Bohl 2023….

ragtimejoe1 said:

Off the top of my head (I'll have to go look at numbers) the Lubick years at csu were better than today as we're the Long years at UNM.

Suds is probably tougher today. UNLV? I honestly don't remember. I think they had a decent year or two in Glenn's time... I'm guessing they are a push. AF? I'm also guessing a push.
Technically Bohl doesn't play suds or unlv every year.

Click to expand...

In conference winning percentage for Those five teams during Bohl and Glenn's tenure:

CSU During Glenn's era: 0.319
CSU During Bohl's era: 0.442

UNM During Glenn's era: 0.447
UNM During Bohl's era: 0.313

AFA During Glenn's era: 0.500
AFA During Bohl's era: 0.633

UNLV During Glenn's era: 0.191
UNLV During Bohl's era: 0.278

SDSU During Glenn's era: 0.348
SDSU During Bohl's era: 0.714

Overall Group During Glenn's era: 0.361
Overall Group During Bohl's era: 0.476

Only UNM has gotten worse in conference winning percentage when you compare the era's. I think a lot of that is explained by the overall weaker conference. I think this group of teams is a pretty good yardstick. I definitely hate that Bohl is barely above .500 against them but I hated being .400 with Glenn even more.

ragtimejoe1 said:

It isn't nostalgia for Glenn years as much as it is that he was a really nice guy, got crap for resources, and still performed as well as Bohl especially in the non-JA years. The resources spent on Bohl haven't generated much of a ROI and Bohl squashes fan excitement around the program.

Click to expand...

I hear you with the nice guy argument, but in the same way that I don't care about Bohl being a "dick"...I did not care that Glenn was a nice guy. If I get to choose between a nice guy and a "dick" and they both have 10 wins...I'll give the nice guy the edge.. but if he has 9 wins?...sayonara. This is about winning games. So much of what I see people complaining about with Bohl would go away instantly if we were averaging 9 wins and we had beaten SDSU for the title with JA. To me... that means it's about winning.

I have no idea where to get data on the 5 teams that were the same between the two eras but I'm certain they did not keep their spending level while Wyoming increased theirs, particularly SDSU and CSU. For us to expect better results due to increased funding, there would have to be an increase in funding relative to our opponents. If you take the conference as a whole we are much better off then back then ... but, as I pointed out earlier, that is because the top spenders left....not because we are now outspending that same group of schools. If you are a UNM fan or CSU fan...you can probably make the same claim I hear Pokes fan's making..."We spend way more and still don't win"..(particularly UNM).

To re-iterate...if you have some numbers here where you compare those programs to UW from then until now you could convince me otherwise.

ragtimejoe1 said:

You really believe Bohl teams would beat the T25 teams of Utah, TCU, and byu? Since Bohl rarely beats anyone above 75, I'm thinking it's not much of a stretch to pencil those in as losses along with at least 1 P5 game. He'd have to win 7 of 8 against a better unm and csu team along with a decent AF and suds team. Wouldn't happen.

Back to "at minimum, there's not a nickel's worth of difference between them".

Click to expand...

again..a better UNM, CSU, AFA, and UNLV is debatable..at best. SDSU is the only team of that group that I would say is competitively different from back then and they are much better.

I'm sorry I left you with the impression that I believe Bohl's Cowboys to be amazing...I do not believe they would have done any better than Glenn did, with the exception of 2008. After last year...I believe Bohl to capable of sinking to that level though. He just has not yet.

You realize everything you're posting supports the at minimum there's not a nickel's worth of difference between them, right.

Who cares why the within conference spending gap narrowed? The important part is that it did and Bohl benefits from that while Glenn was hamstrung by lack of support.

Comparing conference winning percentages is worthless. Of course compared to then, it will go up. Everyone was losing to TCU, UT, and byu. That's the freaking point. If you think today's rams are worse than the Lubick era rams, well, I don't know what to tell you. Same for UNM.

If I ever get time, I'll look up the historical end of the year rankings. Someone already broke out the difference between Bohl and Glenn vs teams with a pulse. It was largely a push.

Not sure why it ruffles feathers but Bohl = Glenn but has benefitted from better resources. Bohl's non-JA years are pretty bad.

ragtimejoe1 said:

You realize everything you're posting supports the at minimum there's not a nickel's worth of difference between them, right.

Who cares why the within conference spending gap narrowed? The important part is that it did and Bohl benefits from that while Glenn was hamstrung by lack of support.

Click to expand...

This is why it matters ... if the only reason that we are more competitive with program investment vs in-conference teams is due to the top 1/3 of the conference leaving ... then any argument that Glenn did worse as a direct result of poor support is not supported by the fact that Glenn did slightly worse against programs with whom we roughly are on par with in spending then vs now. I'll say it again...if our comparative spend against those programs is way more now...then I'll change my tune. (I still think it’s dumb to factor that in when rating coaches….you play the guys on the schedule with the resources you have)

ragtimejoe1 said:

Comparing conference winning percentages is worthless. Of course compared to then, it will go up. Everyone was losing to TCU, UT, and byu. That's the freaking point. If you think today's rams are worse than the Lubick era rams, well, I don't know what to tell you. Same for UNM.

