Bohl 2023….

[Cornpoke]

If Joe Glenn had the resources and budget that Bohl has been given, relative to the same scale during that period, I would argue Glenn would be the more successful HC

 

[307bball]

If Joe Glenn had the resources and budget that Bohl has been given, relative to the same scale during that period, I would argue Glenn would be the more successful HC

You can already pretty much answer this question...how did Glenn do against the 5 teams that were in the MWC back then that are still in the MWC? How has Bohl done? Read the previous posts...Ragtime and I have hashed and re-hashed this. Their are six teams that are in both eras. We know the records of both coaches against those teams...I don't know the spending difference with that group between eras (somebody please publish this). Was Joe Glenn's Wyoming program around the median of that group? Below? and if it was below...how far above/below that line do you have to get before you can expect it to influence how hard it is to get wins? Of that group...I don't think we have kept up with SDSU or CSU...they have both built new stadiums...and it's not like the UNM's and UNLV's of the world have stood still.

I think you could say that Glenn would have won more games if he had a program investment that was on par with TCU, Utah, and BYU.....but even Bohl does not enjoy that.

 

[CowboyNV]

It is a bit strange to be debating how good Bohl is or isn't. I'll tell you how good he is. He has averaged 5.6 wins (total) per season. He has averaged 3.4 conference wins per season. As a comparison, Dandy Dave Christensen averaged 5.4 wins (total) per season and 3.2 conference wins per season. Statistically there isn't a whole hell of a lot of difference, yet Dave was sent packing after 5 years, and old Bohly is still here for his 9th. I certainly was no fan of Dave, but I'm also no fan of Bohl. Different styles, different philosophies, both ass hats, and both achieved the same lousy results. Not sure if this is an indictment of Wyoming in general, or Tom Burman since he hired both of these guys.

 

[307bball]

It is a bit strange to be debating how good Bohl is or isn't. I'll tell you how good he is. He has averaged 5.6 wins (total) per season. He has averaged 3.4 conference wins per season. As a comparison, Dandy Dave Christensen averaged 5.4 wins (total) per season and 3.2 conference wins per season. Statistically there isn't a whole hell of a lot of difference, yet Dave was sent packing after 5 years, and old Bohly is still here for his 9th. I certainly was no fan of Dave, but I'm also no fan of Bohl. Different styles, different philosophies, both A$$ hats, and both achieved the same lousy results. Not sure if this is an indictment of Wyoming in general, or Tom Burman since he hired both of these guys.

I think a lot of it comes from the feelings people have around the Joe Glenn era. I get the sense that a lot of people feel like Glenn got the shaft and I don't see it that way. I don't think anybody faults him for getting kicked around by the trio of BYU, TCU, and Utah...(though I would have liked to see us at least put up a fight). He got the axe because his program became uncompetitive with the rest of the conference. That will bite Bohl too if he doesn't turn it around because it's looking awfully familiar to this Cowboy fan.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

It's not complicated. Bohl rarely beats teams with a pulse and is generally toss-ups against bad teams.

Last year wasn't an anomaly. It was his deepest team and should have been a better year. The MWC was just better than expected but still a long ways from the Glenn era. Nonetheless, the teams had enough of a pulse to beat Bohl. It'll happen every year if a team is in the top 60 or 70. As long as we can get 6 or 7 sub-70 teams on the schedule, we're golden. I imagine Glenn would be the same.

 

[307bball]

It's not complicated. Bohl rarely beats teams with a pulse and is generally toss-ups against bad teams.

Last year wasn't an anomaly. It was his deepest team and should have been a better year.

You speak truth. Hopefully it was an anomaly, but I I don't think it was.

The MWC was just better than expected but still a long ways from the Glenn era.

Glenn had plenty of teams in yester-years MWC outside the top 60 and he did not fare well against them. The bottom 5 of that era's MWC was very pedestrian. I'm not claiming today's MWC is not pedestrian either...but lets not build up the UNLV, CSU, AFA, UNM, and SDSU of that era.

The top three?..really good and difficult for even major P5 programs to beat...the rest? Not so much.

