Non P12/MWC discussion

[307bball]

Decided to post this under it's own section....was detracting from more pointed discussion about the conference negotiations.

Appreciate your post, and you have definitely spent some time thinking about this entire UW AD mess.

My basic point, is that it all starts with leadership. And our leader has really never gotten it done, and watched from afar (mostly) as UW has fallen behind. There is a loser mentality at UW, and it starts at the top. The whole "doing more with less" bullshit is just that.

Tom is the CEO of UW athletics the business. And the business has been in chapter 11 for all of his 19 years. I like Tom as a person, and have known him almost my whole life. But as an AD of my beloved university, where I spend a boatload of cash and even more amount of time, I am a very dissatisfied customer.

Appreciate yours as well. I do think that leadership and all that goes into it is lacking. I think where I diverge from a lot of folks on here is that, over time, I have wondered how much that lack of leadership is driving the mediocrity. Another way of saying that.... If the AD had made great and visionary decisions (let's not consider perfection here...) since the time that Tiller left, what does today look like? Let's set aside the pie in the sky situation where Wyoming suddenly is some vibrant economy with 4x the population that it had during the '90's. In that situation the best case is some streak of hiring top notch coaches to run the major programs that keeps Wyoming in the competitive elite of the MWC through the pre-NIL era. Starting in 2021 (when NIL became available to athletes), we would still be suffering more than everybody else because there just isn't the media opportunities in Wyoming to match what is happening elsewhere. When you make that list ... it's not like Wyoming is in the middle...we are at the bottom.

Now...Burman's legacy is that he was not able to accomplish that. What meager success that Wyoming had during his tenure could have probably been replicated by an empty chair making much less $$ than he does. I don't particularly care how much he makes...I care that he didn't deliver any great coaches to Laramie during a time period where that could have really mattered....now...it's starting to look like even that doesn't matter.

Many of the things you say are likely true. So, if I’m a leader, let’s say a business leader that is providing direction of a disadvantaged or disenfranchised organization, it means you work harder to develop any kind of success. It requires vision. If not, the business goes bankrupt and dies.

Can you point to anything UW athletics, Burman, has done to raise the bar on their “business” or program? Any “outside the box” ideas to become relevant? Any vision?

I really can’t.

You are absolutely correct to point that out...I think the description of Burman as a leader of a disadvantaged organization is pretty accurate. In that situation you could be twice as smart and savvy than your competitors and barely be treading water. Unfortunately we have no way of knowing what would have happened if Burman had not prioritized facility spending and had poured money into coaches ... for example. I think I agree with some comments by folks who have advocated for greatly increasing coaching compensation. Burman himself may have not been able to make that happen though...who knows.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

I don't dislike Burman as a person but he has unilaterally selected coaches that have been disastrous. That's on him; not external factors. The spring game is another example of opportunity lost. That could have been promoted more, collective present, fan engagement activities, etc. Instead, it was a dud for fan engagement. A good ad would maximize every opportunity. Would it help winning? Who knows but it would feel like effort. The spring game is 1 example of many opportunities. Looking at 1 individually? Probably not significant. Looking at all the little things over nearly 2 decades? It matters. Burman has been good at securing taxpayer money to fund athletics and facilities. Outside of that? Very little. Wyoming acts like an athletic department that doesn't belong. We shouldn't be surprised when performance follows.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

With the official announcement of the departing teams, it is now time to officially retire the "disadvantaged program" stuff. The excuse machine is no longer grounded in any reality.

Specifically talking about the new MWC, we no longer have some insurmountable boogeyman that keeps only us down but not conference peers. The only reason for failing to achieve MWC championships will be the failing of people. There is no rational argument that can be made describing how WYO is disadvantaged relative to 2026 MWC peers.

After reflecting on the question and with the new information, it's clear this topic is now largely dead looking forward.

"Poor Little Ole WYO Excuse Machine" 1999-2026. R.I.P. and good riddance.

