Fire Bohl

[doreno5]

It may actually be the case that Wyoming has not really been close to a conference championship outside of one year in the last 25 years simply because of bad coaching. I hope that is the case .... I really do.

I mean, it's definitely been a combination of factors...but the coaching has almost assuredly been the biggest.

Our coaching history has been terrible:

-Dimel semi-successfully rode on Tiller's coattails obviously...then failed miserably at Houston, got booted back to being a coordinator at KState for years and years, and is now falling on his face year after year at UTEP.

-Koenning needs no introduction or explanation. He was never a head coach again (outside of a single game as an interim).

-Glenn's tenure has some nuance for sure and is a brighter spot

-DC literally got laughed out of the country; he's coaching in Poland.

-Bohl is the best of the group, but look at the discussion we're having now.

Bohl does bring stability to the program but I am starting wonder if Wyoming may not be better served in the long run by bringing in some up and coming young coaching talent to refresh the staff instead of hanging onto longtime assistants .

 

[307bball]

It may actually be the case that Wyoming has not really been close to a conference championship outside of one year in the last 25 years simply because of bad coaching. I hope that is the case .... I really do.

I mean, it's definitely been a combination of factors...but the coaching has almost assuredly been the biggest.

Our coaching history has been terrible:

-Dimel semi-successfully rode on Tiller's coattails obviously...then failed miserably at Houston, got booted back to being a coordinator at KState for years and years, and is now falling on his face year after year at UTEP.

-Koenning needs no introduction or explanation. He was never a head coach again (outside of a single game as an interim).

-Glenn's tenure has some nuance for sure and is a brighter spot

-DC literally got laughed out of the country; he's coaching in Poland.

-Bohl is the best of the group, but look at the discussion we're having now.

What is the mechanism that good coaches use to win that not so good coaches can't seem to employ? I think it used to be strategy and communication but that difference has been narrowed significantly. In the modern game, everybody has access to the best strategies and counter-strategies....it's just how well you can employ it. I don't think that is what seperates good/bad coaches.

My theory is that fit matters more than anything else. Every program has a personality and if you can find the fit you have found the coach. The best example out there is Nick Saban at Alabama. Is the dominance at Alabama because of his strategic genius?...I don't think so.

The reason I don't think the coach is the biggest factor is that there is a competitive tier that college football programs slot into and it's very sticky in both directions. The inertia you would have to overcome to become a top 50 program if you are in the bottom half of CFB is enormous no matter the coach. If you are a program in the top 50, you can fire under-performing coaches until you find the right "fit". That strategy will backfire on programs trying to jump tiers though.

You might say "well...top 50 is pretty tough...I just want to win a conference championship or two".... While that is more likely than becoming a perennial top-40 program, in the conference Wyoming plays in, it has probably never happened that the conference champion is not a top-50 program. Let's imagine though, that the conference as a whole gets worse every year (which is pretty much happening). Why do the same teams continue to be on the top, middle, and bottom? There is some movement but it's remarkably stable over time even while all the programs involved are changing coaches all the time. I just can't escape the pessimism that the coach is no longer the biggest variable. The reason that makes me pessimistic is that, as hard as it is to find a good coach, I think it's the fanbase/money required to be consistently good that continues to drift further away from what is realistically possible at Wyoming.

Anyways...the only way we can know for sure is to hire 'em and fire 'em. If it's the coach then we'll hit eventually...if it isn't....it won't matter.

 

[stymeman]

I’m willing to take that chance to try to bust through the 7-5 pond water bowl state this program is stuck in.

Me too

Me 3 and to infinity, lol

 

[DamThatRiver22]

This week's press conference was probably the most accountable I've ever seen Bohl hold himself and the coaching staff.

He's not always lacking in self-awareness, and he's repeated that this loss was squarely on him multiple times over the last few days.

At least he's aware, honest, and...unlike years past...not biting the press guys' heads off when they push him on it.

But none of that means a damned thing if he doesn't know how to fix it. That's what drives me insane.

We can rant about Bohl being stubborn with specific things (which he is) until the cows come home, but when you have a complete and total meltdown in ALL phases of the game, no clear answers, and a coach fully admitting that it's entirely on him...

We've reached the end of what Bohl is outright capable of, at least in this setting/in Laramie. And more and more, it seems like he's starting to realize it.

I almost wonder if the last two games have even broken him a bit.

 

[Outlaw Arthur Morgan]

If there is an argument that Bohl is better than Glenn, I'm not sure I belive it.

