In case anyone forgot

[bladerunnr]

Interesting reading all of the takes on this thread...Seems like a consensus would be that, overall, the Vigen/Bohl combo will forever be limited by the inability to produce offensive consistency. This is to say that the duo is entangled to the point that they probably are not going to be seperated and to point fingers at Vigen is ultimately an indictment of Bohl himself since he is either:

A: The one directing the conservative nature of the offense
B: he has been hoodwinked by Vigen and won't part with him.

No matter how you slice it ... it's time to part w/Bohl right?

I realize this is a rhetorical question. But it deserves an answer. I guess my answer would be "who would you replace him with"? Between Vic, DC, and Glenn, Bohl is practically Bear Bryant. You look at all the close losses recently, Tulsa, San Diego State, Boise State, and now this one, and it's tempting to say we make bad calls at the end of games. But all of those games could have gone our way. As long as we are competitive and winning about 1/2 our games, Bohl's job is safe. Until this covid thing is over, I don't possibly see how you could make any changes even if this year is a total disaster. Now, if this year goes bad and next year goes bad as well, then we can have the discussion.

 

[307bball]

Interesting reading all of the takes on this thread...Seems like a consensus would be that, overall, the Vigen/Bohl combo will forever be limited by the inability to produce offensive consistency. This is to say that the duo is entangled to the point that they probably are not going to be seperated and to point fingers at Vigen is ultimately an indictment of Bohl himself since he is either:

A: The one directing the conservative nature of the offense
B: he has been hoodwinked by Vigen and won't part with him.

No matter how you slice it ... it's time to part w/Bohl right?

I realize this is a rhetorical question. But it deserves an answer. I guess my answer would be "who would you replace him with"? Between Vic, DC, and Glenn, Bohl is practically Bear Bryant. You look at all the close losses recently, Tulsa, San Diego State, Boise State, and now this one, and it's tempting to say we make bad calls at the end of games. But all of those games could have gone our way. As long as we are competitive and winning about 1/2 our games, Bohl's job is safe. Until this covid thing is over, I don't possibly see how you could make any changes even if this year is a total disaster. Now, if this year goes bad and next year goes bad as well, then we can have the discussion.

Hmmm... I tend to agree but it seems like people are pretty convinced that this is as good as it gets for Bohl at Wyoming...If you are in that camp (I'm not there...yet), then the strength of the program relative to the past 15 or so years is cold comfort. Your point is well made...it's not like quality coaches are pounding down our door.

 

[PokeNer]

Interesting reading all of the takes on this thread...Seems like a consensus would be that, overall, the Vigen/Bohl combo will forever be limited by the inability to produce offensive consistency. This is to say that the duo is entangled to the point that they probably are not going to be seperated and to point fingers at Vigen is ultimately an indictment of Bohl himself since he is either:

A: The one directing the conservative nature of the offense
B: he has been hoodwinked by Vigen and won't part with him.

No matter how you slice it ... it's time to part w/Bohl right?

I realize this is a rhetorical question. But it deserves an answer. I guess my answer would be "who would you replace him with"? Between Vic, DC, and Glenn, Bohl is practically Bear Bryant. You look at all the close losses recently, Tulsa, San Diego State, Boise State, and now this one, and it's tempting to say we make bad calls at the end of games. But all of those games could have gone our way. As long as we are competitive and winning about 1/2 our games, Bohl's job is safe. Until this covid thing is over, I don't possibly see how you could make any changes even if this year is a total disaster. Now, if this year goes bad and next year goes bad as well, then we can have the discussion.

Hmmm... I tend to agree but it seems like people are pretty convinced that this is as good as it gets for Bohl at Wyoming...If you are in that camp (I'm not there...yet), then the strength of the program relative to the past 15 or so years is cold comfort. Your point is well made...it's not like quality coaches are pounding down our door.

And now we've come full circle on the conundrum of whether or not Burman forces Bohl's hand. I don't think anyone that watches WYO football closely is calling for a Mike Leach type offense, but it is plain as day to see what this program could have accomplished with an offense even in the top-75% of FBS.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

1 word: trust.

The offense plays like there are trust issues somewhere. I don't know if it is Bohl's trust in Vigen, Vigen's trust in QB/WR, or other. Getting rid of Bohl to address this 1 issue is ludicrous. All other aspects of the team are in pretty good shape for how things work at WYO (i.e. recruit and develop), and I reject the notion that the offense has to be this way or get rid of Bohl.

