Jay Sawvel named head coach

[ragtimejoe1]

Changing staffs doesn't mean blowing up the program. The right staff can take it up a notch.

If Bohl is WYO's peak, the hire makes sense. I personally think it could be better.

Changing staffs absolutely means blowing up the program. Different coaching styles, different play books, practices run differently, different philosophies on strength and nutrition, different personalities. The list goes on and on. The only thing that doesn't change with a new staff is the players on the team (for the most part).

I get it. There's two camps. 1 that thinks Bohl is the peak for WYO. In this case, the hire makes sense. Alternatively, do you think this guy is better than Bohl and Bohl was keeping a lid on him? I don't.

The other camp thinks Bohl laid a good foundation and the right staff can build the house. These guys had 10 years to build the house.

I understand people are too scared to get away from 7 wins. Too scared to risk going back to the abyss. Fair enough. In retrospect, with Burman making the decisions, the fear is probably justified. I'm not sure I trust the guy to make the right decision either, so perhaps trying to just not screw up is the best approach.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Why pay more? 900k base with incentives for success. If he wins, he'd be in the upper half. Literally no other fbs program would hire him for head coach. 900k + potential incentives is more than fair.

Firstly, every coach in the MWC has built-in incentives. He wouldn't be the only one hitting them, and it wouldn't move the needle on his position much...especially with how low you're wanting to pay him in the first place.

Secondly, as I mentioned, you can pile all the incentives on there all you want, but setting a base salary that low almost guarantees a proportionately lower assistant pool, which cuts his legs out from under him.

Thirdly, you straight up don't know what calls he's gotten, or what calls he would have gotten had he not immediately been named successor. He has 8 years as a P5 DC. He was well-liked at Minnesota, floundered a bit at Wake, and has spent four years since as DC under one of the best defensive-minded HCs in the country in Bohl. I don't think he's the cream of the crop by any means, but your adamant assertion that he wouldn't get any HC job anywhere in the country for the insanely low amount you want to pay him is absurd. There are several HCs in the SBC, CUSA, and MAC that make higher than that and several teams in those conferences would probably love to have an established name in Sawvell (who isn't nearly as much of an unknown presence as some people in our little bubble here seem to think), lmao.

And fourthly, let me reiterate that it's a bad look for the program and any potential future coaches and assistants.

Again, I'm f*cking glad none of you are ADs. Y'all want to have your cake and eat it, too, and you'd drive the program into the ground day 1. Disagree with the hire all you want, but now that it's done your vision of the financial aspect is insane. People want Bohl or better performance on a bottom 2-3 MWC coaching and assistant pool...that's insane.

I said he wouldn't be a hc at FBS level. I'm sure he could jump in at the FCS level and make much less. What's he going to do, say no? Guess what, we'll throw 2.5 at someone and you'll be looking for a new job.

Leverage. He doesn't have any. This by definition is cronyism likely with some motivation to move Bohl's kid along.

So, I'm guessing you're thinking he's better than Bohl and Bohl was keeping a lid on him.

 

[McPeachy]

I would have preferred a national search. And I would prefer someone with HC experience at some level. BUT let's give him our support. What else can we do?

Agreed. I would prefer a shot at Jerry Kill or Barry Odom, but hey, maybe Sawvel can pull off something Bohl never did - a MWC Championship? That said, this should be Tom's last hire if it ends up failing. Then again, extend him (Tom) if Sawvel kills it.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

That said, this should be Tom's last hire if it ends up failing. Then again, extend him (Tom) if Sawvel kills it.

I'd support that.

 

[CowboyNV]

Perhaps Burman knows that after the PAC2 get done raiding the MWC, Wyoming will be left in the Big Sky or something similar, and it won't much matter who is head coach. Wyoming's problems are much more than a middling head coach and .500 ball over the past ten years. Unfortunately, the AD, University President, and the BOT are not visionary enough to survive in this new college landscape.

 

[307bball]

So, I'm guessing you're thinking he's better than Bohl and Bohl was keeping a lid on him.

You do not have to believe that Bohl limited him to be optimistic about Sawvel as a HC. HC and DC and OC all do different things...It will be informative to watch how this goes. If he is a better HC than Bohl .... it should show up in wins I would think. The salary stuff is not the right place to focus...The HC position costs what it costs. That number is more of a function of the school you happen to be coaching at than anything else. I think the most accurate observation you could make on the salary topic is that HC and staff salary correlate heavily with wins. From that standpoint...open the checkbook...pay a lot then hire and fire baby!

 

[307bball]

Perhaps Burman knows that after the PAC2 get done raiding the MWC, Wyoming will be left in the Big Sky or something similar, and it won't much matter who is head coach. Wyoming's problems are much more than a middling head coach and .500 ball over the past ten years. Unfortunately, the AD, University President, and the BOT are not visionary enough to survive in this new college landscape.

If the bolded text above is true....what are the moves to be made? Do we just circle the actions taken for the last 20 or so years and say "don't do that"?...

 

[ragtimejoe1]

So, I'm guessing you're thinking he's better than Bohl and Bohl was keeping a lid on him.

