Call your shot...

[ragtimejoe1]

I don't know what kind of rhetorical box you are trying to build here..

I guarantee that if the offense struggles next year, there would be posts about everyone bitching about playcalling and Vigen but that wasn't the problem. I'll definitely refer back to this thread

We already know haha. There was no other point of making up things that no one ever said other than to justify a non-existent argument.

Wait for it.....

Seriously, it'll be a few months.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Can we plug joe into the slot position?

If you are referring to me, I thought you were a WYO fan!!??? I'd be worse than Vigen for the offense. Our O is handicapped enough; making them play 10 vs 11 sure isn't going to help.

 

[307bball]

I guarantee that if the offense struggles next year, there would be posts about everyone bitching about playcalling and Vigen but that wasn't the problem. I'll definitely refer back to this thread

Playcalling complaints happen every year...it is the default gripe of the low-information fan. Happened last year...it will happen next year and after that....and so on. Still nobody wants Vigen back.

I disagree with the statement of the performance on offense next year. It has been so bad that any coach worth their salt will improve it. If you can't improve on WYO's offensive output of the last 2-3 years, you don't belong in coaching. Of course there are variables, sheesh, but the bar is so low that it is easily attainable. It is sort of like someone trying to lose 10 pounds. If you are 6' tall and weigh 185, that might be tougher to do. If you are 6' tall and weigh 700, not that big of hurdle.

Yes!!! Our offense has been sooo bad that it is statistically unlikely that we would remain at this level...I recall having made that point earlier on another thread.

You seem convinced that the offensive output of the next season will either vindicate or indict Vigen...I don't see it that way and I don't think very many people do. The jury is in...Vigen is not up to the task. Anybody who felt like having Vigen at the helm was the correct way forward after the 2016 season has long since given up that position...Except Craig Bohl!!!! Heck...I was bullish on the entire program, including the offense after 2016! Not anymore. Vigen might be the biggest reason our offense was no good right after Josh Allen left, but he is for damn sure not the reason it sucked for so long since then...and that is definitively not a defense of Vigen.

Kudos to Vigen for cultivating a relationship with a very popular head coach that allowed him to underperform for a very long time.....and he somehow avoided getting the axe and parlayed that underperformance into a head coach position....

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Yes!!! Our offense has been sooo bad that it is statistically unlikely that we would remain at this level...I recall having made that point earlier on another thread.

You seem convinced that the offensive output of the next season will either vindicate or indict Vigen...I don't see it that way and I don't think very many people do. The jury is in...Vigen is not up to the task. Anybody who felt like having Vigen at the helm was the correct way forward after the 2016 season has long since given up that position...Except Craig Bohl!!!! Heck...I was bullish on the entire program, including the offense after 2016! Not anymore. Vigen might be the biggest reason our offense was no good right after Josh Allen left, but he is for damn sure not the reason it sucked for so long since then...and that is definitively not a defense of Vigen.

Kudos to Vigen for cultivating a relationship with a very popular head coach that allowed him to underperform for a very long time.....and he somehow avoided getting the axe and parlayed that underperformance into a head coach position....

No, my prediction is that we'll see such a drastic improvement on offense (assuming the QBs can get their arms under moderate control), that it will leave no question Vigen was the problem. The players are largely the same. The conference is largely same. The only major difference is Vigen is gone. Next season will shed light on how bad Vigen was and future seasons will only galvanize that.

You don't think next season is that great of a predictor either way. For the love of god, I get it no matter how many times you say it or in what manner. I personally think Vigen was so bad and such an anchor that it will be unquestionable improvement beyond a minor statistical improvement. Maybe I'm alone? I don't speak for others, so ??

Our D without Stanard has been good consistently. Say all you want about youth and whatever, it was and remains clear the guy can coach positions just not the whole defense.

 

[307bball]

No, my prediction is that we'll see such a drastic improvement on offense (assuming the QBs can get their arms under moderate control), that it will leave no question Vigen was the problem. The players are largely the same. The conference is largely same. The only major difference is Vigen is gone. Next season will shed light on how bad Vigen was and future seasons will only galvanize that.

You don't think next season is that great of a predictor either way. For the love of god, I get it no matter how many times you say it or in what manner. I personally think Vigen was so bad and such an anchor that it will be unquestionable improvement beyond a minor statistical improvement. Maybe I'm alone? I don't speak for others, so ??