There were times in the NV game where the offense looked more than competent and times that it looked like a high school team. The key isn't getting rid of coaches or major changes, but for them to figure out how to have the competent offense on the field more often than the high school offense. I would hope that Bohl is a good enough coach to know the difference and work to get more productivity out of the offense.

 

[bladerunnr]

1 word: trust.

The offense plays like there are trust issues somewhere. I don't know if it is Bohl's trust in Vigen, Vigen's trust in QB/WR, or other. Getting rid of Bohl to address this 1 issue is ludicrous. All other aspects of the team are in pretty good shape for how things work at WYO (i.e. recruit and develop), and I reject the notion that the offense has to be this way or get rid of Bohl.

There were times in the NV game where the offense looked more than competent and times that it looked like a high school team. The key isn't getting rid of coaches or major changes, but for them to figure out how to have the competent offense on the field more often than the high school offense. I would hope that Bohl is a good enough coach to know the difference and work to get more productivity out of the offense.

Go back in time about 2 years. Vanderwahl was having another ineffective game against Utah state at home. Chambers comes in and brings the team back. We get the ball back with a chance to tie in last few minutes. Bohl pulls Chambers and puts Vanderwahl back in because he knew the 2 minute offense. One quick 3 and out and we lose. Bohl defends his moronic decision. Bohl is the one running the show. This isn't about Vigen. We will never have a dynamic offense unless we have a number of NFL quality players and a top 10 1st round qb. We will never be the team that confuses other teams with our schemes and play calling. Whatever Bohl is, he isn't going to change now.

 

[307bball]

1 word: trust.

The offense plays like there are trust issues somewhere. I don't know if it is Bohl's trust in Vigen, Vigen's trust in QB/WR, or other. Getting rid of Bohl to address this 1 issue is ludicrous. All other aspects of the team are in pretty good shape for how things work at WYO (i.e. recruit and develop), and I reject the notion that the offense has to be this way or get rid of Bohl.

There were times in the NV game where the offense looked more than competent and times that it looked like a high school team. The key isn't getting rid of coaches or major changes, but for them to figure out how to have the competent offense on the field more often than the high school offense. I would hope that Bohl is a good enough coach to know the difference and work to get more productivity out of the offense.

Go back in time about 2 years. Vanderwahl was having another ineffective game against Utah state at home. Chambers comes in and brings the team back. We get the ball back with a chance to tie in last few minutes. Bohl pulls Chambers and puts Vanderwahl back in because he knew the 2 minute offense. One quick 3 and out and we lose. Bohl defends his moronic decision. Bohl is the one running the show. This isn't about Vigen. We will never have a dynamic offense unless we have a number of NFL quality players and a top 10 1st round qb. We will never be the team that confuses other teams with our schemes and play calling. Whatever Bohl is, he isn't going to change now.

Question for you bladerunnr...Is it your position that there is no real upside to keeping Bohl around? Would you agree that he has brought stability and pulled us out of the basement as a program but now we need to move on to make the next step?

 

[bladerunnr]

1 word: trust.

The offense plays like there are trust issues somewhere. I don't know if it is Bohl's trust in Vigen, Vigen's trust in QB/WR, or other. Getting rid of Bohl to address this 1 issue is ludicrous. All other aspects of the team are in pretty good shape for how things work at WYO (i.e. recruit and develop), and I reject the notion that the offense has to be this way or get rid of Bohl.

There were times in the NV game where the offense looked more than competent and times that it looked like a high school team. The key isn't getting rid of coaches or major changes, but for them to figure out how to have the competent offense on the field more often than the high school offense. I would hope that Bohl is a good enough coach to know the difference and work to get more productivity out of the offense.

Go back in time about 2 years. Vanderwahl was having another ineffective game against Utah state at home. Chambers comes in and brings the team back. We get the ball back with a chance to tie in last few minutes. Bohl pulls Chambers and puts Vanderwahl back in because he knew the 2 minute offense. One quick 3 and out and we lose. Bohl defends his moronic decision. Bohl is the one running the show. This isn't about Vigen. We will never have a dynamic offense unless we have a number of NFL quality players and a top 10 1st round qb. We will never be the team that confuses other teams with our schemes and play calling. Whatever Bohl is, he isn't going to change now.

Question for you bladerunnr...Is it your position that there is no real upside to keeping Bohl around? Would you agree that he has brought stability and pulled us out of the basement as a program but now we need to move on to make the next step?

