I'm seeing a lot of comments like "with this offense we'll get 6 wins per year" or "unless we fire Vigen we are stuck at 6-7 wins per year", as if, right now, that would be a bad thing. I would loooove for us to average 6-7 wins per year. I think our three year rolling average since 2000 is under 5 wins per year. Since 1950 it is still below 6...and that includes the "heydey" of the late '80's and early '90s. Last year our rolling average went above 6 wins for the first time since '99 (I might be off by a year). I get that people "demand championships" but isn't this attitude part of what let to Tiller leaving? (I was a young pokes fan back then...I had just heard that some vocal fans thought he wasn't good enough).
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!
6-7 wins per year would be amazing!
- Thread starter 307bball
- Start date
bladerunnr
Well-known member
307bball said:
Tiller faced the comparison to Roach. We didn't know Vic was on the horizon (after Dimel). Plus, if we start talking number of wins, the team only played 10 games a year until the 70's. Then we played 11 until recently. Dimel's last year was 8-3. So 6 wins isn't what it used to be. It's .500 now. Plus, ties ended in ties. So Bob Devaney coached us 5 years and had a record of 35-10-5. That's 7 wins a year, but only 2 losses a year. Pretty damn good. So I see where your trying to get to, but I don't buy it. We generally schedule 2 gimmees a year. If we only get 4 more the rest of the year, that's so so. I certainly wouldn't call it amazing.
bladerunnr said:
I'm not counting ties...I'm saying wins per year. I only included the data back to 1960 to provide some context....since 2000 our rolling average even worse. No one is calling averaging 6 wins per year in college football amazing, however, it is a fact that at Wyoming, since 1999 we have not achieved that. Some of the current crop of players we have playing for us may not have been born yet.
I'm pointing out how moronic it sounds when wyoming fans, of all people, act like we should be able to roll over and get 6 wins...what's your context for that?...that has literally only happened sporadically in our program history and not at all in almost the last 20 years. ... so yeah...I'm calling six wins per year a huuuuge step in the right direction. Maybe I was to young during Roach/Tiller and did not get my expectations set....I remember being at some of those games but by the time I was paying attention, Dimel was on his way out and it has been tough sledding since then. Seen a lot of crappy football.
LanderPoke
Well-known member
An average of 8 wins a year would be great.
Anyway, to your point, this is why I'm pretty high on the program right now. Historically, our bad seasons are well below 6 wins. We are in a 'down' cycle right now and we are going to be right at the 8 win mark, imo. I say we are in a down cycle because we are a young team. Tons of the players on our two-deep are underclassmen. We are at a point in our program where a bad season is 6-7 wins. The future is bright.
Anyway, to your point, this is why I'm pretty high on the program right now. Historically, our bad seasons are well below 6 wins. We are in a 'down' cycle right now and we are going to be right at the 8 win mark, imo. I say we are in a down cycle because we are a young team. Tons of the players on our two-deep are underclassmen. We are at a point in our program where a bad season is 6-7 wins. The future is bright.
ragtimejoe1
Well-known member
I wonder how many sub-75 or sub-100 teams on the schedule compares across the various coaches. SOS is definitely relevant.
Again, before feelings get hurt, I like Bohl a lot. I'm just saying SOS matters.
Again, before feelings get hurt, I like Bohl a lot. I'm just saying SOS matters.
ragtimejoe1 said:
If the question is "which Wyoming team was better?", Then you would definitely have to find in to things like SOS. Wins per year is pretty good because it's a rough metric that controls for conference strength. Wyoming's OOC games, on average, are pretty stable... Especially if you combine them into three year chunks. The conference itself fluctuates a bit more but I think the goal is to be good whether or not the conference is any good.
Ultimately stats are for losers (lol), and Wyoming is finally back to averaging over 6 wins per year (3 yr rolling average). I'll be the fan calling that progress... I'll be the fan that points out the lunacy of being in our position today and complaining about six wins. The trajectory right now is up and it happened with Bohl/Vigen.... Nobody wants to settle here and maybe that is not what people are saying... If that's the case then I'm reacting to a sentiment that is not there.
lakesbison
Well-known member
Wyoming should be estatic... I see 8-9 wins this year and for the foreseeable future with bohl.
7 wins isn't the end of the world either. sure beats 2-3 wins a year
7 wins isn't the end of the world either. sure beats 2-3 wins a year
calpoke25
Well-known member
6-7 wins a year would be amazing? Gawd no wonder we put up with this dog shit offense.
Bohl is being paid and football in general is being funded at the top of the conference. Our facilities and pay say we should be competing for championships, not settling for 6-7 wins a year. WTF did we drop 200 million on football facilities for if we’re just happy with 6 wins?
Bohl is being paid and football in general is being funded at the top of the conference. Our facilities and pay say we should be competing for championships, not settling for 6-7 wins a year. WTF did we drop 200 million on football facilities for if we’re just happy with 6 wins?
calpoke25 said:
I do think it is important that this gets framed correctly...and I hope that is being done at the athletic department. I specifically said "Nobody wants to settle here.." This is a snapshot of where the program is heading. If your want to get from below 6 wins per year to 8 then in makes sense that at some point you find yourself averaging 6 wins per year.
