Hey, Bohl

[LanderPoke]

You just lost to the most hated rival in year seven after they had to hire a new coach. Inexcusable the way we were prepared. This was our super bowl and they beat us pretty easily. Unacceptable

 

[Wyovanian]

Bohl isn't the next level guy. Time to move on.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Disagree with moving on from Bohl. 4 coaches and 20 years makes a trend.

There are issues other than coaching that hold WYO down. Some may be addressable and some are not. Bohl has been the best at competing despite these challenges. Granted it is in a dilapidated MWC, but the point remains.

 

[Wyovanian]

Disagree with moving on from Bohl. 4 coaches and 20 years makes a trend.

There are issues other than coaching that hold WYO down. Some may be addressable and some are not. Bohl has been the best at competing despite these challenges. Granted it is in a dilapidated MWC, but the point remains.

Wyoming has always had challenges, but we've also been able to compete for conference championships. Bohl, at this point, is slightly better than Glenn. I think we've hit our ceiling under Bohl/ Vigen.

 

[307bball]

Disagree with moving on from Bohl. 4 coaches and 20 years makes a trend.

There are issues other than coaching that hold WYO down. Some may be addressable and some are not. Bohl has been the best at competing despite these challenges. Granted it is in a dilapidated MWC, but the point remains.

Wyoming has always had challenges, but we've also been able to compete for conference championships. Bohl, at this point, is slightly better than Glenn. I think we've hit our ceiling under Bohl/ Vigen.

By what metric has wyoming "completed for championships"? In my adult memory, wyoming has had one year that you could say it was competing for a championship. Otherwise... Good years have merely been marked by not completely sucking and going to some low tier bowl. I'm not necessarily knocking the bowl wins that we have had (they were soooo fun), but nobody is confusing wyoming with the top tier of our own conference in the last twenty plus years.

We may indeed have hit the ceiling under Bohl, but it's it's feeling to me that the cieling is there independent of the guy running the program.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Disagree with moving on from Bohl. 4 coaches and 20 years makes a trend.

There are issues other than coaching that hold WYO down. Some may be addressable and some are not. Bohl has been the best at competing despite these challenges. Granted it is in a dilapidated MWC, but the point remains.

Wyoming has always had challenges, but we've also been able to compete for conference championships. Bohl, at this point, is slightly better than Glenn. I think we've hit our ceiling under Bohl/ Vigen.

Since tv and markets took over and in the modern era of cfb, we haven't sniffed being competitive, especially for championships.
It is what it is and our challenges will only magnify. The ceiling with Bohl is better than the coaching abyss. Just my opinion but I agree that when considering conference strength, Bohl is better than Glenn but not by a lot.

 

[cowpoke pride]

Disagree with moving on from Bohl. 4 coaches and 20 years makes a trend.

There are issues other than coaching that hold WYO down. Some may be addressable and some are not. Bohl has been the best at competing despite these challenges. Granted it is in a dilapidated MWC, but the point remains.

Wyoming has always had challenges, but we've also been able to compete for conference championships. Bohl, at this point, is slightly better than Glenn. I think we've hit our ceiling under Bohl/ Vigen.

I hope that we haven't reached our ceiling under Bohl, but it might be true. Last conference title was 1993. Hell, Northwestern, Washington St and Rutgers have all won one more recently than us.

 

[Wyovanian]

Disagree with moving on from Bohl. 4 coaches and 20 years makes a trend.

There are issues other than coaching that hold WYO down. Some may be addressable and some are not. Bohl has been the best at competing despite these challenges. Granted it is in a dilapidated MWC, but the point remains.

Wyoming has always had challenges, but we've also been able to compete for conference championships. Bohl, at this point, is slightly better than Glenn. I think we've hit our ceiling under Bohl/ Vigen.