That's correct. There is no upside. But there could be a big downside. In other words, I don't believe we will ever win conference championships or even our division with Bohl. However, I think we will be a mediocre to good program that wins 6 or 7 games a year and maybe goes to a minor bowl game. We could easily make a bad hire a la Csewe and go back to 3 wins a year. So, I'm not advocating we get rid of him but I'm kind of meh about the future of the program. He really lost me a few years ago with Vanderwahl and then going back to him again last year. Moreover, I think the level of talent on the team is greatly overstated. I think we have middle of the league type talent, especially at the skill positions. But, that's a lot better than bottom of the league talent.
I'm usually wrong about nearly everything. Even watching the game the other night - I was wondering did we start moving the ball because we opened up the offense or did Nevada start playing soft to protect their lead? I'm never really too sure about what I'm actually seeing. I've been a Wyoming fan for so long that I'm used to us losing. I almost expect it. So I really hope that I'm wrong about all of this.

 

[307bball]

1 word: trust.

The offense plays like there are trust issues somewhere. I don't know if it is Bohl's trust in Vigen, Vigen's trust in QB/WR, or other. Getting rid of Bohl to address this 1 issue is ludicrous. All other aspects of the team are in pretty good shape for how things work at WYO (i.e. recruit and develop), and I reject the notion that the offense has to be this way or get rid of Bohl.

There were times in the NV game where the offense looked more than competent and times that it looked like a high school team. The key isn't getting rid of coaches or major changes, but for them to figure out how to have the competent offense on the field more often than the high school offense. I would hope that Bohl is a good enough coach to know the difference and work to get more productivity out of the offense.

Go back in time about 2 years. Vanderwahl was having another ineffective game against Utah state at home. Chambers comes in and brings the team back. We get the ball back with a chance to tie in last few minutes. Bohl pulls Chambers and puts Vanderwahl back in because he knew the 2 minute offense. One quick 3 and out and we lose. Bohl defends his moronic decision. Bohl is the one running the show. This isn't about Vigen. We will never have a dynamic offense unless we have a number of NFL quality players and a top 10 1st round qb. We will never be the team that confuses other teams with our schemes and play calling. Whatever Bohl is, he isn't going to change now.

Question for you bladerunnr...Is it your position that there is no real upside to keeping Bohl around? Would you agree that he has brought stability and pulled us out of the basement as a program but now we need to move on to make the next step?

That's correct. There is no upside. But there could be a big downside. In other words, I don't believe we will ever win conference championships or even our division with Bohl. However, I think we will be a mediocre to good program that wins 6 or 7 games a year and maybe goes to a minor bowl game. We could easily make a bad hire a la Csewe and go back to 3 wins a year. So, I'm not advocating we get rid of him but I'm kind of meh about the future of the program. He really lost me a few years ago with Vanderwahl and then going back to him again last year. Moreover, I think the level of talent on the team is greatly overstated. I think we have middle of the league type talent, especially at the skill positions. But, that's a lot better than bottom of the league talent.
I'm usually wrong about nearly everything. Even watching the game the other night - I was wondering did we start moving the ball because we opened up the offense or did Nevada start playing soft to protect their lead? I'm never really too sure about what I'm actually seeing. I've been a Wyoming fan for so long that I'm used to us losing. I almost expect it. So I really hope that I'm wrong about all of this.

Thanks for the answer. This conversation gets me thinking more about what success looks like in CFB. I did a quick check of MWC schools and here are the win totals for the last four years:

Cream of the Crop
BSU - 43
SDSU - 38

Top of the Middle
AFA - 31
WYO - 30

Middle
UH - 28
FSU - 27
USU - 27

Bottom of the Middle
NV - 23
CSU - 21

We have a football Team?
UNM - 17
UNLV - 17
SJSU - 12

Interestingly, during that stretch...even Mighty BSU did not get a new years day bowl. Also...during that same time period Wyoming is the only team in the top 7 (of these rankings) without a 10 win season. So how does Wyoming get to 31 wins?...by being consistent. Fresno, by comparison, was really feast or famine with 2 seasons winning 10 or more coupled with a 4 and a 1 win season. Over that same four year stretch, if memory serves, I remember losing small and winning big. Meaning our wins seemed, for the most part, comfortable while losses were excruciatingly close. This suggests to me that we are closer to jumping up a tier than dropping down a tier.

