I know that Colorado is a historical rival. I've never had a hate for them, although I think their fans are up there with Wisconsin and Missouri as some of the worst.
The Colorado AD had a dumpster fire on his hands with his football team. He made a choice to gamble a little bit.
However, his investment is a paltry $30M over 5 years. So if the gamble doesn't pay off its pretty easy to get out of. Already, the decision has brought a lot of national media attention and exposure to the program.
Compare this to the choice Alberts made. He's guaranteeing $74M for a coach that hasn't brought much national media attention or excitement to the program. Watching game 1, you could even argue that the team has taken a step back since how it finished the season against Iowa.
Regardless how the game against TCU ends up, it's hard to look at the athletes on the field and them going toe-to-toe with a ranked team and say, "good thing we don't have that here". Momentum breeds success.
How possible is it next week we lose against a coach with almost 2/5 the salary we are paying?
Remember, Sanders inherited a program in far worse shape than ours was. This was a Colorado team that got beat 49-7 by Minnesota. Yet, if they surpass Rhule in year 1 what does that say for Albert's decision? Are Husker fans willing to play "the long game" and wait for that "magical year 3" that may not even occur if we can't generate any excitement to recruit with?