By what metric has wyoming "completed for championships"? In my adult memory, wyoming has had one year that you could say it was competing for a championship. Otherwise... Good years have merely been marked by not completely sucking and going to some low tier bowl. I'm not necessarily knocking the bowl wins that we have had (they were soooo fun), but nobody is confusing wyoming with the top tier of our own conference in the last twenty plus years.

We may indeed have hit the ceiling under Bohl, but it's it's feeling to me that the cieling is there independent of the guy running the program.

I grew up in Laramie and came of age in the 80's. We won back to back conference championships, undefeated in conference play. We had wins over Wisconsin, Wazzou, CU, among others. It can be done. "Good enough" isn't good enough for me. Sorry.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Man, Wyovanian, I used to be with you. I think the game changed in 98 which handicapped us.

I get it. I really do. I just think we're now in a situation that makes it nearly impossible to repeat previous successes. I could be totally wrong.

 

[SDPokeFan]

7-5, 8-4. That’s as good as it will ever get here, regardless of who coaches. And it’s gonna be a lot more 6-6 and 7-5 than 8-4.

 

[307bball]

Disagree with moving on from Bohl. 4 coaches and 20 years makes a trend.

There are issues other than coaching that hold WYO down. Some may be addressable and some are not. Bohl has been the best at competing despite these challenges. Granted it is in a dilapidated MWC, but the point remains.

Wyoming has always had challenges, but we've also been able to compete for conference championships. Bohl, at this point, is slightly better than Glenn. I think we've hit our ceiling under Bohl/ Vigen.

By what metric has wyoming "completed for championships"? In my adult memory, wyoming has had one year that you could say it was competing for a championship. Otherwise... Good years have merely been marked by not completely sucking and going to some low tier bowl. I'm not necessarily knocking the bowl wins that we have had (they were soooo fun), but nobody is confusing wyoming with the top tier of our own conference in the last twenty plus years.

We may indeed have hit the ceiling under Bohl, but it's it's feeling to me that the cieling is there independent of the guy running the program.

I grew up in Laramie and came of age in the 80's. We won back to back conference championships, undefeated in conference play. We had wins over Wisconsin, Wazzou, CU, among others. It can be done. "Good enough" isn't good enough for me. Sorry.

Look...I grew up and came of age in the '90's...not too much younger than you. I see all the grainy footage and pictures from the "glory" days of the late '80s. 1990 was 30 years ago!!! If we had some semblance of "competing for a championship" every 2 to 4 years during the last 20 or so years, then I would say that what we are seeing is unacceptable ....but that is not the case. I acknowledge that there was a time when Wyoming "competed for championships"....that time has seemed farther and farther away each year. Players that have played for UW since around 2010 were not even born the last time UW had a conference championship...soon, even the fans will not have this first person memory of "competing for championships. The evidence suggests that multi-year conference dominance in the current (post 1998) environment is at least unlikely at UW...and maybe impossible!!! That suxxxx!!! If our problem was "coaching" or "talent" I think we would have at least hit on something that worked more often than it has. I am actually begrudgingly in agreement that we have hit our ceiling under Bohl...but I do not believe that the ceiling is there because of Bohl.

People who follow the trends in CFB know better than me....but something happened in the late '90's that UW is having a hard time adjusting to. For an example of another program that has not adjusted well...look at Nebraska. I definitely did not see them sliding into irrelevance as they have....and yet no matter what they do...they have been unable to sniff the heights they achieved during the '90s. I have some close friends who are lifelong Nebraska fans and they are ruminating on some of these same topics that we are.

 

[LanderPoke]

I hope not too many read the defeatist junk in this thread..

 

[Asmodeanreborn]

I'm curious - how much do you think money under the table from bag men is going to possible recruits to Wyoming? It seems nobody's denying it's common practice in the larger conferences, including PAC-12 that is always trying to take the moral high road.

 

[307bball]

I hope not too many read the defeatist junk in this thread..