 

[307bball]

With the official announcement of the departing teams, it is now time to officially retire the "disadvantaged program" stuff. The excuse machine is no longer grounded in any reality.

Specifically talking about the new MWC, we no longer have some insurmountable boogeyman that keeps only us down but not conference peers. The only reason for failing to achieve MWC championships will be the failing of people. There is no rational argument that can be made describing how WYO is disadvantaged relative to 2026 MWC peers.

After reflecting on the question and with the new information, it's clear this topic is now largely dead looking forward.

"Poor Little Ole WYO Excuse Machine" 1999-2026. R.I.P. and good riddance.

You characterization of the people observing the uphill battle that Wyoming athletics has been fighting is laughably myopic. The golden age and goal of UW athletics has always been something like what happened in football in the '60s and in men's basketball and football in the late '80s and early '90s. Isn't that something you would have liked to have happen in the last 30 years? I sure would have loved it. Most Wyoming fans remember that and pine for it. Commentary and observation that Wyoming has fought an uphill battle is in specific reference to that level of achievement having become unavailable in Wyoming due to a mixture of factors both in and out of our control seems to trigger you...and as time has passed...the amount of factors outside of our control has grown ... not diminished.

Now..if you goal is to be competitive with the remainder of what is left in the MW...then great. That is about where we are at already. I had no Idea that was what I was supposed to be satisfied with. Unfortunately for me, I'm ripped at the idea that CSU and Utah St and Fresno and SDSU and BSU are looking to be in an upward trajectory that Wyoming my never have had available to them.

 

[PorkerPoke]

Agree with all the expressed sentiments.

I have no good insights to add.

I feel that the tolerance low performance for extended periods of time is a big part of our demise, but being a lightly populated state with a winter forced isolation of Laramie for fan attendance along with perpetual subpar performances says a lot.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

You characterization of the people observing the uphill battle that Wyoming athletics has been fighting is laughably myopic. The golden age and goal of UW athletics has always been something like what happened in football in the '60s and in men's basketball and football in the late '80s and early '90s. Isn't that something you would have liked to have happen in the last 30 years? I sure would have loved it. Most Wyoming fans remember that and pine for it. Commentary and observation that Wyoming has fought an uphill battle is in specific reference to that level of achievement having become unavailable in Wyoming due to a mixture of factors both in and out of our control seems to trigger you...and as time has passed...the amount of factors outside of our control has grown ... not diminished.

Now..if you goal is to be competitive with the remainder of what is left in the MW...then great. That is about where we are at already. I had no Idea that was what I was supposed to be satisfied with. Unfortunately for me, I'm ripped at the idea that CSU and Utah St and Fresno and SDSU and BSU are looking to be in an upward trajectory that Wyoming my never have had available to them.

The uphill battle discussions by some, including the ad, cross a line of, well, too many challenges so let's temper expectations. If that's the case, taxpayers and students should tell Burman the same thing relative to funding.

For the future MWC, weren't you the one saying you can only win the games on your schedule and that schedule strength doesn't matter when comparing coaches? Looks like WYO should be competitive with the remaining MWC. At least the excuse machine is dead.

 

[307bball]

The uphill battle discussions by some, including the ad, cross a line of, well, too many challenges so let's temper expectations. If that's the case, taxpayers and students should tell Burman the same thing relative to funding.

For the future MWC, weren't you the one saying you can only win the games on your schedule and that schedule strength doesn't matter when comparing coaches? Looks like WYO should be competitive with the remaining MWC. At least the excuse machine is dead.

Your ending comment is inaccurately extrapolating a discussion about comparing coaches across eras...It doesn't apply outside of the context it was in...and definitely doesn't apply to how fans feel about what has gone on in college athletics at UW over the past 30+ years.

