WyoNation.com

OrediggerPoke wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:03 pm Here is how I subjectively rate our coaches for the past 25 years based on results, competition and state of the program:
1) Tiller
2) Bohl
3) Dimel
4) Glenn
5) DC
6) Koenning

Here is how I subjectively rate our coaches based on likability and pride of them representing the program for the past 25 years:
1) Glenn
2) Tiller
3) Bohl
4) Koenning
(big gap)
5) Dimel
6) DC

That seems about right. Who can forget, 'Power river, buckle up!' with glenn driving around some vintage car.....

WyoBrandX wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 2:54 pm

OrediggerPoke wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:03 pm Here is how I subjectively rate our coaches for the past 25 years based on results, competition and state of the program:
1) Tiller
2) Bohl
3) Dimel
4) Glenn
5) DC
6) Koenning

Here is how I subjectively rate our coaches based on likability and pride of them representing the program for the past 25 years:
1) Glenn
2) Tiller
3) Bohl
4) Koenning
(big gap)
5) Dimel
6) DC

That seems about right. Who can forget, 'Power river, buckle up!' with glenn driving around some vintage car.....

Since I never actually met any of them, I can't comment on likability. But DC gets the nod over Glen. He took us to 2 bowl games and if Brett Smith hadn't turned pro, Bohl would have had a lot more to work with.
In terms of representing the program, Glenn made national news when he guaranteed a win over Utah and then showed the finger when Utah onside kicked when the score was 50-0. We were the laughing stock of college football for a day or so. Not so much for the finger but guaranteeing a win and then getting massacred. I'll never understand the love for Joe Glenn.

bladerunnr wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:12 pm

WyoBrandX wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 2:54 pm

OrediggerPoke wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:03 pm Here is how I subjectively rate our coaches for the past 25 years based on results, competition and state of the program:
1) Tiller
2) Bohl
3) Dimel
4) Glenn
5) DC
6) Koenning

Here is how I subjectively rate our coaches based on likability and pride of them representing the program for the past 25 years:
1) Glenn
2) Tiller
3) Bohl
4) Koenning
(big gap)
5) Dimel
6) DC

That seems about right. Who can forget, 'Power river, buckle up!' with glenn driving around some vintage car.....

Since I never actually met any of them, I can't comment on likability. But DC gets the nod over Glen. He took us to 2 bowl games and if Brett Smith hadn't turned pro, Bohl would have had a lot more to work with.
In terms of representing the program, Glenn made national news when he guaranteed a win over Utah and then showed the finger when Utah onside kicked when the score was 50-0. We were the laughing stock of college football for a day or so. Not so much for the finger but guaranteeing a win and then getting massacred. I'll never understand the love for Joe Glenn.

I used to love his comments. "We came out today to battle it out. Didn't realize we were snakebit. We'll get em next time. Powder river let'er buck!"

Joe Glenn was awesome to have around as a coach.

bladerunnr wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:12 pm

WyoBrandX wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 2:54 pm

OrediggerPoke wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:03 pm Here is how I subjectively rate our coaches for the past 25 years based on results, competition and state of the program:
1) Tiller
2) Bohl
3) Dimel
4) Glenn
5) DC
6) Koenning

Here is how I subjectively rate our coaches based on likability and pride of them representing the program for the past 25 years:
1) Glenn
2) Tiller
3) Bohl
4) Koenning
(big gap)
5) Dimel
6) DC

That seems about right. Who can forget, 'Power river, buckle up!' with glenn driving around some vintage car.....

Since I never actually met any of them, I can't comment on likability. But DC gets the nod over Glen. He took us to 2 bowl games and if Brett Smith hadn't turned pro, Bohl would have had a lot more to work with.
In terms of representing the program, Glenn made national news when he guaranteed a win over Utah and then showed the finger when Utah onside kicked when the score was 50-0. We were the laughing stock of college football for a day or so. Not so much for the finger but guaranteeing a win and then getting massacred. I'll never understand the love for Joe Glenn.

Glenn is a great guy. Heck I’d love it if he was our AD. I remember being a freshman and watching him standing over a piano in the student union singing the school song along with a few hundred of us students before a movie night. He was active in the community, a great guest speaker, always at cowboy joe club events.

bladerunnr wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 4:12 pm

WyoBrandX wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 2:54 pm

OrediggerPoke wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:03 pm Here is how I subjectively rate our coaches for the past 25 years based on results, competition and state of the program:
1) Tiller
2) Bohl
3) Dimel
4) Glenn
5) DC
6) Koenning

Here is how I subjectively rate our coaches based on likability and pride of them representing the program for the past 25 years:
1) Glenn
2) Tiller
3) Bohl
4) Koenning
(big gap)
5) Dimel
6) DC

That seems about right. Who can forget, 'Power river, buckle up!' with glenn driving around some vintage car.....

