Rocky Long leaving SDSU

[Expat_Poke]

Since his initial discussions about stepping down were in Dec, is there any documentation that it was because an AD was forcing his hand on coordinators or are Vigen fanboys running with internet rumors?

BoHl eQuALs vIgEN. VigEN iS GrEAt cAUsE hE rUnS BoHLs OFfenSe aNd bOhL iS tHe OnLy cOaCh wHo cAn wiN heRe. ThErEs nO wAY AnOthEr CoOrdiNaToR wOuLD HeLp OUr tERRibLE OffEnSe AnD iF wE TeLL bOhL hE hAs to gO bOhL wiLL bE SAD aNd rEtiRE LiKe LoNg wHo dEfiNeTeLy rEtiReD bECaUse oF tHaT aNd nOt bEcAuSe hEs 70 yeArS oLd. iF wE TeLL BoHl ViGeN haS tO gO WeLL nEvEr bE GooD eVeR aGaiN.

God it's hard to type like that. I don't know how lax does it so often

I'm only kidding around to those who feel like telling Bohl Vigen needs to put a decent offense on the field or pack his bags is gonna make Bohl leave. It's obvious he hasn't performed, and it's also obvious Bohl is never gonna make a change with Vigen no matter how bad our offense is at putting points on the board and passing efficiency. As long as we look good statistically at running we can brag and beat our chest about our hard nosed culture and Vigens not going anywhere no matter how bad we are at beating good teams and actually putting points on the board and sustaining drives.

I think its likely Long retired for a number of reasons, age being at the top of the list. He and Bohl may both be too stubborn to hear that their offenses suck and staff changes are needed for them to stop holding their respective teams back from greater successes. Perhaps Bohl and Long would leave if the AD tried to force them to make a change. Maybe their stubbornness and inability to make changes in order to have a successful offense when teams can force you to have a passing game is why both have been unable to win championships at the rate Boise State has. But what do I know, I'm just some dude who thinks I could coach little league and that we could be much better with a different coordinator given that the vast majority of teams are more successful on offense than us, even the ones that have challenges similar to ours.

2019 offense points per game 25.8 pts/game which was good for 80th in the nation. Definitely room for improvement. Yet lets take a closer look, at yards per point Wyoming ranked 49th in the nation. Bohl likes to run the clock and limit number of possessions. What this means is if you look at total yards or points, our offense is going to look mediocre to awful, but you look at other parameters that matter more than yards (ultimately it is score more points then you give up), our offense while definite room for improvement is not unfixably bad. Unfortunately while I could find points per play (don't care as it is weighted to favor big pass plays vs chewing up the opposing offense on consistent but smaller runs) I could not find points per possession. That statistic is what you really need to compare offenses, the closest I could find is yards per point but even that has some flaws.

I will get a points/game and a yards per point for coaches tonight after work. At a quick glance though Bohl is looking better than DC.

Yeah I want to see improvement on the offense, but Vigen has shown he can run a top 30 offense in points per game and yards per point (2016 Wyoming was 26th and 16th respectively). We saw improvement in offensive production from 2018 to 2019, and I bet we will see further improvement going into 2020. Like I said elsewhere, I think Bohl is a good coach, and would blow any of us out of the water coaching a pee-wee team, and I think 2020 will give us a good idea as to future of the Wyoming program for better or worse. :twocents:

 

[ItSucksToBeACSURam]

Since his initial discussions about stepping down were in Dec, is there any documentation that it was because an AD was forcing his hand on coordinators or are Vigen fanboys running with internet rumors?

BoHl eQuALs vIgEN. VigEN iS GrEAt cAUsE hE rUnS BoHLs OFfenSe aNd bOhL iS tHe OnLy cOaCh wHo cAn wiN heRe. ThErEs nO wAY AnOthEr CoOrdiNaToR wOuLD HeLp OUr tERRibLE OffEnSe AnD iF wE TeLL bOhL hE hAs to gO bOhL wiLL bE SAD aNd rEtiRE LiKe LoNg wHo dEfiNeTeLy rEtiReD bECaUse oF tHaT aNd nOt bEcAuSe hEs 70 yeArS oLd. iF wE TeLL BoHl ViGeN haS tO gO WeLL nEvEr bE GooD eVeR aGaiN.

God it's hard to type like that. I don't know how lax does it so often

I'm only kidding around to those who feel like telling Bohl Vigen needs to put a decent offense on the field or pack his bags is gonna make Bohl leave. It's obvious he hasn't performed, and it's also obvious Bohl is never gonna make a change with Vigen no matter how bad our offense is at putting points on the board and passing efficiency. As long as we look good statistically at running we can brag and beat our chest about our hard nosed culture and Vigens not going anywhere no matter how bad we are at beating good teams and actually putting points on the board and sustaining drives.