If you have an alternate opinion...please enlighten me. I don't think it is defeatist to try and accurately define the problem. It's insanity to do the same thing over and over again and expect different results. Paul Roach and the '80s aren't right around the corner...they are in the rear-view...what worked in the past is not working now for a variety of reasons that I don't think UW athletics has responded well to. Maybe you have evidence or a narrative that neatly explains how multiple coaches/styles have been consistent only in the ability to produce mediocre results during this century....if not...what is so wrong with speculation that the malaise of the last 20+ years may not be the fault of the coaches?

 

[307bball]

I'm curious - how much do you think money under the table from bag men is going to possible recruits to Wyoming? It seems nobody's denying it's common practice in the larger conferences, including PAC-12 that is always trying to take the moral high road.

I don't think that it goes on at UW level institutions. The pond that the UW level programs swim in is not rife with deep pockets. Maybe I'm wrong...but I'm betting it doesn't really go on in non-P5 programs and it seems to be only a thing in the real blue-bloods (Bama, Clemson, Texas, etc)

That is my understanding of it. Also...I think the "soft" incentive of a larger social media following has become a big deal...it is much easier to achieve that an Ohio State level program than at UW.

 

[Asmodeanreborn]

Also...I think the "soft" incentive of a larger social media following has become a big deal...it is much easier to achieve that an Ohio State level program than at UW.

That's a good point I haven't really thought much about.

As for Texas and Bama and so on... from reading posts on /r/cfb, it appears quite prevalent at the west coast schools as well. I've seen long posts about interactions with bag men at Wazzu and Oregon, for example. I initially expected fans from those schools to call it out and be pissed at even the suggestion, but they're just commenting on those threads without denials...

I don't know... I could totally see it happening in Boise.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

I hope not too many read the defeatist junk in this thread..

There's rah rah bs and then there is reality. The BCS/AQ/P5 etc. label was a HUGE limitation for all those that didn't achieve that label. Add in emphasis on markets and TV and the challenges became even more severe for us. The entire landscape of college football changed and we were no longer peers with all programs in the US. We were relegated to a lower level which has huge impacts on recruiting. 65 universities already have a significant recruiting advantage.

When considering recruiting within the G5 ranks, the impacts of TV and markets take effect. Consider market size and look at consistency in programs. I haven't put a ton of research into and it is totally off the cuff, but I'm guessing the consistently stronger teams reside in the upper half of markets. Again, I could be wrong here.

This leads us to WYO. We must identify talent that is overlooked and develop that talent. We can't out recruit the P5 or even a significant chunk of the G5, so we have to have a different strategy. I think Bohl and company are really good at this and better than we can get in the coaching abyss. Talent is getting better, there is no question. However, we aren't like other programs where we have other coaches come in and take us to the next level. Other coaches come in and will screw up the development program. They might win for a year or two or three, but the program will be in shambles after that (unless they have Bohl's unique ability to identify and develop talent).

The offense sucks, no doubt. However, that is the last piece to put together. Moving on from Bohl is a fool's errand with delusions of grandeur. It's sort of like 3 people buying a really expensive car. 1 has a trust fund and can make it happen immediately. 1 uses credit and tries to obtain immediately only to put themselves in a worse position overall that they can't get out of. 1 doesn't have the funds but works a decade to get it and remains financially solid. We are the latter group.

 

[WestWYOPoke]

I hope not too many read the defeatist junk in this thread..

There's rah rah bs and then there is reality. The BCS/AQ/P5 etc. label was a HUGE limitation for all those that didn't achieve that label. Add in emphasis on markets and TV and the challenges became even more severe for us. The entire landscape of college football changed and we were no longer peers with all programs in the US. We were relegated to a lower level which has huge impacts on recruiting. 65 universities already have a significant recruiting advantage.

When considering recruiting within the G5 ranks, the impacts of TV and markets take effect. Consider market size and look at consistency in programs. I haven't put a ton of research into and it is totally off the cuff, but I'm guessing the consistently stronger teams reside in the upper half of markets. Again, I could be wrong here.