All this to say...I think if you look at success relative to conference foes...we are in one of the better stretches of Wyoming football. Even writing that statement felt bad. This just goes to show the pit the program had sunk into prior to Bohl. I suppose a reasonable person could say that we are as good as we are going to get so we might as well pull the trigger and roll the dice on another coach and another system.

 

[nashvillepoke]

I’m hoping that the first half can be chalked up to losing the starting QB on the first series and levi not quite being ready. I’m sure Sean received most of the reps and we gameplanned around him. There is something called momentum and we lost it all. That being said, I too agree that it was odd that Vigen went back to conservative calling after we squared up. Let’s also not forget that we probably win this game if crow doesn’t [#]f##k up two straight punts.

For the most part I agree with you all but there’s also someone that argued against qb sneaking out of your own endzone. Who was that clown? That’s probably the worst take I’ve ever read on this board and we’ve had Dino, beaver poke and that East popcorn state person.

Here’s hoping we keep throwing like we did in the second half

I will defend my comment about running a qb sneak out of your own endzone against a stacked box and an oline that has not gotten any push all day long. If you think it was a horrible take then that is fine. I thought it was quite possibly the worst play call I have ever seen.

 

[Poke in New England]

Interesting reading all of the takes on this thread...Seems like a consensus would be that, overall, the Vigen/Bohl combo will forever be limited by the inability to produce offensive consistency. This is to say that the duo is entangled to the point that they probably are not going to be seperated and to point fingers at Vigen is ultimately an indictment of Bohl himself since he is either:

A: The one directing the conservative nature of the offense
B: he has been hoodwinked by Vigen and won't part with him.

No matter how you slice it ... it's time to part w/Bohl right?

I realize this is a rhetorical question. But it deserves an answer. I guess my answer would be "who would you replace him with"? Between Vic, DC, and Glenn, Bohl is practically Bear Bryant. You look at all the close losses recently, Tulsa, San Diego State, Boise State, and now this one, and it's tempting to say we make bad calls at the end of games. But all of those games could have gone our way. As long as we are competitive and winning about 1/2 our games, Bohl's job is safe. Until this covid thing is over, I don't possibly see how you could make any changes even if this year is a total disaster. Now, if this year goes bad and next year goes bad as well, then we can have the discussion.

Hmmm... I tend to agree but it seems like people are pretty convinced that this is as good as it gets for Bohl at Wyoming...If you are in that camp (I'm not there...yet), then the strength of the program relative to the past 15 or so years is cold comfort. Your point is well made...it's not like quality coaches are pounding down our door.

And now we've come full circle on the conundrum of whether or not Burman forces Bohl's hand. I don't think anyone that watches WYO football closely is calling for a Mike Leach type offense, but it is plain as day to see what this program could have accomplished with an offense even in the top-75% of FBS.

Top 75% is really all it would take. It's not a big ask for us not to be in the 120's in passing offense along with the triple option teams. With the exception of when we had a once in a lifetime quarterback prospect (for 1 year only) we have made every single passing completion look like a chore.

There's no other program in FBS football (unless you can point me to one) that succeeds with our particular gameplan, approach, and results. It actually is amazing to think of getting back to back 8 win seasons with our particular brand of football, which actually does earn Bohl some credit. But the questions about the ceiling are 100% fair. Time will tell what kind of season Nevada has, but it's possible this will be the inevitable "WTF" loss that happens every season. Personally I am not looking forward to 4-5 of the same crushing losses that play out in the same exact way every time.

 

[laxwyo]

Interesting reading all of the takes on this thread...Seems like a consensus would be that, overall, the Vigen/Bohl combo will forever be limited by the inability to produce offensive consistency. This is to say that the duo is entangled to the point that they probably are not going to be seperated and to point fingers at Vigen is ultimately an indictment of Bohl himself since he is either:

A: The one directing the conservative nature of the offense
B: he has been hoodwinked by Vigen and won't part with him.

No matter how you slice it ... it's time to part w/Bohl right?

I realize this is a rhetorical question. But it deserves an answer. I guess my answer would be "who would you replace him with"? Between Vic, DC, and Glenn, Bohl is practically Bear Bryant. You look at all the close losses recently, Tulsa, San Diego State, Boise State, and now this one, and it's tempting to say we make bad calls at the end of games. But all of those games could have gone our way. As long as we are competitive and winning about 1/2 our games, Bohl's job is safe. Until this covid thing is over, I don't possibly see how you could make any changes even if this year is a total disaster. Now, if this year goes bad and next year goes bad as well, then we can have the discussion.

