Burman Philosophy - Promoting within

[307bball]

Almost every pre-season prediction is off in magnitude. We only have information PBJ and Burman provide. Remember practices are closed. Irrelevant imo.

For the second part, not everyone was on board with continuity hire and Polasek was the more "continuos" option on staff if continuity was the focus. He was just on the wrong side of the ball.

Well in the case of this year...almost nobody even got the direction right. What is the explanation of that? I'm not beating my chest here saying I predicted this catastrophe....I definitely didn't. I figured 6 or 7 wins this year and then a couple ho-hum years before he would get shown the door as attendance and excitement dwindled.

I disagree that Polasek would have been seen as more continuous....who wanted Bohl's offense to continue? Everybody wanted a different flavor of offense and everybody agreed that what Bohl built defensively should be what was brought into the next coaching regime. The Sawvell hate at this point is well deserved but at the time of his elevation to HC, the worst thing you could say about him was that the process by which he was elevated was flawed.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Well in the case of this year...almost nobody even got the direction right. What is the explanation of that? I'm not beating my chest here saying I predicted this catastrophe....I definitely didn't. I figured 6 or 7 wins this year and then a couple ho-hum years before he would get shown the door as attendance and excitement dwindled.

I disagree that Polasek would have been seen as more continuous....who wanted Bohl's offense to continue? Everybody wanted a different flavor of offense and everybody agreed that what Bohl built defensively should be what was brought into the next coaching regime. The Sawvell hate at this point is well deserved but at the time of his elevation to HC, the worst thing you could say about him was that the process by which he was elevated was flawed.

Point is: who cares if fans' predictions are off when a program is locked up like fort Knox? I'd argue it's to be expected. There's almost no information available other than what is approved to be released.

Look at coaching history. Polasek was the continuity hire or Vigen (many said he'd make a good hc). Read the PBJ hiring thread. Lots of concerns. Burman and a few fanboys were the only ones all in on this. Well, of course Junior too.

 

[307bball]

Point is: who cares if fans' predictions are off when a program is locked up like fort Knox? I'd argue it's to be expected. There's almost no information available other than what is approved to be released.

Look at coaching history. Polasek was the continuity hire or Vigen (many said he'd make a good hc). Read the PBJ hiring thread. Lots of concerns. Burman and a few fanboys were the only ones all in on this. Well, of course Junior too.

Everybody can see how pedestrian the offense has been...keeping a program locked up like Fort Knox doesn't mean we all don't notice the offense struggles under Vigen and Polesek.

You are straying into the realm of opinion again by saying that Polasek was the continuity hire....that may be your opinion and you are welcome to it. I seem to remember tons of ink spilled lamenting the offense....that was one place where continuity was not wanted.

Anyways...I don't think Burmans fan club is active in this forum and that is where I do most of my engagement with other fans. You seem to detect them everywhere. The vibe I got from the Sawvell hiring thread was overall positive....mostly due to the overall strength of that side of the football and the opportunity to "clean house" as it relates to a dated offensive style. Having concerns about the hire is not what I'm talking about .... I'm talking about predictions that this was the obvious wrong hire from a competition standpoint...If those were out there, it was in the decided and silent minority. I think every hire has had people on both sides...this one was very uniformly positive in my opinion.

 

[TheRealUW]

To point the finger at Svoboda is a gross over simplification IMO. Svoboda has played poorly no doubt. But even Josh Allen would struggle mightily with this team. The defense didn’t show up against ASU and looked lost in penetration and tackling. The O-line play has been nothing short of abysmal and is shocking in the regression under the new scheme.

If Svoboda was the main problem as being suggested, then I’d be a lot less concerned with this coaching staff and their ability to turn things around. But in one offseason’s time, every position group (other than punter) has showed significant regression and an inability to adjust to the scheme being pushed on them.

These are all fair points and I agree with you on a lot of what you have said. The coaches have been abysmal. There is no doubt in my mind that this coaching staff needs to be fired at the end of the year - we will never be competitive under them.

That being said, Svoboda has been horrendous. I was one of the guys who was very high on Svoboda before the season. I was at the game in Austin last year and came away very impressed. He made some NFL level throws, was consistently accurate, and usually picked the right place to throw the ball. Even most of the Texas fans I talked with were impressed - most of them were shocked that he was our back-up. But it's pretty clear after two games that he is not our guy long-term. It's one thing to have a bad game, but I don't see how he turns it around - there are so many things that need fixing.

