by the athletic department to control use of the Ralphie. Mike Bohn and company have been portrayed in a positive light, as they tried to work with local business leaders to educate and better manage use of the university’s most beloved marketing logo.

Past articles have featured discussions about local businesses which either used or misused Ralphie for promotional purposes. The most recent violators include on-campus units such as food services in the UMC whose employees wore uniform/t-shirts with Ralphie on them. For years, the Leeds School of Business which has had a two-foot Ralphie plastered on the wall in the lobby of the dean’s suites.

Branding is a serious matter. CU fans of all types like Ralphie because the logo is unique and it represents the positive things about CU. It is a feel good logo.

Cynics are quick to point out that the interlocking CU may be elegant, but it represents perceptions of CU that are not necessarily positive. For example, CU stands for Cornhuskerhater U – and obnoxious football fans, Cannabis U – and the infamous 4/21 on-campus celebrations, Churchill U – and Ward Churchill’s contribution to the school’s image, Coors U – for the beerless sporting events held in the Coors Events Center, or Controversy U – for the ongoing challenges that keep the state’s flagship university in the headlines. Branding is important.

Prior to February 12, the athletic department was the designated “Ralphie enforcer.” The article suggests that they aren’t the villains. In fact, nobody in the CU system is the bad guy. Instead, the blame for the crackdown is a much needed $780,000 branding and awareness campaign.

In the article, Regent Stephen Ludwig, D-Lone Tree pointed out that the enforcement has been heightened for financial and communication reasons. He stated, “The enforcement may seem Draconian, but we are a $2.8 billion enterprise that has invested a lot of time and money in getting our branding straight so that we can communicate with one voice.”

And another reason for the crackdown is money.

The article also quoted CU officials who clarified that Ralphie can only be used for sports and competition, such as political campaigns for the regents. One regent indicated that he had used the logo in his campaign because it is a great logo that people recognize. Another regent indicated that she avoided using Ralphie in her campaign because it represents athletics only at the Boulder campus and the regents serve multiple systems.

For many, the branding discussion is contentious and it raises a series of questions.

• Do the CU regents have their priorities straight when their discussions are focused on whether food service employees in Boulder should be wearing Ralphie t-shirts?
• Are the “Ralphie enforcers” being Draconian by enforcing the tactics outlined in their branding campaign?
• Is the $2.8 billion enterprise more focused on $$ generated from Ralphie than they are in making the state’s flagship university stronger and more relevant?
• How can the regents justify using Ralphie in their election campaigns?
• What is the first thing that comes to mind when Colorado residents are asked to think about when you mention CU – Ward Churchill, party school, corn huskers, academics, or Ralphie?

Like it or not, branding is a serious matter – for Google, the Bubba Gump’s restaurant chain, and CU – and that includes Ralphie.

These are YOUR Colorado Buffs, but be careful what you do with Ralphie.

Go Buffs!

 

Newcomers Finish As Expected in First PAC-12 Season

horvath Leave a comment

The inaugural PAC-12 athletic season has come to a close and Colorado and Utah finished as expected. With the exception of cross country, the newcomers showed that they can compete in the conference, but that they are not yet serious contenders for the top spots in the league.

In the ever-important sport of football, Utah finished third in the South Division with a 4-5 record. The Buffs ended at the bottom of the pack with 2 wins and 7 losses. The conference will be well represented in the upcoming BCS Bowl Series.

On the volleyball court CU compiled a spirited 1-21 record, while Utah finished 9th with 6 wins and 15 losses in conference play. UCLA won the national championship, defeating Illinois 3-1 in four closely fought sets. Illinois squeaked by USC in the semifinals 3-2. Arguably, the PAC-12 is the toughest volleyball conference in the country which will present challenges for the newcomers in 2012. In December, Tom Hogan, CU assistant coach and former USOC coach, announced that he will be leaving the Buff program.

Utah finished a respectable 5th place with a 6-5 record in women’s soccer, while Colorado was 1-9-1. CU’s only win of the season came in conference play. Stanford won the National Championship in women’s soccer. In November, Coach Bill Hempen ended his successful 11-year tenure at CU.

The one bright spot for the Buffs was cross country. To nobody’s surprise, Colorado swept both the men’s and women’s PAC-12 events. At the NCAAs, Arizona’s Lawi Lalang won the Men’s individual title. The PAC-12 had finishers in the second, sixth and 8th position. Buff Richard Medina finished 8th. On the women’s side, PAC-12 Champion CU finished third overall.

