BOULDER, Colo. - In sports, the numbers don't lie. They don't tell the whole story either.
University of Colorado head football coach Dan Hawkins by the numbers: 4 years, 16 wins, 32 losses, 1 bowl game, 0 bowl wins, and 0 Big 12 North titles.
You think that is bad? How about this? Road record under Hawkins: 2-20.
Even his most ardent supporters can't defend those numbers.
Here is the reality, though: win or lose Friday against arch rival Nebraska, Hawkins will most likely return to coach CU next yearÂ…and here is the kicker, the decision has very little to do with football.
The bottom line in Boulder is this: wins and losses are secondary to the image of the program.
Years ago, Andre Agassi famously told us "image is everything". (Note: Obviously, except for his own image, as we have learned). But I digress.
CU's administration is much more concerned with how the school is viewed off the field by their academic peers than the performance of their football players on the field.
In some ways, this is understandable. The university went through an embarrassing ordeal in the final stages of Gary Barnett's tenure and that is the sort of stain that may never totally fade away. In regards to the football program, as long as the school stays out of the negative headlines on the front page, the very few accolades they receive on the sports page will be acceptable.
This is an admirable stance based on principle, but hard to justify to a fan that bleeds black and gold.
At certain schools, the message is simple: win at all costs. CU is not one of those schools. That "win or else" mentality is not there, and school officials are probably more than happy to admit that.
The feeling you get is that CU would rather be 6-6 every year with no problems off the field than 8-4 with a few problems, or 10-2 with a myriad of issues. This stance also deserves to be applauded because the majority of the other FCS schools would gladly deal with one headache after another if it meant 10 wins in exchange.
As skewed as that sounds, it also makes sense. After all, at most big time collegiate programs, football is the lynchpin. The gate revenue from 6 sold-out home games each season, plus parking, concessions, merchandise sales, and booster support is enough to pay for and sustain all of the schools non-revenue sports. In other words, it's an old Reaganism: Trickle Down Economics. Take care of football and subsequently football will take care of everything else in the athletic pecking order.
The major issue CU is facing here though is a severe disconnect between the administration and fans. That is a divide than can never be allowed to become too wide. Simply put: who pays to sit in the majority of those 53,613 seats every Saturday in the fall? The fans. If they are fed up, their voices deserve to be heard.
Here is what the majority are saying: Hawkins needs to go. The University response: a vote of confidence for Hawkins. Each side is entitled to their opinions but you can see where the frustration of Buffs Nation is coming from. How can a guy who has NEVER had a winning season be given a vote of confidence? At the very least, don't you just evaluate him at the end of the season? Anything less is saying that 16-32 is acceptable, at least for now. For fans of a school that lays claim to a co-national title and a Heisman trophy winner, that is hard news to stomach.
One other factor is presumably frustrating to both sides is that each will freely admit that Boulder is such a beautiful place with so much to do, that football will never be the main attraction, even on Saturdays. Hiking, biking, jogging, Pearl Street Mall -you name it there are plenty of alternatives to watching pigskin in this town.
Football is not a top-of-mind issue and, either nobody cares, or they don't care enough to change that perception. (Believe me, recruits notice that). Can you say that about Norman, Oklahoma or Austin, Texas or College Station, Texas or Lincoln, Nebraska. Yes, maybe those towns care a little too much about college football but the team's performance is the lifeblood of those communities. Random people come together to unite as one. In Boulder, the interest level sometimes seems to equal the apathy level.
Would that be different if CU was 8-3 instead of 3-8? Maybe, but if school president Phil DiStefano thinks 3 wins is worthy of a vote of confidence, how can you be upset if the fan base is disenchanted and disengaged?
Hawkins, to his immense credit, has piloted a program that has largely put Barnett's missteps in the rear view mirror, while creating very few of his own. The team GPA is solid and the graduation rate is quite impressive. Then again, that is the case at Stanford and Northwestern, and both of those teams have eight wins instead of eight losses. CU football officials also claim that rigid academic standards keep them from getting the best players. Maybe. Though, it's not tougher than at Stanford or Northwestern and both of those schools have bowl eligible teams.
