Vote for Burman's worst decision (or lack of)!!

[Douglaspoke]

Bohl was 9-4 last season: several 7-8 win seasons before that

IF SAWFUL had gone 10-2 with a Win over A State /BYU and MWC CHampionship in his first year..
Wyoming fan base would be rocking. CJC membership going crazy--Season tixs sale changed upwards.

PAC10 Invite likely? or at least in the discussions.

By 2021, UW wasn’t standing at a fork in the road. It was already playing catch-up in a system that was about to punish small, remote programs even more severely

 

[McPeachy]

The decline was already baked in well before NIL, the portal, and the Pac/MWC chaos became the dominant issues.

The decline was "already baked in" when he got the position following Barta in the summer of 2006. However, the last 5+ years has been monumental in the decline of UW athletics (all athletics, sans maybe Rodeo). Sure, he was shitty to begin with, but he is much shittier currently.

Let's use the Burger King analogy. Yes, it sucked 20 years ago, but recently with smaller portions, higher prices, awful service, and dirty facilities, it is 10x worse.

 

[OrediggerPoke]

Bohl was 9-4 last season: several 7-8 win seasons before that

IF SAWFUL had gone 10-2 with a Win over A State /BYU and MWC CHampionship in his first year..
Wyoming fan base would be rocking. CJC membership going crazy--Season tixs sale changed upwards.

PAC10 Invite likely? or at least in the discussions.

Yep.

And Sawvel was hired because of continuity. We brought back the vast majority of starters from the 9-4 team and turned it into a 3-9 team that couldn’t even beat Idaho at home or even be competitive with any decent team on the schedule.

To say this downturn is because of NIL, the Black-14 or any other excuse folks are coming up with is pure bullshit. Burman and Sawvel are directly responsible for dismantling the program at the absolute worst time possible.

 

[307bball]

Bohl was 9-4 last season: several 7-8 win seasons before that

IF SAWFUL had gone 10-2 with a Win over A State /BYU and MWC CHampionship in his first year..
Wyoming fan base would be rocking. CJC membership going crazy--Season tixs sale changed upwards.

PAC10 Invite likely? or at least in the discussions.

My guess...and it could be completely wrong, is that if things had gone as you say, the chances of getting a P invite would go from zero to zero plus something small.

As it stands right now...nobody outside of Wyoming thinks of UW as a conference expansion candidate. UW is not even mentioned when discussing marginal candidadates. Thrown in a 10-2 Sawfull season as you describe and the only thing that changes is it would force us into the "marginal candidate" discussion but that is it.

 

[McPeachy]

My guess...and it could be completely wrong, is that if things had gone as you say, the chances of getting a P invite would go from zero to zero plus something small.

As it stands right now...nobody outside of Wyoming thinks of UW as a conference expansion candidate. UW is not even mentioned when discussing marginal candidadates. Thrown in a 10-2 Sawfull season as you describe and the only thing that changes is it would force us into the "marginal candidate" discussion but that is it.

Hmmm.

Burman stated emphatically, on numerous occasions, that he was going to model UW Football after Boise State. If that was actually accomplished, things would be completely different, and yes, an "invitation" would have been forthcoming. Not that it means much, as I would rather have a string of conference championships - six in fact - than anything, including joining another G6 conference.

 

[307bball]

Yep.

And Sawvel was hired because of continuity. We brought back the vast majority of starters from the 9-4 team and turned it into a 3-9 team that couldn’t even beat Idaho at home or even be competitive with any decent team on the schedule.

To say this downturn is because of NIL, the Black-14 or any other excuse folks are coming up with is pure bullshit. Burman and Sawvel are directly responsible for dismantling the program at the absolute worst time possible.

I think people are mixing together two related but separate things.

Thing 1: Sawvel’s quality as a coach.
Thing 2: The long-term systemic problems facing UW athletics, both internal and external.

Those two things obviously affect each other, but they are not the same issue. You could replace Sawvel with a legitimately great coach and things in Laramie would be better. They might even be a lot better. But that still would not come close to reversing the larger structural problems UW is dealing with.

My guess is that even in some alternate reality where Wyoming was a perennial top-tier Mountain West program, Sawvel still wouldn’t be the guy. Burman made the wrong hire. He clearly prioritized continuity, and the jury is no longer out on whether that worked. It didn’t.