I think its likely Long retired for a number of reasons, age being at the top of the list. He and Bohl may both be too stubborn to hear that their offenses suck and staff changes are needed for them to stop holding their respective teams back from greater successes. Perhaps Bohl and Long would leave if the AD tried to force them to make a change. Maybe their stubbornness and inability to make changes in order to have a successful offense when teams can force you to have a passing game is why both have been unable to win championships at the rate Boise State has. But what do I know, I'm just some dude who thinks I could coach little league and that we could be much better with a different coordinator given that the vast majority of teams are more successful on offense than us, even the ones that have challenges similar to ours.

2019 offense points per game 25.8 pts/game which was good for 80th in the nation. Definitely room for improvement. Yet lets take a closer look, at yards per point Wyoming ranked 49th in the nation. Bohl likes to run the clock and limit number of possessions. What this means is if you look at total yards or points, our offense is going to look mediocre to awful, but you look at other parameters that matter more than yards (ultimately it is score more points then you give up), our offense while definite room for improvement is not unfixably bad. Unfortunately while I could find points per play (don't care as it is weighted to favor big pass plays vs chewing up the opposing offense on consistent but smaller runs) I could not find points per possession. That statistic is what you really need to compare offenses, the closest I could find is yards per point but even that has some flaws.

I will get a points/game and a yards per point for coaches tonight after work. At a quick glance though Bohl is looking better than DC.

Yeah I want to see improvement on the offense, but Vigen has shown he can run a top 30 offense in points per game and yards per point (2016 Wyoming was 26th and 16th respectively). We saw improvement in offensive production from 2018 to 2019, and I bet we will see further improvement going into 2020. Like I said elsewhere, I think Bohl is a good coach, and would blow any of us out of the water coaching a pee-wee team, and I think 2020 will give us a good idea as to future of the Wyoming program for better or worse. :twocents:

A. If Vigen and Bohl's philosophy is ball control and limiting possessions, how many games this season did we win the time of possession AND the total plays run? I bet its less than 50%. I have no idea but that is my suspicion.
B. Vigen has shown, with a team of 8+ NFL talents, he can run an offense potent enough to play in a championship game and to get to a bowl game just to get handled by BYU. I guess thats a kudos to him. Does anyone TRULY believe the success that season was more of Vigens scheme/planning or because of the numerous NFL players on that roster? Maybe both, I dont know. If it is a combo of both, is wise to hang our hats on a scheme that requires team full of NFL players? Is that sustainable?

 

[Expat_Poke]

Since his initial discussions about stepping down were in Dec, is there any documentation that it was because an AD was forcing his hand on coordinators or are Vigen fanboys running with internet rumors?

BoHl eQuALs vIgEN. VigEN iS GrEAt cAUsE hE rUnS BoHLs OFfenSe aNd bOhL iS tHe OnLy cOaCh wHo cAn wiN heRe. ThErEs nO wAY AnOthEr CoOrdiNaToR wOuLD HeLp OUr tERRibLE OffEnSe AnD iF wE TeLL bOhL hE hAs to gO bOhL wiLL bE SAD aNd rEtiRE LiKe LoNg wHo dEfiNeTeLy rEtiReD bECaUse oF tHaT aNd nOt bEcAuSe hEs 70 yeArS oLd. iF wE TeLL BoHl ViGeN haS tO gO WeLL nEvEr bE GooD eVeR aGaiN.

God it's hard to type like that. I don't know how lax does it so often

I'm only kidding around to those who feel like telling Bohl Vigen needs to put a decent offense on the field or pack his bags is gonna make Bohl leave. It's obvious he hasn't performed, and it's also obvious Bohl is never gonna make a change with Vigen no matter how bad our offense is at putting points on the board and passing efficiency. As long as we look good statistically at running we can brag and beat our chest about our hard nosed culture and Vigens not going anywhere no matter how bad we are at beating good teams and actually putting points on the board and sustaining drives.

I think its likely Long retired for a number of reasons, age being at the top of the list. He and Bohl may both be too stubborn to hear that their offenses suck and staff changes are needed for them to stop holding their respective teams back from greater successes. Perhaps Bohl and Long would leave if the AD tried to force them to make a change. Maybe their stubbornness and inability to make changes in order to have a successful offense when teams can force you to have a passing game is why both have been unable to win championships at the rate Boise State has. But what do I know, I'm just some dude who thinks I could coach little league and that we could be much better with a different coordinator given that the vast majority of teams are more successful on offense than us, even the ones that have challenges similar to ours.

2019 offense points per game 25.8 pts/game which was good for 80th in the nation. Definitely room for improvement. Yet lets take a closer look, at yards per point Wyoming ranked 49th in the nation. Bohl likes to run the clock and limit number of possessions. What this means is if you look at total yards or points, our offense is going to look mediocre to awful, but you look at other parameters that matter more than yards (ultimately it is score more points then you give up), our offense while definite room for improvement is not unfixably bad. Unfortunately while I could find points per play (don't care as it is weighted to favor big pass plays vs chewing up the opposing offense on consistent but smaller runs) I could not find points per possession. That statistic is what you really need to compare offenses, the closest I could find is yards per point but even that has some flaws.