If I ever get time, I'll look up the historical end of the year rankings. Someone already broke out the difference between Bohl and Glenn vs teams with a pulse. It was largely a push.

Not sure why it ruffles feathers but Bohl = Glenn but has benefitted from better resources. Bohl's non-JA years are pretty bad.

Click to expand...

Are you intentionally twisting what I'm trying to say?

Today's Ram's are indeed worse than the peak Lubick era Rams...That was never my contention. The '03-'07 rams were nowhere near the height of the '90s Lubick rams. Joe Glenn played a rams team that was not good...any ram fan will acknowledge that....and Glenn went 2-4 against them. Heck...Lubick pulled the "3 conference wins in two years" one year earlier than Glenn did!

As far as UNM...yes...that appears to be the only team that was objectively better back during Glenn's tenure...What a juggernaut... .541 winning percentage overall during that stretch. Thank goodness we don't have to play teams of that caliber anymore :roll:

I think it must have be you with whom I've sparred before about the merits of using SOS as a way to evaluate a program. And if you like Glenn then I get why you would want to rely on it...it's literally the only metric that he comes out ahead on. I don't say SOS is worthless...it's just not a good stand-alone metric when evaluating a coach. If we had a time machine and played the '04 pokes against the '16 pokes maybe Glenn's boys were just tougher all around and would whip the pants off of the '16 squad...that is not at issue. Bohl has done better (not a huge margin) against some very similar (and generally underwhelming) competition. Competition that was NOT out-investing either guy. I'm worried that Bohl is heading the wrong direction though.....in fact I predict it. And I'm not worried about it due to some emotional attachment to Bohl...the minute he drops below Glenn in the metrics I've outlined...then I give Glenn the nod.
I get that you give Glenn the “good guy” discount. Bully for you. That stuff didn’t matter to me when I suffered through the last few Glenn years and I didn’t care that DC was a prick while watching Brett Smith run circles around people….it doesn’t matter to me if Bohl offends every person in the fanbase by calling them “little league coaches” or not acknowledging them during a pre-game encounter….. Just win…just win.

*edited for clarity and grammar

Holy fuck dude. It’s a matter of opinion.

Subcanis said:

Holy [#]f##k dude. It’s a matter of opinion.

Click to expand...

Some stuff is...some stuff isn't.

SOS is not really a matter of opinion. Winning % is not a matter of opinion. I enjoy the lively debate w/ragtime even if I think he has some bias towards Glenn that is not backed up by metrics.

I was a pretty heavy Bohl Kool-aid drinker following the '16 pokes team. After last year I think my faith in Bohl was mis-placed. This discussion has tendrils that reach into a lot of areas. What do you blame a coach for that he actually has responsibility for? How high can high expectations go at Wyoming before they become unrealistic? How do you appropriately invest in an FBS program and how do you rate performance given that investment? Is the institutional memory at UW of being a top 40-ish program in the late '80s through most of the '90s creating unrealistic expectations?

All stuff I like discussing. I'm glad to have those discussions with people who are game to have them. Even when they take on a bit of an exasperated tone.

Well, if you're right, Bohl should come out of Provo with a W.

When I get time, I'll look numbers up. Bohl is among the highest paid in MWC; I think Glenn was middle at best. Level of invest is generally strongly correlated with success. Obviously correlated doesn't mean cause and effect but also not a worthless metric.

If you think Bohl would stand a chance against TCU, Utah, or byu, then we'll agree to disagree. Since Bohl struggles to beat teams with a pulse, I'm surprised you feel that way. We'll see in Provo I guess.

ragtimejoe1 said:

Well, if you're right, Bohl should come out of Provo with a W.

When I get time, I'll look numbers up. Bohl is among the highest paid in MWC; I think Glenn was middle at best. Level of invest is generally strongly correlated with success. Obviously correlated doesn't mean cause and effect but also not a worthless metric.

If you think Bohl would stand a chance against TCU, Utah, or byu, then we'll agree to disagree. Since Bohl struggles to beat teams with a pulse, I'm surprised you feel that way. We'll see in Provo I guess.

Click to expand...

I guess I'll have to quote myself for clarity:

After last year I think my faith in Bohl was mis-placed.

I'm worried that Bohl is heading the wrong direction though.....in fact I predict it.

I'm sorry I left you with the impression that I believe Bohl's Cowboys to be amazing...I do not believe they would have done any better than Glenn did, with the exception of 2008.