The part that confuses me the most is that Hawkins seemed like the perfect fit. He is a high-energy guy who many thought would excel at recruiting and help the Buffs close the talent gap with their Big 12 opponents. That simply hasn't happened. If anything, recruiting has suffered and their most high profile player, Darrell Scott, has already transferred. Coach "Hawk" was thought to be an innovative and "out-of-the-box" hire that would fit well in an eclectic place such as Boulder. That hasn't been the case.
To me, his biggest mistake has been at the one place he has always thrived: in front of the microphone. The day he was hired, he had this zinger for the jam-packed room at the Dal Ward Center. He explained his theory of bringing "Hawk Love" to the football program. When asked what "Hawk Love" was, he responded by saying "ask my wife." The crowd let out a hearty laugh and the future seemed bright.
However, his media responses now are neither funny nor engaging. If anything, they are shortsighted and misleading. As the team was suffering one humiliating defeat after another, instead of taking accountability, Hawkins kept saying his team was on the verge of turning it around. In fact, four days before playing Missouri, Hawkins raised his hand and displayed the smallest of space between his index finger and thumb and said of his team's revival: "we are that close", indicating they were on the verge of a breakthrough. Four days later, they trailed Missouri by 30 pointsÂ…at halftime.
To me, despite all of the negativity, he deserves one more year. His recruits have not panned out but he finally seems to have a quarterback he can rely on. Tyler Hansen has played inspired football but probably couldn't start for any other team in the conference. However, stability at quarterback is vital, especially in this league and they need to see if a full season of him under center can make the difference. If not, then even Hawkins may have to admit that it is just not meant to be for him Boulder.
If he fails, it will be all the more disappointing because the Big 12 North has been mediocre his entire tenure and winning the division is markedly easier than emerging from the Big 12 South. Another missed opportunity.
Maybe he should have never left his old school to come here.
Hey, how is Boise State doing anyway?
University of Colorado head football coach Dan Hawkins by the numbers: 4 years, 16 wins, 32 losses, 1 bowl game, 0 bowl wins, and 0 Big 12 North titles.
You think that is bad? How about this? Road record under Hawkins: 2-20.
Even his most ardent supporters can't defend those numbers.
Here is the reality, though: win or lose Friday against arch rival Nebraska, Hawkins will most likely return to coach CU next yearÂ…and here is the kicker, the decision has very little to do with football.
The bottom line in Boulder is this: wins and losses are secondary to the image of the program.
Years ago, Andre Agassi famously told us "image is everything". (Note: Obviously, except for his own image, as we have learned). But I digress.
CU's administration is much more concerned with how the school is viewed off the field by their academic peers than the performance of their football players on the field.
In some ways, this is understandable. The university went through an embarrassing ordeal in the final stages of Gary Barnett's tenure and that is the sort of stain that may never totally fade away. In regards to the football program, as long as the school stays out of the negative headlines on the front page, the very few accolades they receive on the sports page will be acceptable.
This is an admirable stance based on principle, but hard to justify to a fan that bleeds black and gold.
At certain schools, the message is simple: win at all costs. CU is not one of those schools. That "win or else" mentality is not there, and school officials are probably more than happy to admit that.
The feeling you get is that CU would rather be 6-6 every year with no problems off the field than 8-4 with a few problems, or 10-2 with a myriad of issues. This stance also deserves to be applauded because the majority of the other FCS schools would gladly deal with one headache after another if it meant 10 wins in exchange.
As skewed as that sounds, it also makes sense. After all, at most big time collegiate programs, football is the lynchpin. The gate revenue from 6 sold-out home games each season, plus parking, concessions, merchandise sales, and booster support is enough to pay for and sustain all of the schools non-revenue sports. In other words, it's an old Reaganism: Trickle Down Economics. Take care of football and subsequently football will take care of everything else in the athletic pecking order.
