Who are we? Where are we heading?

Everything Wyoming Cowboy and Mountain West football!
307bball
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2251
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 12:08 pm
Has liked: 12 times
Been liked: 60 times

ragtimejoe1 wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 8:22 am
307bball wrote: Thu Feb 25, 2021 8:00 pm
ragtimejoe1 wrote: Thu Feb 25, 2021 4:13 pm
OrediggerPoke wrote: Wed Feb 24, 2021 8:02 pm I agree with 307bball on this one. The coach has relatively little to do with strength of schedule. You can only beat who you are scheduled to play. Bohl won more games over the past few than Glenn did so Bohl gets the nod.
For sure. Hopefully suds, bsu, and maybe nv leave. That should really improve the WYO team. Heck, even dropping to FCS should get us a bunch of wins over a few years at least.

If you get more bottom teams and you beat more bottom teams, definitely a good indicator of how far a program has come.
Straw man much? Is anybody voicing this opinion?

Open call for anybody that has the opinion that it is a good thing for wyoming if the conference that Wyoming plays in to get weaker. What? Nobody has that opinion? Sssssshhhhhocking.
If SOS is irrelevant, then logic dictates the fastest way to the top is try to weaken SOS as much as possible. We can drastically strengthen our program by seeking the easiest possible path to Ws.

Of course, the other angle is that SOS does matter when considering where a program is at. Glenn faced 3 automatic (or nearly) conference losses + usually at least 1 OOC auto (or nearly). Bohl faces 1 conference auto loss (or nearly). If Bohl faced bsu 3 times in a season, most years that would be at minimum 2 losses and likely 3. That leaves 5 games he has a chance to win. Based on his results, we can reasonably expect 2-3 wins of 5. Good years would be 4 conference wins and bad years probably somewhere around 1; sounds familiar. Before anyone starts, Bohl's teams couldn't compete with TCU, Utah, and most byu teams; at minimum, he loses 2 of those games every year (he's only beat bsu once).

Again, I like Bohl and I don't think we can do a lot better. HOWEVER, the GREATLY weakened MWC has inflated the w/l record relative to previous coaches and he isn't nearly as handicapped with respect to budgets and facilities.

If he gets an offense that is at least middle of CFB, then I think the program will be set. Until he shows he can consistently field an effective offense (not air raid; just effective), I don't think he's demonstrated much beyond what our past coaches have. The w/l record is more a function of a weaker schedule. I'm in full support of Bohl and believe he'll get the offense fixed.
SoS is not irrelavant...nobody is saying that.

Joe Glenn's last 21 losses:
Took 35 games
Avg differential: -20.4
number of losses by 23 or more: 9

Craig Bohl's last 21 losses:
Took 45 Games
Avg differential: -11.2
number of losses by 23 or more: 3

The numbers I picked are pretty arbitrary but as long as you consider at least 10 losses, the pattern will still emerge. I don't believe that pattern is only explained by JG having to play TCU, BYU, and Utah every year. Look...these comparisons will ultimately have a big "eye test" factor in them. The only statement I would make that seems completely uncontroversial is this:

Relative to their opponents, Craig Bohl's performance is better than Joe Glenn's.

My opinion is that this is the primary reason why Bohl has been extended and why Glenn got the boot. I don't remember anybody defending Glenn after going 3-13 in conference his last two years...and for good reason. I think we do cut our coaches slack when they lose to really good teams...it's when we consistently lose to cellar-dwellers and the rams that the seat starts to heat up...as it should. If last year had not been the covid catastrophe and Bohl had won 2 or 3 conference games, I think the seat would be uncomfortably warm. As I said earlier...I'm undecided on what to think of last season.
307bball
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2251
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 12:08 pm
Has liked: 12 times
Been liked: 60 times

ragtimejoe1 wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 8:49 am On a different note relative to where we are heading, Bohl has to show he can win without Josh Allen. Yes, I give all the credit in the world to Bohl and Vigen for identifying a diamond in the rough to provide 2 solid years. However, Bohl has coached 7 seasons and is 14-24 in conference without Josh Allen. He also hasn't been above .500 in a weak MWC without Josh. Either figure something out on offense, or he needs to find another future top 10 draft pick at QB.
I agree w/you here :D
Wyovanian
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2395
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:28 pm
Location: Wherever I'm At
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 16 times

Gotta love all these people arguing for their limitations....

We take what we can get... We're only Wyoming, we can't ever be very good... an occasional Conference Championship is good enough... blah, blah, blah...

Seriously, why don't you all do us a favor- grab SDPoke and get out of the boat. It's the lack of vision and thinking in disruptive ways that holds Wyoming back. And not just in D1 Athletics.

"Good enough" is not good enough. Demand better. Expect better.

"The reasonable man adapts to the world around him. The unreasonable man expects the world to adapt to him. Therefore, all progress is made by unreasonable men."

"Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours."
"WE are the music makers and WE are the dreamers of the dreams." -Willy Wonka (Gene Wilder) Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory
307bball
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2251
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 12:08 pm
Has liked: 12 times
Been liked: 60 times

Wyovanian wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:51 pm Gotta love all these people arguing for their limitations....

We take what we can get... We're only Wyoming, we can't ever be very good... an occasional Conference Championship is good enough... blah, blah, blah...

Seriously, why don't you all do us a favor- grab SDPoke and get out of the boat. It's the lack of vision and thinking in disruptive ways that holds Wyoming back. And not just in D1 Athletics.

"Good enough" is not good enough. Demand better. Expect better.

"The reasonable man adapts to the world around him. The unreasonable man expects the world to adapt to him. Therefore, all progress is made by unreasonable men."

"Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours."
You bring up another good point Wyovanian...although I take issue with how it is worded. "Good enough" by itself is meaningless. It must be qualified or we end up in a rabbit hole of competing interpretations.

"Good enough" to get to a conference championship? I would say that next year, with 1 conference loss, we would be pretty likely to appear in the conference championship. The average amount of losses for teams that appeared in the MWC championship game is 1.4. I'm avoiding saying anything here about winning the championship since that would be more specifically dependent upon the team we would end up facing in the championship game.

"Good enough" for a Wyoming HC to keep his job? I think we are seeing the answer to this in CB right now. I believe if his record was even just a little bit worse than it is right now he would not have gotten the extension and may even not be the HC right now.

"Good enough" to play in a New Years Bowl? Feels like we are a long ways from ever seeing this happen from a competitive standpoint. The deck is very stacked against teams that have a one year spike. New Years Bowl teams from outside of the P5 seem to only go to teams that string together 2 to 3 elite years.

"Good enough" For me (307bball) to enjoyably consume a Wyoming football season? This one is hard to answer definitively except to say that I have enjoyed The CB era more than I have any other era since Tiller (this includes the highs and the heartaches). This is probably the metric that the Athletics department cares about in the aggregate (not so much me personally) since it directly relates to attendance and fan engagement.

"Good enough" For Wyovanian? I have no idea...just speculation based upon your above comments I would say it looks like some sort of dominance through methods that could be generically described as "expecting more" and "demanding better".
Wyovanian
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2395
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:28 pm
Location: Wherever I'm At
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 16 times

307bball wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 4:24 pm
Wyovanian wrote: Fri Feb 26, 2021 3:51 pm Gotta love all these people arguing for their limitations....

We take what we can get... We're only Wyoming, we can't ever be very good... an occasional Conference Championship is good enough... blah, blah, blah...

Seriously, why don't you all do us a favor- grab SDPoke and get out of the boat. It's the lack of vision and thinking in disruptive ways that holds Wyoming back. And not just in D1 Athletics.

"Good enough" is not good enough. Demand better. Expect better.

"The reasonable man adapts to the world around him. The unreasonable man expects the world to adapt to him. Therefore, all progress is made by unreasonable men."

"Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours."
You bring up another good point Wyovanian...although I take issue with how it is worded. "Good enough" by itself is meaningless. It must be qualified or we end up in a rabbit hole of competing interpretations.

"Good enough" to get to a conference championship? I would say that next year, with 1 conference loss, we would be pretty likely to appear in the conference championship. The average amount of losses for teams that appeared in the MWC championship game is 1.4. I'm avoiding saying anything here about winning the championship since that would be more specifically dependent upon the team we would end up facing in the championship game.

"Good enough" for a Wyoming HC to keep his job? I think we are seeing the answer to this in CB right now. I believe if his record was even just a little bit worse than it is right now he would not have gotten the extension and may even not be the HC right now.

"Good enough" to play in a New Years Bowl? Feels like we are a long ways from ever seeing this happen from a competitive standpoint. The deck is very stacked against teams that have a one year spike. New Years Bowl teams from outside of the P5 seem to only go to teams that string together 2 to 3 elite years.

"Good enough" For me (307bball) to enjoyably consume a Wyoming football season? This one is hard to answer definitively except to say that I have enjoyed The CB era more than I have any other era since Tiller (this includes the highs and the heartaches). This is probably the metric that the Athletics department cares about in the aggregate (not so much me personally) since it directly relates to attendance and fan engagement.

"Good enough" For Wyovanian? I have no idea...just speculation based upon your above comments I would say it looks like some sort of dominance through methods that could be generically described as "expecting more" and "demanding better".
Competing for a conference championship 3 seasons out of 4 would meet my threshold. For now. The fact is, one has to constantly adjust their expectations or else complacency rears its ugly head.
"WE are the music makers and WE are the dreamers of the dreams." -Willy Wonka (Gene Wilder) Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory
307bball
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2251
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 12:08 pm
Has liked: 12 times
Been liked: 60 times

Wyovanian wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 5:49 pm Competing for a conference championship 3 seasons out of 4 would meet my threshold. For now. The fact is, one has to constantly adjust their expectations or else complacency rears its ugly head.
Just so I understand....you are asking that we achieve at a level that we have not done...ever? At least as far back as 1980. In '87 and '88 we had back to back conference championships but the two years on either side I would definitely not consider "competing for a conference title". Since 1980 (40 years of Wyoming football), here are the years I would consider us to have been "competing for a conference title":

2016
1998 (Might have to squint real hard for this one)
1996
1993
1988 (Champions)
1987 (Champions)

The 1998 season opened with a terrible loss to Tulsa and a tight loss to AFA. After that we played pretty good but never overtook AFA.