Since I never actually met any of them, I can't comment on likability. But DC gets the nod over Glen. He took us to 2 bowl games and if Brett Smith hadn't turned pro, Bohl would have had a lot more to work with.
In terms of representing the program, Glenn made national news when he guaranteed a win over Utah and then showed the finger when Utah onside kicked when the score was 50-0. We were the laughing stock of college football for a day or so. Not so much for the finger but guaranteeing a win and then getting massacred. I'll never understand the love for Joe Glenn.

Glenn was so down to earth and was just completely honest. He truly cared for his players and staff. The first time I met him, it was like talking with someone you knew for years. He made everyone feel that way and there was nothing fake about him. That’s how he was as a person. It was heartbreaking for me that he couldn’t have been more successful in terms of wins and losses. If Glenn wanted to run for governor, he would win and it wouldn’t be close.

The first time I met DC, it was like he was just going through the motions and he didn’t give a poop about any of the Wyoming people. It was like he felt he was better than all of us. He left that event as soon as he could because he apparently had better things to do than chat with some of the biggest cowboy fans and donors. Everything about him was fake to me. I didn’t like him. You couldn’t have paid me to have a beer with him.

Bohl is nowhere close to as personal as Glenn. But Bohl isn’t fake and what you see is what you get IMO. I appreciate his sincerity but can’t say I’d enjoy a long night of beers with him like I would Glenn. Although I’d definitely have a beer with him given the opportunity.

All that said, I truly believe Bohl has this program in a much better place than it ever was under Glenn. The depth and the offensive line play is worlds better than it ever was under Glenn. Unfortunately Glenn had trouble recruiting the program changing QB.

Glenn brought us out of some pretty dark times and was obviously extremely personable, that’s the reason people look back fondly on him. I think in hindsight he deserved one more year. He did get curb stomped a bunch but he was playing in a very difficult conference. I think this years team would’ve probably gotten equally smashed playing top 10 teams in conference.

I don’t think it’s that people love Glenn so much, it’s when we hear about how great Bohl is doing and building depth and this and that Cowboy tough and he’s so much better than any prior coach back to Tiller is when people start to defend Glenn more. That’s how it is for me at least. Bohl is doing a decent job in a much, much weaker conference with much greater resources and institutional support than any prior Wyoming football coach ever.

Bohl is average at best and deserves harsh criticism for his inability to improve the weak areas of his program. He knows what needs to change and doesn't have the courage to do it. We are never going to win the division or conference under Bohl.

We won the division when we went to the MW title game.

Brown and Gold wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:32 am Bohl is average at best and deserves harsh criticism for his inability to improve the weak areas of his program. He knows what needs to change and doesn't have the courage to do it. We are never going to win the division or conference under Bohl.

BS.

Brown and Gold wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:32 am Bohl is average at best and deserves harsh criticism for his inability to improve the weak areas of his program. He knows what needs to change and doesn't have the courage to do it. We are never going to win the division or conference under Bohl.

We won the division and damn near the conference in 2016 and, barring injuries or transfers, I think we got a good shot next year. It would be nice to have a new OC to facilitate this, but Bohl has us in a good spot. There are plenty of programs in this conference that have found themselves in the cellar despite it being a weaker overall conference and spending more than ever on football. If we got rid of Bohl one of three things would happen: we get a dumpster fire, we get a coach who has a bit of success and then either goes DC or he bolts at the first P5 offer or we get a small school guy who wants to build a program and needs 5 years to get us back to this point. Sticking with Bohl is not accepting mediocrity, it’s getting the chance to watch a Wyoming team be competitive every year and hopefully bag a conference title.

Brown and Gold wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:32 am Bohl is average at best and deserves harsh criticism for his inability to improve the weak areas of his program. He knows what needs to change and doesn't have the courage to do it. We are never going to win the division or conference under Bohl.

Not again. Not as currently constructed. We need a change on the offensive side of the ball. Being around the 100 mark or worse will not get it done. Bohl has shown, when he can get the offense to good (if not VERY good) we can compete with the best in the conference. I cannot imagine next season we will have a team with 6, 7, 8, 9, 10+ NFL players like we did in 2016 so we will have to make up the difference through play calling and execution. If Bohl refuses to change Vigen or play calling, why not simplify the scheme? We keep hearing how difficult the scheme is, how complex it is. Why? Who is it fooling? The defenses know to load the box, clog the A gap, and the Pokes offense stops. Why not simplify the scheme? Maybe cull the play book. Instead of 76 different variations of the dive, have say, 3 versions of the dive. Have 3 versions of the blast. Have 3 different screens. Slants, outs, sweeps etc. Why are we running this incredibly complex scheme if the only team its confusing is us?