Again...if the goal was/is to be competitive with the teams that are left in the conference...then I guess it's time to break out the party hats because when you line up Wyoming's results from the last 10 to 15 years with the new MWC, we are right in the mix in that group.

You have charted the competitive decline of Wyoming's conference when it comes to football fairly accurately IMO. What we are heading into is not a decline...it's a free fall that possibly drops to FCS. This has much bigger ramifications than an over time decline in SOS or SRS rating. This is a competitive level that will feel fundamentally different than the declines from the TCU, Utah, BYU MWC to the BSU dominated version of the same conference. Wyoming will fare pretty well competitively, at least in the beginning of this new arrangement (basketball might still suck). But it will feel hollow. The gears of college athletics have ground us down......sad state of affairs.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Your ending comment is inaccurately extrapolating a discussion about comparing coaches across eras...It doesn't apply outside of the context it was in...and definitely doesn't apply to how fans feel about what has gone on in college athletics at UW over the past 30+ years.

Again...if the goal was/is to be competitive with the teams that are left in the conference...then I guess it's time to break out the party hats because when you line up Wyoming's results from the last 10 to 15 years with the new MWC, we are right in the mix in that group.

You have charted the competitive decline of Wyoming's conference when it comes to football fairly accurately IMO. What we are heading into is not a decline...it's a free fall that possibly drops to FCS. This has much bigger ramifications than an over time decline in SOS or SRS rating. This is a competitive level that will feel fundamentally different than the declines from the TCU, Utah, BYU MWC to the BSU dominated version of the same conference. Wyoming will fare pretty well competitively, at least in the beginning of this new arrangement (basketball might still suck). But it will feel hollow. The gears of college athletics have ground us down......sad state of affairs.

I disagree. Destruction of the excuse machine is the first step for accountability. There literally is no reason to fail other than failure of the people running the show.

With accountability we may have a chance at success in the new MWC. We weren't having success before. If accountability can be restored and success achieved in the new MWC, maybe, just maybe, a culture of success and accountability for failure can be instilled rather than empty slogans of doing more with less or cowboy touch and largely accepting mediocrity because of all our challenges.

I look forward to an accountability era.

 

[307bball]

I disagree. Destruction of the excuse machine is the first step for accountability. There literally is no reason to fail other than failure of the people running the show.

With accountability we may have a chance at success in the new MWC. We weren't having success before. If accountability can be restored and success achieved in the new MWC, maybe, just maybe, a culture of success and accountability for failure can be instilled rather than empty slogans of doing more with less or cowboy touch and largely accepting mediocrity because of all our challenges.

I look forward to an accountability era.

You disagree with what? are you responding to a different thread?

 

[ragtimejoe1]

You disagree with what? are you responding to a different thread?

This part

But it will feel hollow. The gears of college athletics have ground us down.

For the first time since 1999, we have a realistic chance of doing well in conference consistently. Success breeds success. Burman, coaches, fans, and media can no longer lean on the crutch of being disadvantaged. Maybe we didn't get ground down. Maybe we ended up where we needed to be. Maybe this is exactly what was needed to have a chance at fixing the sinking ship.

Mostly losing vs a stronger schedule vs mostly winning against a weaker schedule. What's better?

Now to another question (not liklihood-just if) . If PBJ sticks around 6+ years, has 65% conference winning percentage, and wins 1-2 mwc championships, will he be considered a better coach than Bohl?

 

[307bball]

For the first time since 1999, we have a realistic chance of doing well in conference consistently. Success breeds success. Burman, coaches, fans, and media can no longer lean on the crutch of being disadvantaged. Maybe we didn't get ground down. Maybe we ended up where we needed to be. Maybe this is exactly what was needed to have a chance at fixing the sinking ship.

Mostly losing vs a stronger schedule vs mostly winning against a weaker schedule. What's better?

Now to another question (not liklihood-just if) . If PBJ sticks around 6+ years, has 65% conference winning percentage, and wins 1-2 mwc championships, will he be considered a better coach than Bohl?