A good QB can mask a lot of shortcomings, but not all of them. I do believe that we beat Idaho if Josh Allen is at QB for us. I would also bet we could pick up another 3-4 wins during the season with Allen at QB. The way things look now, I'm not sure we even win a single game this year. Bad QB play combined with bad coaching is a recipe for a dumpster fire, and that is exactly what we have on our hands.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Everybody can see how pedestrian the offense has been...keeping a program locked up like Fort Knox doesn't mean we all don't notice the offense struggles under Vigen and Polesek.

You are straying into the realm of opinion again by saying that Polasek was the continuity hire....that may be your opinion and you are welcome to it. I seem to remember tons of ink spilled lamenting the offense....that was one place where continuity was not wanted.

Anyways...I don't think Burmans fan club is active in this forum and that is where I do most of my engagement with other fans. You seem to detect them everywhere. The vibe I got from the Sawvell hiring thread was overall positive....mostly due to the overall strength of that side of the football and the opportunity to "clean house" as it relates to a dated offensive style. Having concerns about the hire is not what I'm talking about .... I'm talking about predictions that this was the obvious wrong hire from a competition standpoint...If those were out there, it was in the decided and silent minority. I think every hire has had people on both sides...this one was very uniformly positive in my opinion.

I tagged you on several posts expressing concern on this hire. There's a few rah rah fanboys who adamantly defended PBJ and Burman but many also questioned it. Many said Vigen would make a good hc. I don't know that Polasek was considered much, honestly. I think by the time Polasek was here most understood that the OC was doing what Bohl said more so than they didn't know what they are doing.

No, it is not opinion that Polasek (or Vigen) was the continuity hire. Both have much more history with Bohl than PBJ and that's a fact. They were both on the wrong side of the ball. The continuity explanation was just bs.

 

[bladerunnr]

A lot revisionism going on here. First, Josh Allen would not have struggled saturday against Idaho. I saw receivers wide open. Svoboda didn't see them, He was always locked in on one guy. When he did see them, he missed them. Josh had remarkable speed. He could outrun a secondary. Svoboda is actually a statue in the pocket with no pocket presence at all. This is a case where the coaching staff saw this great big guy with Josh Allen like size and thought they could turn him into something. Give me a 5'10" guy with accuracy and an ability to read the coverage.
And finally, I did not see the Texas game. But we only scored one touchdown. And that was Waylee running 65 yards through the Texas defense. Svoboda had decent stats but he also threw a pick six. I'm sure he will start Saturday, but if he doesn't improve, it's time to give someone else a chance.

 

[307bball]

I tagged you on several posts expressing concern on this hire. There's a few rah rah fanboys who adamantly defended PBJ and Burman but many also questioned it. Many said Vigen would make a good hc. I don't know that Polasek was considered much, honestly. I think by the time Polasek was here most understood that the OC was doing what Bohl said more so than they didn't know what they are doing.

No, it is not opinion that Polasek (or Vigen) was the continuity hire. Both have much more history with Bohl than PBJ and that's a fact. They were both on the wrong side of the ball. The continuity explanation was just bs.

It's not that Polasek or Vigen would not have been considered a continuity hire....it's that it would have been viewed by many as the wrong (ie...offensive) kind of continuity. Sawvell was a continuity hire relating to the one area of the team that had been widely considered worth keeping continuous.

It's interesting to go back and read the comments...you pointed out the most pointedly negative of them. There is also lots of neutrality and sentiment that a nationwide search was not the correct way to go. Is that a veiled pro-Burman person in your opinion? None of this changes the fact that by the time Summer had come around and heading into the start of the season, sentiment was very positive.

Is there any positive view of the Sawvell hiring at the time it happened that you don't consider to be "rah rah" fanboy? Was there really no where to honestly stand and be hopeful about the future at the time of his hiring? Having a positive or even neutral outlook at the time of his hiring seems to be akin to being a Burman supporter if I'm reading your comments correctly.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

It's not that Polasek or Vigen would not have been considered a continuity hire....it's that it would have been viewed by many as the wrong (ie...offensive) kind of continuity. Sawvell was a continuity hire relating to the one area of the team that had been widely considered worth keeping continuous.

It's interesting to go back and read the comments...you pointed out the most pointedly negative of them. There is also lots of neutrality and sentiment that a nationwide search was not the correct way to go. Is that a veiled pro-Burman person in your opinion? None of this changes the fact that by the time Summer had come around and heading into the start of the season, sentiment was very positive.