So, in your opinion.. there really is no "glory days" to draw upon. By the metric you have described...I think the only programs that meet it are the tip top programs in the country...the Alabama's and Ohio State's of the world. I'm all for a high bar but that feels unrealistically high. The only G5 program that would meet your criteria would be BSU.

Is there anything in the history of Wyoming athletics that makes you think this level of success is reasonable to expect? I hate to "argue for our limitations" as you so eloquently put it, but unreasonable goals can be very counter-productive.

For myself.. I'm a couple ticks above neutral on the last four years. If last year was a real season I would be neutral or maybe a tick below. Am I being too lenient? Am I not being a good fan by enjoying this period of being above .500 in conference play?

I'm perceiving anger or frustration directed at fans or administration for "settling" ... I don't see it that way. I think being somewhat pleased with the last 5 years has a lot to do with the level achieved in the 10+ years before that. If we take this logic forward...and we put year after year of slightly above .500 football together...as those years go by....fans (myself included) will want more.
Wyovanian
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2395
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:28 pm
Location: Wherever I'm At
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 16 times

307bball wrote: Mon Mar 01, 2021 11:26 am
Wyovanian wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 5:49 pm Competing for a conference championship 3 seasons out of 4 would meet my threshold. For now. The fact is, one has to constantly adjust their expectations or else complacency rears its ugly head.
Just so I understand....you are asking that we achieve at a level that we have not done...ever? At least as far back as 1980. In '87 and '88 we had back to back conference championships but the two years on either side I would definitely not consider "competing for a conference title". Since 1980 (40 years of Wyoming football), here are the years I would consider us to have been "competing for a conference title":

2016
1998 (Might have to squint real hard for this one)
1996
1993
1988 (Champions)
1987 (Champions)

The 1998 season opened with a terrible loss to Tulsa and a tight loss to AFA. After that we played pretty good but never overtook AFA.

So, in your opinion.. there really is no "glory days" to draw upon. By the metric you have described...I think the only programs that meet it are the tip top programs in the country...the Alabama's and Ohio State's of the world. I'm all for a high bar but that feels unrealistically high. The only G5 program that would meet your criteria would be BSU.

Is there anything in the history of Wyoming athletics that makes you think this level of success is reasonable to expect? I hate to "argue for our limitations" as you so eloquently put it, but unreasonable goals can be very counter-productive.

For myself.. I'm a couple ticks above neutral on the last four years. If last year was a real season I would be neutral or maybe a tick below. Am I being too lenient? Am I not being a good fan by enjoying this period of being above .500 in conference play?

I'm perceiving anger or frustration directed at fans or administration for "settling" ... I don't see it that way. I think being somewhat pleased with the last 5 years has a lot to do with the level achieved in the 10+ years before that. If we take this logic forward...and we put year after year of slightly above .500 football together...as those years go by....fans (myself included) will want more.
Like I said, "...all progress is made by unreasonable men."
The past is the past.
"WE are the music makers and WE are the dreamers of the dreams." -Willy Wonka (Gene Wilder) Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory
307bball
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2251
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 12:08 pm
Has liked: 12 times
Been liked: 60 times

Wyovanian wrote: Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:54 pm
307bball wrote: Mon Mar 01, 2021 11:26 am
Wyovanian wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 5:49 pm Competing for a conference championship 3 seasons out of 4 would meet my threshold. For now. The fact is, one has to constantly adjust their expectations or else complacency rears its ugly head.
Just so I understand....you are asking that we achieve at a level that we have not done...ever? At least as far back as 1980. In '87 and '88 we had back to back conference championships but the two years on either side I would definitely not consider "competing for a conference title". Since 1980 (40 years of Wyoming football), here are the years I would consider us to have been "competing for a conference title":

2016
1998 (Might have to squint real hard for this one)
1996
1993
1988 (Champions)
1987 (Champions)

The 1998 season opened with a terrible loss to Tulsa and a tight loss to AFA. After that we played pretty good but never overtook AFA.

So, in your opinion.. there really is no "glory days" to draw upon. By the metric you have described...I think the only programs that meet it are the tip top programs in the country...the Alabama's and Ohio State's of the world. I'm all for a high bar but that feels unrealistically high. The only G5 program that would meet your criteria would be BSU.

Is there anything in the history of Wyoming athletics that makes you think this level of success is reasonable to expect? I hate to "argue for our limitations" as you so eloquently put it, but unreasonable goals can be very counter-productive.