The HC position costs what it costs. That number is more of a function of the school you happen to be coaching at than anything else. I think the most accurate observation you could make on the salary topic is that HC and staff salary correlate heavily with wins. From that standpoint...open the checkbook...pay a lot then hire and fire baby!

Nonsense, you pay based on experience. He should be half of Bohl at most. The rest of the staff already earns what they earn. Keep the DC salary the same. It's not hard. He should be paid in the bottom 1/3 of the MWC until he proves he deserves extension and salary increase.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Perhaps Burman knows that after the PAC2 get done raiding the MWC, Wyoming will be left in the Big Sky or something similar, and it won't much matter who is head coach. Wyoming's problems are much more than a middling head coach and .500 ball over the past ten years. Unfortunately, the AD, University President, and the BOT are not visionary enough to survive in this new college landscape.

If the bolded text above is true....what are the moves to be made? Do we just circle the actions taken for the last 20 or so years and say "don't do that"?...

Quit shaking down students and taxpayers to fund it. Make them survive on their own or die. The taxpayer tit has created a culture of mediocrity.

 

[307bball]

If the bolded text above is true....what are the moves to be made? Do we just circle the actions taken for the last 20 or so years and say "don't do that"?...

Quit shaking down students and taxpayers to fund it. Make them survive on their own or die. The taxpayer tit has created a culture of mediocrity.

Is that a common structure for middle to low tier college football? Is our athletics funded more by fees/taxes than other institutions?

 

[307bball]

The HC position costs what it costs. That number is more of a function of the school you happen to be coaching at than anything else. I think the most accurate observation you could make on the salary topic is that HC and staff salary correlate heavily with wins. From that standpoint...open the checkbook...pay a lot then hire and fire baby!

Nonsense, you pay based on experience. He should be half of Bohl at most. The rest of the staff already earns what they earn. Keep the DC salary the same. It's not hard. He should be paid in the bottom 1/3 of the MWC until he proves he deserves extension and salary increase.

If you look, over time, at MW schools and what they pay the HC...there is movement but you will see that the higher performing schools pay more to coaches than the lower performing schools

There are two different things..I'm trying to focus on what Wyoming pays for a head coach....not analyze HC salary in general. . The approach of "pay the lowest possible" just isn't they way it will ever work in college athletics anymore (if it ever did). If you pay in the lower third of the conference in compensation to coach's and staff, you should expect lower third results. There are exceptions...but the market corrects them quickly (low performing higher paid coach's get fired pretty quick and high performing low paid coach's get elevated or poached).

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Quit shaking down students and taxpayers to fund it. Make them survive on their own or die. The taxpayer tit has created a culture of mediocrity.

Is that a common structure for middle to low tier college football? Is our athletics funded more by fees/taxes than other institutions?

If memory serves correctly, yes, we are funded as a percentage basis more by taxpayers than other peer institutions. I'll look it up again if I get the chance. I could be wrong, because going strictly off of vague memory. I'm not sure about student fee level.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Nonsense, you pay based on experience. He should be half of Bohl at most. The rest of the staff already earns what they earn. Keep the DC salary the same. It's not hard. He should be paid in the bottom 1/3 of the MWC until he proves he deserves extension and salary increase.

If you look, over time, at MW schools and what they pay the HC...there is movement but you will see that the higher performing schools pay more to coaches than the lower performing schools

There are two different things..I'm trying to focus on what Wyoming pays for a head coach....not analyze HC salary in general. . The approach of "pay the lowest possible" just isn't they way it will ever work in college athletics anymore (if it ever did). If you pay in the lower third of the conference in compensation to coach's and staff, you should expect lower third results. There are exceptions...but the market corrects them quickly (low performing higher paid coach's get fired pretty quick and high performing low paid coach's get elevated or poached).

You have to pay more if you are doing a search not hiring within for a candidate that likely did not have other HC options. It matters. Invest appropriate to experience.
I'm sure UW faculty doesn't feel the same. Hire a relatively inexperienced guy for 20 x the average faculty salary without a search? Not a good look.

 

[307bball]

Is that a common structure for middle to low tier college football? Is our athletics funded more by fees/taxes than other institutions?

If memory serves correctly, yes, we are funded as a percentage basis more by taxpayers than other peer institutions. I'll look it up again if I get the chance. I could be wrong, because going strictly off of vague memory. I'm not sure about student fee level.

This is an interesting topic to me...I've always loved college sports but people make the argument that public money should not be spent on it. Public universities spending is always scrutinized and spending on athletics never seems to go down.

 

[Bryoming]

Changing staffs absolutely means blowing up the program. Different coaching styles, different play books, practices run differently, different philosophies on strength and nutrition, different personalities. The list goes on and on. The only thing that doesn't change with a new staff is the players on the team (for the most part).

I get it. There's two camps. 1 that thinks Bohl is the peak for WYO. In this case, the hire makes sense. Alternatively, do you think this guy is better than Bohl and Bohl was keeping a lid on him? I don't.

The other camp thinks Bohl laid a good foundation and the right staff can build the house. These guys had 10 years to build the house.