But that does not mean Sawvel is the whole explanation for where UW is. Wyoming has been trying to swim upstream in a college athletics environment that has become brutally difficult for a school like this. The case study for extreme success at Wyoming’s level is Boise State, and that was not just “hire a good coach and win games.” Boise won a ton, but the school and community also grew in ways that were never realistically going to happen in Laramie.

Moderate success was more realistic. That probably looks something like being consistently competitive in the Mountain West, occasionally winning the league, and at least being talked about as a program with enough value to be attractive in realignment conversations. I don’t fault Burman for failing to turn Wyoming into Boise State. That seems like an unreasonable expectation. But there was a path to being much better than this, and the fork in that road came well before NIL, the portal, and the latest round of realignment chaos.

So yes, Sawvel looks like a bad coach. And yes, Burman deserves blame for hiring him. But the bigger indictment of Burman is not that he missed on one coach. It’s that after two decades, Wyoming was still so fragile that one bad continuity hire could expose just how little had actually been built. I have pointed out in the past some of these problems were percolating even before Burman but I truly don't believe that it was too late back in '06 when he was hired.

 

[307bball]

Hmmm.

Burman stated emphatically, on numerous occasions, that he was going to model UW Football after Boise State. If that was actually accomplished, things would be completely different, and yes, an "invitation" would have been forthcoming. Not that it means much, as I would rather have a string of conference championships - six in fact - than anything, including joining another G6 conference.

Agreed, If Wyoming and BSU had swapped fortunes, since 2006, it would be Wyoming that would be the darling.

As far as Burman modelling UW football after BSU.....he should be reminded that the one thing he could do like BSU does, is fire underperforming coaches. The rest of what has gone on in Boise is not happinign in Laramie nor is it within the control of an AD. So...I don't care what he says, a coach that performs like Sawvell does wouldn't get out of his first season in Boise. Whatever Burman is doing, it doesn't even rhyme with what BSU is doing.

 

[OrediggerPoke]

I think people are mixing together two related but separate things.

Thing 1: Sawvel’s quality as a coach.
Thing 2: The long-term systemic problems facing UW athletics, both internal and external.

Those two things obviously affect each other, but they are not the same issue. You could replace Sawvel with a legitimately great coach and things in Laramie would be better. They might even be a lot better. But that still would not come close to reversing the larger structural problems UW is dealing with.

My guess is that even in some alternate reality where Wyoming was a perennial top-tier Mountain West program, Sawvel still wouldn’t be the guy. Burman made the wrong hire. He clearly prioritized continuity, and the jury is no longer out on whether that worked. It didn’t.

But that does not mean Sawvel is the whole explanation for where UW is. Wyoming has been trying to swim upstream in a college athletics environment that has become brutally difficult for a school like this. The case study for extreme success at Wyoming’s level is Boise State, and that was not just “hire a good coach and win games.” Boise won a ton, but the school and community also grew in ways that were never realistically going to happen in Laramie.

Moderate success was more realistic. That probably looks something like being consistently competitive in the Mountain West, occasionally winning the league, and at least being talked about as a program with enough value to be attractive in realignment conversations. I don’t fault Burman for failing to turn Wyoming into Boise State. That seems like an unreasonable expectation. But there was a path to being much better than this, and the fork in that road came well before NIL, the portal, and the latest round of realignment chaos.

So yes, Sawvel looks like a bad coach. And yes, Burman deserves blame for hiring him. But the bigger indictment of Burman is not that he missed on one coach. It’s that after two decades, Wyoming was still so fragile that one bad continuity hire could expose just how little had actually been built. I have pointed out in the past some of these problems were percolating even before Burman but I truly don't believe that it was too late back in '06 when he was hired.

I'm not conflating anything.

It is pretty simple. Wyoming was 9-4. Wyoming was able to retain almost the entire roster of that 9-4 team. Wyoming proceeded to go 3-9 at the exact moment when Wyoming's conference future was up in the air. Had Wyoming been successful that season, it is pretty clear to me that Wyoming likely would have had other options than agreeing to pay UNLV and Air Force a bunch of money to hang on to this concept of the MWC. Wyoming looked awful and its options were thus limited. We are now stuck in crappy conference, with a crappy media deal, with a crappy outlook and no real hope. What else is there to say?

 

[307bball]

I'm not conflating anything.

It is pretty simple. Wyoming was 9-4. Wyoming was able to retain almost the entire roster of that 9-4 team. Wyoming proceeded to go 3-9 at the exact moment when Wyoming's conference future was up in the air. Had Wyoming been successful that season, it is pretty clear to me that Wyoming likely would have had other options than agreeing to pay UNLV and Air Force a bunch of money to hang on to this concept of the MWC. Wyoming looked awful and its options were thus limited. We are now stuck in crappy conference, with a crappy media deal, with a crappy outlook and no real hope. What else is there to say?

