Bohl ranks 6th..

[ragtimejoe1]

Several conference rankings has MWC as 3rd best (typically...sometimes 2nd) g5 conference. We used to be the best g5. I'm sorry you don't think the mwc has regressed. It has. No really good teams and full of sub-90 teams. The MWC is hovering around 40ish % ooc win percentage. No wonder you like that. Just slightly lower than Bohl's 48% winning percentage (roughly).

On the bright side, we may lose fsu, suds, bsu, or csu (1 or combo of). That way we'll have a much better chance at more wins and it will be the exact same as when Utah, tcu, and byu were here.... at least in your world.

[307bball]

Several conference rankings has MWC as 3rd best (typically...sometimes 2nd) g5 conference. We used to be the best g5. I'm sorry you don't think the mwc has regressed. It has. No really good teams and full of sub-90 teams. The MWC is hovering around 40ish % ooc win percentage. No wonder you like that. Just slightly lower than Bohl's 48% winning percentage (roughly).

On the bright side, we may lose fsu, suds, bsu, or csu (1 or combo of). That way we'll have a much better chance at more wins and it will be the exact same as when Utah, tcu, and byu were here.... at least in your world.

Come on Ragtime....there is some disagreement here but there is no need to strawman people like this.....Nowhere did I make a claim about the MW's strength over time..I merely am not using it as a metric to evaluate coaches and I think it's a mistake to do so. I don't like or dislike the MW's ooc win% and have not referenced that. I care greatly about Wyoming's ooc win% though.... did I reference that and cause some confusion or something?

Your attempts to characterize my "world" being one that we merely win more since the conference is weakened does not take into account anything I've said on conference strength and the magnitude of the task of winning a conference title regardless of the overall strength of the conference. You obviously aren't reading the content of my comments. I largely agree with your assessment of the relative strength of the MW over time, even as I think you are exaggerating the magnitude to suit some agenda to not recognize anything Bohl has done.

Do you feel deep down that the case against CB is so weak that you have to layer on all this nonsense about playing in a bad conference to make it work? He is what he is...great guy, great representative, good program builder...but because he can't field a competent offense, the competitive ceiling is somewhere lower than conference championships. That would not change if he was coaching at Texas or at Tulsa. Fire and hire all you want ... if you are at Ohio St...you are going to win a crap ton of games....do it at Wyoming and, unless our commitment to the program increases dramatically, It is going to be a challenge to get championships.

The goal is to win...the low-IQ message board pablum about SOS and "it was better back when...." is wearisome, particularly if the person you are trying to discuss it with is not interested in actually having a dialogue. Just take the coach and ask...did they win?...draw that line wherever you want....for me, the only coaches I can say yes to in my lifetime are Roach and Tiller. Some of the coaches, like Koenning.....I don't even hesitate to think about answering it....But coaches like Glenn, Bohl, and Dimel...I at least pause....but the answer is still "no". And during that pause...what am I considering?...It's a lot of things...SOS or strength of conference is probably in there but the differences in that don't matter to me....what matters to me is:

1. Beating the sheep
2. Conference championships
3. Beating AFA
4. Beating BSU (used to be BYU)

Beyond that ... bowl games are great but they don't mean as much as they used to .... and somewhere at the very end is "how good was the conference". If a coach can't deliver with some consistency on 1-4, I really don't care about the rest.

[Asmodeanreborn]

Ultimately none of this matters. CSU might stay mediocre/bad for a while, but eventually their access to vastly larger amounts of money will make up for the incompetence. I'm having a really hard time seeing how we'll be able to compete with them in the long run, especially once our conference fails and that source of money dries up for us.

NIL has hurt a lot of programs, but it'll hurt Wyoming more than most in the long run. Any diamonds in the rough we find will be around for a single season. I suppose if we implemented a new offense where nobody had the opportunity to stand out, we might have a small chance to keep decent players?

[Itsux2beaewe]

Ultimately none of this matters. CSU might stay mediocre/bad for a while, but eventually their access to vastly larger amounts of money will make up for the incompetence. I'm having a really hard time seeing how we'll be able to compete with them in the long run, especially once our conference fails and that source of money dries up for us.