I guess i'm not so much arguing that Bohl is any good (he does not appear to be)

Bohl appears to be a thoroughly slightly more than mediocre coach

Neither coach is killing it in that category but Bohl is better there (so far..this next season could be a bloodbath)

Click to expand...

If I'm right...and the above statements I have made are correct...that equals a win in Provo? What am I missing?

Also..please stop mis-representing me in regards to how Bohl would do against TCU, Utah, or BYU from the Glenn years. I have made no statements about that except tangentially when saying Bohl would not have done better than Glenn did. When I looked back at those comments I should have clarified....He would not have done batter than Glenn against those top three teams.

You keep saying I believe Bohl would have beaten or been competitive with those three teams....just because you say it does not make it true. I do not believe that and nothing i've written in this conversation should lead a reasonably intelligent person to think otherwise.

My points rest firmly in results against common conference foes with whom spending and program investment are in the same ball park for both coaches. Unless you have forgotten...the teams you mentioned are not in the MWC anymore so I'm not considering them. The debate over who is a better coach should be separable from the debate over who is overpaid.

I believe that if Joe Glenn had gotten to above .500 against that group of teams that are common between both eras in conference....he does not get fired when he does. That is not that high of a bar, based on what I'm reading from folks on these forums. I don't see the evidence that any of them were world beaters back then despite your assertions that CSU and UNM were heavyweights.

Ultimately I respect your opinion about there not being a "nickels worth" of difference between them. It's certain a defensible position. I happen to disagree and say there is maybe a dime's worth of difference (i.e. still a small amount) that is shrinking fast.

307bball said:

ragtimejoe1 said:

Off the top of my head (I'll have to go look at numbers) the Lubick years at csu were better than today as we're the Long years at UNM.

Suds is probably tougher today. UNLV? I honestly don't remember. I think they had a decent year or two in Glenn's time... I'm guessing they are a push. AF? I'm also guessing a push.
Technically Bohl doesn't play suds or unlv every year.

Click to expand...

In conference winning percentage for Those five teams during Bohl and Glenn's tenure:

CSU During Glenn's era: 0.319
CSU During Bohl's era: 0.442

UNM During Glenn's era: 0.447
UNM During Bohl's era: 0.313

AFA During Glenn's era: 0.500
AFA During Bohl's era: 0.633

UNLV During Glenn's era: 0.191
UNLV During Bohl's era: 0.278

SDSU During Glenn's era: 0.348
SDSU During Bohl's era: 0.714

Overall Group During Glenn's era: 0.361
Overall Group During Bohl's era: 0.476

Only UNM has gotten worse in conference winning percentage when you compare the era's. I think a lot of that is explained by the overall weaker conference. I think this group of teams is a pretty good yardstick. I definitely hate that Bohl is barely above .500 against them but I hated being .400 with Glenn even more.

ragtimejoe1 said:

It isn't nostalgia for Glenn years as much as it is that he was a really nice guy, got crap for resources, and still performed as well as Bohl especially in the non-JA years. The resources spent on Bohl haven't generated much of a ROI and Bohl squashes fan excitement around the program.

Click to expand...

I hear you with the nice guy argument, but in the same way that I don't care about Bohl being a "dick"...I did not care that Glenn was a nice guy. If I get to choose between a nice guy and a "dick" and they both have 10 wins...I'll give the nice guy the edge.. but if he has 9 wins?...sayonara. This is about winning games. So much of what I see people complaining about with Bohl would go away instantly if we were averaging 9 wins and we had beaten SDSU for the title with JA. To me... that means it's about winning.

I have no idea where to get data on the 5 teams that were the same between the two eras but I'm certain they did not keep their spending level while Wyoming increased theirs, particularly SDSU and CSU. For us to expect better results due to increased funding, there would have to be an increase in funding relative to our opponents. If you take the conference as a whole we are much better off then back then ... but, as I pointed out earlier, that is because the top spenders left....not because we are now outspending that same group of schools. If you are a UNM fan or CSU fan...you can probably make the same claim I hear Pokes fan's making..."We spend way more and still don't win"..(particularly UNM).

To re-iterate...if you have some numbers here where you compare those programs to UW from then until now you could convince me otherwise.

ragtimejoe1 said:

You really believe Bohl teams would beat the T25 teams of Utah, TCU, and byu? Since Bohl rarely beats anyone above 75, I'm thinking it's not much of a stretch to pencil those in as losses along with at least 1 P5 game. He'd have to win 7 of 8 against a better unm and csu team along with a decent AF and suds team. Wouldn't happen.

Back to "at minimum, there's not a nickel's worth of difference between them".

Click to expand...

again..a better UNM, CSU, AFA, and UNLV is debatable..at best. SDSU is the only team of that group that I would say is competitively different from back then and they are much better.