Nonetheless, the teams had enough of a pulse to beat Bohl. It'll happen every year if a team is in the top 60 or 70. As long as we can get 6 or 7 sub-70 teams on the schedule, we're golden. I imagine Glenn would be the same.

I think this is the key part...You can hang on at Wyoming by just being mediocre. This appears to be Bohl's saving grace. You may think that achieving mere mediocrity is not a good enough reason to not fire Bohl after last season ... I'm sympathetic to that point of view.

However, it was not too much to ask of Glenn's abilities that he at least get to .500 against the not-so-great remainder of the MWC of that era. He failed and got fired. C'est la vide. Bohl is hanging to that threshold by a thread. If there is one thing we both agree on, it is that Bohl's system and abilities suggest that in this next year he will be joining the ranks of other coaches that could not get past that mediocre threshold at Wyoming.

 

[307bball]

BTW...just for chuckles:

AVG year end Sagarin team rankings Glenn's era VS Bohl's:

CSU Then: 75
CSU Now: 94

SDSU Then: 92
SDSU Now: 60

UNM Then: 65
UNM Now: 125

UNLV Then: 108
UNLV Now: 134

AFA Then: 64
AFA Now: 63

Entire group now: 81
Entire group then: 95

Is that a huge difference?...not to me. For reference, last year that was the difference between Eastern Washington and East Carolina. Do you know which one was 81 and which one was 95? does it matter? If you are hanging out beyond 75 you pretty much don't matter.

I think the threshold of a Sagarin ranking of 60 or 70 makes sense. I'm not sure what to make of the difference between 80 and 120..but the difference between 35 and 75 looks pretty huge to me. If you just look at those rankings...the top 60 are programs with some good successes. After that...it's kind of a horror show. If you consider yourself a real program in any era, this is a group of schools you should hardly ever lose to. Teams like BSU and TCU and Utah hardly ever do. That is the type of program I think we should try and be....Glenn failed ... Bohl is failing...I'll change that to past tense as soon as he gets fired.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

There are 12 games on the schedule. Looking at each team's ranking at the end of the year is the best metric. Comparing old mwc team's is not a good metric because almost everyone had 3 auto losses not to mention a likely p5 ooc loss. Naturally they'll rank lower than today in a dilapidated mwc.

Like I said, if the team is top 60 or 70 (whatever that number is), then it is a likely loss for either coach. 70 to 90 or so is a toss-up (50/50), and below that, I'd guess around 75% chance of winning.

Look at each years schedule regardless of teams. Glenn played way more teams in the top 60 or 70 and definitely top 90. He definitely had some sub 100s too.

 

[307bball]

There are 12 games on the schedule. Looking at each team's ranking at the end of the year is the best metric. Comparing old mwc team's is not a good metric because almost everyone had 3 auto losses not to mention a likely p5 ooc loss. Naturally they'll rank lower than today in a dilapidated mwc.

Ragtime, I was using year end Sagarin ratings...am I missing something?...I don't know a ton about the formula Sagarin uses but lots of teams with more losses are higher in the rankings based (i assume) on degree of difficulty. For instance, in 2004 (Glenn's highest Sagarin year end rating), plenty of teams with less wins than us finished higher in the rankings (Stanford, BYU, Notre Dame to name a few)...if it was just wins/losses that would not be the case.

Glenn Played 9 P5 teams while he was HC....with 6 of them being top 60 in year end Sagarin.
Bohl has Played 9 P5 teams and every one of them ended in the top 60 in year end Sagarin.

All of those games for both coaches took place over a six year stretch...Bohl's seventh year was the COVID year and last year we did not play a P5 opponent.

I don't see how Glenn's OOC schedule was tougher than Bohl's. The way I see it...Glenn got to play three P5 teams when they were on the outside of the top 60 ('03 Kansas, '04 Ole Miss, and '06 Virginia). Meanwhile over Bohl's first six years he got the same number of P5 teams (more in regular season since UCLA in '04 was a bowl game), and every one of them were top 60.