Our D without Stanard has been good consistently. Say all you want about youth and whatever, it was and remains clear the guy can coach positions just not the whole defense.

I guess the difference in you and I is that I do not need next season to shed light on the "question" of whether Vigen was holding us back. I'm comfortable saying the following:

No matter what the offense does next year, Vigen was a bad OC.

What I don't understand is... I get the sense that you also feel that way but you seem to need the offense to be good next year to prove that. If the offense stays the same would you be willing to say that Vigen was a good OC?

I think we are more on the same page than I originally thought....there is some difference on what it will mean if the offense gets better or not next year...but I believe that to firmly in the realm of things that reasonable people can disagree upon.

Finally, to get back to the start of this whole odyssey, I remain skeptical that there is any love lost in pokenation for Vigen. The mythical Vigen "fanboy" has yet to materialize despite this running discussion. The strongest defense of Vigen for the last two years has come from CB himself...all of us armchair QB's have been done w/him for a long time now.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Finally, to get back to the start of this whole odyssey, I remain skeptical that there is any love lost in pokenation for Vigen. The mythical Vigen "fanboy" has yet to materialize despite this running discussion. The strongest defense of Vigen for the last two years has come from CB himself...all of us armchair QB's have been done w/him for a long time now.

Like I said, this is a good bookmark. If you are correct, we won't hear any "I told you so" if the offense sputters (which I don't think will be a worry anyway).

We'll see at the end of next year.

 

[bullbugle307]

The Vigen fanboy is not mythical. One year ago half of this board thought 3 things:

1. Our defense was only good because of our terrible offense.

2. Any improvement or change whatsoever to our offense would directly cause a decrease in our defensive performance.

3. Any offensive problems we had were all on the players lack of execution. The scheme was perfect. The play calling was great etc.

It's hilarious listening to a bunch of you guys act like you weren't Vigen fan boys until the very end and that you weren't parroting Vigen and Bohls line up and punch you in the mouth rhetoric every chance you got. The worst Vigen fan boy has pretty much kept quiet on this issue and has been smart enough not to act like he didn't defend him til the end. Some of you guys would be wise to do the same before someone digs up all the posts that show how many of you flip flopped on this once the popular opinion finally lost out to the painfully obvious reality.

 

[bullbugle307]

Oh, and let's not forget all the defense blaming instead of EVER holding the offense accountable AND Vigen=Bohl. Last I checked Bohl is still our coach so why expect anything different from Polasek. If Vigen=Bohl then Polasek=Bohl, so why expect the offense to progress if it's really just Bohls offense either way.

 

[fromolwyoming]

Can we plug joe into the slot position?

If you are referring to me, I thought you were a WYO fan!!??? I'd be worse than Vigen for the offense. Our O is handicapped enough; making them play 10 vs 11 sure isn't going to help.

Nah, it'd be Little Giants situation!

 

[307bball]

The Vigen fanboy is not mythical. One year ago half of this board thought 3 things:

1. Our defense was only good because of our terrible offense.

2. Any improvement or change whatsoever to our offense would directly cause a decrease in our defensive performance.

3. Any offensive problems we had were all on the players lack of execution. The scheme was perfect. The play calling was great etc.

It's hilarious listening to a bunch of you guys act like you weren't Vigen fan boys until the very end and that you weren't parroting Vigen and Bohls line up and punch you in the mouth rhetoric every chance you got. The worst Vigen fan boy has pretty much kept quiet on this issue and has been smart enough not to act like he didn't defend him til the end. Some of you guys would be wise to do the same before someone digs up all the posts that show how many of you flip flopped on this once the popular opinion finally lost out to the painfully obvious reality.

I'm on record with saying a version of points 2 and 3 that actually makes sense... Not the twisted version that you have reflected. I'll disagree with anybody on here if I think they are wrong... But the consistent misrepresentation of what people are trying to say it's pretty slimy. I've enjoyed going back and forth with ragtime.... Sometimes it's frustrating but more often than not that frustration reveals a misunderstanding.

Initially I was under the impression there was a ton of Vigen support.... Now we are down to one? Are you talking about CB himself?

 

[johnywyo]

Lets all agree, its time to turn the page and see what develops under our new OC.
We’ll find out early on when & if we start the season off with our adversary Vigen scripting plays against our D. One fact remains about Vigen’s legacy, he found and worked with two pretty decent pro QB’s that continue to make noise in NFL.

