Attempt to predict by looking back

[307bball]

I think the entire Bohl Era is long enough to be stiatistically significant and it was an example of what should at least be possible at Wyoming. I went through and looked at Wyoming's record against teams that will be in the new MWC starting next year and did the same for teams that will be in the new PAC starting next year.

Record against teams in the new MWC: 23-16
Record against teams in the new PAC: 15-22

Obviously, at this moment, Sawful probably couldn't win in any conference. The point of this was to see how "competetive" we were against those two cohorts of teams over that period of time. I didn't do this for each team in both groups so I can't compare that but it's obvious we are better competetively in the new MWC than in the new PAC. In fact, with the exception of CSU (haha), we probably have the worst success if ranked against that group. In the new MWC group, we would were right there in the mix with the top teams over that time span.

All this to say, If we assume that Sawful is eventually fired (please, please, please), Wyoming is a place that has shown it can structurally compete and even do very well against the new conference. For some reason i'm just not excited for this ... am I crazy? Is it wrong to feel this way?

 

[Steamboat]

I think the entire Bohl Era is long enough to be stiatistically significant and it was an example of what should at least be possible at Wyoming. I went through and looked at Wyoming's record against teams that will be in the new MWC starting next year and did the same for teams that will be in the new PAC starting next year.

Record against teams in the new MWC: 23-16
Record against teams in the new PAC: 15-22

Obviously, at this moment, Sawful probably couldn't win in any conference. The point of this was to see how "competetive" we were against those two cohorts of teams over that period of time. I didn't do this for each team in both groups so I can't compare that but it's obvious we are better competetively in the new MWC than in the new PAC. In fact, with the exception of CSU (haha), we probably have the worst success if ranked against that group. In the new MWC group, we would were right there in the mix with the top teams over that time span.

All this to say, If we assume that Sawful is eventually fired (please, please, please), Wyoming is a place that has shown it can structurally compete and even do very well against the new conference. For some reason i'm just not excited for this ... am I crazy? Is it wrong to feel this way?

"Wyoming is a place that has shown it can structurally compete and even do very well against the new conference." Add you will get a contract extension every other year.

 

[cowpoke pride]

All this to say, If we assume that Sawful is eventually fired (please, please, please), Wyoming is a place that has shown it can structurally compete and even do very well against the new conference. For some reason i'm just not excited for this ... am I crazy? Is it wrong to feel this way?

No, its not wrong to feel that we. We were supposed to compete when TCU, Utah and BYC left also. In the 15 years since, we appeared in (and actually hosted) one CCG and realistically were conference champion contenders maybe 2 other seasons.

 

[TheRealUW]

I think the entire Bohl Era is long enough to be stiatistically significant and it was an example of what should at least be possible at Wyoming. I went through and looked at Wyoming's record against teams that will be in the new MWC starting next year and did the same for teams that will be in the new PAC starting next year.

Record against teams in the new MWC: 23-16
Record against teams in the new PAC: 15-22

Obviously, at this moment, Sawful probably couldn't win in any conference. The point of this was to see how "competetive" we were against those two cohorts of teams over that period of time. I didn't do this for each team in both groups so I can't compare that but it's obvious we are better competetively in the new MWC than in the new PAC. In fact, with the exception of CSU (haha), we probably have the worst success if ranked against that group. In the new MWC group, we would were right there in the mix with the top teams over that time span.

All this to say, If we assume that Sawful is eventually fired (please, please, please), Wyoming is a place that has shown it can structurally compete and even do very well against the new conference. For some reason i'm just not excited for this ... am I crazy? Is it wrong to feel this way?

I think a lot of fans feel this way.

We aren't just moving down in competition level, we are also now in a conference with teams that have no historic or geographic relevance to us. These school aren't so much "peer intuitions" as they are schools that just happened to have about the same athletic brand relevance and media valuation as us.

It really hit home with me when the MWC started calling UNLV and Air Force the conference's "flagship programs" and agreed to give them more money. UNLV has a pretty anemic football history and hasn't really had a good basketball program in almost three decades. Air Force has one of the worst basketball programs in the entire region and the football program hasn't been nationally relevant in a long time. When these two are your "flagship programs", you know you are in trouble.

I know a lot of people seem to think the teams that left for the PAC are, at the very least, going to end up in about the same situation as the current MWC teams. I disagree. I believe the PAC teams are in a much better position to thrive financially and athletically long-term than the MWC teams are. Only time will tell though.