Hmmm... I tend to agree but it seems like people are pretty convinced that this is as good as it gets for Bohl at Wyoming...If you are in that camp (I'm not there...yet), then the strength of the program relative to the past 15 or so years is cold comfort. Your point is well made...it's not like quality coaches are pounding down our door.

And now we've come full circle on the conundrum of whether or not Burman forces Bohl's hand. I don't think anyone that watches WYO football closely is calling for a Mike Leach type offense, but it is plain as day to see what this program could have accomplished with an offense even in the top-75% of FBS.

Top 75% is really all it would take. It's not a big ask for us not to be in the 120's in passing offense along with the triple option teams. With the exception of when we had a once in a lifetime quarterback prospect (for 1 year only) we have made every single passing completion look like a chore.

There's no other program in FBS football (unless you can point me to one) that succeeds with our particular gameplan, approach, and results. It actually is amazing to think of getting back to back 8 win seasons with our particular brand of football, which actually does earn Bohl some credit. But the questions about the ceiling are 100% fair. Time will tell what kind of season Nevada has, but it's possible this will be the inevitable "WTF" loss that happens every season. Personally I am not looking forward to 4-5 of the same crushing losses that play out in the same exact way every time.

I actually think our ceiling is much higher considering our type of football if we could just get even slightly better in the passing game. That being said, we did score 31 points in regulation. Would everyone on the board be happy with the offense putting up 31 game in and out? I think the D is the bigger concern right now.

 

[laxwyo]

I’m hoping that the first half can be chalked up to losing the starting QB on the first series and levi not quite being ready. I’m sure Sean received most of the reps and we gameplanned around him. There is something called momentum and we lost it all. That being said, I too agree that it was odd that Vigen went back to conservative calling after we squared up. Let’s also not forget that we probably win this game if crow doesn’t [#]f##k up two straight punts.

For the most part I agree with you all but there’s also someone that argued against qb sneaking out of your own endzone. Who was that clown? That’s probably the worst take I’ve ever read on this board and we’ve had Dino, beaver poke and that East popcorn state person.

Here’s hoping we keep throwing like we did in the second half

I will defend my comment about running a qb sneak out of your own endzone against a stacked box and an oline that has not gotten any push all day long. If you think it was a horrible take then that is fine. I thought it was quite possibly the worst play call I have ever seen.

You should actually be banned from ever commenting on football, if that’s what you consider the worst play call ever.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Elephant in the room: modern college football began emphasizing things that are glaring weaknesses in Laramie. Market size, fan attendance, exposure, remote campus, etc.

2000-2002: VK .147 pct
2003-2008: JG .423 pct
2009-2013: DC .435 pct
2014-2020: CB .468 pct

20 years a trend makes. I remember a quote in a paper article discussing JG where JG asked someone (I don't recall this person but someone with a lot of MWC experience), "why can't you win at WYO". The response was something like "that's just the way it is". The other thing I remember was when DC was hired, Burman commented that because of recruiting problems, Wyoming needed a unique system (at the time he was opposed to 3 yards and a cloud of dust). I'm not so sure Burman wasn't right, but everyone and their dog started running the spread. That meant trying to out recruit numerous other programs with our now glaring weaknesses (small market, tv, etc.). Enter CB and he definitely has stabilized the winning side of things albeit in a MUCH weaker conference than VK, JG, and to a lesser extent DC (at least towards the end of his tenure). If he can just get the offense fixed without NFL talent, we will have a unique program with its own ID and is more a developmental system. Going back to chasing the next big thing in coaching is a fool's errand in my opinion. The offense is atrocious for sure. I can't stand it. However, the defense is rebuilding this year and I like our odds of building an offense with CB more than building a program with a whole new staff. I personally believe CB is the best coach to overcome UWs deficiencies in the modern CFB landscape, especially with the pending budget crisis.

With that said, VK did pretty well as DC but never a HC again. JG was not good in SD. DC has been a position coach journeyman. I recognize it is entirely possible that we just swung and missed on the previous coaches.

 

[307bball]

Elephant in the room: modern college football began emphasizing things that are glaring weaknesses in Laramie. Market size, fan attendance, exposure, remote campus, etc.