Last season was tough to swallow, and losing Chambers and X really hurt us, and we have to recruit more offensive firepower to ever get out of this hole we’ve continued to bury ourselves in. Play calling aside, Bohl needs find some gems that Christensen was able to provide.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Lets all agree, its time to turn the page and see what develops under our new OC.
We’ll find out early on when & if we start the season off with our adversary Vigen scripting plays against our D. One fact remains about Vigen’s legacy, he found and worked with two pretty decent pro QB’s that continue to make noise in NFL.

Last season was tough to swallow, and losing Chambers and X really hurt us, and we have to recruit more offensive firepower to ever get out of this hole we’ve continued to bury ourselves in. Play calling aside, Bohl needs find some gems that Christensen was able to provide.

Agreed but I think Vigen's problems extended way beyond play calling which is why i think we'll see a huge improvement.

 

[laxwyo]

I can say with certainly that I didn’t have much of a reaction either way when Vigen left. We ran the ball well, we just can’t pass. Maybe Vigen could have schemed better, maybe not. I was always a “it’s not the play calling kind of guy”. I’d watch a guy miss an assignment and the RB would get blown up in the backfield while someone here would cry about the play calling. I rode the “if the qbs could throw, we’d be unstoppable”train for 2 years. I hope to hell that it’s all Vigens fault. I just don’t see one guy being the whole problem. BuT sTaNaRd! Stanard had almost all freshmen. Maybe he was terrible but I know he had young players. The same reason I don’t blame Stanard necessarily is because of Dickert. Was Dickert a magician? You’d be hard pressed to tell me Dickert didn’t inherit a sweet D. Throw Dickert with the same D Stanard had and i doubt much changes. I hope to hell Vigen was the whole problem. I hope he sucked so hard. I hope he was the cancer.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

I think Lax officially qualifies as someone who can call us dumbasses if the offense continues to sputter. Fair assessment, imo. Called his shot.

Oredigger has straddled the fence enough it's hard to tell, so I'm sure he'll say he qualified and told us how the offense was Bohl's fault. Of course, if the offense is decent, he'll say he also said that because it's Bohl's offense. :?

307 will soon get back to the fanboy term and miss the entire point of this thread :lol:

 

[307bball]

I think Lax officially qualifies as someone who can call us dumbasses if the offense continues to sputter. Fair assessment, imo. Called his shot.

Oredigger has straddled the fence enough it's hard to tell, so I'm sure he'll say he qualified and told us how the offense was Bohl's fault. Of course, if the offense is decent, he'll say he also said that because it's Bohl's offense. :?

307 will soon get back to the fanboy term and miss the entire point of this thread :lol:

Hehe...that's a good one ragtime. I will say that the silence is deafening from all the supposed folks with warm feelings toward Vigen. Lot of folks wringing their hands expecting a ton of Vigen support to show up in the fanbase, while the Head guy (Bohl) has unequivocally supported him with no reaction.

Lax said it better than I have been able to. Totally agree with his hope that the only problem in our offense was a guy named Vigen....However, I completely reject ragtime's assertion that you would be able to pin down the major cause of our offensive struggles the last few years based on what happens next year.

Direct question to anybody following this thread (particularly Ragtime)...If the offense struggles next year ... do you feel that would vindicate Vigen?

For me..the answer is ...no way!

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Lax said it better than I have been able to. Totally agree with his hope that the only problem in our offense was a guy named Vigen....However, I completely reject ragtime's assertion that you would be able to pin down the major cause of our offensive struggles the last few years based on what happens next year.

I stand corrected. 307 and Oredigger have effectively straddled the fence and laid claim to any position. :lol:

Direct question to anybody following this thread (particularly Ragtime)...If the offense struggles next year ... do you feel that would vindicate Vigen?

For me..the answer is ...no way!

My take is that we'll see a noticeable improvement on offense; so much so that it will be obvious that Vigen was holding it back. That's what I believe will happen. I don't think this is Cockhill and Glenn because the teams are so much weaker now. Any coach worth their salt should be able to field a functioning offense against the lackluster Ds we largely face.

If the offense is a clone of previous seasons, then, yes, I do think it exonerates Vigen.

I completely understand that your trying to pin down a "decision bias" if you will, but I would disagree with that notion. Vigen had more than enough time to demonstrate that he can competently field an offense. If there is relatively substantial improvement in 1 year without Vigen, then I think it clearly points to Vigen as the culprit.