In the context of college football at large....I believe 6 wins per year is about the mean. It's probably just under 6.
In the context of Wyoming football specifically 6 wins per year as measured by a three year rolling average is BETTER THAN WE HAVE DONE IN 20 YEARS!! What is so hard to understand about this? Paul Roach is not walking through that door people....Nobody in the athletic department from those days is even around. Lets compare apples to apples here. This is about where this program is trending and if your not excited about the current trend then I don't know what to say.
Maybe you are convinced that this is the ceiling of what the current leadership can achieve...I'm not. I don't think it is obvious that three years from now we will be looking back and saying "time for a change at the top". As soon as i'm convinced that the program is stagnating (as every Wyoming program as done for 20 years) then i'll be right there calling for the AD to get back on the coaching treadmill to change things up.
ragtimejoe1
Well-known member
Agree to disagree, lol. A 5 win season with an SOS of 40 (or more importantly loaded with top 50 teams) is better than a 6 win season with 1 t25 team and 11 sub-75 teams, for example.307bball said:
I'd also rate position in conference relative to peers for things like budgets, facilities, etc.
Comparing win totals today to previous coaches is largely irrelevant. The MWC is weaker (though improving the past few years) and WYO's budgets relative to MWC members has improved due to realignment.
Going back to Tiller and Roach makes even less sense.
Your point of not being a doormat is well taken and I do appreciate that about the current staff. However, I also acknowledge their bar is lower than most (maybe all) previous coaches.
I find the comment about number of games per year an interesting and important point I hadn't thought about. What is the rolling average of losses per year say over the last 30 or 40 years, are we seeing improvement there?
So far every single year bohl has had six or more losses including the year we played in the mountain West championship. Will we have less than six losses this year? It would be a first under Bohl if we do
So far every single year bohl has had six or more losses including the year we played in the mountain West championship. Will we have less than six losses this year? It would be a first under Bohl if we do
TSpoke
Well-known member
I've been thinking even since last year when we finished up against the bottom of the conference to finish at 6-6 that I believe that the bottom with this coaching staff is 6 wins. That is a very good thing. We used to top out at 6 wins and be pumped for a low level bowl game. Now those bowl games are gonna become expected at a minimum. and we will have higher highs. We haven't breached the 8 win mark but we will get there. Perhaps this year even(not a prediction just a possibility). So now we will begin to fluctuate between 6 wins and 10 wins a year till we then continue to build the program and then 8 wins eventually becomes our bottom(or at least that the goal. This season is the seniors are going to have been bowl eligible every year they were here. Whens the last time a senior class had that here. Things are going in the right direction even if while we are in the middle of it we may want it to go faster.
Thanks everybody for this discussion...I'm a numbers nerd so I prepared another chart.
https://imgur.com/a/upso1aU
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1osFwMrBZXnpyc_OeM7reEytGqkxUrdr_/view?usp=sharing
As you can see, I've added information for a rolling average of win %....probably a better indicator of how well a program is doing than straight wins per year....and still....no matter how you slice it, the direction we are on is good. Our rolling average for win% is above .500 for the first time since the tail end of Dana Dimel's tenure.
https://imgur.com/a/upso1aU
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1osFwMrBZXnpyc_OeM7reEytGqkxUrdr_/view?usp=sharing
As you can see, I've added information for a rolling average of win %....probably a better indicator of how well a program is doing than straight wins per year....and still....no matter how you slice it, the direction we are on is good. Our rolling average for win% is above .500 for the first time since the tail end of Dana Dimel's tenure.
McPeachy said:
How about win 2 lose 10?...and have that happen every third or fourth year?....Is this current situation not better than that? I'm merely advocating for some historical context for where we are as a program with the last 20 years being the yardstick as opposed to the 20 years before that. I do think we'll get there...I think Bohl is the guy to do it...maybe i'm wrong but the data suggest that he's closer than all of the coaches we've had since Dimel.
WestWYOPoke
Well-known member
calpoke25 said:
Where in the hell are you getting this from??? Bohl is #4 for head coaches salaries in the MWC, which puts him in the mid-70s for all of FBS. Not sure how Wyoming football compares in the conference as I can't find numbers on that anywhere, but the athletic department as a whole sits 10th out of 12 in expenses, ahead of only Utah State and San Jose State.
Edit: did some more digging and found the actual numbers for football for the 2017 season. Wyoming was 8th in the conference in football budget, and 5th for coaching staff budgets. (Bohl is #4 for head coach)
LanderPoke
Well-known member
We had a terrible 15 years there. Nice graph
OrediggerPoke
Well-known member
307bball said:
Very informative graph! Shows that the two biggest impacts on the program: (1) the Black 14; and (2) the Koenning years. Bohl is the first coach since Dimel to put the Wyoming program at an average historical level, very interesting.