For further information on the PAC-12, click here.

 

What About Academic Performance Incentives?

horvath Leave a comment

Kyle Ringo, sports writer for the Boulder Daily Camera, recently wrote an intriguing editorial on the local football scene, “McElwain Deal Could Pave Way for Raise for Embree” (December 14, 2011).

A short replay for those not familiar with the situation…

Jon Embree was hired to rebuild the University of Colorado football program at an annual salary of $725,000, plus on-field incentives. This is the lowest salary in the PAC-12. Embree bleeds Black and Gold and is well qualified despite his lack of experience as a head coach. He has surrounded himself with a qualified team of assistant coaches and has rekindled enthusiasm for the sport, CU Athletics, the university, and fundraising efforts.

Jim McElwain was recently hired to coach the Colorado State Rams, a school that was successful in a weak conference under Sonny Lubick. McElwain will be paid $1.3 million to try to put CSU back on the football map.

Now for the intriguing part of Ringo’s editorial…
McElwain has a $200,000 incentive in his contract related to his players’ academic performance.

The focus of the editorial was $$ and it did not address the specifics of McElwain’s academic performance incentive nor did it look at some of the questions surrounding the concept. Some questions that might be posed are presented below.
• Participation on a D1 athletic team is time consuming. As a result, athletes have access to tutors and in some cases are required to use them. Given that level of support is it is appropriate for an academic incentive to be offered?
• Most special groups, including athletic teams, include students who perform above the average in the classroom. If that is the case, then why is an academic performance incentive necessary?
• Are academic performance incentives based on a student’s improvement or his grades? This question is relevant because some athletics lack strong academic backgrounds for socioeconomic or other reasons.
• Former CU basketball Coach Jeff Bzdelik stated publicly it was difficult to produce a quality basketball team at CU given the universities high academic standards. f this is the case, how do you establish an appropriate academic standard for football and basketball?
• Would an academic performance incentive require students to perform at a certain level in meaningful classes that develop knowledge and skills that will allow the student-athletes to get a job when they graduate?
• How many coaches in Colorado’s colleges and universities have a clause in their contract that awards them for their students’ performance in the classroom?
• Does Embree have a academic incentive for the classroom performance of his players? If not, then why? If so, then why wasn’t it discussed in Ringo’s article?
• Do physics or accounting professors have similar performance  incentives for their students? This is a rhetorical question. Grade inflation has become so rampant in some universities, CU included, that policies have been set in certain disciplines, such as the Leeds School, that establish quotas that limit the number of A’s and B’s in a class.
• Is an academic performance incentive meaningful, or is it just a clause placed in the contract to pacify the “jock-haters.”

Both athletics and academics are important to our colleges and universities. It is truly an interesting challenge to find a balance between the two.

 

Stay Focused on the Present

horvath Leave a comment

The University of Colorado Women’s Volleyball team completed its inaugural season in the PAC-12 with a 1-21 record. On November 18, the Buffs captured their only conference win in a thriller against Washington State 3-2. Despite their dismal win-loss record, the team improved in key areas – teamwork, court coverage, spirit, and a more balanced offense. As well, many of the players elevated their skills.

With that in mind I asked Assistant Coach Tom Hogan, what he did to keep the spirits of the players up during the extended winless drought and how he raised the performance of the team despite their record. His answer was simple, “We worked hard in practices and matches to stay focused on the present. When you focus on the past or the future, your performance drops off. That is what we did and we were able to do it better than in years past.” It is important to note the emphasis on the words, “worked hard.”

These words of wisdom apply to any sport. For example, when a tennis player enters a tournament he/she should stay focused on the match at hand, rather than thinking about who they might play in the second or third round of the tournament. They should concentrate on the things they can control, such as how hard they try, proper hydration, staying focused on the present, and what they must do to maximize their performance. At the same time they must disregard the factors they cannot control, such as the weather, temperature, bad line calls, or crowd distractions.

As illustrated by Coach Hogan’s comments, the basics of sport are simple. As anyone who has coached or played a sport can testify, consistent execution during good times and bad is the challenge.

 

Fans Rush the FIeld After First Conference Win

horvath Leave a comment

The University of Colorado’s entrance into the Pac 12 has seen its share of bumps and bruises. The soccer coach has resigned. The volleyball team fought hard, but lost 19 straight conference matches.