If the offense sputters some but looks somewhat improved while it is apparent that the approach has changed, I think it is a little less clear and probably requires at least 2 years to see where it goes. I don't think it gets to here, but we'll see.

I definitely think it'll be an evaluation of parts of the season (i.e. first part of the season will be quite a bit different than latter part of the season). I think it will be very possible that the averages don't look great because of a sputter at first followed by substantial improvement. Even in this case, I think it will be a conviction of Vigen because the offense rarely improved over the season. Maybe game to game, but rarely steady improvement unless we had a string of cupcakes on the schedule.

 

[307bball]

I stand corrected. 307 and Oredigger have effectively straddled the fence and laid claim to any position. :lol:

My take is that we'll see a noticeable improvement on offense; so much so that it will be obvious that Vigen was holding it back. That's what I believe will happen. I don't think this is Cockhill and Glenn because the teams are so much weaker now. Any coach worth their salt should be able to field a functioning offense against the lackluster Ds we largely face.

If the offense is a clone of previous seasons, then, yes, I do think it exonerates Vigen.

I completely understand that your trying to pin down a "decision bias" if you will, but I would disagree with that notion. Vigen had more than enough time to demonstrate that he can competently field an offense. If there is relatively substantial improvement in 1 year without Vigen, then I think it clearly points to Vigen as the culprit.

If the offense sputters some but looks somewhat improved while it is apparent that the approach has changed, I think it is a little less clear and probably requires at least 2 years to see where it goes. I don't think it gets to here, but we'll see.

I definitely think it'll be an evaluation of parts of the season (i.e. first part of the season will be quite a bit different than latter part of the season). I think it will be very possible that the averages don't look great because of a sputter at first followed by substantial improvement. Even in this case, I think it will be a conviction of Vigen because the offense rarely improved over the season. Maybe game to game, but rarely steady improvement unless we had a string of cupcakes on the schedule.

I think we are getting somewhere here...allow me to steel-man your position. Is the following accurate?

You believe Vigen to be no good. Despite that belief...you are open to the possibility that trends larger than he could control were, in fact, contributing to the terrible-ness of the offense. So, if that were the case, you believe that a bad offense next year would necessarily mean that Vigen was not holding the offense back. As such, you are withholding judgement on Vigen until next years results are in.

Assuming I got any of that right...It makes a kind of sense. However, I feel like I've seen enough of Vigen to make a call on his ability as an OC no matter what happens next year. Consider a situation where the Cowboys offense makes great leaps next year...why is it out of the realm of possibility that part of that would have to do with an updated HC philosophy? I feel like CB himself has a lot to answer for in the offensive failing department that Vigen himself may have wanted to do differently. I have no evidence for or against this. My personal belief is that its a lot of both...but there is no doubt that the Vigen/Bohl combo was pathetic on offense.

Finally...I don't see the metaphorical fence I'm being accused of straddling. What is the intellectual inconsistency in holding simultaneously, the belief that Vigen was not a good OC and that the offensive struggles were bigger than just him?

 

[ragtimejoe1]

You believe Vigen to be no good. Despite that belief...you are open to the possibility that trends larger than he could control were, in fact, contributing to the terrible-ness of the offense. So, if that were the case, you believe that a bad offense next year would necessarily mean that Vigen was not holding the offense back. As such, you are withholding judgement on Vigen until next years results are in.

Assuming I got any of that right...It makes a kind of sense. However, I feel like I've seen enough of Vigen to make a call on his ability as an OC no matter what happens next year. Consider a situation where the Cowboys offense makes great leaps next year...why is it out of the realm of possibility that part of that would have to do with an updated HC philosophy?

I think you about have it. I don't believe CB himself was holding the offense back because it had a feel that he gave a lot of flexibility to his coaches. I've never seen an offense play as tight as Vigen's and not just conservative--afraid to play. I've worked under leadership that for whatever reason things just didn't function like they should. Vigen is that guy. I think he is a good guy, but he must have stressed the wrong things, had the guys thinking too much, or something. The philosophy won't change and I don't think CB will decide to turn more or less of the offense over. They might look harder at their players and playbooks to determine what can and can't work. However, if Vigen were still here, I don't think that fixes Vigen's problems. 7 years is enough to show he was not adaptable to make an offense work or didn't have the leadership skills. If the offense is terrible again, then I think the CB finger on the offense theory begins to be most likely. I get it. There will be no way to disprove that Vigen would have performed better because CB is "reengineering" the offense. However, we heard similar things about addressing the offense and it never mattered with Vigen at the healm.

