OC.....

[307bball]

The coming budget scrutiny (at least many are predicting this) will be justifiable and necessary.

I fear 19 years of complaceny, acceptance of mediocrity, and bemoaning theoretical outside forces will come to bite UW in the coming budget discussions. Reality is that we can't field a fbs team without taxpayer money. Now the game changed and UW athletics needs more money. Does the question finally arise, "for what?"? Will "we played a part in the Josh Allen story" be enough or does someone finally point out that you're the worst athletic department in the MWC and among the worst in g6? If the latter, does funding start to follow achievements? That will be the nail in the coffin. Thanks, TB

I think I largely agree with your diagnosis even if I don’t agree with your attribution. Yes—mediocrity and complacency exist. You’d be hard-pressed to find anyone outside the UW bubble who would argue otherwise. Where I part ways with you is the idea that this mediocrity is some conscious, daily choice being made by leadership.

I don’t see people choosing mediocrity. I see mediocre people in positions with very limited power to materially change outcomes. That’s an important distinction. Internal inertia and very real external constraints shape results far more than intent does. And there’s an irony here when we talk about accountability and compensation: there is a level of pay beyond which the results we’re getting become clearly unjustifiable. I’m not convinced we’re actually there yet.

In fact, if UW truly wanted to change its trajectory, the fastest way would be to radically change who is willing to work here. Double the compensation for top-level administrators—President, AD, deans—and suddenly Wyoming becomes an attractive destination for an entirely different tier of talent. As it stands, we aim for “competitive” pay and then act surprised when we’re subject to the same market forces you’re so reluctant to acknowledge. Saying “we could get these results for much less” isn’t fiscal realism—it’s the express lane to FCS irrelevance. We’ve been drifting that direction for a while already.

And one last thing: the outside forces you dismiss aren’t theoretical. Difficult to quantify is not the same thing as imaginary. Economists study labor deployment and geographic friction constantly. Despite Wyoming’s lower cost of living, the cost to hire is high if you want quality. That’s true whether you’re recruiting an electrical engineer or an offensive coordinator. Geography matters. Markets matter. Ignoring that reality doesn’t make it go away.

 

[The Juice]

How about an OC who has been in the NFL as a coach and even as a head coach along with being the OC for Belichek at UNC?

He’s out of a job right now and I could easily see the UW media write up followed by an almost 100% regurgitation of the write up across the entire 2-4 Wyoming sports media outlets that have the ability to research the candidate and do their own writing.

Please don’t ruin the surprise by looking up Freddie Kitchens because all you need to know is his resume looks impressive if you just look at the job titles and employers ignoring the annoying performance details that don’t really reflect what a good deal Wyoming will be getting with recruits clamoring to be in association with those who have contacts with the big boys.

That's great, and why would Freddie Kitchens be interested in becoming the OC at Wyoming? Someone with so many connections with "big boys" (none of whom are associated with Wyoming) is probably going to join forces with one of those connections, don't you think?

 

[PorkerPoke]

That's great, and why would Freddie Kitchens be interested in becoming the OC at Wyoming? Someone with so many connections with "big boys" (none of whom are associated with Wyoming) is probably going to join forces with one of those connections, don't you think?

Sarcasm - look up Freddie and you will see another version of Jay Johnson and maybe not even that good…

 

[PorkerPoke]

James Madison hired their OC.

Jacksonville State is looking for an OC.

Wyoming is still competing with 8 other G level programs in finding the OC of choice.

 

[cowpoke pride]

Could be a complete overaction on my part, but every day that goes by without out a hire makes me more worried about next season.

 

[OrediggerPoke]

Could be a complete overaction on my part, but every day that goes by without out a hire makes me more worried about next season.

How so? You are optimistic about next season if we bring in an OC? I have little optimism either way.

 

[cowpoke pride]

How so? You are optimistic about next season if we bring in an OC? I have little optimism either way.

With possibly the worst schedule in the country next year, anything is possible......

 

[ragtimejoe1]

I think I largely agree with your diagnosis even if I don’t agree with your attribution. Yes—mediocrity and complacency exist. You’d be hard-pressed to find anyone outside the UW bubble who would argue otherwise. Where I part ways with you is the idea that this mediocrity is some conscious, daily choice being made by leadership.