WYO football is probably a fool's errand. Is what it is I guess.

Eh, I'll argue that. Glenn never wore a headset. He was just on the sideline. He had his assistants doing the rest.

Glenn could do alot with talent. Bohl creates talent -> Glenn couldn't recruit to Wyo, but Bohl doesn't either - he makes it.

Bohl has more resources than Glenn did. Glenn got the IPF built.

Glenn had less disciplined teams, Bohl is much more of a hardass.

Glenn beat Bohl the last time NDSU played in laramie by a field goal.

Glenn was exceptionally commited to his staff and kept them around (cockhill, and crew) longer than they were welcome at the time, but they probably needed some strength coaches and recruity managers. Bohl usually loses a few coordinators every few years.

They aren't close to being the same. Who do you think is better? You probably already have an opinion. This isn't 1988 when teams trained under the west stand starting a week before practice, then first game was a week later. These guys are full on nutrition and strength training year round. The coaches are still limited in interactions the 8 months of the year this is happening - despite NIL and all that nonsense now.

Its not pretty.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

If there is an argument that Bohl is better than Glenn, I'm not sure I belive it.

WYO football is probably a fool's errand. Is what it is I guess.

Eh, I'll argue that. Glenn never wore a headset. He was just on the sideline. He had his assistants doing the rest.

Glenn could do alot with talent. Bohl creates talent -> Glenn couldn't recruit to Wyo, but Bohl doesn't either - he makes it.

Bohl has more resources than Glenn did. Glenn got the IPF built.

Glenn had less disciplined teams, Bohl is much more of a hardass.

Glenn beat Bohl the last time NDSU played in laramie by a field goal.

Glenn was exceptionally commited to his staff and kept them around (cockhill, and crew) longer than they were welcome at the time, but they probably needed some strength coaches and recruity managers. Bohl usually loses a few coordinators every few years.

They aren't close to being the same. Who do you think is better? You probably already have an opinion. This isn't 1988 when teams trained under the west stand starting a week before practice, then first game was a week later. These guys are full on nutrition and strength training year round. The coaches are still limited in interactions the 8 months of the year this is happening - despite NIL and all that nonsense now.

Its not pretty.

Glenn had a short leash and bad year after moving on fro. Cockhill.i don't think Bohl survives 10 years in Glenn's mwc. I don't think they are much different I think the schedule softened. I think Glenn would be similar in the past 10 years as Bohl.

Been hashed and rehashed but Bohl mostly doesn't beat teams with a pulse.

 

[DamThatRiver22]

Glenn had a short leash and bad year after moving on fro. Cockhill.i don't think Bohl survives 10 years in Glenn's mwc. I don't think they are much different I think the schedule softened. I think Glenn would be similar in the past 10 years as Bohl.

Been hashed and rehashed but Bohl mostly doesn't beat teams with a pulse.

I tend to agree here.

It's long been established that Bohl can't punch up (or even across, most of the time). He's got a significant losing record against teams over .500 (even if you throw out the first two rebuilding years). And for exciting and memorable as his P5 wins were...and I'm not trying to minimize them too much, because the talent gap is still there...Mizzou ended up 6-6 and in the basement of the SEC next to the perennial meme we know as Vandy, while Texas Tech is currently 3-5 and towards the bottom of the B12. He can't win on the road, he can't win big conference games, he always drops a headscratcher to a lesser team, and every single year the team tailspins with efforts like this and we're left wondering if Bohl's lost the locker room.

The Mountain West, unfortunately, is the weakest it's been in a very long time (for the last two years)....yet he couldn't get it done last year and this year the only way it's happening is through pure chaos.

An MWC with BYU, TCU, Utah, BSU in their prime, etc.? Bohl wouldn't have lasted two years.

The only reason Bohl has accomplished what he has is because he's been given the longest leash of almost any coach in college football, let alone Wyoming football history, relative to results...in a much weaker conference than we used to be in. But there are very few programs that would accept this kind of embarrassment and mediocrity for nearly ten years before moving on; I can only think of a few who have and prior to Bohl, we weren't one of them.

 

[307bball]

Glenn had a short leash and bad year after moving on fro. Cockhill.i don't think Bohl survives 10 years in Glenn's mwc. I don't think they are much different I think the schedule softened. I think Glenn would be similar in the past 10 years as Bohl.

Been hashed and rehashed but Bohl mostly doesn't beat teams with a pulse.

I tend to agree here.