Is there any positive view of the Sawvell hiring at the time it happened that you don't consider to be "rah rah" fanboy? Was there really no where to honestly stand and be hopeful about the future at the time of his hiring? Having a positive or even neutral outlook at the time of his hiring seems to be akin to being a Burman supporter if I'm reading your comments correctly.

For continuity, I'm speaking from a "coaching with Bohl" standpoint. Vigen and Polasek clearly have more years with Bohl and would be more a continuity hire with that definition.

You and I are speculating as to the fans' response if they were hired. I don't think Vigen would have caused a stir. Polasek? Maybe. Nonetheless, fans' potential response is irrelevant.

I only tagged you in the negative posts to show that PBJ hire wasn't overwhelmingly endorsed by the fan base. Like I said, I view that as irrelevant.

Did Burman really not know, after 4 years, that PBJ was unqualified? Really? Maybe something else drove the decision???

 

[PorkerPoke]

Speaking of the retention of Bohl's staff...

Sitting at the ASU I was surrounded by some former Poke players. One of them in speaking to the others as they criticized the play effort as "soft" stated Wyoming has a recruiting problem and directly mentioned the name of the Executive Director of Recruiting who also is the running backs coach. The overall consensus from this group was the players must be enjoying the nice personable coaches because they certainly didn't look like they were being well coached.

I do not believe for a moment that anyone of the current coaches is so oblivious as to not be aware of the tools they don't have to work with. For instance, when was the last time the fans were able to witness a WR making impressive plays? Is it the scheme or are most of these recruits as easy to guard as a tree or when they are allowed to run a route as they get open the QB cannot deliver the ball?

And how about the Executive Director of Recruiting who also is the running backs coach going into the spring 2024 recruiting period knowing he had one viable RB (Harrison), a hurt one recuperating from a serious knee injury (McNeely) and nothing but question marks? The portal grab for a backup in case of attrition for whatever reason was not exactly a player that demonstrated a difference making ability at the position. In fact it is apparent why the former school had converted him to DB instead of RB. No offense to any player in particular, but the job of the coaching staff is to get the best player and if a recruit beats out another "established" player so be it.

Think about the QB position. Bohl, the mastermind developer, published a national alert for a QB and then proceeded to select Svoboda. Fortunately Peasley came along or there would have been NOTHING to work with. In the 3rd year since the "national search" was unleashed here we are talking again about a QB situation where the level of play is exceeded by the opponents QB on a routine basis. I really like Anderson and would watch his Southlake Carroll high school game streams then BOOM - his knee got blown. Glad Bohl stayed with Anderson, but once again is the knee potentially precarious? Is this staff adequately looking at Anderson or is Svoboda the designated starter with little to no chance there will be any competition? From what I heard Swavel say in the post game was the expectation exists that Svoboda will be the cat's meow (someday - he just doesn't know when). My biggest question is how precarious are we at the QB position?

The real question from an offensive standpoint is if there is any intention of putting an offense on the field that is designed to be a legitimate threat to score points or was that a blah blah blah statement from Swavel as he proceeded to hire the guy that hasn't exactly lit up the college football world after being fired at the peak of his career for lack of production? Will Wyoming fans ever see another QB that can exceed a 60% completion rate with receivers who can add the yards after catch component to the passing game or will we be forced to perpetually see failed 5 yard swing pass attempts to stationary receivers with DB's draped all over them? I spoke to Burman (before the Bohl national QB search announcement) after the last Potato Bowl and pointed out that the program would never be able to compete for a MWC championship with an anemic offense. Not that I have any sway by any means, but apparently as long as the program gets to 6+ wins it doesn't matter if they hover around .500 in conference play.

Wyoming is definitely not the highest desired destination for recruiting. I was born in Wyoming, went to UW and tried to start my career there but haven't lived in Wyoming for over 40 years. As far as the ability to find players that can make plays, I am convinced facilities are more than adequate and the opportunity to play at a high level is present in the MWC. One of my buddies sums it up this way - what skill player really wants to play in a marginally productive run heavy offense with a QB that doesn't throw well? It may be good for the feature RB but the feature RB will only be as good as the OL. Even a good OL cannot defeat 8 players in the box and if there are no WR's that can get open along with a QB that can't pass the ball then the offense will be a perpetual under 300 total offense unit forcing the defense to play continuously while the program continues losing winnable games because they cannot score points.

Maybe I am just an old guy that never understood all the X's and O's intricately of how to play the game, but I always thought the objective of football, basketball, baseball, soccer, etc. was to score more points than your opponent. I have assembled enough park and rec teams to know when I see a weak player who may be a great beer drinker but is a liability on the field.