I don’t see people choosing mediocrity. I see mediocre people in positions with very limited power to materially change outcomes. That’s an important distinction. Internal inertia and very real external constraints shape results far more than intent does. And there’s an irony here when we talk about accountability and compensation: there is a level of pay beyond which the results we’re getting become clearly unjustifiable. I’m not convinced we’re actually there yet.

In fact, if UW truly wanted to change its trajectory, the fastest way would be to radically change who is willing to work here. Double the compensation for top-level administrators—President, AD, deans—and suddenly Wyoming becomes an attractive destination for an entirely different tier of talent. As it stands, we aim for “competitive” pay and then act surprised when we’re subject to the same market forces you’re so reluctant to acknowledge. Saying “we could get these results for much less” isn’t fiscal realism—it’s the express lane to FCS irrelevance. We’ve been drifting that direction for a while already.

And one last thing: the outside forces you dismiss aren’t theoretical. Difficult to quantify is not the same thing as imaginary. Economists study labor deployment and geographic friction constantly. Despite Wyoming’s lower cost of living, the cost to hire is high if you want quality. That’s true whether you’re recruiting an electrical engineer or an offensive coordinator. Geography matters. Markets matter. Ignoring that reality doesn’t make it go away.

Maybe you're not, but it seems you're missing the point. It's not like WYO has no outside force problems like markets and geography, which BTW, also contribute to strengths and potential strengths like a single university for the state and fans to invest interest and money in. Yes, limitations exist but they exist in sorm form or another for every damn g6 team. WYO's are no more insurmountable than any other g6 team. Maybe and I stress maybe there are a few like bsu who are living off the brand PEOPLE built over the past few decades. G6 is our only measuring stick. Any comparison to p4 is nonsense.

The problem is, as Sterbrrg said, the excuses might be true but they're insufficient. WYO has a history of excusing people failures because of the challenges that all g6 teams face. It's important because if one doesn't recognize the reason for failure one can't address correcting failure. WYO athletics has let the excuse machine cover for incompetence resulting in the unwillingness to address incompetence leading to a complete failure of the athletic department. The focus has been trying to create a perfect environment for the people in those positions to succeed and using the external factor excuse when they don't. Instead the focus should have been and be, create the best environment possible and find people who can succeed in the environment provided.

Accepting mediocrity and using the external excuses have created a self perpetuating cycle of irrelevance and failure.

 

[307bball]

Maybe you're not, but it seems you're missing the point. It's not like WYO has no outside force problems like markets and geography, which BTW, also contribute to strengths and potential strengths like a single university for the state and fans to invest interest and money in. Yes, limitations exist but they exist in sorm form or another for every damn g6 team. WYO's are no more insurmountable than any other g6 team. Maybe and I stress maybe there are a few like bsu who are living off the brand PEOPLE built over the past few decades. G6 is our only measuring stick. Any comparison to p4 is nonsense.

The problem is, as Sterbrrg said, the excuses might be true but they're insufficient. WYO has a history of excusing people failures because of the challenges that all g6 teams face. It's important because if one doesn't recognize the reason for failure one can't address correcting failure. WYO athletics has let the excuse machine cover for incompetence resulting in the unwillingness to address incompetence leading to a complete failure of the athletic department. The focus has been trying to create a perfect environment for the people in those positions to succeed and using the external factor excuse when they don't. Instead the focus should have been and be, create the best environment possible and find people who can succeed in the environment provided.

Accepting mediocrity and using the external excuses have created a self perpetuating cycle of irrelevance and failure.

A lot to agree with...There is a complexity here that I'm trying to disentangle. A couple things.

It beggars belief that the pluses and minuses somehow add up to a wash when comparing Wyoming to its G6 peers in talent acquisition and retention. Every serious analysis of labor markets shows a real penalty for geographic remoteness. That penalty doesn’t disappear because it’s inconvenient to measure. Over time, it shows up in results.

On causality: Nobody disputes that many of the people in charge haven’t been very good. What’s harder to separate is how much of that is cause versus selection effect. When jobs are harder, pay less, and offer less upside than peer positions, the pool of candidates changes. The mistakes then get labeled incompetence when they’re often predictable outcomes of a constrained market. That doesn’t excuse failure—but it does explain why failure compounds faster here.

The cycle wasn’t created by “using excuses.” The language came later, as people tried to explain why the same errors are more punishing at Wyoming than at most G6 schools.