The football team was outscored 154 to 79 in its first four conference games, before upsetting Arizona 48-29 in game five.

It is hard to tell if the season was harder on the team or the fans, who were excited to celebrate any good turn of events.

After winning the Arizona game, Buff fans rushed the field after the game (much as they did 20ish years ago when they qualified to play in the Orange Bowl for the national championship).

Afterwards, the Daily Camera (11/14) interviewed a student whose response to the fans’ celebratory mood was, “Oh, how embarrassing.”

Perspective is everything.

Club Volleyball Tryouts – Read the Play, Move Your Feet, Communicate

horvath Leave a comment

Most club volleyball tryouts are nerve wracking.

They involve playing in a different gym, seeing new coaches armed with clipboards and pens
ready to make notes, and long lines of nervous girls anxiously attempting to impress the other players and coaches with their abilities. Many players and their parents enter such an event believing that the way to make a good mark is to have good skills such as a great serve, good hands, and a hard spike.

While these skills are important, coaches have different philosophies and may have different criteria for their clubs’ tryouts. Some coaches measure sport specific skills, such as passing, setting, or serving. Other coaches will evaluate general athletic skills such as jumping, leaping, speed, strength, or agility.

Tom Hogan, a coach in the CU Women’s Volleyball program and former USOC assistant coach, told a group of players at a TCA Volleyball Club tryout in Boulder that standout athletes possess the following qualities:
• They read the play and they react to the ball, even when it is not coming directly to them.
• They move their feet and get to the ball.
• They communicate on the court – they get along with their teammates and support them; they talk when they are going for the ball; they have a positive presence on the court. While Hogan’s list was specific to volleyball, it applies to most other sports.

Very few of the players and their parents would have populated their tryout list with these qualities. In other words, a high-caliber coach has a different perspective on the sport and what makes a quality player. This is something for parents and players to keep in mind as the club season progresses.

 

Enough is Enough – Jon Embree

horvath Leave a comment

Washington State 31 University of Colorado 27!

The Buffs gagged! They choked! They stunk it up at the end of the game and Washington State took advantage of the opportunity provided them. That is why you play the game.

On October 5, 2011 the Daily Camera summarized Head Coach Embree’s locker room speech to his players after the loss. He is quoted as saying, “I asked them: ‘When is it going to be enough? When is enough, enough? You put in all of this work, you do all of this stuff that you have done from spring ball to training camp for this? This is what we did the work for?’

“Embree said, “So when is it enough? When are they going to get tired of losing? When are they going to get tired of finding a way to lose?”

“Because you know what? This staff, we’ve been here for five weeks, and I’m tired of it. So if you’ve been here for five years, you’ve got to be tired of it too.”

So was the coach wrong for being so frank about their performance? Will his words be immortalized in a movie?

Can you coach players with losing habits to develop winning habits overnight?

Is it possible that parents have been more blunt with their own children when they don’t practice their piano before their lessons?

Were his comments any more harsh than what a father would say to his daughter who came in two hours after curfew with her shirt on backwards?

Has society become so “politically correct” that such harsh words cannot be spoken?

Will someone step forward in the future claim that the coaches words caused d him psychological damage?

Should the Buffs have joined hands with WSU after the game and sang Kumbaya?

Will the coach’s words ultimately motivate the players to perform better? Or will his tough love cause some of the players to quit the team?

Wasn’t it more repulsive to hear Denver Bronco Head Coach, Josh McDaniels, swearing at his team during the NFL Network’s 2009 Thanksgiving night broadcast?

College sports is a form of entertainment. Lots of money is at stake for Embree and his staff and for the competing universities.

Enough is enough!

 

Golly Gee Whiz

horvath Leave a comment

Ohio State University president (and former CU president), Gordon Gee was criticized for comments he made about the teams from the Big Ten and SEC. Gee stated that these schools deserve to play in the BCS bowl games more than schools such as TCU because they play a ‘murderer’s row’ of opponents and we do not play the Little Sisters of the Poor.

The December 3, 2010 issue of the Daily Camera quoted Gee as reporting to the criticism by saying, “What do I know about college football? I look like Orville Redenbacher. I have no business talking about college football.”

At least Gee has a sense of humor.

Has Gee, forgotten that over the past 15 years college and university presidents have taken greater control over the NCAA?

At least he didn’t belittle the academic programs of the schools that play the Little Sisters of the Poor (as was done by University of Colorado President Bruce Benson).

Golly Gee whiz.