2000-2002: VK .147 pct
2003-2008: JG .423 pct
2009-2013: DC .435 pct
2014-2020: CB .468 pct

20 years a trend makes. I remember a quote in a paper article discussing JG where JG asked someone (I don't recall this person but someone with a lot of MWC experience), "why can't you win at WYO". The response was something like "that's just the way it is". The other thing I remember was when DC was hired, Burman commented that because of recruiting problems, Wyoming needed a unique system (at the time he was opposed to 3 yards and a cloud of dust). I'm not so sure Burman wasn't right, but everyone and their dog started running the spread. That meant trying to out recruit numerous other programs with our now glaring weaknesses (small market, tv, etc.). Enter CB and he definitely has stabilized the winning side of things albeit in a MUCH weaker conference than VK, JG, and to a lesser extent DC (at least towards the end of his tenure). If he can just get the offense fixed without NFL talent, we will have a unique program with its own ID and is more a developmental system. Going back to chasing the next big thing in coaching is a fool's errand in my opinion. The offense is atrocious for sure. I can't stand it. However, the defense is rebuilding this year and I like our odds of building an offense with CB more than building a program with a whole new staff. I personally believe CB is the best coach to overcome UWs deficiencies in the modern CFB landscape, especially with the pending budget crisis.

With that said, VK did pretty well as DC but never a HC again. JG was not good in SD. DC has been a position coach journeyman. I recognize it is entirely possible that we just swung and missed on the previous coaches.

I think that the issues facing Wyoming have way more to do with changes in modern CFB and less to do with whiffing on three coaches in a row. Don't get me wrong...I kind of wish that our problem was whiffing on coaching hires...that would be easier to fix.

Of the coaches you listed...Here is years above .500:

Bohl: 4 out of 6
DC: 2 out of 5
Glenn: 2 out of 6
Vic: 0 out of 3

Also...The trendline of wins under Bohl is up over his tenure...the other coaches was a one year spike followed by a drop.

I am really digging this particular thread. I'm pretty convinced the Vigen hate is a red herring. Everybody seems to have a lot of respect for the job Bohl has done and Vigen is seen as the scapegoat for a sucky offense. As I said above ... I'm not convinced that Bohl is not THE reason we have had the offensive production we have had. I mean...he is the head guy right?..if he wanted something different I doubt Vigen could convince him otherwise.

 

[Poke in New England]

Interesting reading all of the takes on this thread...Seems like a consensus would be that, overall, the Vigen/Bohl combo will forever be limited by the inability to produce offensive consistency. This is to say that the duo is entangled to the point that they probably are not going to be seperated and to point fingers at Vigen is ultimately an indictment of Bohl himself since he is either:

A: The one directing the conservative nature of the offense
B: he has been hoodwinked by Vigen and won't part with him.

No matter how you slice it ... it's time to part w/Bohl right?

I realize this is a rhetorical question. But it deserves an answer. I guess my answer would be "who would you replace him with"? Between Vic, DC, and Glenn, Bohl is practically Bear Bryant. You look at all the close losses recently, Tulsa, San Diego State, Boise State, and now this one, and it's tempting to say we make bad calls at the end of games. But all of those games could have gone our way. As long as we are competitive and winning about 1/2 our games, Bohl's job is safe. Until this covid thing is over, I don't possibly see how you could make any changes even if this year is a total disaster. Now, if this year goes bad and next year goes bad as well, then we can have the discussion.

Hmmm... I tend to agree but it seems like people are pretty convinced that this is as good as it gets for Bohl at Wyoming...If you are in that camp (I'm not there...yet), then the strength of the program relative to the past 15 or so years is cold comfort. Your point is well made...it's not like quality coaches are pounding down our door.

And now we've come full circle on the conundrum of whether or not Burman forces Bohl's hand. I don't think anyone that watches WYO football closely is calling for a Mike Leach type offense, but it is plain as day to see what this program could have accomplished with an offense even in the top-75% of FBS.

Top 75% is really all it would take. It's not a big ask for us not to be in the 120's in passing offense along with the triple option teams. With the exception of when we had a once in a lifetime quarterback prospect (for 1 year only) we have made every single passing completion look like a chore.