I'm all for a good coach ranking discussion...but for the same reason I didn't keep this discussion in the thread that was more focused on what was coming out of the conference negotiations, let's create a new thread or resurrect one of our old discussions to talk about that.

Apologies for the following epistle....the TLDR is ... I think there is confusion between two separate outcomes in the fortunes for Wyoming athletics. I try to clarify my position between them.

I'm not trying to pick apart your words ... But why do you not feel conflicted in your statement that, since '99, we have not had a realistic chance to be consistently good? This seems to contradict statements that, if not for Burman's incompetence, we would be so much better. Even me, at my most forgiving, don't think we didn't have a chance at competitive success. For myself, the results that were achieved on the gridiron and the hardwood since '99 are pretty much unacceptable. For instance, I don't care how good the MWC was when BYU, Utah and TCU were in the conference...we went 4 years with 8 conference victories....that should have have been Burman's exit. A good series of coaches following Dimel in '00 and McClain in '07 would have had much better results over that time span. That is Burman's fault.

I think this contradiction may due to some confusion about what we are saying when we blame and point the finger at Burman. There are a couple of outcomes that people lay at his feet

1. One is the death of competitive results to write home about since he has been AD. I'm on record saying that his inability to get good coaches into Laramie and to nimbly move on from bad ones has been a disaster. He owns the outcomes his coaching hires have produced and it isn't good.
2. The other outcome is what has happened relating to conference realignment, conference bowl's that nobody cares about, the transfer environment, and the overall diminishment of Wyoming's perceived status in college athletics. This is the criticism of Burman that doesn't have much weight.

Now, it's not like things would not have been somewhat better in relation to the second criticism if he had hired better coaches and we had better competitive results. There is a link between the two....but the forces that are behind what is going on at the level of college athletics that we care about overwhelm the good that comes from whatever competitive success we could have achieved. Not only that, but we are now in an era where those changes that Burman and UW don't really control (NIL, transfer rules changes) are beginning to feed back pretty strongly into the competitive results even when good coaches can be hired.

I'm pretty confident saying that outcome #1 above has Burman's fingerprints all over it while outcome #2 is the metaphorical gear of college athletic history that is grinding Wyoming athletics to dust.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

I'm all for a good coach ranking discussion...but for the same reason I didn't keep this discussion in the thread that was more focused on what was coming out of the conference negotiations, let's create a new thread or resurrect one of our old discussions to talk about that.

Apologies for the following epistle....the TLDR is ... I think there is confusion between two separate outcomes in the fortunes for Wyoming athletics. I try to clarify my position between them.

I'm not trying to pick apart your words ... But why do you not feel conflicted in your statement that, since '99, we have not had a realistic chance to be consistently good? This seems to contradict statements that, if not for Burman's incompetence, we would be so much better. Even me, at my most forgiving, don't think we didn't have a chance at competitive success. For myself, the results that were achieved on the gridiron and the hardwood since '99 are pretty much unacceptable. For instance, I don't care how good the MWC was when BYU, Utah and TCU were in the conference...we went 4 years with 8 conference victories....that should have have been Burman's exit. A good series of coaches following Dimel in '00 and McClain in '07 would have had much better results over that time span. That is Burman's fault.

I think this contradiction may due to some confusion about what we are saying when we blame and point the finger at Burman. There are a couple of outcomes that people lay at his feet

1. One is the death of competitive results to write home about since he has been AD. I'm on record saying that his inability to get good coaches into Laramie and to nimbly move on from bad ones has been a disaster. He owns the outcomes his coaching hires have produced and it isn't good.
2. The other outcome is what has happened relating to conference realignment, conference bowl's that nobody cares about, the transfer environment, and the overall diminishment of Wyoming's perceived status in college athletics. This is the criticism of Burman that doesn't have much weight.