In my opinion the biggest problem was and is the offensive scheme which prevents this program from being competitive at the upper reaches of the MWC. If you are going to be a run happy scheme then be an AFA or Army effective level program. Otherwise have a decent balance that is difficult to stop while having a defense that is strong enough not to break even if it bends a bit. I expect to see a lot of defenses stuff the box with man coverage effectively stifling the life out of this team game after game this season. Have seen a lot of seasons of Wyoming football from the powerful teams to the anemically pathetic. So far this year has started as one of the weaker years. If there was any concern about the impacts the portal might have with the strategy of staff retention means player retention it may come back to haunt the program going forward if what that former (Bohl recruit) player said has any accuracy about recruiting and the coaching staff.

 

[307bball]

For continuity, I'm speaking from a "coaching with Bohl" standpoint. Vigen and Polasek clearly have more years with Bohl and would be more a continuity hire with that definition.

You and I are speculating as to the fans' response if they were hired. I don't think Vigen would have caused a stir. Polasek? Maybe. Nonetheless, fans' potential response is irrelevant.

I only tagged you in the negative posts to show that PBJ hire wasn't overwhelmingly endorsed by the fan base. Like I said, I view that as irrelevant.

Did Burman really not know, after 4 years, that PBJ was unqualified? Really? Maybe something else drove the decision???

There is not a chance in hell Burman thought Sawvell was unqualified. He knows if a football hire implodes his job is immeasurably more miserable and probably about to be taken away from him. Your dislike for Burman is coloring your opinion here.

I'm very glad that you pointed that thread out...I went and skimmed it. Lots to digest. The discussion veered quickly from the merits of Sawvell to more broad ranging topics about college football. The pre-season positivity had colored my recollection of how people felt about Sawvell at the time of his hiring. The majority seemed to be taking a wait and see approach and were fine with his hiring, but, as you pointed out, there were those who didn't like the hire right away.

One thing that comes through in re-reading that thread...you really defended quite vigorously your dislike of Burman, BOT, UW admin, defenders of mediocrity, etc, etc. No matter what, it seemed like you could not believe a reasonable person could ever believe that the elevation of Sawvell or Wyoming's athletic struggles were anything but the manifestation of deep rot within the University. I hope you realize that not everything is a conspiracy. It's much more likely that the difficulty of winning football games at UW is not much different than the difficulty of winning football games everywhere else. Sometimes a bad coach is just a bad coach...you don't need a conspiracy to go with it.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

There is not a chance in hell Burman thought Sawvell was unqualified. He knows if a football hire implodes his job is immeasurably more miserable and probably about to be taken away from him. Your dislike for Burman is coloring your opinion here.

I'm very glad that you pointed that thread out...I went and skimmed it. Lots to digest. The discussion veered quickly from the merits of Sawvell to more broad ranging topics about college football. The pre-season positivity had colored my recollection of how people felt about Sawvell at the time of his hiring. The majority seemed to be taking a wait and see approach and were fine with his hiring, but, as you pointed out, there were those who didn't like the hire right away.

One thing that comes through in re-reading that thread...you really defended quite vigorously your dislike of Burman, BOT, UW admin, defenders of mediocrity, etc, etc. No matter what, it seemed like you could not believe a reasonable person could ever believe that the elevation of Sawvell or Wyoming's athletic struggles were anything but the manifestation of deep rot within the University. I hope you realize that not everything is a conspiracy. It's much more likely that the difficulty of winning football games at UW is not much different than the difficulty of winning football games everywhere else. Sometimes a bad coach is just a bad coach...you don't need a conspiracy to go with it.

I don't dislike anyone. I do believe that Sterberg and his report were on to something.

So Burman just hired PBJ out of incompetence? If he had 4 years to evaluate a candidate and couldn't detect problems with placing him as hc, then he's really terrible at his job. Perhaps his reservations were overcome with certain persuading?

Sometimes, especially in a "good old boy" system, there can be shady procedures disguised as just bad hires. I don't think I'm the only one buying into the "conspiracy theory" as you put it.

 

[307bball]

I don't dislike anyone. I do believe that Sterberg and his report were on to something.

So Burman just hired PBJ out of incompetence? If he had 4 years to evaluate a candidate and couldn't detect problems with placing him as hc, then he's really terrible at his job. Perhaps his reservations were overcome with certain persuading?

Sometimes, especially in a "good old boy" system, there can be shady procedures disguised as just bad hires. I don't think I'm the only one buying into the "conspiracy theory" as you put it.