For myself.. I'm a couple ticks above neutral on the last four years. If last year was a real season I would be neutral or maybe a tick below. Am I being too lenient? Am I not being a good fan by enjoying this period of being above .500 in conference play?

I'm perceiving anger or frustration directed at fans or administration for "settling" ... I don't see it that way. I think being somewhat pleased with the last 5 years has a lot to do with the level achieved in the 10+ years before that. If we take this logic forward...and we put year after year of slightly above .500 football together...as those years go by....fans (myself included) will want more.
Like I said, "...all progress is made by unreasonable men."
The past is the past.
Well...I guess there is room for all of us in this crazy world. I hope you get what you want out of your fanhood. I know I've had a great time watching the 'boys the last 5 years.
OrediggerPoke
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 6113
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 12:57 am
Has liked: 52 times
Been liked: 213 times

307bball wrote: Tue Mar 02, 2021 3:57 pm Well...I guess there is room for all of us in this crazy world. I hope you get what you want out of your fanhood. I know I've had a great time watching the 'boys the last 5 years.
I'm on the same page. Of course we would all love conference and national championships and great bowl games every year. These are certainly goals. But, at the end of the day and when the season is over, we have to ask did the team compete, give us joy and make us proud as Wyoming residents, alumni and fans. Saying boohoo we didn't win a conference championship this year therefore I'm going to voice my opinion as to how bad and how much our program let us down is a bit ridiculous.

I can say that Bohl's teams have consistently made me proud to be a Wyoming fan and always excited for the next year. There has been no quit in these teams whatsoever. Certainly this last season was very disappointing from a results standpoint but it would be unfair to point the finger at anyone given the circumstances (frankly I'm happy that we had a fall season). Next season there will certainly be more expectations given the experience returning. I'm looking forward to it, and, really hope the team meets and exceeds those expectations.
Wyovanian
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2395
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:28 pm
Location: Wherever I'm At
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 16 times

307bball wrote: Tue Mar 02, 2021 3:57 pm
Wyovanian wrote: Tue Mar 02, 2021 2:54 pm
307bball wrote: Mon Mar 01, 2021 11:26 am
Wyovanian wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 5:49 pm Competing for a conference championship 3 seasons out of 4 would meet my threshold. For now. The fact is, one has to constantly adjust their expectations or else complacency rears its ugly head.
Just so I understand....you are asking that we achieve at a level that we have not done...ever? At least as far back as 1980. In '87 and '88 we had back to back conference championships but the two years on either side I would definitely not consider "competing for a conference title". Since 1980 (40 years of Wyoming football), here are the years I would consider us to have been "competing for a conference title":

2016
1998 (Might have to squint real hard for this one)
1996
1993
1988 (Champions)
1987 (Champions)

The 1998 season opened with a terrible loss to Tulsa and a tight loss to AFA. After that we played pretty good but never overtook AFA.

So, in your opinion.. there really is no "glory days" to draw upon. By the metric you have described...I think the only programs that meet it are the tip top programs in the country...the Alabama's and Ohio State's of the world. I'm all for a high bar but that feels unrealistically high. The only G5 program that would meet your criteria would be BSU.

Is there anything in the history of Wyoming athletics that makes you think this level of success is reasonable to expect? I hate to "argue for our limitations" as you so eloquently put it, but unreasonable goals can be very counter-productive.

For myself.. I'm a couple ticks above neutral on the last four years. If last year was a real season I would be neutral or maybe a tick below. Am I being too lenient? Am I not being a good fan by enjoying this period of being above .500 in conference play?

I'm perceiving anger or frustration directed at fans or administration for "settling" ... I don't see it that way. I think being somewhat pleased with the last 5 years has a lot to do with the level achieved in the 10+ years before that. If we take this logic forward...and we put year after year of slightly above .500 football together...as those years go by....fans (myself included) will want more.
Like I said, "...all progress is made by unreasonable men."
The past is the past.
Well...I guess there is room for all of us in this crazy world. I hope you get what you want out of your fanhood. I know I've had a great time watching the 'boys the last 5 years.
It goes way beyond "fanhood". Five years? Multiply that by nine and add two generations before me. Add in lots of time and lots of treasure. The "good enough" attitude is an argument for "reason", which has no place in the pursuit of excellence.
"WE are the music makers and WE are the dreamers of the dreams." -Willy Wonka (Gene Wilder) Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory
307bball
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2251
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 12:08 pm
Has liked: 12 times
Been liked: 60 times

Wyovanian wrote: Wed Mar 03, 2021 10:14 am It goes way beyond "fanhood". Five years? Multiply that by nine and add two generations before me. Add in lots of time and lots of treasure. The "good enough" attitude is an argument for "reason", which has no place in the pursuit of excellence.
The five years is just the amount of time I've enjoyed watching recently.... I've been a fan of the pokes since I watched my old man punch a hole in ceiling in excitement over a pokes game on the radio in the '80s.

I don't know about you but I did not enjoy being a pokes fan for much of JG and DC.