I understand people are too scared to get away from 7 wins. Too scared to risk going back to the abyss. Fair enough. In retrospect, with Burman making the decisions, the fear is probably justified. I'm not sure I trust the guy to make the right decision either, so perhaps trying to just not screw up is the best approach.

Define better? If you're just talking about wins and losses, we'll find out. Keeping a lid on him? Sawvel ran the defense, which has been pretty damn good under his watch. How on earth would you think that hiring someone on to run the defense is "keeping a lid" on them?

As far as your house building analogy, the general contractor is in charge. If the house isn't getting built you can change the GC and keep the same subcontractors to keep the project on track, which is what is being done here.

You made zero reference to whether or not changing staff equates to blowing up the program. You're the king of strawman arguments on this board, but this one takes the cake.

 

[307bball]

If you look, over time, at MW schools and what they pay the HC...there is movement but you will see that the higher performing schools pay more to coaches than the lower performing schools

There are two different things..I'm trying to focus on what Wyoming pays for a head coach....not analyze HC salary in general. . The approach of "pay the lowest possible" just isn't they way it will ever work in college athletics anymore (if it ever did). If you pay in the lower third of the conference in compensation to coach's and staff, you should expect lower third results. There are exceptions...but the market corrects them quickly (low performing higher paid coach's get fired pretty quick and high performing low paid coach's get elevated or poached).

You have to pay more if you are doing a search not hiring within for a candidate that likely did not have other HC options. It matters. Invest appropriate to experience.
I'm sure UW faculty doesn't feel the same. Hire a relatively inexperienced guy for 20 x the average faculty salary without a search? Not a good look.

mmm well...I can't say you aren't consistent...but I do believe you are out of step with what is going on in college football head coach compensation norms. That doesn't mean you are wrong by the way...I really don't know. I suspect that your bottom line might be "how much does it cost to run a program" while at the more successful schools the mindset is more "how can we win more".... though I'm sure there is a lot of overlap there. It amazes me what coaches can command in compensation nowadays. It feels like it's "pay-to-win"....and that will definitely leave Wyoming in the dust. No amount of doing "more with less" can un-ring that bell.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

I get it. There's two camps. 1 that thinks Bohl is the peak for WYO. In this case, the hire makes sense. Alternatively, do you think this guy is better than Bohl and Bohl was keeping a lid on him? I don't.

The other camp thinks Bohl laid a good foundation and the right staff can build the house. These guys had 10 years to build the house.

I understand people are too scared to get away from 7 wins. Too scared to risk going back to the abyss. Fair enough. In retrospect, with Burman making the decisions, the fear is probably justified. I'm not sure I trust the guy to make the right decision either, so perhaps trying to just not screw up is the best approach.

Define better? If you're just talking about wins and losses, we'll find out. Keeping a lid on him? Sawvel ran the defense, which has been pretty damn good under his watch. How on earth would you think that hiring someone on to run the defense is "keeping a lid" on them?

As far as your house building analogy, the general contractor is in charge. If the house isn't getting built you can change the GC and keep the same subcontractors to keep the project on track, which is what is being done here.

You made zero reference to whether or not changing staff equates to blowing up the program. You're the king of strawman arguments on this board, but this one takes the cake.

My def of blowing up is Bohl's 1st 2 years. It is possible to hire a new staff that builds rather than blows up.

Now your turn. Will he win more than Bohl?

 

[Bryoming]

Define better? If you're just talking about wins and losses, we'll find out. Keeping a lid on him? Sawvel ran the defense, which has been pretty damn good under his watch. How on earth would you think that hiring someone on to run the defense is "keeping a lid" on them?

As far as your house building analogy, the general contractor is in charge. If the house isn't getting built you can change the GC and keep the same subcontractors to keep the project on track, which is what is being done here.

You made zero reference to whether or not changing staff equates to blowing up the program. You're the king of strawman arguments on this board, but this one takes the cake.

My def of blowing up is Bohl's 1st 2 years. It is possible to hire a new staff that builds rather than blows up.

Now your turn. Will he win more than Bohl?

 

[wwplayer]

Seems to me that perhaps some of the people who would have preferred the old model of going with a national search for a new coach are forgetting the fact that college sports is currently in a state of chaos (basically unrestricted transfers, NIL, big programs buying players, etc.) and nobody knows how it will all shake out 3, 5, 10 years from now. Hiring a new coach from the outside might have been the best approach in the (stable) past, but I think everyone has to agree it's the Wild, Wild West at this point in time. Despite some glaring weaknesses (offense, right?), Bohl managed to create a very stable program, which seems be be, at least, holding up under the tremendous pressure of a rapidly changing college sports climate. When the whole world is swirling around you, sometimes it's best to just stand pat for the time being. With things being like they used to be, I probably would have been in support of a bigger change (like perhaps bringing in a new guy/system). But considering the whole picture of the way college sports are going RIGHT NOW, moving Sawvel up to HC is the right move (for Dec. 2023).

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Well, 1 thing about it, we'll know by this time next year. No first year coach excuse bs. He doesn't get that leash as an internal hire.