• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your WyoNation.com experience today!

Lower Division Transfer

We got beat by Idaho and beat Washington state and almost beat a playoff team in Boise. I don't think there is much difference in the athletes of the upper reaches of FCS and most of FBS. I'm fine with it. COACHING is more important in football than any other sport imo. The COACHING needs to improve.
 
LanderPoke said:
We got beat by Idaho and beat Washington state and almost beat a playoff team in Boise. I don't think there is much difference in the athletes of the upper reaches of FCS and most of FBS. I'm fine with it. COACHING is more important in football than any other sport imo. The COACHING needs to improve.
Click to expand...
Totally agree. Teams that are just bad, by and large, have bad coaching. For example, Jay Sawvell=bad coach.

I think you get diminishing returns though. Meaning, you might be able to always be in the top half of the conference with good coaching (see Craig Bohl), but without some of those top-level guys, may be tough to get a chip.
 
Wyomingisgreat1 said:
What do you guys think about getting all these lower Division Transfers?
Click to expand...
I think it’s a good strategy. Players that proved they can play and are hungry. There are some solid players in D2 and FCS. Seems less risky than taking the third stringer from Ole Miss who never saw the field.
 
It's all talent evaluation, attitude evaluation, scheme fit, and coaching. The level they come from shouldn't matter. A kid at p4 who sat might be just as hungry to show his skills as a lower division kid.

Winning and good players that fit should be the priority not limiting the pool you look in.
 
Football programs add what?...20 to 30 players each year? Over the course of any 3 to 4 year stretch that is about 100 guys, give or take a few. Completely independent of the scheme you run or any of the other intangibles, it will always be better if those 100 guys are highly rated or have proven themselves at a higher level.

Does Wyoming have a choice? Wyoming and schools like Wyoming that do not ever get the cream of the crop are always trying to find overlooked talent or hidden talent that can be developed. Very difficult. In the case of Wyoming specifically...the "juice" or "hype" around the program is very meh. That means recruits (at whatever level) don't really set Wyoming apart from other programs like they would with a Boise St, for example. At that point you are left competing on other things...how nice is the weather? Will family be able to watch me play? Is it an exciting place to live from a non-football perspect?...all of these questions that, while Wyoming may not be at the bottom of the list...for sure is not at the top much.
 
Off topic a bit, but I wonder what the UW Football (and others frankly) annual turnover rate is. I wonder if it is even measured anymore.
 
Wyoming is and will continue to be a player development program. Basically with NIL schools like Wyoming will be minor league teams for the bigger names. It would not shock me to see some sort of formal or informal arrangements between certain schools where a major program directs players who they like but who are not quite ready to make the jump to big time college FB to designated schools with the understanding if they improve they would be transferring via the portal later.
 
I don't know how this is different than when the Erickson, Roach and Tiller teams succeeded with junior college transfers. Weren't so many of our great players JUCOs? Dabby Dawson? Josh Wallwork, Joe Hughes? JA17?
 
307bball said:
Football programs add what?...20 to 30 players each year? Over the course of any 3 to 4 year stretch that is about 100 guys, give or take a few. Completely independent of the scheme you run or any of the other intangibles, it will always be better if those 100 guys are highly rated or have proven themselves at a higher level.

Does Wyoming have a choice? Wyoming and schools like Wyoming that do not ever get the cream of the crop are always trying to find overlooked talent or hidden talent that can be developed. Very difficult. In the case of Wyoming specifically...the "juice" or "hype" around the program is very meh. That means recruits (at whatever level) don't really set Wyoming apart from other programs like they would with a Boise St, for example. At that point you are left competing on other things...how nice is the weather? Will family be able to watch me play? Is it an exciting place to live from a non-football perspect?...all of these questions that, while Wyoming may not be at the bottom of the list...for sure is not at the top much.
Click to expand...
Quit focusing on P4. That'll never happen or players of that caliber will never happen.

It's about positioning within the new MWC and, relative to those schools, we should be able to do quite well if the talent evaluation and coaching is sufficient.

More than likely, the new MWC champ won't be in the playoff hunt annually.
 
ragtimejoe1 said:
Quit focusing on P4. That'll never happen or players of that caliber will never happen.

It's about positioning within the new MWC and, relative to those schools, we should be able to do quite well if the talent evaluation and coaching is sufficient.

More than likely, the new MWC champ won't be in the playoff hunt annually.
Click to expand...
I'm not focussing on P4...I'm pointing out that the pool of players that Wyoming is recruiting from, even relative to our conference, is not all that high. Among that pool, we are competing for the best rated by whatever metric..so is UNM, so is CSU, and so on. What is the selling point, or narrative that a coach at Wyoming can bring to recruits that sets them apart from that group?...I don't know what it is. This means that it's going to be a bit of a crap shoot....they'll do as good as they can but I think it's going to be tough sledding to out-talent anybody.
 
307bball said:
I'm not focussing on P4...I'm pointing out that the pool of players that Wyoming is recruiting from, even relative to our conference, is not all that high. Among that pool, we are competing for the best rated by whatever metric..so is UNM, so is CSU, and so on. What is the selling point, or narrative that a coach at Wyoming can bring to recruits that sets them apart from that group?...I don't know what it is. This means that it's going to be a bit of a crap shoot....they'll do as good as they can but I think it's going to be tough sledding to out-talent anybody.
Click to expand...
For the players at our level, it's mainly relationship to/with coaches and NIL. That's by far the biggest. Who is ahead of them? Does the system fit their skills or how they want to play? Facilities, environment, and community characteristics are a ways down the list.

WYO can compete just fine in the new MWC. This isn't tcu, Utah, byu, or even bsu anymore. Unlv may step up enough for a big disparity, but, as of now, they don't.
 
ragtimejoe1 said:
For the players at our level, it's mainly relationship to/with coaches and NIL. That's by far the biggest. Who is ahead of them? Does the system fit their skills or how they want to play? Facilities, environment, and community characteristics are a ways down the list.

WYO can compete just fine in the new MWC. This isn't tcu, Utah, byu, or even bsu anymore. Unlv may step up enough for a big disparity, but, as of now, they don't.
Click to expand...
I pretty much agree....if the goal is compete...then we are pretty much there....I think I posted the record against the future conference members from the last 10 or so years that shows we fit that group pretty nicely.

Now if you want to dominate that group...that is a different task...and I don't know that recruiting is the correct vehicle to deliver that. I guess if you go completely triple option, then you can tailor the recruiting to that skill set but defensively everybody will still be going after the same guys.
 
307bball said:
I pretty much agree....if the goal is compete...then we are pretty much there....I think I posted the record against the future conference members from the last 10 or so years that shows we fit that group pretty nicely.

Now if you want to dominate that group...that is a different task...and I don't know that recruiting is the correct vehicle to deliver that. I guess if you go completely triple option, then you can tailor the recruiting to that skill set but defensively everybody will still be going after the same guys.
Click to expand...
I actually expect a little more parity in the new mwc. Maybe a team goes on a 2 or maybe 3 year run but I'm not expecting consistent dominance by 1 team.

I could certainly be wrong but I think the portal will pretty much prevent that.
 
It just sucks that in order to talk about being competitive required the top 1/3 of the conference (that does not include CSU) splitting. I'm hopeful but it didn't really make a much of a difference when essentially the same thing happened 13 years ago.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top