ItSucksToBeACSURam wrote: ↑Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:52 am
Expat_Poke wrote: ↑Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:31 am
ItSucksToBeACSURam wrote: ↑Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:14 am
Expat_Poke wrote: ↑Mon Jan 13, 2020 11:10 am
bullbugle307 wrote: ↑Mon Jan 13, 2020 12:09 am
ragtimejoe1 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 12, 2020 10:14 am
Since his initial discussions about stepping down were in Dec, is there any documentation that it was because an AD was forcing his hand on coordinators or are Vigen fanboys running with internet rumors?
BoHl eQuALs vIgEN. VigEN iS GrEAt cAUsE hE rUnS BoHLs OFfenSe aNd bOhL iS tHe OnLy cOaCh wHo cAn wiN heRe. ThErEs nO wAY AnOthEr CoOrdiNaToR wOuLD HeLp OUr tERRibLE OffEnSe AnD iF wE TeLL bOhL hE hAs to gO bOhL wiLL bE SAD aNd rEtiRE LiKe LoNg wHo dEfiNeTeLy rEtiReD bECaUse oF tHaT aNd nOt bEcAuSe hEs 70 yeArS oLd. iF wE TeLL BoHl ViGeN haS tO gO WeLL nEvEr bE GooD eVeR aGaiN.
God it's hard to type like that. I don't know how lax does it so often
I'm only kidding around to those who feel like telling Bohl Vigen needs to put a decent offense on the field or pack his bags is gonna make Bohl leave. It's obvious he hasn't performed, and it's also obvious Bohl is never gonna make a change with Vigen no matter how bad our
offense is at putting points on the board and passing efficiency. As long as we look good statistically at running we can brag and beat our chest about our hard nosed culture and Vigens not going anywhere no matter how bad we are at beating good teams and actually putting points on the board and sustaining drives.
I think its likely Long retired for a number of reasons, age being at the top of the list. He and Bohl may both be too stubborn to hear that their offenses suck and staff changes are needed for them to stop holding their respective teams back from greater successes. Perhaps Bohl and Long would leave if the AD tried to force them to make a change. Maybe their stubbornness and inability to make changes in order to have a successful offense when teams can force you to have a passing game is why both have been unable to win championships at the rate Boise State has. But what do I know, I'm just some dude who thinks I could coach little league and that we could be much better with a different coordinator given that the vast majority of teams are more successful on offense than us, even the ones that have challenges similar to ours.
2019 offense points per game 25.8 pts/game which was good for 80th in the nation. Definitely room for improvement. Yet lets take a closer look, at yards per point Wyoming ranked 49th in the nation. Bohl likes to run the clock and limit number of possessions. What this means is if you look at total yards or points, our offense is going to look mediocre to awful, but you look at other parameters that matter more than yards (ultimately it is score more points then you give up), our offense while definite room for improvement is not unfixably bad. Unfortunately while I could find points per play (don't care as it is weighted to favor big pass plays vs chewing up the opposing offense on consistent but smaller runs) I could not find points per possession. That statistic is what you really need to compare offenses, the closest I could find is yards per point but even that has some flaws.
I will get a points/game and a yards per point for coaches tonight after work. At a quick glance though Bohl is looking better than DC.
Yeah I want to see improvement on the offense, but Vigen has shown he can run a top 30 offense in points per game and yards per point (2016 Wyoming was 26th and 16th respectively). We saw improvement in offensive production from 2018 to 2019, and I bet we will see further improvement going into 2020. Like I said elsewhere, I think Bohl is a good coach, and would blow any of us out of the water coaching a pee-wee team, and I think 2020 will give us a good idea as to future of the Wyoming program for better or worse.
A. If Vigen and Bohl's philosophy is ball control and limiting possessions, how many games this season did we win the time of possession AND the total plays run? I bet its less than 50%. I have no idea but that is my suspicion.
B. Vigen has shown, with a team of 8+ NFL talents, he can run an offense potent enough to play in a championship game and to get to a bowl game just to get handled by BYU. I guess thats a kudos to him. Does anyone TRULY believe the success that season was more of Vigens scheme/planning or because of the numerous NFL players on that roster? Maybe both, I dont know. If it is a combo of both, is wise to hang our hats on a scheme that requires team full of NFL players? Is that sustainable?
Well as for your first question Wyoming won the most important category 8 out of 5 times and was two missed field goals within 39 yards of making that 10 of 3 times. Wyoming has had four stretches of 4 years or more of 0.500 or better seasons that is 1901-1904, 1949-1969, 1993-1999, and 2016-2019. Bohl has given us the third (The 1901-1904 includes a couple of 1-0 type seasons so not counting that) most sustainable stretch of Wyoming winning seasons ever.
What? 8 out of 5 and 10 of 3? Huh? What do missing 2 field goals have to do with Time of Posession and Plays Run?
And I dont think anyone unhappy with Vigen is ignoring the success Bohl has had. Its been great. What drives us nuts is that it could be SO MUCH BETTER. With Top 90 offense this season we'd have won 10 games if not 11. That should not be ignored because the team has been at or above .500 4 years in a row. Thats great, but it can be (and should) be so much better.
I don't think your statement is correct that with a top 90 offense we would have 10 wins. It should be "With a top 90 offense...
and no drop-off in any other category..". It's not obvious that you can change things like offensive style/pace/philosophy without also impacting the results on the other side of the ball...in fact...it stands to reason that the more times you expose your defense, no matter how good it is, the numbers will worsen.
Just do a thought experiment...Lets say that Wyoming allowed opponents to score on X% of their possessions where "N" is the number of opponents possessions. If "N" increases..X will increase as well....Defensive stats will have to diminish over a whole season. Now...I don't have the answer (and this is a super low-resolution way to view this) but I'm sure that expecting changes in offensive style/pace/philosophy to have no impact on defensive results is a non-starter.
Also...there is a sort of zero-sum game that college coaches have to play when it comes to spending developmental and prep time with their team. There are literal limits to practice time, not to mention attention spans of 18-23 year old men. Maybe a coach could put a focus on an aspect of the game that is deficient and improve it...but whose to say that is the best use of their focus? What if the cost in the areas that were above average is too great?
These are just general observations/thoughts....and incomplete at that.
Here is what i'm sure of:
- Wyoming's offense must improve to get to the "next level"
This improvement will almost assuredly come at some cost to defensive level
The trick is to maximize offensive improvement and minimize defensive drop off.
Bullbugele307...love your statistical analysis...keep it up. One stat I would love to see is percent positive offensive plays where a positive play is defined as having gained 50% of the necessary yards to gain on 1st down, 70% of the yards to gain on second down, and 100% of the yards to gain on 3/4th downs. I would imagine Wyoming would be average at best (or just bad) in this stat.