Again...Glenn's SOS is better than Bohl's but that is entirely due to BYU, Utah, and TCU ... not OOC games.

Last year was an anomaly for Wyoming from a SOS standpoint....that was probably the weakest OOC schedule we have ever had. It does not surprise me at all that we won every one of those games. The in conference part of the schedule was pretty typical I think ... MWC is not a power conference.

Like I said, if the team is top 60 or 70 (whatever that number is), then it is a likely loss for either coach. 70 to 90 or so is a toss-up (50/50), and below that, I'd guess around 75% chance of winning.

Yup

Look at each years schedule regardless of teams. Glenn played way more teams in the top 60 or 70 and definitely top 90. He definitely had some sub 100s too.

This not true of OOC games ... as mentioned above...Bohl's OOC games were tougher than Glenn's. The in-conference difference is much bigger though...due to TCU, Utah, and BYU. Bohl only has to deal with BSU every year and SDSU every third year or so? So against P5 teams...Both Glen and Bohl do about the same (terrible)...though Bohl plays more top 60 teams in that category. Glenn had to play two programs that were as good as any of the top 30 P5 teams every year in conference as well as a BUY team that was a notch below that but still top 60 material. I think it's fair to assume Bohl would do about the same against them.

That leaves the rest of the MWC during Glenn and Bohl's tenure. Glenn was not good against that group...it cost him his job. Bohl is slightly better..but not great and if he goes the direction you and I think he's going, he will also lose his job.

As far as what threshold to use for the cutoff between legit teams and the rest...60 feels about right. You could convince me that 70 is good....90 is too lenient. When I think of the "good" years from this century, they are all at least top 75. We've only been on the wrong side of 90 three times between Glenn and Bohl's tenure...Glenn's last year and Bohl's first two years. So that's a lot of years of top '90 where none of us fans felt like we were any good.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

If I get time, I'll look up final rankings of each team each year to b see if you are right. I'm betting you're not and that Glenn had way more teams on the schedule in the top 60 or 70. Not averages; actual numbers of teams in top 60 or 70.

 

[307bball]

If I get time, I'll look up final rankings of each team each year to b see if you are right. I'm betting you're not and that Glenn had way more teams on the schedule in the top 60 or 70. Not averages; actual numbers of teams in top 60 or 70.

Just to head off the inevitable misrepresentation of what I'm saying....I'm comparing Glenn and Bohl's P5 opponents.

P5 opponents that Joe Glenn Played:
'03 - Oklahoma State - Year end Sagarin ranking: 32
'03 - Kansas - Year end Sagarin ranking: 72
'04 - Texas A&M - Year end Sagarin ranking: 23
'04 - Ole Miss - Year end Sagarin ranking: 82
'04 - UCLA - Year end Sagarin ranking: 34 *Vegas Bowl*
'05 - Florida - Year end Sagarin ranking: 19
'05 - Ole Miss - Year end Sagarin ranking: 102
'06 - Virginia - Year end Sagarin ranking: 68
'07 - Virginia - Year end Sagarin ranking: 41
'08 - Tennessee - Year end Sagarin ranking: 58

P5 opponents that Bohl Played:
'14 - Oregon - Year end Sagarin ranking: 4
'14 - Michigan State - Year end Sagarin ranking: 6
'15 - Washington State - Year end Sagarin ranking: 43
'16 - Nebraska - Year end Sagarin ranking: 45
'17 - Iowa - Year end Sagarin ranking: 18
'17 - Oregon - Year end Sagarin ranking: 40
'18 - Washington State - Year end Sagarin ranking: 20
'18 - Missouri - Year end Sagarin ranking: 18
'19 - Missouri - Year end Sagarin ranking: 54

Both coaches had 9 P5 regular season opponents over a six year span. Glenn played one more P5 team overall due to appearing in the '04 Vegas Bowl. Glenn was fired after his sixth year while Bohl got to coach on in a conference only Covid year followed by last years schedule with no P5 opponents.