It's long been established that Bohl can't punch up (or even across, most of the time). He's got a significant losing record against teams over .500 (even if you throw out the first two rebuilding years). And for exciting and memorable as his P5 wins were...and I'm not trying to minimize them too much, because the talent gap is still there...Mizzou ended up 6-6 and in the basement of the SEC next to the perennial meme we know as Vandy, while Texas Tech is currently 3-5 and towards the bottom of the B12. He can't win on the road, he can't win big conference games, he always drops a headscratcher to a lesser team, and every single year the team tailspins with efforts like this and we're left wondering if Bohl's lost the locker room.

The Mountain West, unfortunately, is the weakest it's been in a very long time (for the last two years)....yet he couldn't get it done last year and this year the only way it's happening is through pure chaos.

An MWC with BYU, TCU, Utah, BSU in their prime, etc.? Bohl wouldn't have lasted two years.

The only reason Bohl has accomplished what he has is because he's been given the longest leash of almost any coach in college football, let alone Wyoming football history, relative to results...in a much weaker conference than we used to be in. But there are very few programs that would accept this kind of embarrassment and mediocrity for nearly ten years before moving on; I can only think of a few who have and prior to Bohl, we weren't one of them.

Your comment about the length of leash given to Bohl relative to results is interesting to me. What results are we talking about? I think you, me and most of us probably have visions of hoisting a conference championship trophy or something like that but I do not think that is what the University and athletic department are thinking.

I think as long as the football program is not having a scandal and the ticket sales are not in the toilet, a Wyoming coach is perfectly safe no matter how angry we (the forum dwellers) get. This was actually the same standard for Koenning, Glenn, and DC. All of us point out that "well Bohl has better facilities and weaker conference foes then those guys"....but none of that is what matters. Wyoming fans generally want to attend home games in Laramie and witness wins while winning most games against CSU. Bohl has delivered that and thus, his job is not in jeopardy. That is the bar that previous coaches, including Glenn, did not get above. It's not complicated. You don't have to clear that bar by a mile ... you just have to get over it and Bohl has done that.

I'm fine with Firing Bohl. I can't convince myself that a better (even a much better) coach gets us to a championship though.

 

[Outlaw Arthur Morgan]

Eh, I'll argue that. Glenn never wore a headset. He was just on the sideline. He had his assistants doing the rest.

Glenn could do alot with talent. Bohl creates talent -> Glenn couldn't recruit to Wyo, but Bohl doesn't either - he makes it.

Bohl has more resources than Glenn did. Glenn got the IPF built.

Glenn had less disciplined teams, Bohl is much more of a hardass.

Glenn beat Bohl the last time NDSU played in laramie by a field goal.

Glenn was exceptionally commited to his staff and kept them around (cockhill, and crew) longer than they were welcome at the time, but they probably needed some strength coaches and recruity managers. Bohl usually loses a few coordinators every few years.

They aren't close to being the same. Who do you think is better? You probably already have an opinion. This isn't 1988 when teams trained under the west stand starting a week before practice, then first game was a week later. These guys are full on nutrition and strength training year round. The coaches are still limited in interactions the 8 months of the year this is happening - despite NIL and all that nonsense now.

Its not pretty.

Glenn had a short leash and bad year after moving on fro. Cockhill.i don't think Bohl survives 10 years in Glenn's mwc. I don't think they are much different I think the schedule softened. I think Glenn would be similar in the past 10 years as Bohl.

Been hashed and rehashed but Bohl mostly doesn't beat teams with a pulse.

Glenn had a short leash and bad year after moving on fro. Cockhill.i don't think Bohl survives 10 years in Glenn's mwc. I don't think they are much different I think the schedule softened. I think Glenn would be similar in the past 10 years as Bohl.

I have wondered for years why Burman had such a hard on for getting rid of Glenn. I'll still stand on the hill that Glenn could coach talent but couldn't recruit it. He let us know that the NCAA rule changes that kept recruits from flying on UW jets hurt. Everyone had to be driven up from denver after that rule change.

Strangely, in this day and age, it seems like universities that can afford it are flying private jets made of gold to pick up recruits.

Its really apples and oranges to me anymore. In 2003, I think players still went home in the summers. Now they are on campus year around. We didn't feed them back then, now they are on specific diets. Go back to the Roach days - and they were cutting timber in the hills and setting concrete for exercise (thats a joke - they had weight rooms back then).

The era's were different. I don't think its fair to compare. I would really love to see what Glenn could have done with the resources given to Bohl (especially) or Christensen.