It seems like you and I may just fundamentally disagree on the place of "reason". Reason does not equal mediocrity... Never has and never will. Those who achieve excellence are the absolute best practitioners of "reason" there are. I would argue that excellence can truly only be realized when a person "reasonably" assesses strength and weakness and charts a new path forward.

The problem with sports is that it is a pretty closed loop... If somebody wins....they somebody else has to lose. College athletics are suuuuper tilted away from Wyoming and schools like Wyoming. Might that have something to do with the struggles in the last twenty years? I think you can answer that question in the affirmative without giving under performing coaches and administrators a pass.
Wyovanian
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2395
Joined: Mon Sep 05, 2011 12:28 pm
Location: Wherever I'm At
Has liked: 13 times
Been liked: 16 times

307bball wrote: Wed Mar 03, 2021 10:53 am
Wyovanian wrote: Wed Mar 03, 2021 10:14 am It goes way beyond "fanhood". Five years? Multiply that by nine and add two generations before me. Add in lots of time and lots of treasure. The "good enough" attitude is an argument for "reason", which has no place in the pursuit of excellence.
The five years is just the amount of time I've enjoyed watching recently.... I've been a fan of the pokes since I watched my old man punch a hole in ceiling in excitement over a pokes game on the radio in the '80s.

I don't know about you but I did not enjoy being a pokes fan for much of JG and DC.

It seems like you and I may just fundamentally disagree on the place of "reason". Reason does not equal mediocrity... Never has and never will. Those who achieve excellence are the absolute best practitioners of "reason" there are. I would argue that excellence can truly only be realized when a person "reasonably" assesses strength and weakness and charts a new path forward.

The problem with sports is that it is a pretty closed loop... If somebody wins....they somebody else has to lose. College athletics are suuuuper tilted away from Wyoming and schools like Wyoming. Might that have something to do with the struggles in the last twenty years? I think you can answer that question in the affirmative without giving under performing coaches and administrators a pass.
You're conflating "reason" with "reasonable". Reason is practically synonymous with logic. Logically, while there are reasons for low expectations at UW, there is absolutely no reason why should accept said reasons as infinite condition. As for what is reasonable, we don't strive to be reasonable. We re-define that and always challenge the accepted notion.

EVERYONE is accountable.
"WE are the music makers and WE are the dreamers of the dreams." -Willy Wonka (Gene Wilder) Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory
307bball
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2251
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 12:08 pm
Has liked: 12 times
Been liked: 60 times

Wyovanian wrote: Wed Mar 03, 2021 1:11 pm
307bball wrote: Wed Mar 03, 2021 10:53 am
Wyovanian wrote: Wed Mar 03, 2021 10:14 am It goes way beyond "fanhood". Five years? Multiply that by nine and add two generations before me. Add in lots of time and lots of treasure. The "good enough" attitude is an argument for "reason", which has no place in the pursuit of excellence.
The five years is just the amount of time I've enjoyed watching recently.... I've been a fan of the pokes since I watched my old man punch a hole in ceiling in excitement over a pokes game on the radio in the '80s.

I don't know about you but I did not enjoy being a pokes fan for much of JG and DC.

It seems like you and I may just fundamentally disagree on the place of "reason". Reason does not equal mediocrity... Never has and never will. Those who achieve excellence are the absolute best practitioners of "reason" there are. I would argue that excellence can truly only be realized when a person "reasonably" assesses strength and weakness and charts a new path forward.

The problem with sports is that it is a pretty closed loop... If somebody wins....they somebody else has to lose. College athletics are suuuuper tilted away from Wyoming and schools like Wyoming. Might that have something to do with the struggles in the last twenty years? I think you can answer that question in the affirmative without giving under performing coaches and administrators a pass.
You're conflating "reason" with "reasonable". Reason is practically synonymous with logic. Logically, while there are reasons for low expectations at UW, there is absolutely no reason why should accept said reasons as infinite condition. As for what is reasonable, we don't strive to be reasonable. We re-define that and always challenge the accepted notion.

EVERYONE is accountable.
I was not conflating anything...your words:
Wyovanian wrote: Wed Mar 03, 2021 10:14 am The "good enough" attitude is an argument for "reason", which has no place in the pursuit of excellence.
Nobody is accepting anything as an infinite condition....I hate that the second anybody breathes a word that the results achieved on the field might have an explanation beyond the abilities of the current HC....it gets shouted down with some inane call to "demand excellence". Every coach I have every watched at every program has "demanded excellence" .... that is not and has never been the issue. There have been some bad coaches at UW, but the argument can be made, that they are not in a position to succeed...at least long term. At least try to understand what I'm saying from the perspective that I hate the idea of Wyoming being mediocre or below for any length of time. There is zero "good enough" in me....but at the same time, I'm not blind, and I'm not the only one that can see the evolution of have's vs have-nots that has consumed college athletics. There was a time when to play for a middling school from a power conference or go to a school like Wyoming was a lateral move. Now it is a no-brainer from every angle. The talent at the Ohio State's of the world has always been crazy good, but now, the best players are consistently choosing low level power conference schools over non power conference schools. This is really obvious in football but I believe that men's basketball is following the same trend. This goes beyond the results of any one season. For Wyoming to be competing for NY6 bowl games...we would need to have a coach and staff that could make up for this differential .... and we would need them to stay. Neither of those things has happened since Paul roach was roaming the sidelines. Do the thought experiment of having a coach as good as Nick Saban or Dabo in Laramie....are we in NY6 bowl contention every year? I don't think so ... and furthermore...I believe the success of the Saban's, and Swinney's of the world have way more to do with the overspending of the Athletic departments they are in. Now obviously ... when you have fanbases like they do..you can afford it.