I'm sorry I left you with the impression that I believe Bohl's Cowboys to be amazing...I do not believe they would have done any better than Glenn did, with the exception of 2008. After last year...I believe Bohl to capable of sinking to that level though. He just has not yet.

Click to expand...

One thing you are missing about this post is that the records of those 5 teams during the Bohl years is they aren’t having to play TCU, BYU and Utah which would be 3 more losses on those teams records most years so that would make their records during the Bohl years worse or as bad as when they played the Glenn teams.

So I would say at Best Bohl and Glenn are about even and at worst Glenn is actually better.

seattlecowboy said:

307bball said:

ragtimejoe1 said:

Off the top of my head (I'll have to go look at numbers) the Lubick years at csu were better than today as we're the Long years at UNM.

Suds is probably tougher today. UNLV? I honestly don't remember. I think they had a decent year or two in Glenn's time... I'm guessing they are a push. AF? I'm also guessing a push.
Technically Bohl doesn't play suds or unlv every year.

Click to expand...

In conference winning percentage for Those five teams during Bohl and Glenn's tenure:

CSU During Glenn's era: 0.319
CSU During Bohl's era: 0.442

UNM During Glenn's era: 0.447
UNM During Bohl's era: 0.313

AFA During Glenn's era: 0.500
AFA During Bohl's era: 0.633

UNLV During Glenn's era: 0.191
UNLV During Bohl's era: 0.278

SDSU During Glenn's era: 0.348
SDSU During Bohl's era: 0.714

Overall Group During Glenn's era: 0.361
Overall Group During Bohl's era: 0.476

Only UNM has gotten worse in conference winning percentage when you compare the era's. I think a lot of that is explained by the overall weaker conference. I think this group of teams is a pretty good yardstick. I definitely hate that Bohl is barely above .500 against them but I hated being .400 with Glenn even more.

ragtimejoe1 said:

It isn't nostalgia for Glenn years as much as it is that he was a really nice guy, got crap for resources, and still performed as well as Bohl especially in the non-JA years. The resources spent on Bohl haven't generated much of a ROI and Bohl squashes fan excitement around the program.

Click to expand...

I hear you with the nice guy argument, but in the same way that I don't care about Bohl being a "dick"...I did not care that Glenn was a nice guy. If I get to choose between a nice guy and a "dick" and they both have 10 wins...I'll give the nice guy the edge.. but if he has 9 wins?...sayonara. This is about winning games. So much of what I see people complaining about with Bohl would go away instantly if we were averaging 9 wins and we had beaten SDSU for the title with JA. To me... that means it's about winning.

I have no idea where to get data on the 5 teams that were the same between the two eras but I'm certain they did not keep their spending level while Wyoming increased theirs, particularly SDSU and CSU. For us to expect better results due to increased funding, there would have to be an increase in funding relative to our opponents. If you take the conference as a whole we are much better off then back then ... but, as I pointed out earlier, that is because the top spenders left....not because we are now outspending that same group of schools. If you are a UNM fan or CSU fan...you can probably make the same claim I hear Pokes fan's making..."We spend way more and still don't win"..(particularly UNM).

To re-iterate...if you have some numbers here where you compare those programs to UW from then until now you could convince me otherwise.

ragtimejoe1 said:

You really believe Bohl teams would beat the T25 teams of Utah, TCU, and byu? Since Bohl rarely beats anyone above 75, I'm thinking it's not much of a stretch to pencil those in as losses along with at least 1 P5 game. He'd have to win 7 of 8 against a better unm and csu team along with a decent AF and suds team. Wouldn't happen.

Back to "at minimum, there's not a nickel's worth of difference between them".

Click to expand...

again..a better UNM, CSU, AFA, and UNLV is debatable..at best. SDSU is the only team of that group that I would say is competitively different from back then and they are much better.

I'm sorry I left you with the impression that I believe Bohl's Cowboys to be amazing...I do not believe they would have done any better than Glenn did, with the exception of 2008. After last year...I believe Bohl to capable of sinking to that level though. He just has not yet.

Click to expand...

One thing you are missing about this post is that the records of those 5 teams during the Bohl years is they aren’t having to play TCU, BYU and Utah which would be 3 more losses on those teams records most years so that would make their records during the Bohl years worse or as bad as when they played the Glenn teams.

So I would say at Best Bohl and Glenn are about even and at worst Glenn is actually better.

Click to expand...

Boise clearly would replace one of those teams for Bohl era losses for those 5. So, only two teams.

seattlecowboy said:

307bball said:

again..a better UNM, CSU, AFA, and UNLV is debatable..at best. SDSU is the only team of that group that I would say is competitively different from back then and they are much better.

I'm sorry I left you with the impression that I believe Bohl's Cowboys to be amazing...I do not believe they would have done any better than Glenn did, with the exception of 2008. After last year...I believe Bohl to capable of sinking to that level though. He just has not yet.

Click to expand...