I also don’t buy that Wyoming’s measuring stick should be NMSU, SJSU, NIU, or whoever else happens to be in the league. Wyoming athletics was built on a stronger brand than that. And it’s hard to miss how places like Provo, Salt Lake City, Boise—and even Fort Collins—have materially changed while we haven’t. Those weren’t attitude shifts; they were market and environment changes.

The real failure isn’t acknowledging external forces—it’s failing to respond to them appropriately. Wyoming has to invest more than peers without those disadvantages just to get comparable results. That’s not excuse-making; it’s pricing reality. Ignoring it doesn’t create accountability—it creates churn and decline.

 

[TheRealUW]

A lot to agree with...There is a complexity here that I'm trying to disentangle. A couple things.

It beggars belief that the pluses and minuses somehow add up to a wash when comparing Wyoming to its G6 peers in talent acquisition and retention. Every serious analysis of labor markets shows a real penalty for geographic remoteness. That penalty doesn’t disappear because it’s inconvenient to measure. Over time, it shows up in results.

On causality: Nobody disputes that many of the people in charge haven’t been very good. What’s harder to separate is how much of that is cause versus selection effect. When jobs are harder, pay less, and offer less upside than peer positions, the pool of candidates changes. The mistakes then get labeled incompetence when they’re often predictable outcomes of a constrained market. That doesn’t excuse failure—but it does explain why failure compounds faster here.

The cycle wasn’t created by “using excuses.” The language came later, as people tried to explain why the same errors are more punishing at Wyoming than at most G6 schools.

I also don’t buy that Wyoming’s measuring stick should be NMSU, SJSU, NIU, or whoever else happens to be in the league. Wyoming athletics was built on a stronger brand than that. And it’s hard to miss how places like Provo, Salt Lake City, Boise—and even Fort Collins—have materially changed while we haven’t. Those weren’t attitude shifts; they were market and environment changes.

The real failure isn’t acknowledging external forces—it’s failing to respond to them appropriately. Wyoming has to invest more than peers without those disadvantages just to get comparable results. That’s not excuse-making; it’s pricing reality. Ignoring it doesn’t create accountability—it creates churn and decline.

You sort of touch on this in a lot of your posts, but I think it is important to state it explicitly - for UW athletics to become competitive at the highest level of college athletics, the entire state of Wyoming is going to have to change. Not just the UW Athletic’s Department, not just UW, and not just Laramie.

This presents a real conundrum because a lot of what Wyomingites love about the state is that it is not like any other place in the country. Wyoming has largely eschewed economic diversification/development in part to keep the way of life that is so unique to Wyoming.

As college athletics have morphed into professional leagues, it has laid bare the economic disadvantage Wyoming is at, at least in some part due to Wyomingite’s own choices.

Ultimately, the question becomes whether Wyoming is willing to invest in radical change that could take 10+ years to see the ROI in order to keep UW athletics competitive on a consistent basis?

 

[ragtimejoe1]

You sort of touch on this in a lot of your posts, but I think it is important to state it explicitly - for UW athletics to become competitive at the highest level of college athletics, the entire state of Wyoming is going to have to change. Not just the UW Athletic’s Department, not just UW, and not just Laramie.

This presents a real conundrum because a lot of what Wyomingites love about the state is that it is not like any other place in the country. Wyoming has largely eschewed economic diversification/development in part to keep the way of life that is so unique to Wyoming.

As college athletics have morphed into professional leagues, it has laid bare the economic disadvantage Wyoming is at, at least in some part due to Wyomingite’s own choices.

Ultimately, the question becomes whether Wyoming is willing to invest in radical change that could take 10+ years to see the ROI in order to keep UW athletics competitive on a consistent basis?

Let me put it this way, with the right people who i believe are in our budget, WYO could be an upper 1/4 g6 team with our current level of investment.

 

[TheRealUW]

Let me put it this way, with the right people who i believe are in our budget, WYO could be an upper 1/4 g6 team with our current level of investment.

Who, exactly, are the people that you believe can turn things around and are in our current budget?

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Who, exactly, are the people that you believe can turn things around and are in our current budget?

It depends on the position. Strictly from an athletics standpoint, I think Sterberg was the right hire and Burman's days were numbered with him in charge. For AD, that would take a little research but would have to be synergized with the ambitious president.

Coaching? There are probably more options than we'd like to admit. I truly believe we would have had a shot at Bronco for example keeping Bohl's salary level. Yeah, he left for usu but obviously put some pieces in place.

WYO is a bad job because people made it a bad job and used the limitations as an excuse for their bad job.