On a conciliatory note...I agree that any accepted notion that status quo is good enough should be challenged. Nothing I'm saying should be construed that way.
OrediggerPoke
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 6113
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 12:57 am
Has liked: 52 times
Been liked: 213 times

307bball wrote: Wed Mar 03, 2021 3:15 pm
Nobody is accepting anything as an infinite condition....I hate that the second anybody breathes a word that the results achieved on the field might have an explanation beyond the abilities of the current HC....it gets shouted down with some inane call to "demand excellence". Every coach I have every watched at every program has "demanded excellence" .... that is not and has never been the issue. There have been some bad coaches at UW, but the argument can be made, that they are not in a position to succeed...at least long term. At least try to understand what I'm saying from the perspective that I hate the idea of Wyoming being mediocre or below for any length of time. There is zero "good enough" in me....but at the same time, I'm not blind, and I'm not the only one that can see the evolution of have's vs have-nots that has consumed college athletics. There was a time when to play for a middling school from a power conference or go to a school like Wyoming was a lateral move. Now it is a no-brainer from every angle. The talent at the Ohio State's of the world has always been crazy good, but now, the best players are consistently choosing low level power conference schools over non power conference schools. This is really obvious in football but I believe that men's basketball is following the same trend. This goes beyond the results of any one season. For Wyoming to be competing for NY6 bowl games...we would need to have a coach and staff that could make up for this differential .... and we would need them to stay. Neither of those things has happened since Paul roach was roaming the sidelines. Do the thought experiment of having a coach as good as Nick Saban or Dabo in Laramie....are we in NY6 bowl contention every year? I don't think so ... and furthermore...I believe the success of the Saban's, and Swinney's of the world have way more to do with the overspending of the Athletic departments they are in. Now obviously ... when you have fanbases like they do..you can afford it.

On a conciliatory note...I agree that any accepted notion that status quo is good enough should be challenged. Nothing I'm saying should be construed that way.
What it really comes down to - and you hit on it - is a financial commitment to success. The Alabamas and Ohio States are spending ridiculous amounts of money on their football programs. But they can because of the built in advantage of media contracts, fanbase, etc...Wyoming is never going to spend that kind of money on football and nor should it. In fact given the financial shape of the state and my conservative views, I believe quite strongly that our athletic programs must be run to ensure that we avoid unnecessary spending. I disagree with others that believe that athletic programs should be completely self sustaining because I do recognize that athletic programs provide other benefits - - most notably marketing of the University itself.
User avatar
WYO_Fan_inPA
Ranch Hand
Posts: 442
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2014 4:29 pm
Location: Tennessee
Has liked: 12 times
Been liked: 10 times

I think we're like most other G5 programs.. we make a bowl game, and that is a success, for now. The problem is keeping a pretty good coach... a guy comes in, leads us to 9 or 10 win season or two, then leaves for a P5 job. Then, we're back to trying to make a bowl game or have a losing season or two.

Our best hope, and not sure how realistic, is to join a P5 conference. That will increase athletics revenue, spending, and recruiting. Just like how Utah did. They are now contenders in the PAC-12.
Image
Expat_Poke
Ranch Hand
Posts: 211
Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2014 8:58 pm
Location: Under the evening shadow of the Big Horns
Been liked: 3 times

307bball wrote: Mon Mar 01, 2021 11:26 am
Wyovanian wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 5:49 pm Competing for a conference championship 3 seasons out of 4 would meet my threshold. For now. The fact is, one has to constantly adjust their expectations or else complacency rears its ugly head.
Just so I understand....you are asking that we achieve at a level that we have not done...ever? At least as far back as 1980. In '87 and '88 we had back to back conference championships but the two years on either side I would definitely not consider "competing for a conference title". Since 1980 (40 years of Wyoming football), here are the years I would consider us to have been "competing for a conference title":

2016
1998 (Might have to squint real hard for this one)
1996
1993
1988 (Champions)
1987 (Champions)

The 1998 season opened with a terrible loss to Tulsa and a tight loss to AFA. After that we played pretty good but never overtook AFA.

So, in your opinion.. there really is no "glory days" to draw upon. By the metric you have described...I think the only programs that meet it are the tip top programs in the country...the Alabama's and Ohio State's of the world. I'm all for a high bar but that feels unrealistically high. The only G5 program that would meet your criteria would be BSU.