One thing you are missing about this post is that the records of those 5 teams during the Bohl years is they aren’t having to play TCU, BYU and Utah which would be 3 more losses on those teams records most years so that would make their records during the Bohl years worse or as bad as when they played the Glenn teams.

So I would say at Best Bohl and Glenn are about even and at worst Glenn is actually better.

Click to expand...

I'm not missing that at all...I'll quote myself again "Only UNM has gotten worse in conference winning percentage when you compare the era's. I think a lot of that is explained by the overall weaker conference."

My memory of the Glenn years are of Utah BYU, and TCU being juggernauts the entire time...and while they dominated that era, It's not like they were an auto-loss for the rest of the conference except for when they were peaking. For Utah, nobody in conference beat them in '03, '04, or '08 except for a pretty salty '03 UNM team. For TCU, '03, '05, and '08 were very good but the best TCU teams actually played against Dave Christiansen in '09 and '10. For BYU...Glenn was getting worse while they were peaking from '06 through '08. All this to say...those teams set the standard for excellence during that era in the MWC but they did not just lose to each other... Wyoming had wins against all three of them during that time period...just not when they were at their best. Boise State is the obvious corollary to those three programs in the Bohl Era....dominant but beatable if they are not having a peak year.

BTW..my math for CSU and UNM was not accurate for the in-conference win percentages. They are:

CSU During Glenn's era: 0.413 not 0.319
CSU During Bohl's era: 0.442

UNM During Glenn's era: 0.543 not 0.447
UNM During Bohl's era: 0.313

Overall Group During Glenn's era: 0.396 not 0.361
Overall Group During Bohl's era: 0.476

That overall win percentage difference equates to be just under 4 more wins per team (3.7 to be more accurate) for the stretch from '03 to '08. It may be reasonable to expect that to have been the outcome (roughly) had you replaced BYU, TCU, and Utah with the "average" MWC team from that era. If you give 4 more wins to Glenn he gets to an in-conference win percentage of 0.407 to Bohls (currently) 0.400. Maybe you would get 6 or more wins per team over that era ... It's all kind of gut feel at that point. This analysis has it's problems..one of the big ones to me is the Covid season...that one is just weird but I left it in.

To me...as far as who do I like better?...I like Glenn better...he was a great dude and I loved him at the helm. Who is the better coach?...I give Bohl the nod right now, but his trajectory is steadily downward and I predict that if he coaches two more years Glenn will be better in all the metrics we are discussing.

How much better would Bohl be viewed if after the COVID season he had hung it up...rode off into the sunset and let somebody else (probably would have been Vigen sooo...) take the helm. I think that would have been such a classy move.

laxwyo said:

seattlecowboy said:

307bball said:

ragtimejoe1 said:

Off the top of my head (I'll have to go look at numbers) the Lubick years at csu were better than today as we're the Long years at UNM.

Suds is probably tougher today. UNLV? I honestly don't remember. I think they had a decent year or two in Glenn's time... I'm guessing they are a push. AF? I'm also guessing a push.
Technically Bohl doesn't play suds or unlv every year.

Click to expand...

In conference winning percentage for Those five teams during Bohl and Glenn's tenure:

CSU During Glenn's era: 0.319
CSU During Bohl's era: 0.442

UNM During Glenn's era: 0.447
UNM During Bohl's era: 0.313

AFA During Glenn's era: 0.500
AFA During Bohl's era: 0.633

UNLV During Glenn's era: 0.191
UNLV During Bohl's era: 0.278

SDSU During Glenn's era: 0.348
SDSU During Bohl's era: 0.714

Overall Group During Glenn's era: 0.361
Overall Group During Bohl's era: 0.476

Only UNM has gotten worse in conference winning percentage when you compare the era's. I think a lot of that is explained by the overall weaker conference. I think this group of teams is a pretty good yardstick. I definitely hate that Bohl is barely above .500 against them but I hated being .400 with Glenn even more.

ragtimejoe1 said:

It isn't nostalgia for Glenn years as much as it is that he was a really nice guy, got crap for resources, and still performed as well as Bohl especially in the non-JA years. The resources spent on Bohl haven't generated much of a ROI and Bohl squashes fan excitement around the program.

Click to expand...

I hear you with the nice guy argument, but in the same way that I don't care about Bohl being a "dick"...I did not care that Glenn was a nice guy. If I get to choose between a nice guy and a "dick" and they both have 10 wins...I'll give the nice guy the edge.. but if he has 9 wins?...sayonara. This is about winning games. So much of what I see people complaining about with Bohl would go away instantly if we were averaging 9 wins and we had beaten SDSU for the title with JA. To me... that means it's about winning.