Sagarin top 20 P5 teams:

Glenn - 1
Bohl - 5

Sagarin 21-40 P5 Teams:

Glenn - 2 *3 with UCLA in '04*
Bohl - 1

Sagarin 41-60 P5 Teams:

Glenn - 1
Bohl - 3

Sagarin above 60:

Glenn - 3
Bohl - 0

Bohl clearly was playing the tougher P5 OOC schedule. Glenn Clearly had a tougher top end of in-conference competion. Neither coach fares very well against either of those categories of teams. That is why I'm using the MWC schools that were in both conferences as a sort of tie-breaker. The relative program investment should be comparable within that group, and that is a group of teams that we as fans expect to do well against. That is also a group of teams that is not worlds different from a competitive standpoint between the two eras with the exception of SDSU and UNM who went in different directions. FWIW...SDSU averages a finish within the threshold of the Sagarin top 60 during Bohl's tenure...no other team is that high in either era.

Bohl has (Until Covid year and last year) built a team that did well against that group of teams. Glenn struggled against that same group and got canned as a result. If you think Glenn got fired because he couldn't beat the top three teams in the conference...I don't know what to tell ya. We all see the writing of the wall of what Bohl is doing and a lot of us are predicting that Bohl will be unable to maintain or even get better relative to the middle/bottom of the conference. When that happens, the administration will do what they did with Glenn and the cycle will start all over again.

All this to say....Any defense of Glenn has to first explain why he couldn't manage to go .500 against the middle/bottom of his conference. That was the reason he got fired and the administration was right to do so. This, in no way is a defense of Bohl...if there is a comparison...it is that, so far, he has managed to stay just within that threshold of mediocrity that Vic, Glenn, and DC could not maintain. I think he's heading into the unhappy side of that divide but he has a chance to prove me wrong....color me un-optimistic though.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

I meant the full 12 game schedule. I'm not sure that you're right that Bohl played more top 60-70 teams each year.

 

[307bball]

I meant the full 12 game schedule. I'm not sure that you're right that Bohl played more top 60-70 teams each year.

Ragtime...I'm not claiming that Bohl played more top 60 teams. I chose my words very carefully.
You wrote "There are 12 games on the schedule. Looking at each team's ranking at the end of the year is the best metric. Comparing old mwc team's is not a good metric because almost everyone had 3 auto losses not to mention a likely p5 ooc loss. Naturally they'll rank lower than today in a dilapidated mwc.". The numbers I wrote are taken directly from Sagarin's archives...I may be transcribing some wrong but are they not year end numbers? It says they are. I get that you take issue with averaging a teams year end Sagarin ranking over a span of years...but it's not a useless metric. If you did that for the whole conference over that span how do you think that would shake out?...it would be TCU and Utah in the lead followed by BYU and then the rest.

You claim that everyone had 3 auto losses and a likely P5 loss is only true of Uah and TCU...and sort of BYU....they were just mediocre until Glenn's last two years...the P5 loss is probably likely ... but as I've pointed out...Bohl has played a higher rated P5 slate at least if year end Sagarin rankings are your metric of choice.

Your claim that yesterday's MWC teams would rank lower than today doesn't hold either...Of the five teams i'm considering...one got way better...one got way worse, two went from meh to even more meh and one barely changed at all. As a group...it's a remarkably consistent yardstick.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Like I said, it's not complicated. I said Bohl rarely beats teams with a pulse (above 60 to 70) and Glenn played more teams in that range. When adjusting for playing teams with a pulse, there's not a nickel's worth of difference between them.

You say that's not true. When I get the chance (probably next week), we'll see if you're right.

 

[Outlaw Arthur Morgan]

I can only recall one game where these coaches coached against each other. It might have been 2008 Wyo vs NDSU and Glenn won it by 3 points by a field goal by Vintage.

I think that pretty much sums it up.

Who is the better coach? Well Glenn did beat Bohl in Laramie back then. I do think that game was a wash though.

Glenn really had some undisciplined teams. I remember watching a spring game where he was constantly telling the players to quit crowding the field. And they kept doing it.

I watched the spring game this year and Bohl was pissed and yelling at the defense for celebrating the pick 6.