This leads us to WYO. We must identify talent that is overlooked and develop that talent. We can't out recruit the P5 or even a significant chunk of the G5, so we have to have a different strategy. I think Bohl and company are really good at this and better than we can get in the coaching abyss. Talent is getting better, there is no question. However, we aren't like other programs where we have other coaches come in and take us to the next level. Other coaches come in and will screw up the development program. They might win for a year or two or three, but the program will be in shambles after that (unless they have Bohl's unique ability to identify and develop talent).

The offense sucks, no doubt. However, that is the last piece to put together. Moving on from Bohl is a fool's errand with delusions of grandeur. It's sort of like 3 people buying a really expensive car. 1 has a trust fund and can make it happen immediately. 1 uses credit and tries to obtain immediately only to put themselves in a worse position overall that they can't get out of. 1 doesn't have the funds but works a decade to get it and remains financially solid. We are the latter group.

You probably aren't too far off with this statement. The biggest correlation to on-field success is usually money spent. Obviously, a bigger market share (IE. Boise) leads to more revenue which leads to more spending. When you look at how much each MWC schools spends on football, this becomes very apparent. The most recent data I could find was for 2018 - football expenses (in millions):

CSU 21.7
Boise 18.12
Fresno 18.07
SDSU 15.53
USU 12.07
Wyoming 11.79
Hawaii 11.65
UNLV 10.12
Nevada 10.03
UNM 9.87
AFA 9.84
SJSU 9.54

Couple caveats to this data:
1. CSU had a big jump in 2018 for some reason (associated with stadium??), in 2016 they spent $14.17 and in 2017 - $15.41.
2. Air Force's number does NOT include financial aid as all cadets are already being paid to go to school, so athletics doesn't have to factor that in, at most other MWC schools, financial aid is around 15-18% of their annual expenses.

Couple takeaways from this. First, what in the world is CSU doing? They should be doing better than what they are with the amount of money they are spending. Second, if you take out the exception of CSU, we can see a pretty strong correlation between money spent and on-field success.

 

[cowpoke pride]

Disagree with moving on from Bohl. 4 coaches and 20 years makes a trend.

There are issues other than coaching that hold WYO down. Some may be addressable and some are not. Bohl has been the best at competing despite these challenges. Granted it is in a dilapidated MWC, but the point remains.

Wyoming has always had challenges, but we've also been able to compete for conference championships. Bohl, at this point, is slightly better than Glenn. I think we've hit our ceiling under Bohl/ Vigen.

Wyoming has be nationally ranked for a grand total of one week in the 23 years since I moved there. We haven't competed for much outside of an 8-6 2016 in that time.

If we have hit our ceiling with Bohl, I'm not sure that we are going to do any better with someone else. At least Bohl likes it here and isn't looking to split for the next mid-level P5 opening.

 

[LanderPoke]

I hope not too many read the defeatist junk in this thread..

If you have an alternate opinion...please enlighten me. I don't think it is defeatist to try and accurately define the problem. It's insanity to do the same thing over and over again and expect different results. Paul Roach and the '80s aren't right around the corner...they are in the rear-view...what worked in the past is not working now for a variety of reasons that I don't think UW athletics has responded well to. Maybe you have evidence or a narrative that neatly explains how multiple coaches/styles have been consistent only in the ability to produce mediocre results during this century....if not...what is so wrong with speculation that the malaise of the last 20+ years may not be the fault of the coaches?

We have had really good defenses the past, what, four years? Defenses that are absolutely good enough to win conference championships. We had an offense one year that was good enough to win a championship. So Wyoming, and this staff in particular, is capable of recruiting the pieces necessary to win championships. It just needs to happen in the same year.

We can have consistently great defenses, but not offenses? I don't buy that. We need to can Vigen, swallow our pride, and get a real offense. It CAN happen. We can get the talent here. We have lots of players in the NFL. We have had and do currently have good players here. A lot of them. We don't have some sort of Wyoming disadvantage