Hell, he made like $450k max in 2007 - Christensen a few years later became the "Wyoming Million Dollar Man."

 

[Bryoming]

Bump. He's the worst road coach I've ever seen.

 

[LanderPoke]

Two games like this in a season when we’re still technically in the hunt is unacceptable and embarrassing

 

[WyomingAgJ]

Bump. He's the worst road coach I've ever seen.

It makes you wonder what they even work on the entire week leading up to a road game.

 

[stymeman]

And similar to 2 years ago the slide continues after Air Force...why is my question why...my emotions with this team truly are unraveling, give us hope in the beginning only to be let down yet again....grrrr and to pay my good hard earned $$$ to travel like i love to do...glad there's orher things to do in LV for the rest of my weekend

 

[ragtimejoe1]

More than the road. Bohl can't beat upper mediocre or higher teams. He is in toss-up games with mediocre teams (unless it's on the road) and can beat bad teams. He's had the luxury of having a decade of mostly bad to mediocre teams. Without looking I'll bet he's had the weakest sos average of any relatively recent WYO coach.

This season is simply a classic Bohl team. Beat the teams ranked below x and get beat by teams ranked above y. Stability has been a function of playing mostly bad teams. To give him credit, he has kept us from being one of the mostly bad teams.

Simple, play 4-5 bad teams. Play 3 or 4 mediocre teams. Bam, 6-7 wins. How that stacks against former coaches is all in the eye of the beholder. Did previous coaches get 8-9 games against mostly bad to mediocre teams? Maybe they did?

Tldr: Bohl won't beat a team with a pulse anywhere. Bohl will beat mediocre teams at home but rarely on the road. Bohl will beat bad teams; if on the road it's a toss-up.

 

[307bball]

More than the road. Bohl can't beat upper mediocre or higher teams. He is in toss-up games with mediocre teams (unless it's on the road) and can beat bad teams. He's had the luxury of having a decade of mostly bad to mediocre teams. Without looking I'll bet he's had the weakest sos average of any relatively recent WYO coach.

This season is simply a classic Bohl team. Beat the teams ranked below x and get beat by teams ranked above y. Stability has been a function of playing mostly bad teams. To give him credit, he has kept us from being one of the mostly bad teams.

Simple, play 4-5 bad teams. Play 3 or 4 mediocre teams. Bam, 6-7 wins. How that stacks against former coaches is all in the eye of the beholder. Did previous coaches get 8-9 games against mostly bad to mediocre teams? Maybe they did?

Tldr: Bohl won't beat a team with a pulse anywhere. Bohl will beat mediocre teams at home but rarely on the road. Bohl will beat bad teams; if on the road it's a toss-up.

Except for being competitive (and beating) teams "with a pulse" at home I think this is a decent characterization of the Bohl era. Though it seems mundane to observe that we, like every program outside of the top 50 or so, aren't very competitive with that top 50. The reason Wyoming isn't competitive with teams "with a pulse" is because Wyoming is a program without one.... The answer is within the question. Since the late 90's, that is the level this program has settled to and will probably stay, Bohl or no Bohl

In the micro-environment of the Mountain West, BSU, Fresno, and AFA have solidly placed themselves at the top and everybody else seems to have a ceiling of one great year and then fading to obscurity (like USU a couple years ago and UNLV right now). Maybe SDSU is in that upper group but they just seem to have had the rug pulled out from them with the PAC 12 stuff. Why are those teams at the top every ... single....year?There is just no way that Tedford, Avalos, and Calhoun are just more brilliant football minds then the rest of the MW coaches.

Bohl had his "great" year a long time ago.... He's been here so long I would have hoped to have another but I doubt it will happen.

 

[LanderPoke]

The difference between how we are at home and away is disturbing

 

[ragtimejoe1]

More than the road. Bohl can't beat upper mediocre or higher teams. He is in toss-up games with mediocre teams (unless it's on the road) and can beat bad teams. He's had the luxury of having a decade of mostly bad to mediocre teams. Without looking I'll bet he's had the weakest sos average of any relatively recent WYO coach.

This season is simply a classic Bohl team. Beat the teams ranked below x and get beat by teams ranked above y. Stability has been a function of playing mostly bad teams. To give him credit, he has kept us from being one of the mostly bad teams.

Simple, play 4-5 bad teams. Play 3 or 4 mediocre teams. Bam, 6-7 wins. How that stacks against former coaches is all in the eye of the beholder. Did previous coaches get 8-9 games against mostly bad to mediocre teams? Maybe they did?