ItSucksToBeACSURam wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:31 am

Brown and Gold wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:32 am Bohl is average at best and deserves harsh criticism for his inability to improve the weak areas of his program. He knows what needs to change and doesn't have the courage to do it. We are never going to win the division or conference under Bohl.

Not again. Not as currently constructed. We need a change on the offensive side of the ball. Being around the 100 mark or worse will not get it done. Bohl has shown, when he can get the offense to good (if not VERY good) we can compete with the best in the conference. I cannot imagine next season we will have a team with 6, 7, 8, 9, 10+ NFL players like we did in 2016 so we will have to make up the difference through play calling and execution. If Bohl refuses to change Vigen or play calling, why not simplify the scheme? We keep hearing how difficult the scheme is, how complex it is. Why? Who is it fooling? The defenses know to load the box, clog the A gap, and the Pokes offense stops. Why not simplify the scheme? Maybe cull the play book. Instead of 76 different variations of the dive, have say, 3 versions of the dive. Have 3 versions of the blast. Have 3 different screens. Slants, outs, sweeps etc. Why are we running this incredibly complex scheme if the only team its confusing is us?

Exactly, you do not need to air it out deep every play to improve the offense. Having a few misdirection runs and quick passes will go a long way. Shoot, Chambers could be a fantastic RPO quarterback. The only thing I disagree with is that if we do get our offense to good, we won't just compete, we will dominate this conference. We just need to get it to bad to mediocre to compete for a championship.

SheepSlayer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:37 am

ItSucksToBeACSURam wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:31 am

Brown and Gold wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:32 am Bohl is average at best and deserves harsh criticism for his inability to improve the weak areas of his program. He knows what needs to change and doesn't have the courage to do it. We are never going to win the division or conference under Bohl.

Not again. Not as currently constructed. We need a change on the offensive side of the ball. Being around the 100 mark or worse will not get it done. Bohl has shown, when he can get the offense to good (if not VERY good) we can compete with the best in the conference. I cannot imagine next season we will have a team with 6, 7, 8, 9, 10+ NFL players like we did in 2016 so we will have to make up the difference through play calling and execution. If Bohl refuses to change Vigen or play calling, why not simplify the scheme? We keep hearing how difficult the scheme is, how complex it is. Why? Who is it fooling? The defenses know to load the box, clog the A gap, and the Pokes offense stops. Why not simplify the scheme? Maybe cull the play book. Instead of 76 different variations of the dive, have say, 3 versions of the dive. Have 3 versions of the blast. Have 3 different screens. Slants, outs, sweeps etc. Why are we running this incredibly complex scheme if the only team its confusing is us?

Exactly, you do not need to air it out deep every play to improve the offense. Having a few misdirection runs and quick passes will go a long way. Shoot, Chambers could be a fantastic RPO quarterback. The only thing I disagree with is that if we do get our offense to good, we won't just compete, we will dominate this conference. We just need to get it to bad to mediocre to compete for a championship.

Haha. Tomayto, Tomahto.

OrediggerPoke wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 6:11 am

Brown and Gold wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:32 am Bohl is average at best and deserves harsh criticism for his inability to improve the weak areas of his program. He knows what needs to change and doesn't have the courage to do it. We are never going to win the division or conference under Bohl.

BS.

Bohl is average, if not below average. I wasn't a math major, but I do know that an overall record at Wyoming of 35-40 and a conference record of 23-25 is below average. Now I don't advocate Bohl being fired because I actually like some of the things he has done. But his offenses are woefully ineffective and need to change. If not, and he sticks around another 10 years, we will be having this same discussion over and over and over again, and Craig Bohl will still be average at best. Things need to change. Even I, the little league coach can see this.

Interesting stats to mull over, moral of the story, we are Wyoming home of medocrity, always has always will

stymeman wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 8:15 am Interesting stats to mull over, moral of the story, we are Wyoming home of medocrity, always has always will

Unfortunately true...no matter how you slice it..if the you widen your window past a single year result, Wyoming football really regresses to a slightly below winning team with the exeption being the tail ends of the 80s and 90s.

If you lined up Bohl's best team vs Glenn's and their 2nd, 3rd, etc. I believe Glenn's teams would have the overall advantage. Ironically, Bohl's best team was when the offense had a pulse and the D wasn't that great.

I really like both coaches. I have them at a tie. I think many of Bohl's teams would have been blown out in the MWC of the past. I can't imagine what some of those TCU defenses would have done to Vigen's offense.