There's no other program in FBS football (unless you can point me to one) that succeeds with our particular gameplan, approach, and results. It actually is amazing to think of getting back to back 8 win seasons with our particular brand of football, which actually does earn Bohl some credit. But the questions about the ceiling are 100% fair. Time will tell what kind of season Nevada has, but it's possible this will be the inevitable "WTF" loss that happens every season. Personally I am not looking forward to 4-5 of the same crushing losses that play out in the same exact way every time.

I actually think our ceiling is much higher considering our type of football if we could just get even slightly better in the passing game. That being said, we did score 31 points in regulation. Would everyone on the board be happy with the offense putting up 31 game in and out? I think the D is the bigger concern right now.

31 point games arent all created equal. 31 should be enough to win lots of games, for sure, but we only ever get there in a roundabout way - fall in a hole early by putting our defense on the field for the whole first half, open up the playbook to come back, and then go right back to the same conservative shit when we get close. Damn near every loss we had last year played out along similar lines. And people were blaming the defense after those games too.

 

[307bball]

Interesting reading all of the takes on this thread...Seems like a consensus would be that, overall, the Vigen/Bohl combo will forever be limited by the inability to produce offensive consistency. This is to say that the duo is entangled to the point that they probably are not going to be seperated and to point fingers at Vigen is ultimately an indictment of Bohl himself since he is either:

A: The one directing the conservative nature of the offense
B: he has been hoodwinked by Vigen and won't part with him.

No matter how you slice it ... it's time to part w/Bohl right?

I realize this is a rhetorical question. But it deserves an answer. I guess my answer would be "who would you replace him with"? Between Vic, DC, and Glenn, Bohl is practically Bear Bryant. You look at all the close losses recently, Tulsa, San Diego State, Boise State, and now this one, and it's tempting to say we make bad calls at the end of games. But all of those games could have gone our way. As long as we are competitive and winning about 1/2 our games, Bohl's job is safe. Until this covid thing is over, I don't possibly see how you could make any changes even if this year is a total disaster. Now, if this year goes bad and next year goes bad as well, then we can have the discussion.

Hmmm... I tend to agree but it seems like people are pretty convinced that this is as good as it gets for Bohl at Wyoming...If you are in that camp (I'm not there...yet), then the strength of the program relative to the past 15 or so years is cold comfort. Your point is well made...it's not like quality coaches are pounding down our door.

And now we've come full circle on the conundrum of whether or not Burman forces Bohl's hand. I don't think anyone that watches WYO football closely is calling for a Mike Leach type offense, but it is plain as day to see what this program could have accomplished with an offense even in the top-75% of FBS.

Top 75% is really all it would take. It's not a big ask for us not to be in the 120's in passing offense along with the triple option teams. With the exception of when we had a once in a lifetime quarterback prospect (for 1 year only) we have made every single passing completion look like a chore.

There's no other program in FBS football (unless you can point me to one) that succeeds with our particular gameplan, approach, and results. It actually is amazing to think of getting back to back 8 win seasons with our particular brand of football, which actually does earn Bohl some credit. But the questions about the ceiling are 100% fair. Time will tell what kind of season Nevada has, but it's possible this will be the inevitable "WTF" loss that happens every season. Personally I am not looking forward to 4-5 of the same crushing losses that play out in the same exact way every time.

I actually think our ceiling is much higher considering our type of football if we could just get even slightly better in the passing game. That being said, we did score 31 points in regulation. Would everyone on the board be happy with the offense putting up 31 game in and out? I think the D is the bigger concern right now.

31 point games arent all created equal. 31 should be enough to win lots of games, for sure, but we only ever get there in a roundabout way - fall in a hole early by putting our defense on the field for the whole first half, open up the playbook to come back, and then go right back to the same conservative Sh#t when we get close. Damn near every loss we had last year played out along similar lines. And people were blaming the defense after those games too.

Concern about defense does not equal "blaming" the defense....pointing out that couple key stops late in games last year would have resulted in a ten win season is also not "blaming" the defense. As far as "blame" is concerned ... for the Nevada game...It was pretty spread around (although not covering those two punts was back-breaking).

 

[fromolwyoming]

When the offensive playbook is opened up (not just sending the RB straight up the middle 3 times), we move the ball a LOT easier up and down the field. Including scoring. And after the should have been INT, the defense really stepped up until OT, when it was gashed again.

The first game showed us two teams, really. The first half was a team that almost immediately lost its general. The second half, they punched back hard (scoring points, stopping the other team, forcing TOs). Hawaii should give us a better feel. Hopefully more of what we ultimately saw in the 2nd half over the 1st.