Is there anything in the history of Wyoming athletics that makes you think this level of success is reasonable to expect? I hate to "argue for our limitations" as you so eloquently put it, but unreasonable goals can be very counter-productive.

For myself.. I'm a couple ticks above neutral on the last four years. If last year was a real season I would be neutral or maybe a tick below. Am I being too lenient? Am I not being a good fan by enjoying this period of being above .500 in conference play?

I'm perceiving anger or frustration directed at fans or administration for "settling" ... I don't see it that way. I think being somewhat pleased with the last 5 years has a lot to do with the level achieved in the 10+ years before that. If we take this logic forward...and we put year after year of slightly above .500 football together...as those years go by....fans (myself included) will want more.
We were competing for a slot in the conference championship in 2017 going into the second to last week of conference play. At that point we had one conference loss (10 point road loss to Boise St.) and then Allen got hurt*. Sure the last two weeks didn't go well, but before that Wyoming was competing for a slot in the CCG. 2018 was rough, then 2019 we had a tough schedule and lost three tight games against SDSU, Boise St, and Utah State with the only not close game being Air Force. Wyoming came up short, but they were competitive against 3 of the top five conference teams (not to mention three of the four games played against the top conference opponents we had our backup Vander Waal under center). We were not nearly as competitive in conference under the previous coach, so yes I will take being competitive as a sign of progress. I don't think you can get out of the hole Wyoming is in overnight. I see signs of progress, and this is an important year. The injuries to Allen in 2017 and Chambers in 2018, 2020 have shown Wyoming still needs to improve our depth any given year, and yeah the offense. Hope they work things out and get a better, more efficient offense and take the next step up.

*The zoomies can go take a long walk off a short pier. Yeah they are a service academy, but they still play dirty and their coach is severely lacking in the building proper character department
Returned from my 4 year exodus in Greenieville
307bball
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2251
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 12:08 pm
Has liked: 12 times
Been liked: 60 times

Expat_Poke wrote: Mon Mar 15, 2021 3:59 pm
307bball wrote: Mon Mar 01, 2021 11:26 am
Wyovanian wrote: Sat Feb 27, 2021 5:49 pm Competing for a conference championship 3 seasons out of 4 would meet my threshold. For now. The fact is, one has to constantly adjust their expectations or else complacency rears its ugly head.
Just so I understand....you are asking that we achieve at a level that we have not done...ever? At least as far back as 1980. In '87 and '88 we had back to back conference championships but the two years on either side I would definitely not consider "competing for a conference title". Since 1980 (40 years of Wyoming football), here are the years I would consider us to have been "competing for a conference title":

2016
1998 (Might have to squint real hard for this one)
1996
1993
1988 (Champions)
1987 (Champions)

The 1998 season opened with a terrible loss to Tulsa and a tight loss to AFA. After that we played pretty good but never overtook AFA.

So, in your opinion.. there really is no "glory days" to draw upon. By the metric you have described...I think the only programs that meet it are the tip top programs in the country...the Alabama's and Ohio State's of the world. I'm all for a high bar but that feels unrealistically high. The only G5 program that would meet your criteria would be BSU.

Is there anything in the history of Wyoming athletics that makes you think this level of success is reasonable to expect? I hate to "argue for our limitations" as you so eloquently put it, but unreasonable goals can be very counter-productive.

For myself.. I'm a couple ticks above neutral on the last four years. If last year was a real season I would be neutral or maybe a tick below. Am I being too lenient? Am I not being a good fan by enjoying this period of being above .500 in conference play?

I'm perceiving anger or frustration directed at fans or administration for "settling" ... I don't see it that way. I think being somewhat pleased with the last 5 years has a lot to do with the level achieved in the 10+ years before that. If we take this logic forward...and we put year after year of slightly above .500 football together...as those years go by....fans (myself included) will want more.
We were competing for a slot in the conference championship in 2017 going into the second to last week of conference play. At that point we had one conference loss (10 point road loss to Boise St.) and then Allen got hurt*. Sure the last two weeks didn't go well, but before that Wyoming was competing for a slot in the CCG. 2018 was rough, then 2019 we had a tough schedule and lost three tight games against SDSU, Boise St, and Utah State with the only not close game being Air Force. Wyoming came up short, but they were competitive against 3 of the top five conference teams (not to mention three of the four games played against the top conference opponents we had our backup Vander Waal under center). We were not nearly as competitive in conference under the previous coach, so yes I will take being competitive as a sign of progress. I don't think you can get out of the hole Wyoming is in overnight. I see signs of progress, and this is an important year. The injuries to Allen in 2017 and Chambers in 2018, 2020 have shown Wyoming still needs to improve our depth any given year, and yeah the offense. Hope they work things out and get a better, more efficient offense and take the next step up.