I’m just trying to keep the two things separate conceptually because I think they actually are separate.

Where I think we disagree is on how much a 10-2 type season would have changed Wyoming’s realignment fortunes. I’ll fully admit I don’t know exactly what gets said behind closed doors in conference realignment discussions. None of us really do. And yes, from the outside, going 3-9 that year looked bad.

With that said, I don’t think Boise State, Oregon State, Washington State, or anyone else was sitting around waiting for Wyoming’s 2024 record to be finalized before deciding what UW was worth. These things cook for years. They are built around more than one season's high or low.

So yeah, going 3-9 didn’t help. At most, I’ll concede that going 10-2 would not have hurt. It would have been more fun and less embarrassing for sure, but I don’t buy that one strong season would have created some meaningfully different set of conference options.

The problem is much bigger than one season, even one that happened at the worst possible time.

 

[OrediggerPoke]

I’m just trying to keep the two things separate conceptually because I think they actually are separate.

Where I think we disagree is on how much a 10-2 type season would have changed Wyoming’s realignment fortunes. I’ll fully admit I don’t know exactly what gets said behind closed doors in conference realignment discussions. None of us really do. And yes, from the outside, going 3-9 that year looked bad.

With that said, I don’t think Boise State, Oregon State, Washington State, or anyone else was sitting around waiting for Wyoming’s 2024 record to be finalized before deciding what UW was worth. These things cook for years. They are built around more than one season's high or low.

So yeah, going 3-9 didn’t help. At most, I’ll concede that going 10-2 would not have hurt. It would have been more fun and less embarrassing for sure, but I don’t buy that one strong season would have created some meaningfully different set of conference options.

The problem is much bigger than one season, even one that happened at the worst possible time.

We had to get on our knees and beg UNLV and Air Force with $25-$30 million extra each to stay. I highly doubt that would have been the case had Wyoming had a great season. We would have had other options than paying a bunch of a money to a historically awful program just so we had a place to play.

 

[307bball]

We had to get on our knees and beg UNLV and Air Force with $25-$30 million extra each to stay. I highly doubt that would have been the case had Wyoming had a great season. We would have had other options than paying a bunch of a money to a historically awful program just so we had a place to play.

The "we" in your statement here is not Wyoming...it was the remainder of the MWC.

Your claim seems to be that, holding everything else the same, Wyoming was 6 to 8 more football wins in 2024 from being considered like AFA and UNLV in terms of conference realignment? I admire the simplicity of it.... If that is what you are saying, I don't think that is accurate. Ultimately...it's a counter-factual that is not proveable..but it explains some of the thinking that I'm seeing. We don't all have to have the same opinion.

 

[307bball]

We had to get on our knees and beg UNLV and Air Force with $25-$30 million extra each to stay. I highly doubt that would have been the case had Wyoming had a great season. We would have had other options than paying a bunch of a money to a historically awful program just so we had a place to play.

Just had to look at the standings that year ... maybe they just said "hey, let's invite the top 6 MW teams from this year!". But UNLV and AFA negotiated more money to stay....but they took SDSU who also had three wins that year as well as a 4 win Utah State...hmmm methinks more was going on than whatever the football teams accomplished that year.

Boise State
Nevada-Las Vegas
Colorado State
Fresno State
San Jose State
Air Force
Hawaii
New Mexico
Utah State
San Diego State
Wyoming
Nevada

 

[OrediggerPoke]

Just had to look at the standings that year ... maybe they just said "hey, let's invite the top 6 MW teams from this year!". But UNLV and AFA negotiated more money to stay....but they took SDSU who also had three wins that year as well as a 4 win Utah State...hmmm methinks more was going on than whatever the football teams accomplished that year.

Boise State
Nevada-Las Vegas
Colorado State
Fresno State
San Jose State
Air Force
Hawaii
New Mexico
Utah State
San Diego State
Wyoming
Nevada

Yes we will disagree.

If Wyoming had a successful program, they would have had much more leverage than caving to meet the demands to pay exorbitant dollars to Air Force and UNLV to preserve a very watered down MWC. They could have said no and perhaps the dominos fall very differently and Wyoming tags along with its partners Air Force and New Mexico to be football only in the AAC and park its other sports someplace else (like the Big Sky). That would have been a much better outcome. There are a whole host of outcomes that you aren't considering in your very linear thinking.