The major issue CU is facing here though is a severe disconnect between the administration and fans. That is a divide than can never be allowed to become too wide. Simply put: who pays to sit in the majority of those 53,613 seats every Saturday in the fall? The fans. If they are fed up, their voices deserve to be heard.
Here is what the majority are saying: Hawkins needs to go. The University response: a vote of confidence for Hawkins. Each side is entitled to their opinions but you can see where the frustration of Buffs Nation is coming from. How can a guy who has NEVER had a winning season be given a vote of confidence? At the very least, don't you just evaluate him at the end of the season? Anything less is saying that 16-32 is acceptable, at least for now. For fans of a school that lays claim to a co-national title and a Heisman trophy winner, that is hard news to stomach.
One other factor is presumably frustrating to both sides is that each will freely admit that Boulder is such a beautiful place with so much to do, that football will never be the main attraction, even on Saturdays. Hiking, biking, jogging, Pearl Street Mall -you name it there are plenty of alternatives to watching pigskin in this town.
Football is not a top-of-mind issue and, either nobody cares, or they don't care enough to change that perception. (Believe me, recruits notice that). Can you say that about Norman, Oklahoma or Austin, Texas or College Station, Texas or Lincoln, Nebraska. Yes, maybe those towns care a little too much about college football but the team's performance is the lifeblood of those communities. Random people come together to unite as one. In Boulder, the interest level sometimes seems to equal the apathy level.
Would that be different if CU was 8-3 instead of 3-8? Maybe, but if school president Phil DiStefano thinks 3 wins is worthy of a vote of confidence, how can you be upset if the fan base is disenchanted and disengaged?
Hawkins, to his immense credit, has piloted a program that has largely put Barnett's missteps in the rear view mirror, while creating very few of his own. The team GPA is solid and the graduation rate is quite impressive. Then again, that is the case at Stanford and Northwestern, and both of those teams have eight wins instead of eight losses. CU football officials also claim that rigid academic standards keep them from getting the best players. Maybe. Though, it's not tougher than at Stanford or Northwestern and both of those schools have bowl eligible teams.
The part that confuses me the most is that Hawkins seemed like the perfect fit. He is a high-energy guy who many thought would excel at recruiting and help the Buffs close the talent gap with their Big 12 opponents. That simply hasn't happened. If anything, recruiting has suffered and their most high profile player, Darrell Scott, has already transferred. Coach "Hawk" was thought to be an innovative and "out-of-the-box" hire that would fit well in an eclectic place such as Boulder. That hasn't been the case.
To me, his biggest mistake has been at the one place he has always thrived: in front of the microphone. The day he was hired, he had this zinger for the jam-packed room at the Dal Ward Center. He explained his theory of bringing "Hawk Love" to the football program. When asked what "Hawk Love" was, he responded by saying "ask my wife." The crowd let out a hearty laugh and the future seemed bright.
However, his media responses now are neither funny nor engaging. If anything, they are shortsighted and misleading. As the team was suffering one humiliating defeat after another, instead of taking accountability, Hawkins kept saying his team was on the verge of turning it around. In fact, four days before playing Missouri, Hawkins raised his hand and displayed the smallest of space between his index finger and thumb and said of his team's revival: "we are that close", indicating they were on the verge of a breakthrough. Four days later, they trailed Missouri by 30 pointsÂ…at halftime.
To me, despite all of the negativity, he deserves one more year. His recruits have not panned out but he finally seems to have a quarterback he can rely on. Tyler Hansen has played inspired football but probably couldn't start for any other team in the conference. However, stability at quarterback is vital, especially in this league and they need to see if a full season of him under center can make the difference. If not, then even Hawkins may have to admit that it is just not meant to be for him Boulder.
If he fails, it will be all the more disappointing because the Big 12 North has been mediocre his entire tenure and winning the division is markedly easier than emerging from the Big 12 South. Another missed opportunity.
Maybe he should have never left his old school to come here.
Hey, how is Boise State doing anyway?