I have no idea where to get data on the 5 teams that were the same between the two eras but I'm certain they did not keep their spending level while Wyoming increased theirs, particularly SDSU and CSU. For us to expect better results due to increased funding, there would have to be an increase in funding relative to our opponents. If you take the conference as a whole we are much better off then back then ... but, as I pointed out earlier, that is because the top spenders left....not because we are now outspending that same group of schools. If you are a UNM fan or CSU fan...you can probably make the same claim I hear Pokes fan's making..."We spend way more and still don't win"..(particularly UNM).

To re-iterate...if you have some numbers here where you compare those programs to UW from then until now you could convince me otherwise.

ragtimejoe1 said:

You really believe Bohl teams would beat the T25 teams of Utah, TCU, and byu? Since Bohl rarely beats anyone above 75, I'm thinking it's not much of a stretch to pencil those in as losses along with at least 1 P5 game. He'd have to win 7 of 8 against a better unm and csu team along with a decent AF and suds team. Wouldn't happen.

Back to "at minimum, there's not a nickel's worth of difference between them".

Click to expand...

again..a better UNM, CSU, AFA, and UNLV is debatable..at best. SDSU is the only team of that group that I would say is competitively different from back then and they are much better.

I'm sorry I left you with the impression that I believe Bohl's Cowboys to be amazing...I do not believe they would have done any better than Glenn did, with the exception of 2008. After last year...I believe Bohl to capable of sinking to that level though. He just has not yet.

Click to expand...

One thing you are missing about this post is that the records of those 5 teams during the Bohl years is they aren’t having to play TCU, BYU and Utah which would be 3 more losses on those teams records most years so that would make their records during the Bohl years worse or as bad as when they played the Glenn teams.

So I would say at Best Bohl and Glenn are about even and at worst Glenn is actually better.

Click to expand...

Boise clearly would replace one of those teams for Bohl era losses for those 5. So, only two teams.

Click to expand...

Very fair and solid point and very true.

307bball said:

seattlecowboy said:

307bball said:

again..a better UNM, CSU, AFA, and UNLV is debatable..at best. SDSU is the only team of that group that I would say is competitively different from back then and they are much better.

I'm sorry I left you with the impression that I believe Bohl's Cowboys to be amazing...I do not believe they would have done any better than Glenn did, with the exception of 2008. After last year...I believe Bohl to capable of sinking to that level though. He just has not yet.

Click to expand...

One thing you are missing about this post is that the records of those 5 teams during the Bohl years is they aren’t having to play TCU, BYU and Utah which would be 3 more losses on those teams records most years so that would make their records during the Bohl years worse or as bad as when they played the Glenn teams.

So I would say at Best Bohl and Glenn are about even and at worst Glenn is actually better.

Click to expand...

I'm not missing that at all...I'll quote myself again "Only UNM has gotten worse in conference winning percentage when you compare the era's. I think a lot of that is explained by the overall weaker conference."

My memory of the Glenn years are of Utah BYU, and TCU being juggernauts the entire time...and while they dominated that era, It's not like they were an auto-loss for the rest of the conference except for when they were peaking. For Utah, nobody in conference beat them in '03, '04, or '08 except for a pretty salty '03 UNM team. For TCU, '03, '05, and '08 were very good but the best TCU teams actually played against Dave Christiansen in '09 and '10. For BYU...Glenn was getting worse while they were peaking from '06 through '08. All this to say...those teams set the standard for excellence during that era in the MWC but they did not just lose to each other... Wyoming had wins against all three of them during that time period...just not when they were at their best. Boise State is the obvious corollary to those three programs in the Bohl Era....dominant but beatable if they are not having a peak year.

BTW..my math for CSU and UNM was not accurate for the in-conference win percentages. They are:

CSU During Glenn's era: 0.413 not 0.319
CSU During Bohl's era: 0.442

UNM During Glenn's era: 0.543 not 0.447
UNM During Bohl's era: 0.313

Overall Group During Glenn's era: 0.396 not 0.361
Overall Group During Bohl's era: 0.476

That overall win percentage difference equates to be just under 4 more wins per team (3.7 to be more accurate) for the stretch from '03 to '08. It may be reasonable to expect that to have been the outcome (roughly) had you replaced BYU, TCU, and Utah with the "average" MWC team from that era. If you give 4 more wins to Glenn he gets to an in-conference win percentage of 0.407 to Bohls (currently) 0.400. Maybe you would get 6 or more wins per team over that era ... It's all kind of gut feel at that point. This analysis has it's problems..one of the big ones to me is the Covid season...that one is just weird but I left it in.

To me...as far as who do I like better?...I like Glenn better...he was a great dude and I loved him at the helm. Who is the better coach?...I give Bohl the nod right now, but his trajectory is steadily downward and I predict that if he coaches two more years Glenn will be better in all the metrics we are discussing.

How much better would Bohl be viewed if after the COVID season he had hung it up...rode off into the sunset and let somebody else (probably would have been Vigen sooo...) take the helm. I think that would have been such a classy move.