NIL has hurt a lot of programs, but it'll hurt Wyoming more than most in the long run. Any diamonds in the rough we find will be around for a single season. I suppose if we implemented a new offense where nobody had the opportunity to stand out, we might have a small chance to keep decent players?

Indeed, and The ewes will probably get an invite to a larger conference for Colorado viewership. Especially when CU leaves the PAC “whatever”. Some conference will come calling for the goats. Wyoming doesn’t have the eyes to garner anything much more than The Big Sky etc. The hard reality as much as I love The Pokes. This is our reality.

[307bball]

Ultimately none of this matters. CSU might stay mediocre/bad for a while, but eventually their access to vastly larger amounts of money will make up for the incompetence. I'm having a really hard time seeing how we'll be able to compete with them in the long run, especially once our conference fails and that source of money dries up for us.

NIL has hurt a lot of programs, but it'll hurt Wyoming more than most in the long run. Any diamonds in the rough we find will be around for a single season. I suppose if we implemented a new offense where nobody had the opportunity to stand out, we might have a small chance to keep decent players?

Indeed, and The ewes will probably get an invite to a larger conference for Colorado viewership. Especially when CU leaves the PAC “whatever”. Some conference will come calling for the goats. Wyoming doesn’t have the eyes to garner anything much more than The Big Sky etc. The hard reality as much as I love The Pokes. This is our reality.

Definitely sux for Wyoming fans if traditional rivalries go away. Hopefully somebody or some group can salvage the spirit of college football from this rush for $$. Even some of the big time coaches and AD's have spoken up about what may be lost if things continue.

[ragtimejoe1]

Wyoming doesn’t have the eyes to garner anything much more than The Big Sky etc. The hard reality as much as I love The Pokes. This is our reality.

As long as the coach wins 7+/- games and fans can yell "powder river let r buck or cowboy tough", I don't think most WYO fans will care even if it's Big Sky. Not just an eyeball problem but also an apathy problem. Apparently conference quality doesn't mean anything.

[307bball]

Wyoming doesn’t have the eyes to garner anything much more than The Big Sky etc. The hard reality as much as I love The Pokes. This is our reality.

As long as the coach wins 7+/- games and fans can yell "powder river let r buck or cowboy tough", I don't think most WYO fans will care even if it's Big Sky. Not just an eyeball problem but also an apathy problem. Apparently conference quality doesn't mean anything.

I definitely don't want to re-open a pedantic discussion about the link or lack thereof between conference strength and coaching accumen....but I'm wondering how much blame should Wyoming fans bear for the current situation? How much blame do coaches bear? administration?

Here is my, way too long, story of Wyoming football in my lifetime:

In the late '80s and early '90s, Wyoming had talent, good coaching, national attention, and were a relevant team in the college football world. That was what I expected to continue into the 2000's....boy was I wrong. In '98 Dimel's team got to 25 in the AP and I believe that was the last time that happened. In that year and the preceeding 10 years....We held an AP ranking in 5 of those years. After that you get the deep destruction of the program with Koenning and then the Glenn recovery followed by the Christensen era....at thier best ... they got to 5 wins in conference but then reverted to nearly Koenning levels of ineptitude...at least in Glenns case....Christensen did get to 3 conf wins in his last season but I don't think a lot of people were all that upset to see him go...Which bring us to the current regime.

What to think of Bohl?...Well...there are almost two programs to consider...Pre JA and Post JA. Before Josh Allen took the reigns....those teams almost didn't resemble what came after....very bad...could lose games in almost any fashion. There were some glimmers of what was coming....in 2014, the pokes beat a 10 win AFA team in a game that most Wyoming fans would have been used to seeing them lose...but the consistency wasn't there yet. We all know what has transpired from 2016 and onwards...great defenses and anemic offenses....A title game appearance in 2016 that feels very far in the rear view at this point. Generally fans feel like we are at the ceiling of what Bohl can accomplish. The pokes since 2016 continue to hover at .500 in conference play and until attendance goes away as it did at the end of Christensen, Glenn, and Kenning's tenures....he'll keep coaching.

