ragtimejoe1 said:
Already said it several times. 6-7 wins is probably exactly in line with the philosophy of this hire. 8-9 wins is probably in line with expected upside of this hire. 10+ and conference championship would be homerun with Burman being genius.
5 wins would probably get debated ad nauseum. For me, it shows the narrative about "not blowing up the program" is b.s. and everyone involved should be on the hot seat.
Less than 5 wins proves that the narrative of not blowing up the program is b.s. and all involved should be reassigned or fired.
And the philosophy of the hire is what?....to not get worse by being stable? You seem to have a problem with the execution of that philosophy but do you not see the value in it? If it is a mistake to hire Sawvell...it will be because he's not a good HC...not because Burman's "
philosophy" is faulty. Sawvell winning a bunch of games next year does not make Burman a genius.
Having listened to the interview of Burman...the narrative about "
not blowing up the program" is a pretty big over-simplification. Seems like a lot of media and posters can't hold complicated thoughts in their heads and must boil everything down to an 8 second sound byte. Some players have commented that they appreciated the elevation of Sawvell to HC
but that does not mean an internal hire won't be destructive.
To the extent that there is an
overwhelming narrative of "
not blowing up the program", it's mostly a media and forum confection. It happens to be something that Burman wants to avoid but it's not the only thing that is motivating him. The concrete is pretty dry on the Burman legacy at this point...I think you could call it mixed at best. He's been the AD for a very long time and most of the athletic results during his tenure can't really be described as "excellent"....not much that happens from here on out is going to change that barring scandal or some outlier football and men's basketball results.
IMO, there are a population of fans who you are giving voice to (and doing it well I might add) that are not accepting that Wyoming has, in fact, been left behind in the landscape of modern college athletics. This line of thinking will always place the blame on the person in charge. No matter how poorly Wyoming is able to recruit, no matter how little NIL money Wyoming is able to muster, no matter how small of a value broadcast partners place on airing Wyoming sports....it still is seen as primarily a failing by the coach or the athletic director or BOT that Wyoming is not having success. As a pokes fan for a very long time...this would have been my position in the post-Roach and Tiller years. I began to see the worm turn as the years have slid by. At this point, I would be shocked to my core to see a level of success in athletics at the University of Wyoming that was enjoyed from about 1985 to 1995. There is just no realistic pathway to that place....no matter who you put in those positions. Even a one-off conference championship, as much as I would enjoy that, does not change much. Nobody at our level is going to be able to have sustainable success...it just ain't going to happen.
This probably opens me up to all the versions of "
why even try" or "
that is accepting mediocrity".... If that is the road you want to take to avoid the hard truth...I guess there is nothing much to talk about. If you think I'm missing something, by all means, articulate the potential in Wyoming athletics that is heretofore untapped. I would love to not believe what I see playing out.