Finally...I don't see the metaphorical fence I'm being accused of straddling. What is the intellectual inconsistency in holding simultaneously, the belief that Vigen was not a good OC and that the offensive struggles were bigger than just him?

:lol: The thread is "call your shot". I can predict that next year our record will be 0 wins if everything falls apart and we'll be undefeated if everything comes together. We could also win just 1 game, or 2 games, or 3 games, or ....... What fun is that? Of course anything can happen. I'm calling it that Vigen was so bad the offense is going to see significant and noticeable improvement without him.

 

[laxwyo]

That would be amazing if you’re 100% right and it’d be clear cut. My fear is we’re marginally better on offense, win 7 games and then we’re all “the OC needs two years”. I just never get the feeling that we’re an OC away from winning it. I hope I’m wrong. Sure, other programs with lots more talent that out recruit most of the other programs probably can say that but I don’t think we can. I’m rooting for you to be the genius and the rest of us morons. That’d be great.

You believe Vigen to be no good. Despite that belief...you are open to the possibility that trends larger than he could control were, in fact, contributing to the terrible-ness of the offense. So, if that were the case, you believe that a bad offense next year would necessarily mean that Vigen was not holding the offense back. As such, you are withholding judgement on Vigen until next years results are in.

Assuming I got any of that right...It makes a kind of sense. However, I feel like I've seen enough of Vigen to make a call on his ability as an OC no matter what happens next year. Consider a situation where the Cowboys offense makes great leaps next year...why is it out of the realm of possibility that part of that would have to do with an updated HC philosophy?

I think you about have it. I don't believe CB himself was holding the offense back because it had a feel that he gave a lot of flexibility to his coaches. I've never seen an offense play as tight as Vigen's and not just conservative--afraid to play. I've worked under leadership that for whatever reason things just didn't function like they should. Vigen is that guy. I think he is a good guy, but he must have stressed the wrong things, had the guys thinking too much, or something. The philosophy won't change and I don't think CB will decide to turn more or less of the offense over. They might look harder at their players and playbooks to determine what can and can't work. However, if Vigen were still here, I don't think that fixes Vigen's problems. 7 years is enough to show he was not adaptable to make an offense work or didn't have the leadership skills. If the offense is terrible again, then I think the CB finger on the offense theory begins to be most likely. I get it. There will be no way to disprove that Vigen would have performed better because CB is "reengineering" the offense. However, we heard similar things about addressing the offense and it never mattered with Vigen at the healm.

Finally...I don't see the metaphorical fence I'm being accused of straddling. What is the intellectual inconsistency in holding simultaneously, the belief that Vigen was not a good OC and that the offensive struggles were bigger than just him?

:lol: The thread is "call your shot". I can predict that next year our record will be 0 wins if everything falls apart and we'll be undefeated if everything comes together. We could also win just 1 game, or 2 games, or 3 games, or ....... What fun is that? Of course anything can happen. I'm calling it that Vigen was so bad the offense is going to see significant and noticeable improvement without him.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

That would be amazing if you’re 100% right and it’d be clear cut. My fear is we’re marginally better on offense, win 7 games and then we’re all “the OC needs two years”. I just never get the feeling that we’re an OC away from winning it. I hope I’m wrong. Sure, other programs with lots more talent that out recruit most of the other programs probably can say that but I don’t think we can. I’m rooting for you to be the genius and the rest of us morons. That’d be great.

So far, it appears there's you and possibly 307 and Oredigger. They'll go with they predicted whatever happens. You guys can definitely call us dumbasses if the offense is abysmal next year. Well, at least you can and for the record, i don't think your opinion is out of the realm of possibility. I just think it'll go the other way.

I hope we're right too. I know you give most credit on the d side to more bdays, but there's a reason Stanard isn't a dc right now.

I do worry our QB play won't support huge gains on offense but I'm hoping they get their arms under control. I also hope the new approach simplifies things for them. We play some of the worst defenses in college football. It shouldn't be that hard to field a functioning offense. It isn't like there's 3 t25 teams and a few top 45 teams in conference + some pretty decent p5s OOC. We should at minimum have 8 games against marginal to poor defenses and maybe 1 or 2 against solid defenses.

I'll also go on record that if the offense isn't fixed this year, Bohl's seat better be pretty damn warm the following year. I like Bohl and don't think we'll have anything to worry about.