What about what has been going on outside of Wyoming during those years? From the Roach era onwards..you see a steady consolidation of $$ and personell (in players, coaches and admin) away from MW and lower level schools....at this point, that phenomenon is become a consolidation towards the SEC and B10 alone. There are too many moves to recount here but the waters that Roach and Tiller navigated are worlds different than what Bohl is swimming in. That transition happened in my lifetime and it feels like a slow moving trainwreck if you are a supporter of schools outside the traditional power structure. I derive a lot of enjoyment when Wyoming shows up on the national stage and acquits themselves well...that opportunity is going away....across all sports. Many people have pointed out that we fit better, in terms of size, culture, and program investment, in a conference like the Big Sky outside of the FBS. That is probably true when it comes to the fit. Is that our future?...is it inevitable? have past administrations been handcuffed? or were there moves that could have been made? If that is our future...what does that mean for fan and university support?

[ragtimejoe1]

I'm not quoting that. Brevity is the soul of wit.

Conference strength and team performance both matter. I don't have time to go back but attendance for bigger games against either p5 teams or highly ranked g5 teams (if POKES are doing well) is generally greater than other scenarios (yes that is speculation until I get time to look it up). Put us in the Big Sky and my money is that attendance drops through the floor unless we reach playoffs.

The Sternberg report should have been taken more seriously.

[307bball]

I'm not quoting that. Brevity is the soul of wit.

Conference strength and team performance both matter. I don't have time to go back but attendance for bigger games against either p5 teams or highly ranked g5 teams (if POKES are doing well) is generally greater than other scenarios (yes that is speculation until I get time to look it up). Put us in the Big Sky and my money is that attendance drops through the floor unless we reach playoffs.

The Sternberg report should have been taken more seriously.

"Conference strength and team performance both matter." Agreed...all things being equal...it's better to be in the SEC than CUSA...More exposure, better recruits, chance at national title..the list goes on. Team performance is at least somewhat within the control of a coach and administration...at least within the definition of success within a particular conference. Overall conference competitive strength has become completely outside the control of individual programs. Looking at what has happened over the last 30 years....it's almost like the broadcast partners have picked which conferences are going to have the most resources and therefore, they will be the strongest on the field.

I don't think you have to back up your statement at all that bigger games are more well attended....that is pretty much self evident at every level from High school to the NFL. I think there are two variables and you alluded to both:

1. Interest in a particular game...this would be the factor that drives high attendance at the border war or the MW championship game that was played in Laramie or the games in Laramie against Nebraska or Texas....all are very well attended compared to other games during those seasons due to interest in that particular game.

2. Overall strength of the Cowboy football team. This is what killed Koenning, Glen, and Christensen. If the product is sub-par nobody shows up. Good Cowboy teams get higher attendance even against blah opponents and even in non-high attendance sports...(see Women's basketball at Wyoming). If you win...people show up to watch. I still think Bohl is 4 conference wins over two years from getting the boot....(for example, going 2-6 twice in a row)...were it not for Covid...I think he's fired after 2021...but pretty much everybody got a pass for that year, rightly or wrongly.

So what drives the high average attendance at Big Sky schools like Montana and Montana State? Or NDSU? They average in the 20k range I think...better than a lot of the low attendance MW schools. They certainly never see a marquee FBS opponent roll into town...yet they do very well in attendance. Is it inconceivable that Wyoming could achieve those numbers if they were to become a Big Sky conference member? I mean...it could be as simple as...wins=attendance...losses=low attendance. If you win at FCS you get good attendance just like at every other level.

For the record...I really, really, really don't want Wyoming to drop down....

[ragtimejoe1]

Pure speculation, but our attendance issues would be magnified in the Big Sky. Laramie is challenged by low population and difficult travel at times in the fall.

Again, brevity, man, brevity.

[307bball]

Pure speculation, but our attendance issues would be magnified in the Big Sky. Laramie is challenged by low population and difficult travel at times in the fall.

Again, brevity, man, brevity.

I'm all for brevity and simplicity....some topics don't lend themselves well to a one or two sentence cause and effect summary.

I think I agree with your speculation though.... A .500 Wyoming Cowboy Big Sky team would have worse attendance than a .500 Wyoming MWC team.

What about an FCS national title contending Wyoming Big Sky team?...like you said...hard to speculate.