Glenn could have really used some help in recruiting and player development. He did really well with Koennings players. When he recruited his own, they just weren't what he needed. I think this was his downfall. Although he did get a few great players in like Vintage and Fletcher. Anyone remember the Fletcher is a badass thread? NCAA recruiting rules did change in his tenure, and probably worked against him.

Bohl doesn't really recruit. He finds players that he think he can refine. He does a pretty good job of it. It does require resources to do this. I'm not even sure if this could have been possible 20-30 years ago.

I see a bunch of arguing about SOS, strength of the MWC, and such. I don't think about that too much. Glenn was here when nobody cared about concussions. The rules of the game were different back then. Its a bit more watered down now and that goes in the favor of teams with talent and depth.

I've come up with a thought experiment. What if we put Glenn, Christensen, and Bohl in jail?

I think Glenn would use his charisma to remember all the guards names, and walk out the front door someday, because security forgot he was an inmate.

Christensen would implement break out (AFA) Tuesdays and escape after taking a beating from other inmates for implementing break out (AFA) Tuesdays.

Bohl would chip away at the concrete one day at a time over 20 years. When he was ready to make the escape, he would be moved to a new cell and have to start over. And the next day, he would start chipping away.

 

[Outlaw Arthur Morgan]

One more note. It is interesting that both Glenn and Bohl generally have tough defenses. Glenn's did a slide at the end and I think that might have been what got him fired, and Bohl's didn't stabilize until getting rid of Stanard. Christensen just robbed the defense for the best players, and always though he should win a shootout.

Glenn and Bohl usually have solid special teams. Christensen never really seemed to put that piece together.
Glenn would do some fun plays now and then - remember that kickoff return reverse with Devin Moore going like 98 yards against CSU? But we also used to kick from the 20 back then too.

There is one curiosity that gets me these days. Marty English. He did great on Glenn's team. Was terrible on Christensens. Now he is back with Bohl - and doing well. I thought he was great with Glenn. Thought Christensen's defenses were going to be great (and started worshipping Breske after that fell apart). There is some serious culture differences here. How does an assistant go to good, bad, then good? And of course, I'll let the Wyoming Superbowl comments slide for now.

 

[Outlaw Arthur Morgan]

I have one more vote for Joe. This is one of my favorite memories

I skipped the game the next year at WMS - the only home game I have missed since 2007. Why? I was going to onside kick Kyle Whittingham's ass if I showed up. (I was younger then, I'd certainly given him a challenge, but would have probably got whopped - hence why I didn't go). I cut a bunch of firewood instead.

 

[307bball]

Like I said, it's not complicated. I said Bohl rarely beats teams with a pulse (above 60 to 70) and Glenn played more teams in that range. When adjusting for playing teams with a pulse, there's not a nickel's worth of difference between them.

You say that's not true. When I get the chance (probably next week), we'll see if you're right.

What, specifically, Do I say is not true?

You made two statements there....first you say, "Bohl rarely beats teams with a pulse (above 60 to 70) and Glenn played more teams in that range." Are you claiming I think this is not true?

Then you say "When adjusting for playing teams with a pulse, there's not a nickel's worth of difference between them." This is much more a statement of opinion...what you mean by "adjusting for playing teams with a pulse", and how much is a "nickel's worth", makes all the difference here.

Look, I thought it was you, but I know I've seen it floating around on these forums, where Glenn is viewed sympathetically and the reasons given have to do with no program investment for Wyoming at the time, and having to play a far tougher schedule. I think the sympathetic view for Glen does not come from those places but, in fact, it comes from people giving Glenn the "nice guy" discount. People view Bohl as a jerk and are trying to justify hating on him for reasons that are not backed up by what actually happened. I have a problem with this...(I have many problems, this is just one of them ..hahaha).