Tldr: Bohl won't beat a team with a pulse anywhere. Bohl will beat mediocre teams at home but rarely on the road. Bohl will beat bad teams; if on the road it's a toss-up.

Except for being competitive (and beating) teams "with a pulse" at home I think this is a decent characterization of the Bohl era. Though it seems mundane to observe that we, like every program outside of the top 50 or so, aren't very competitive with that top 50. The reason Wyoming isn't competitive with teams "with a pulse" is because Wyoming is a program without one.... The answer is within the question. Since the late 90's, that is the level this program has settled to and will probably stay, Bohl or no Bohl

In the micro-environment of the Mountain West, BSU, Fresno, and AFA have solidly placed themselves at the top and everybody else seems to have a ceiling of one great year and then fading to obscurity (like USU a couple years ago and UNLV right now). Maybe SDSU is in that upper group but they just seem to have had the rug pulled out from them with the PAC 12 stuff. Why are those teams at the top every ... single....year?There is just no way that Tedford, Avalos, and Calhoun are just more brilliant football minds then the rest of the MW coaches.

Bohl had his "great" year a long time ago.... He's been here so long I would have hoped to have another but I doubt it will happen.

When I get time, I'll look it up. I'm guessing you're being too generous with top 50 and overestimating home record against decent teams. Total guess at this point.

AF, imo, is totally scheme and dedicated kids.

 

[307bball]

Except for being competitive (and beating) teams "with a pulse" at home I think this is a decent characterization of the Bohl era. Though it seems mundane to observe that we, like every program outside of the top 50 or so, aren't very competitive with that top 50. The reason Wyoming isn't competitive with teams "with a pulse" is because Wyoming is a program without one.... The answer is within the question. Since the late 90's, that is the level this program has settled to and will probably stay, Bohl or no Bohl

In the micro-environment of the Mountain West, BSU, Fresno, and AFA have solidly placed themselves at the top and everybody else seems to have a ceiling of one great year and then fading to obscurity (like USU a couple years ago and UNLV right now). Maybe SDSU is in that upper group but they just seem to have had the rug pulled out from them with the PAC 12 stuff. Why are those teams at the top every ... single....year?There is just no way that Tedford, Avalos, and Calhoun are just more brilliant football minds then the rest of the MW coaches.

Bohl had his "great" year a long time ago.... He's been here so long I would have hoped to have another but I doubt it will happen.

When I get time, I'll look it up. I'm guessing you're being too generous with top 50 and overestimating home record against decent teams. Total guess at this point.

AF, imo, is totally scheme and dedicated kids.

I'm just saying we are not competitive with the top 50... You could change that to the top 60 or top half and the point remains. We are on the wrong side of that line unless you make it the top three quarters or so. If your are in the bottom 3\4 or 2\3 or half...you aren't competitive with the programs on the other side of that line. Would Wyoming be a top half program since the year 2000? In all of FBS? Maybe? Nonetheless it has remained stable that way since before the year 2000. The bright spots for the program since then are decidedly pedestrian.

As far as home record vs top 50 teams (or wherever you draw that line), it's also terrible but the games are more competitive and when we do beat a team "with a pulse" (Fresno and TT both top 50 SRS this year) it is going to be in Laramie.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

When I get time, I'll look it up. I'm guessing you're being too generous with top 50 and overestimating home record against decent teams. Total guess at this point.

AF, imo, is totally scheme and dedicated kids.

I'm just saying we are not competitive with the top 50... You could change that to the top 60 or top half and the point remains. We are on the wrong side of that line unless you make it the top three quarters or so. If your are in the bottom 3\4 or 2\3 or half...you aren't competitive with the programs on the other side of that line. Would Wyoming be a top half program since the year 2000? In all of FBS? Maybe? Nonetheless it has remained stable that way since before the year 2000. The bright spots for the program since then are decidedly pedestrian.

As far as home record vs top 50 teams (or wherever you draw that line), it's also terrible but the games are more competitive and when we do beat a team "with a pulse" (Fresno and TT both top 50 SRS this year) it is going to be in Laramie.

I understand. I'm just saying that cutoff bar...60, 70, whatever... hasn't changed. The number of teams we play above or below that line changed.

 

[phxpoke]

The difference between how we are at home and away is disturbing

We are the Philadelphia Eagles at home and the Arizona Cardinals on the road.