Again, I like Bohl but with a very weak schedule, better budget and resources relative to the teams he plays compared to any past coach, and still having one of the worst offenses in CFB that squeaks by a bottom 1/3 SOS, makes me think he hasn't exactly moved mountains. I'm happy to have him as coach but would like to see him improve the offense.

Side note and trivia Wed. Anyone remember what Burman said about offense when he fired Glenn?

SheepSlayer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:37 am

ItSucksToBeACSURam wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:31 am

Brown and Gold wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:32 am Bohl is average at best and deserves harsh criticism for his inability to improve the weak areas of his program. He knows what needs to change and doesn't have the courage to do it. We are never going to win the division or conference under Bohl.

Not again. Not as currently constructed. We need a change on the offensive side of the ball. Being around the 100 mark or worse will not get it done. Bohl has shown, when he can get the offense to good (if not VERY good) we can compete with the best in the conference. I cannot imagine next season we will have a team with 6, 7, 8, 9, 10+ NFL players like we did in 2016 so we will have to make up the difference through play calling and execution. If Bohl refuses to change Vigen or play calling, why not simplify the scheme? We keep hearing how difficult the scheme is, how complex it is. Why? Who is it fooling? The defenses know to load the box, clog the A gap, and the Pokes offense stops. Why not simplify the scheme? Maybe cull the play book. Instead of 76 different variations of the dive, have say, 3 versions of the dive. Have 3 versions of the blast. Have 3 different screens. Slants, outs, sweeps etc. Why are we running this incredibly complex scheme if the only team its confusing is us?

Exactly, you do not need to air it out deep every play to improve the offense. Having a few misdirection runs and quick passes will go a long way. Shoot, Chambers could be a fantastic RPO quarterback. The only thing I disagree with is that if we do get our offense to good, we won't just compete, we will dominate this conference. We just need to get it to bad to mediocre to compete for a championship.

This is what frustrates me, you don't have to change much to make the offense more productive. Just don't call an effin HB Dive every first down, and 50% of the 2nd downs. It's one thing if you are just dominating the LOS but when you are getting 1 or 2 yards most people would think to try something new. Maybe a run to the outside, a screen, slants or crossing routes, anything to back the opposing LBs up a bit.....

HR_Poke wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 9:52 am

SheepSlayer wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:37 am

ItSucksToBeACSURam wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 7:31 am

Brown and Gold wrote: ↑Wed Dec 04, 2019 12:32 am Bohl is average at best and deserves harsh criticism for his inability to improve the weak areas of his program. He knows what needs to change and doesn't have the courage to do it. We are never going to win the division or conference under Bohl.

Not again. Not as currently constructed. We need a change on the offensive side of the ball. Being around the 100 mark or worse will not get it done. Bohl has shown, when he can get the offense to good (if not VERY good) we can compete with the best in the conference. I cannot imagine next season we will have a team with 6, 7, 8, 9, 10+ NFL players like we did in 2016 so we will have to make up the difference through play calling and execution. If Bohl refuses to change Vigen or play calling, why not simplify the scheme? We keep hearing how difficult the scheme is, how complex it is. Why? Who is it fooling? The defenses know to load the box, clog the A gap, and the Pokes offense stops. Why not simplify the scheme? Maybe cull the play book. Instead of 76 different variations of the dive, have say, 3 versions of the dive. Have 3 versions of the blast. Have 3 different screens. Slants, outs, sweeps etc. Why are we running this incredibly complex scheme if the only team its confusing is us?

Exactly, you do not need to air it out deep every play to improve the offense. Having a few misdirection runs and quick passes will go a long way. Shoot, Chambers could be a fantastic RPO quarterback. The only thing I disagree with is that if we do get our offense to good, we won't just compete, we will dominate this conference. We just need to get it to bad to mediocre to compete for a championship.

This is what frustrates me, you don't have to change much to make the offense more productive. Just don't call an effin HB Dive every first down, and 50% of the 2nd downs. It's one thing if you are just dominating the LOS but when you are getting 1 or 2 yards most people would think to try something new. Maybe a run to the outside, a screen, slants or crossing routes, anything to back the opposing LBs up a bit.....

If you look at last year, we were 2-6 when Chambers got his first start. We definitely played lesser competition the last 4 games but regardless the offense caught fire. Chambers ran out of the shotgun and we ran a lot of misdirection. We didn't air it out and we still were based on a power run game, but we gave the defense a little to think about. So what do we do in the offseason? We put Chambers back under center and reinstated dive left dive right. Don't get me wrong, I love getting under center (I was appalled under DC when we would have 2 inches to gain and would still be in shotgun to run up the middle) and playing power football but the LBs should at least have to make a read to plug the hole rather than knowing exactly which hole to plug prior to the play.