[ragtimejoe1]

What about an FCS national title contending Wyoming Big Sky team?...like you said...hard to speculate.

Well, we've already established that a 4--6 year run of 7+ wins in the Big SKy would be the greatest WYO coach in history, right? Afterall, the coach can only play the games on the schedule. A NC run in FCS would exceed any previous WYO accomplishments in the modern era, right?

[307bball]

What about an FCS national title contending Wyoming Big Sky team?...like you said...hard to speculate.

Well, we've already established that a 4--6 year run of 7+ wins in the Big SKy would be the greatest WYO coach in history, right? Afterall, the coach can only play the games on the schedule. A NC run in FCS would exceed any previous WYO accomplishments in the modern era, right?

Well... We have Bohl averaging 7+ wins (COVID year notwithstanding) for 6 years... Does that make him the greatest ever? For me the answer is no.

Is the question, "what is tougher?" ... If so .. FCS title would be tougher than going .500 in the MWC.

I was talking about attendance though... I was agreeing with your speculation about the effect of dropping to FCS on attendance..... Then I saw what the top FCS teams draw in attendance and was very surprised. Is that replicable in Laramie? Would back to back FCS titles be a 20k attendance draw?

[ragtimejoe1]

Is the question, "what is tougher?" ... If so .. FCS title would be tougher than going .500 in the MWC.

Interesting, so 2/3 of the mwc is worse than the upper end of fcs? Hmm, thinking about that, I might not disagree.

[307bball]

Is the question, "what is tougher?" ... If so .. FCS title would be tougher than going .500 in the MWC.

Interesting, so 2/3 of the mwc is worse than the upper end of fcs? Hmm, thinking about that, I might not disagree.

The tippy-top FCS programs are no joke. Much like the tippy top FBS programs are becoming NFL-lite at this point. Those teams have great coaching, strategy and are very disciplined. The only thing that the FCS is missing is that high end athlete that tends to go to the FBS schools (and increasingly to the SEC and B10).

Anyways....I'm kind of looking at degree of difficulty of the accomplishment...not necessarily "who would win" (although ... a national title FCS team probably does very well against the bottom 2/3 of the FBS). The difficulty of Winning a Big Sky conference championship seems to be on par with the difficulty of winning an MWC championship....Even though the MW champion probably wins a head to head game 95% of the time.

*edit* I don't want to denigrate FCS Athletes...Every year some get drafted and sometimes it's pretty high.

[ragtimejoe1]

The worst nfl team would pummel the best college football team. It wouldn't be close.

So Bohl, with more scholarships, has built an upper level fcs team? I might could go with that.

[307bball]

The worst nfl team would pummel the best college football team. It wouldn't be close.

So Bohl, with more scholarships, has built an upper level fcs team? I might could go with that.

yep...But Bohl is in pretty much the same boat with every other non P5 team that will never get an invite to the big time. And the NFL-lite comment was more about the players being more professional than amateur athletes.

It's not a perfect analogy... but like weight classes in wrestling...some low level heavyweight would crush a national champion from a lower weight class but that does not mean the lower weight class guy is not as good.

The FCS, or FBS, or NFL, or high school levels all have some rules for who is eligible and how much resources are available....Among those categories, the FBS has become unbalanced to a pretty alarming degree within it's own ranks. 50 years ago...you tell everybody how many scholarships to offer and when/how they can recruit.. and it sort of worked...It wasn't without it's flaws for sure. Now it is laughable.

[ragtimejoe1]

To sum it up, Bohl runs a strong FCS-level team but not string enough to win the FCS NC. The MWC is mostly upper-level FCS-like teams.

Probably pretty fair assessment.

[307bball]

To sum it up, Bohl runs a strong FCS-level team but not string enough to win the FCS NC. The MWC is mostly upper-level FCS-like teams.

Probably pretty fair assessment.

Competitively...that is probably true. Wyoming has a long tradition of playing upper level FCS teams and not looking much better...that goes way back.

[LanderPoke]

To sum it up, Bohl runs a strong FCS-level team but not string enough to win the FCS NC. The MWC is mostly upper-level FCS-like teams.

Probably pretty fair assessment.

I'm guessing Wyoming would win the FCS championship most years.