If you like or are neutral towards Burman...you have done well to hide it. I am of course talking in the realm of his performance as an AD...I assume you at least dislike that about him? As far as the Sternberg report goes,....as long as it is never put into play...it will forever exist as the key that unlocks the potential trapped behind the walls of incompetence in Laramie.

My guess is that Burman hired Sawvell for the reasons he stated in his interview after the fact. I have no reason to believe otherwise. AD's everywhere live and die on those decisions....when the make the wrong one (ie...one that doesn't work out) does that make them incompetent? I suppose that is not too big of a stretch. I don't think you are going to find many comments from me or anybody else on this board that talks much about Burman's "competence". This prompts me again...can you point me to the trove of Burman defenders?

Your final allegation of shady procedures is a tough one. If that is going on:

1. How does that get proven one way or another?
2. If the athletic program starts producing championships does that mean there is not shady procedures in place or that they have been corrected?
3. You seem very convinced this is going on...are you convinced that the shady good ole boy network is the primary cause of UW athletic failings?

 

[ragtimejoe1]

If you like or are neutral towards Burman...you have done well to hide it. I am of course talking in the realm of his performance as an AD...I assume you at least dislike that about him? As far as the Sternberg report goes,....as long as it is never put into play...it will forever exist as the key that unlocks the potential trapped behind the walls of incompetence in Laramie.

My guess is that Burman hired Sawvell for the reasons he stated in his interview after the fact. I have no reason to believe otherwise. AD's everywhere live and die on those decisions....when the make the wrong one (ie...one that doesn't work out) does that make them incompetent? I suppose that is not too big of a stretch. I don't think you are going to find many comments from me or anybody else on this board that talks much about Burman's "competence". This prompts me again...can you point me to the trove of Burman defenders?

Your final allegation of shady procedures is a tough one. If that is going on:

1. How does that get proven one way or another?
2. If the athletic program starts producing championships does that mean there is not shady procedures in place or that they have been corrected?
3. You seem very convinced this is going on...are you convinced that the shady good ole boy network is the primary cause of UW athletic failings?

The Sternberg report is not the key between the current level and champions in every sport level. It is, however, steps towards improvement. Yes, I do belive the report identified a persistent culture of mediocrity at UW and rather than reflect on that, it was soundly dismissed as nonsense by those in charge due to the challenges they so often cite. This all is a completely different topic.

I do not think there have been any other dealings or hirings that I know of that would be considered shady. The PBJ and subsequent junior promotion reeks of it.

 

[307bball]

The Sternberg report is not the key between the current level and champions in every sport level. It is, however, steps towards improvement. Yes, I do belive the report identified a persistent culture of mediocrity at UW and rather than reflect on that, it was soundly dismissed as nonsense by those in charge due to the challenges they so often cite. This all is a completely different topic.

I do not think there have been any other dealings or hirings that I know of that would be considered shady. The PBJ and subsequent junior promotion reeks of it.

At some point Burman won't be there. And at some point after that his replacement won't be there.... Same for UW presidents and BOT. Is there some point in the future after which you would question the whole "acceptance of mediocrity" reason for the middling results we have seen?... Is that particular reason for the struggles just completely unfalsifiable to you?

 

[307bball]

At some point Burman won't be there. And at some point after that his replacement won't be there.... Same for UW presidents and BOT. Is there some point in the future after which you would question the whole "acceptance of mediocrity" reason for the middling results we have seen?... Is that particular reason for the struggles just completely unfalsifiable to you?

To be clear... The reason I'm asking this question is that I have been very clear that the minute we have an AD/HC combo that produces sustained excellence in the absence of some sort of socio-economic upheaval that vaults Wyoming into a place of prestige involving large influxes of people and $$, I will change my tune. At that point it will be obvious that the thing holding us back was merely having the wrong people at the helm...

 

[ragtimejoe1]

The larger issues plaguing UW athletics is a off topic and better suited for off-season banter.

For this topic, I'll say I don't believe PBJ would be the selection if it weren't for junior.

 

[307bball]

The larger issues plaguing UW athletics is a off topic and better suited for off-season banter.

For this topic, I'll say I don't believe PBJ would be the selection if it weren't for junior.

Great ... for myself....I believe it as much as I don't believe it since I really have no evidence either way. You also have no evidence but have chosen carry a belief around that theory.

I will say....to the extent that you are unable to articulate what would falsify your position...it weakens your statements. Which is too bad because when reading our old discussions...you are pretty articulate otherwise.