Now, it's not like things would not have been somewhat better in relation to the second criticism if he had hired better coaches and we had better competitive results. There is a link between the two....but the forces that are behind what is going on at the level of college athletics that we care about overwhelm the good that comes from whatever competitive success we could have achieved. Not only that, but we are now in an era where those changes that Burman and UW don't really control (NIL, transfer rules changes) are beginning to feed back pretty strongly into the competitive results even when good coaches can be hired.

I'm pretty confident saying that outcome #1 above has Burman's fingerprints all over it while outcome #2 is the metaphorical gear of college athletic history that is grinding Wyoming athletics to dust.

Burman tanked programs with bad hires, we agree on that.

He also relied too heavily on taxpayer-funded facilities that took great treasure but yielded little results. The example of missed opportunities at the spring game is but one example of many over 2 decades. He failed to try to generate enthusiasm by any means necessary.

The reason for the contradiction is that I feel Burman and UW's athletic efforts will be competitive in the new league. UW should have been able to do better in the current. bsu is a gorilla but rest should have been beatable. I do not think a bunch of external stuff kept us at .500 in the current MWC. I can't disagree more with that sentiment. Did it keep us from being more competitive with the very best of CFB? Obviously.

What say you on PBJ. IF he achieved greater than .500 in the new conference and wins a MWC championship, is he a better coach than Bohl?

 

[307bball]

Burman tanked programs with bad hires, we agree on that.

He also relied too heavily on taxpayer-funded facilities that took great treasure but yielded little results. The example of missed opportunities at the spring game is but one example of many over 2 decades. He failed to try to generate enthusiasm by any means necessary.

The reason for the contradiction is that I feel Burman and UW's athletic efforts will be competitive in the new league. UW should have been able to do better in the current. bsu is a gorilla but rest should have been beatable. I do not think a bunch of external stuff kept us at .500 in the current MWC. I can't disagree more with that sentiment. Did it keep us from being more competitive with the very best of CFB? Obviously.

What say you on PBJ. IF he achieved greater than .500 in the new conference and wins a MWC championship, is he a better coach than Bohl?

I will again defer discussion about coaching rankings to a different thread with that focus.

As for the rest....if your disagreement with me is because of the bolded statement than I have not been clear enough. Our athletic results, in terms of wins and losses, since '99 are mostly due to people at the head coaching position of the money sports who have not been good at their job. Who is mostly responsible for putting people in those seats and moving on from them?...It's Burman. That is the biggest reason we don't have more wins over his tenure. Does this clarify anything for you in this regard?

Now...that being said. There are a lot of other outcomes for Wyoming in the world of college athletics that are not tied to competitive success. Those outcomes seem fundamentally beyond any athletic director's ability to influence. Keep in mind....this is seperate from wining percentage.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Keep in mind....this is seperate from wining percentage.

We agree that people at UW have dropped the ball not some boogeyman keeping us down.

This part I disagree with. Winning can fix or greatly help those things. Failure exacerbates them.

 

[307bball]

We agree that people at UW have dropped the ball not some boogeyman keeping us down.

This part I disagree with. Winning can fix or greatly help those things. Failure exacerbates them.

Winning definitely fixes the poor winning percentage problem. I think that the formula to win was available to us during the pre-NIL and pre-transfer happy environment, but was not achieved mostly because we had bad coaches or rebuild coaches that we would immediately stub our toe afterwards and regress.

I don't think winning fixes or greatly helps as you claim....It doesn't actively hurt...but all the market size bias is killing us on a lot of fronts.

I'm in a partly wait and see mode on some of these topics...The challenge that is represented by NIL and frictionless transfers may truly be the stake in the heart. It seemed like until that happened I could see...and indeed did see, a lot of competitiveness with the non BSU members of the MWC. Now I don't know.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

Winning definitely fixes the poor winning percentage problem. I think that the formula to win was available to us during the pre-NIL and pre-transfer happy environment, but was not achieved mostly because we had bad coaches or rebuild coaches that we would immediately stub our toe afterwards and regress.