 

[307bball]

Yes we will disagree.

If Wyoming had a successful program, they would have had much more leverage than caving to meet the demands to pay exorbitant dollars to Air Force and UNLV to preserve a very watered down MWC. They could have said no and perhaps the dominos fall very differently and Wyoming tags along with its partners Air Force and New Mexico to be football only in the AAC and park its other sports someplace else (like the Big Sky). That would have been a much better outcome. There are a whole host of outcomes that you aren't considering in your very linear thinking.

The counter-factual was comparing a hypothetical situationwherein nothing changed except Sawvel gets 9 or 10 wins in 2024. That alone does not make Wyoming a "successful" program. I think it's worth making that part clear...that is what I was talking about.

I do believe that if Wyoming had been a "successful program" in the 10 years or so leading up to 2024 (meaning top half finishes in football and Mbb every year and a chip or two in both), then things get interesting. Having a competetive spike or drought in football in 2024 doesn't move the needle (much).

Sorry for the pedantic explanation...I just feel like we were not talking about the same thing.

 

[OrediggerPoke]

The counter-factual was comparing a hypothetical situationwherein nothing changed except Sawvel gets 9 or 10 wins in 2024. That alone does not make Wyoming a "successful" program. I think it's worth making that part clear...that is what I was talking about.

I do believe that if Wyoming had been a "successful program" in the 10 years or so leading up to 2024 (meaning top half finishes in football and Mbb every year and a chip or two in both), then things get interesting. Having a competetive spike or drought in football in 2024 doesn't move the needle (much).

Sorry for the pedantic explanation...I just feel like we were not talking about the same thing.

No. The very shitty 2024 campaign (and awful basketball program to a lesser extent) is the most direct cause of Wyoming’s non-existent options in the latest reassortment of deck chairs on the Titanic.

However, If football and basketball were solid programs the last 10 years, no doubt all options are available to Wyoming (including equal PAC membership).

 

[Wyolie Coyote]

Agreed, If Wyoming and BSU had swapped fortunes, since 2006, it would be Wyoming that would be the darling.

As far as Burman modelling UW football after BSU.....he should be reminded that the one thing he could do like BSU does, is fire underperforming coaches. The rest of what has gone on in Boise is not happinign in Laramie nor is it within the control of an AD. So...I don't care what he says, a coach that performs like Sawvell does wouldn't get out of his first season in Boise. Whatever Burman is doing, it doesn't even rhyme with what BSU is doing.

Boise invested in people, winning people. Then built facilities. Burman invested in bricks and mortar. He did not model anything after Boise.

 

[McPeachy]

Burman invested in bricks and mortar.

Very half-assery, I agree.

AA reseating, WAR reseating, AA renovation, Wildcatter ends missing, Using the IPF for tailgate so the team can't use it Friday / Saturday, Etc.

 

[307bball]

No. The very shitty 2024 campaign (and awful basketball program to a lesser extent) is the most direct cause of Wyoming’s non-existent options in the latest reassortment of deck chairs on the Titanic.

However, If football and basketball were solid programs the last 10 years, no doubt all options are available to Wyoming (including equal PAC membership).

Put it this way: if everything else remains exactly the same ... same basketball program, same market, same media value, same geography, same alumni base, same prior decade of results, same institutional profile ... but Wyoming goes 10-2 instead of 3-9, what actually changes? Is Wyoming suddenly getting a PAC invite? Is UNLV suddenly less valuable because Wyoming won more football games? Is someone cutting UW a check to stay? I just don’t see it. It would have changed the mood. It would have made the season a hell of a lot more fun. It would have avoided an embarrassing faceplant at the worst possible moment. But I don’t think it changes the basic math of realignment.

Yes, if Wyoming football and basketball had been consistently solid for the last decade, I agree the options probably look different. Maybe even “equal PAC membership” different, certainly more interesting than what we ended up with. There is no reason to make that part unclear. I don’t disagree with it, and it is not the point I have been trying, apparently unsuccessfully, to land.

Here is why I think the distinction is important. I think that narrower point matters because if we diagnose the problem as “Sawvel went 3-9 at the wrong time,” then the implied solution is pretty simple: hire a better football coach and don’t faceplant during the next realignment window. I think that badly understates the problem. The real issue is that Wyoming entered that window with too little leverage already built. The 2024 season exposed that. The problem of Wyoming never being even in the conversation of attractive conference members is soooo much larger than any terrible or great season.