*The zoomies can go take a long walk off a short pier. Yeah they are a service academy, but they still play dirty and their coach is severely lacking in the building proper character department
I think your right Expat...particularly that 2019 season...that was thisclose to being a great season.
ragtimejoe1
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 5117
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm
Has liked: 20 times
Been liked: 116 times

Expat_Poke wrote: Mon Mar 15, 2021 3:59 pm 2018 was rough, then 2019 we had a tough schedule
I realize everyone has their own definitions, but, for reference...

SOS
2016 = 77
2017 = 84
2018 = 84
2019 = 85
2020 = 99

Not exactly tough in my opinion and certainly not murder's row. Basically bottom 1/3 to bottom 1/4 in fbs schedule strength. I'd think tough would have to at least be above top 1/2, but just my opinion.
WYO1016 wrote: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:10 am I'm starting to think that Burman has been laying the pipe to ragtimejoe1's wife
Insults are the last resort of fools with a crumbling position.
307bball
WyoNation Addict
Posts: 2251
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 12:08 pm
Has liked: 12 times
Been liked: 60 times

ragtimejoe1 wrote: Tue Mar 16, 2021 11:32 am
Expat_Poke wrote: Mon Mar 15, 2021 3:59 pm 2018 was rough, then 2019 we had a tough schedule
I realize everyone has their own definitions, but, for reference...

SOS
2016 = 77
2017 = 84
2018 = 84
2019 = 85
2020 = 99

Not exactly tough in my opinion and certainly not murder's row. Basically bottom 1/3 to bottom 1/4 in fbs schedule strength. I'd think tough would have to at least be above top 1/2, but just my opinion.
How far do you have to move in a comparative stat like SOS before it would get tough to rank? For instance, If I asked you to rank two teams in order of SOS without looking ... if the two teams are Notre Dame and Tulsa, that is a pretty easy one to rank. What about Kansas St and TCU? My point being, if the consideration is only SOS...is there much difference between #50 and #83? Obviously top ten vs bottom 10 is a pretty big difference...what about the middle third? As an example of this...in 2019, Virginia Tech (8-5) ranked 81st in SOS while their conference counterpart Louisville (8-5) had the same record and ranked 46th in SOS, I would say, despite that difference in SOS looking huge, that it is ultimately pretty meaningless in ranking those two teams.

For my 2 cents, the actual ranking off SOS as calculated does not carry very much information in it outside of the extremes. If you are in the top 5% and bottom 5% I think it says something. I know that the BCS series calculation of SOS did not even account for home vs away games. It was just double the opponents' record plus opponents' opponent's record all divided by three. Maybe the current formula gives different weight to home/away. I consider the 2019 Wyoming season "tough" mostly because we faced our tougher opponents on the road vs at home.
ragtimejoe1
Bronco-Buster
Posts: 5117
Joined: Mon Dec 02, 2013 1:21 pm
Has liked: 20 times
Been liked: 116 times

307bball wrote: Tue Mar 16, 2021 12:38 pm
ragtimejoe1 wrote: Tue Mar 16, 2021 11:32 am
Expat_Poke wrote: Mon Mar 15, 2021 3:59 pm 2018 was rough, then 2019 we had a tough schedule
I realize everyone has their own definitions, but, for reference...

SOS
2016 = 77
2017 = 84
2018 = 84
2019 = 85
2020 = 99

Not exactly tough in my opinion and certainly not murder's row. Basically bottom 1/3 to bottom 1/4 in fbs schedule strength. I'd think tough would have to at least be above top 1/2, but just my opinion.
How far do you have to move in a comparative stat like SOS before it would get tough to rank? For instance, If I asked you to rank two teams in order of SOS without looking ... if the two teams are Notre Dame and Tulsa, that is a pretty easy one to rank. What about Kansas St and TCU? My point being, if the consideration is only SOS...is there much difference between #50 and #83? Obviously top ten vs bottom 10 is a pretty big difference...what about the middle third? As an example of this...in 2019, Virginia Tech (8-5) ranked 81st in SOS while their conference counterpart Louisville (8-5) had the same record and ranked 46th in SOS, I would say, despite that difference in SOS looking huge, that it is ultimately pretty meaningless in ranking those two teams.

For my 2 cents, the actual ranking off SOS as calculated does not carry very much information in it outside of the extremes. If you are in the top 5% and bottom 5% I think it says something. I know that the BCS series calculation of SOS did not even account for home vs away games. It was just double the opponents' record plus opponents' opponent's record all divided by three. Maybe the current formula gives different weight to home/away. I consider the 2019 Wyoming season "tough" mostly because we faced our tougher opponents on the road vs at home.
I get the road game vs home but I think the main point as you outlined is that the schedule hasn't been appreciably different over the years much less a tough schedule.

That said, you aren't wrong in that Bohl teams struggle on the road, so non-cupcakes on the road do pose a significant challenge. Even cupcakes on the road aren't a guarantee.
WYO1016 wrote: Fri Dec 08, 2023 8:10 am I'm starting to think that Burman has been laying the pipe to ragtimejoe1's wife
Insults are the last resort of fools with a crumbling position.
Post Reply