I don't think winning fixes or greatly helps as you claim....It doesn't actively hurt...but all the market size bias is killing us on a lot of fronts.

I'm in a partly wait and see mode on some of these topics...The challenge that is represented by NIL and frictionless transfers may truly be the stake in the heart. It seemed like until that happened I could see...and indeed did see, a lot of competitiveness with the non BSU members of the MWC. Now I don't know.

Well, we at least agree that the excuses, true or not, end after this season. We can argue what's relevant to the past but it is clear the excuse train is out of track.

 

[laxwyo]

Sounds like we should hire Lee Moon again

 

[307bball]

Well, we at least agree that the excuses, true or not, end after this season. We can argue what's relevant to the past but it is clear the excuse train is out of track.

I guess the "excuses" never made any difference to me. Once the final game of yet another mediocre or worse season gets done with...I sort of move on. I've never gotten riled up listening to any statement or interview given by the AD. To me, you either have a good coach or you don't and what the AD says or doesn't say just becomes static. The athletic department admin and the admin at UW as a whole look like they are pretty limited in their ability to affect some exciting positive change. Some of those limits are internal, obviously.... But I can't pretend that that I don't see the structural barriers that UW faces.

Again... To be clear I'm separating the problem into two categories. Problem #1 is primarily a competitive success problem that is fixable with the right coach. Problem #2 is the changing environment in the business and execution of college athletics. That problem is not sensitive to the abilities of an administrative team's savvy or temperament around "excuses".... That problem hinges on $$ and market size. The boundary between the two is permeable but if you are the worst at problem #2 in your group of competitors.... It might not matter how good you are at problem #1.

On this message board that might put me in the minority but I think most fans are actually more like me than the hyper aware folks active here.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

I guess the "excuses" never made any difference to me. Once the final game of yet another mediocre or worse season gets done with...I sort of move on. I've never gotten riled up listening to any statement or interview given by the AD. To me, you either have a good coach or you don't and what the AD says or doesn't say just becomes static. The athletic department admin and the admin at UW as a whole look like they are pretty limited in their ability to affect some exciting positive change. Some of those limits are internal, obviously.... But I can't pretend that that I don't see the structural barriers that UW faces.

Again... To be clear I'm separating the problem into two categories. Problem #1 is primarily a competitive success problem that is fixable with the right coach. Problem #2 is the changing environment in the business and execution of college athletics. That problem is not sensitive to the abilities of an administrative team's savvy or temperament around "excuses".... That problem hinges on $$ and market size. The boundary between the two is permeable but if you are the worst at problem #2 in your group of competitors.... It might not matter how good you are at problem #1.

On this message board that might put me in the minority but I think most fans are actually more like me than the hyper aware folks active here.

Like I said, #2 is now dead for the new MWC. Does it impact us relative to P4? Obviously but so does g5 label. In the new situation, it's irrelevant to conference championships. It's a dead topic.

 

[307bball]

Like I said, #2 is now dead for the new MWC. Does it impact us relative to P4? Obviously but so does g5 label. In the new situation, it's irrelevant to conference championships. It's a dead topic.

I would actually say that it was irrelevant (or at least overcome-able) up until the NCAA fully moved off of the "student"-athlete model. I don't think it's coincidence that smaller market programs have been steadily eroding in the last 20 years and have now fallen off a cliff. As long as there was a restriction on the flow of talent, there was a pathway to success for developmental programs. I never bought that we could not have competed with BYU, TCU and Utah back before they all moved on and I never bought that we could not have been as good as BSU....until it became ok to pay players and players could transfer nearly without restriction.

Going forward, we are in a group that, under the old model, looks like we fit into from a market size standpoint. It's a completely new world out there and I worry that, with frictionless transfer rules and NIL shenanigans, small differences in market size will result in big competitive differences.