Click to expand...

Okay if you equated that into the equation.

To me I think both coaches as far as just football goes for FBS, basically the same. Neither is that much better than the other. Both had good defenses and ran the ball well and both can’t seem to ever develop a good enough QB to get them over the hump.

FCS obviously Bohl ended up better than Glenn and personality wise Glenn better than Bohl.

Basically one in the same football coach wise in my opinion. I have no clue how the football team will do this year. I’m almost checked out on the football program and apathy has set in for me with football between our QB problems and how the overall college landscape has changed.

I’m more invested in the basketball program at this point until football can actually do something significant and that will only be to a certain degree because like I have said before…. The best we can do in football is go to some crappy bowl game that 3/4’s of teams get to go to now. Kinda takes the importance of it out for me. Still hope the Pokes have a good football season though.

seattlecowboy said:

Okay if you equated that into the equation.

To me I think both coaches as far as just football goes for FBS, basically the same. Neither is that much better than the other. Both had good defenses and ran the ball well and both can’t seem to ever develop a good enough QB to get them over the hump.

FCS obviously Bohl ended up better than Glenn and personality wise Glenn better than Bohl.

Basically one in the same football coach wise in my opinion. I have no clue how the football team will do this year. I’m almost checked out on the football program and apathy has set in for me with football between our QB problems and how the overall college landscape has changed.

I’m more invested in the basketball program at this point until football can actually do something significant and that will only be to a certain degree because like I have said before…. The best we can do in football is go to some crappy bowl game that 3/4’s of teams get to go to now. Kinda takes the importance of it out for me. Still hope the Pokes have a good football season though.

Click to expand...

I'll concede that the "Who is better" question between Bohl and Glenn is so close that it is pretty subjective. What activated me is discussion about program investment, relative conference strength through the eras, and how that relates to how good of a coach somebody is. I have opinions on all that stuff and got into a discussion w/Ragtime about it.

I think I'm on pretty good ground when I am questioning the narrative that holds that Glenn's MWC was top to bottom superior than Bohl's MWC. Yes the top was much better...the middle and bottom? I'm not so sure...and if there was a difference it is a matter of degrees.

Agree w/you on the Basketball vs Football stuff but right now .... not much going on for either....so here we are.

Comparing Bohl and Glenn is like comparing plain, lukewarm oatmeal with a beige painted wall and trying to discern which is more exciting and sexy. It is sad that our metrics for success are two coaches with sub .500 records at Wyoming that have collected more participation trophies (i.,e. Tater Bowl victories and the like) than an elementary school summer rec soccer team. I know many will disagree and tell me that my expectations are too high, but a championship or two over 30 or so years is not too much to ask - especially in the stupendously mediocre MW football league that we have been a part of since TCU, BYU and Utah hit the bricks. Granted - Bohl and Glenn didn't preside over that entire span of time, but they own a lot of that real estate.

LawPoke said:

Comparing Bohl and Glenn is like comparing plain, lukewarm oatmeal with a beige painted wall and trying to discern which is more exciting and sexy. It is sad that our metrics for success are two coaches with sub .500 records at Wyoming that have collected more participation trophies (i.,e. Tater Bowl victories and the like) than an elementary school summer rec soccer team. I know many will disagree and tell me that my expectations are too high, but a championship or two over 30 or so years is not too much to ask - especially in the stupendously mediocre MW football league that we have been a part of since TCU, BYU and Utah hit the bricks. Granted - Bohl and Glenn didn't preside over that entire span of time, but they own a lot of that real estate.

Click to expand...

No. Your expectations are not too high. That's why Bohl should be gone. He's had 8 years and 2 conference wins is not acceptable. IMO, we've got nothing to lose. But we've got an AD who can't be proactive. The entire program has to collapse ( Heath, DC, Edwards) before he'll act. If a school in northern Utah with a stadium befitting a D2 school can win the MWC, then we have no excuses.

bladerunnr said:

LawPoke said:

Comparing Bohl and Glenn is like comparing plain, lukewarm oatmeal with a beige painted wall and trying to discern which is more exciting and sexy. It is sad that our metrics for success are two coaches with sub .500 records at Wyoming that have collected more participation trophies (i.,e. Tater Bowl victories and the like) than an elementary school summer rec soccer team. I know many will disagree and tell me that my expectations are too high, but a championship or two over 30 or so years is not too much to ask - especially in the stupendously mediocre MW football league that we have been a part of since TCU, BYU and Utah hit the bricks. Granted - Bohl and Glenn didn't preside over that entire span of time, but they own a lot of that real estate.

Click to expand...

No. You're expectations are not too high. That's why Bohl should be gone. He's had 8 years and 2 conference wins is not acceptable. IMO, we've got nothing to lose. But we've got an AD who can't be proactive. The entire program has to collapse ( Heath, DC, Edwards) before he'll act. If a school in northern Utah with a stadium befitting a D2 school can win the MWC, then we have no excuses.