For those who think Glen would do as well as Bohl in the modern MWC...the evidence does not back this up. Glenn and Bohl do about the same against "teams with a pulse", to borrow a term from you....but Bohl has outperformed Glenn against the non-elite MWC teams from both eras (at least through year 6). Claims about the superiority of the MWC of Glenn's era are absolutely correct, but not because it was better from top to bottom...it was not. The top two were very good followed by an average BYU program that got really good in 2006 and 2007, and a bottom 5 teams were very similar to the current non BSU programs of the MWC. This leaves the OOC games that both Glenn and Bohl played...Glenn obviously played a superior OOC schedule right?...nope...if you go by end of year Sagarin rankings, Glenn's P5 OOC schedule is tougher. Unless you think there is a glaring difference in the smattering of MAC, WAC, and FCS teams that both men played (I did not analyze them), then Bohl played a tougher OOC slate. So when you look at what actually happened...Glenn had to play two teams in-conference (three eventually once BYU made the leap in 2006) that were as tough or tougher than an average/good P5 school. Glenn couldn't beat the bottom half of the MWC by the time he got fired....why does nobody hold that against him? Bohl sucks for all the reasons you have pointed out...why does Glenn escape criticism for not being competitive with the dregs of the MWC from his era...In year 5 and 6?

Somebody posted a year or so back and broke down the difference between Bohl and Glenn's record by tier. Frankly it's a horror show for both coaches. However, through 6 years, Bohl had the better program trajectory. I was cautiously optimistic going into the 2020 season and then it got screwed over by the pandemic...don't really fault Bohl for a lot of that though it did worry me that we struggled like we did. Then 2021 happens and my fears from the COVID season seem to be accurate. We are heading into a season where I think he'll struggle mightily with a mediocre MWC again and I wish we did not have to crash and burn so the next coach has to build from nothing every time.

 

[307bball]

One thing to add...Bohl just had his version of Glenn's 2007 year. 2 conference wins and fans grumbling. If he pulls a Glenn and win's one or none....He is gone..I'm calling it. If he win's 2 or 3 conference games next year....I hope he's gone but I think it's 50/50. If he wins 4 or more conference games that would be a real victory for him...it would mean that he has built something ... maybe it's something mediocre but it's something.

 

[307bball]

I can only recall one game where these coaches coached against each other. It might have been 2008 Wyo vs NDSU and Glenn won it by 3 points by a field goal by Vintage.

I think that pretty much sums it up.

Who is the better coach? Well Glenn did beat Bohl in Laramie back then. I do think that game was a wash though.

Glenn really had some undisciplined teams. I remember watching a spring game where he was constantly telling the players to quit crowding the field. And they kept doing it.

I watched the spring game this year and Bohl was pissed and yelling at the defense for celebrating the pick 6.

Glenn could have really used some help in recruiting and player development. He did really well with Koennings players. When he recruited his own, they just weren't what he needed. I think this was his downfall. Although he did get a few great players in like Vintage and Fletcher. Anyone remember the Fletcher is a badass thread? NCAA recruiting rules did change in his tenure, and probably worked against him.

Bohl doesn't really recruit. He finds players that he think he can refine. He does a pretty good job of it. It does require resources to do this. I'm not even sure if this could have been possible 20-30 years ago.

I see a bunch of arguing about SOS, strength of the MWC, and such. I don't think about that too much. Glenn was here when nobody cared about concussions. The rules of the game were different back then. Its a bit more watered down now and that goes in the favor of teams with talent and depth.

I've come up with a thought experiment. What if we put Glenn, Christensen, and Bohl in jail?

I think Glenn would use his charisma to remember all the guards names, and walk out the front door someday, because security forgot he was an inmate.

Christensen would implement break out (AFA) Tuesdays and escape after taking a beating from other inmates for implementing break out (AFA) Tuesdays.

Bohl would chip away at the concrete one day at a time over 20 years. When he was ready to make the escape, he would be moved to a new cell and have to start over. And the next day, he would start chipping away.

I like your thought experiment. The game continues to evolve over the eras.

Your comment about not paying attention to rankings and SOS is sort of where I'm at but my conversation w/Ragtime meant I had to look into it. The overall numbers through 6 years for both coaches is not great and roughly equal but Glenn nose dived at the end while Bohl took a toilet team and made them average.