Click to expand...

Championships should be the goal right? It's not like I expect one every year...I just would like to see a Wyoming football program be one that the championship has to go through every year. It keeps fans excited/engaged and it's good for the university. If we can become that .... a championship will happen.

Bladerunnr...your comment about the program having to crash and burn before a change is made is spot on. The reason for that may not have anything to do with a lack of proactivity though. Is it possible that the administration is looking at the replacement options and not finding them compelling? If that is the case then you have to start back at the program investment conversation. How do you make Wyoming a place where the best up-and-comers want to be at? Right now I would imagine that good coaches would generally rather be elsewhere. It's probably a little of both.

LawPoke said:

Comparing Bohl and Glenn is like comparing plain, lukewarm oatmeal with a beige painted wall and trying to discern which is more exciting and sexy. It is sad that our metrics for success are two coaches with sub .500 records at Wyoming that have collected more participation trophies (i.,e. Tater Bowl victories and the like) than an elementary school summer rec soccer team. I know many will disagree and tell me that my expectations are too high, but a championship or two over 30 or so years is not too much to ask - especially in the stupendously mediocre MW football league that we have been a part of since TCU, BYU and Utah hit the bricks. Granted - Bohl and Glenn didn't preside over that entire span of time, but they own a lot of that real estate.

Click to expand...

The bolded part made me laugh.

If I had to choose I would probably go with the beige painted wall. At least all I have to do is look at it and not taste it.

seattlecowboy said:

LawPoke said:

Comparing Bohl and Glenn is like comparing plain, lukewarm oatmeal with a beige painted wall and trying to discern which is more exciting and sexy. It is sad that our metrics for success are two coaches with sub .500 records at Wyoming that have collected more participation trophies (i.,e. Tater Bowl victories and the like) than an elementary school summer rec soccer team. I know many will disagree and tell me that my expectations are too high, but a championship or two over 30 or so years is not too much to ask - especially in the stupendously mediocre MW football league that we have been a part of since TCU, BYU and Utah hit the bricks. Granted - Bohl and Glenn didn't preside over that entire span of time, but they own a lot of that real estate.

Click to expand...

The bolded part made me laugh.

If I had to choose I would probably go with the beige painted wall. At least all I have to do is look at it and not taste it.

Click to expand...

I thought about going with "choosing between Bohl and Glenn is like being forced to choose between getting gonorrhea and getting syphilis" - but thought that might be extreme for the circumstance.

LawPoke said:

seattlecowboy said:

LawPoke said:

Comparing Bohl and Glenn is like comparing plain, lukewarm oatmeal with a beige painted wall and trying to discern which is more exciting and sexy. It is sad that our metrics for success are two coaches with sub .500 records at Wyoming that have collected more participation trophies (i.,e. Tater Bowl victories and the like) than an elementary school summer rec soccer team. I know many will disagree and tell me that my expectations are too high, but a championship or two over 30 or so years is not too much to ask - especially in the stupendously mediocre MW football league that we have been a part of since TCU, BYU and Utah hit the bricks. Granted - Bohl and Glenn didn't preside over that entire span of time, but they own a lot of that real estate.

Click to expand...

The bolded part made me laugh.

If I had to choose I would probably go with the beige painted wall. At least all I have to do is look at it and not taste it.

Click to expand...

I thought about going with "choosing between Bohl and Glenn is like being forced to choose between getting gonorrhea and getting syphilis" - but thought that might be extreme for the circumstance.

Click to expand...

LOL - good analogies!

Mine would be: "Choosing between Bohl and Glenn is like choosing to take a very hard steel toe boot kick to the taint or having your balls smashed flat by a mallet" as that is how I feel most of the time as a Wyoming Football fan.

We can all be frustrated by last season, but let's not act like Bohl is a bad coach. He's been the best coach we've had since Joe Tiller got run out of town hands down. It's been 25 years since Tiller left town. Since then we've had:

Dana Dimel - 22-13 - Left on a high note, but was a crap recruiter. His head coaching record since leaving Laramie is 20-59.
Vic Koenning - 5-29 - We all remember this shit show. He's only ever been head coach for 1 game since being canned by UW.
Joe Glenn - 30-41 - We all have fond memories of Joe, but we all also remember that it was time for him to go. Never won more than 7 games, and he only did that once.
Dave Christensen - 27-35 - Not only was ol' dickface a POS, he couldn't stop the opposing offense to save his life. He's been a position coach since he left the Gem City.
Craig Bohl - 45-50 - Is the only coach since Paul Roach to have 3+ 8 win seasons.

My point here is that while we're all frustrated with the last few seasons, the grass is as green as it's been in 25 years. That doesn't mean we should want more, but we also should be careful what we wish for as far as a coaching change goes.