I will get a points/game and a yards per point for coaches tonight after work. At a quick glance though Bohl is looking better than DC.

Yeah I want to see improvement on the offense, but Vigen has shown he can run a top 30 offense in points per game and yards per point (2016 Wyoming was 26th and 16th respectively). We saw improvement in offensive production from 2018 to 2019, and I bet we will see further improvement going into 2020. Like I said elsewhere, I think Bohl is a good coach, and would blow any of us out of the water coaching a pee-wee team, and I think 2020 will give us a good idea as to future of the Wyoming program for better or worse. :twocents:

A. If Vigen and Bohl's philosophy is ball control and limiting possessions, how many games this season did we win the time of possession AND the total plays run? I bet its less than 50%. I have no idea but that is my suspicion.
B. Vigen has shown, with a team of 8+ NFL talents, he can run an offense potent enough to play in a championship game and to get to a bowl game just to get handled by BYU. I guess thats a kudos to him. Does anyone TRULY believe the success that season was more of Vigens scheme/planning or because of the numerous NFL players on that roster? Maybe both, I dont know. If it is a combo of both, is wise to hang our hats on a scheme that requires team full of NFL players? Is that sustainable?

Well as for your first question Wyoming won the most important category 8 out of 5 times and was two missed field goals within 39 yards of making that 10 of 3 times. Wyoming has had four stretches of 4 years or more of 0.500 or better seasons that is 1901-1904, 1949-1969, 1993-1999, and 2016-2019. Bohl has given us the third (The 1901-1904 includes a couple of 1-0 type seasons so not counting that) most sustainable stretch of Wyoming winning seasons ever.

 

[ItSucksToBeACSURam]

Since his initial discussions about stepping down were in Dec, is there any documentation that it was because an AD was forcing his hand on coordinators or are Vigen fanboys running with internet rumors?

BoHl eQuALs vIgEN. VigEN iS GrEAt cAUsE hE rUnS BoHLs OFfenSe aNd bOhL iS tHe OnLy cOaCh wHo cAn wiN heRe. ThErEs nO wAY AnOthEr CoOrdiNaToR wOuLD HeLp OUr tERRibLE OffEnSe AnD iF wE TeLL bOhL hE hAs to gO bOhL wiLL bE SAD aNd rEtiRE LiKe LoNg wHo dEfiNeTeLy rEtiReD bECaUse oF tHaT aNd nOt bEcAuSe hEs 70 yeArS oLd. iF wE TeLL BoHl ViGeN haS tO gO WeLL nEvEr bE GooD eVeR aGaiN.

God it's hard to type like that. I don't know how lax does it so often

I'm only kidding around to those who feel like telling Bohl Vigen needs to put a decent offense on the field or pack his bags is gonna make Bohl leave. It's obvious he hasn't performed, and it's also obvious Bohl is never gonna make a change with Vigen no matter how bad our offense is at putting points on the board and passing efficiency. As long as we look good statistically at running we can brag and beat our chest about our hard nosed culture and Vigens not going anywhere no matter how bad we are at beating good teams and actually putting points on the board and sustaining drives.

I think its likely Long retired for a number of reasons, age being at the top of the list. He and Bohl may both be too stubborn to hear that their offenses suck and staff changes are needed for them to stop holding their respective teams back from greater successes. Perhaps Bohl and Long would leave if the AD tried to force them to make a change. Maybe their stubbornness and inability to make changes in order to have a successful offense when teams can force you to have a passing game is why both have been unable to win championships at the rate Boise State has. But what do I know, I'm just some dude who thinks I could coach little league and that we could be much better with a different coordinator given that the vast majority of teams are more successful on offense than us, even the ones that have challenges similar to ours.

2019 offense points per game 25.8 pts/game which was good for 80th in the nation. Definitely room for improvement. Yet lets take a closer look, at yards per point Wyoming ranked 49th in the nation. Bohl likes to run the clock and limit number of possessions. What this means is if you look at total yards or points, our offense is going to look mediocre to awful, but you look at other parameters that matter more than yards (ultimately it is score more points then you give up), our offense while definite room for improvement is not unfixably bad. Unfortunately while I could find points per play (don't care as it is weighted to favor big pass plays vs chewing up the opposing offense on consistent but smaller runs) I could not find points per possession. That statistic is what you really need to compare offenses, the closest I could find is yards per point but even that has some flaws.

I will get a points/game and a yards per point for coaches tonight after work. At a quick glance though Bohl is looking better than DC.

Yeah I want to see improvement on the offense, but Vigen has shown he can run a top 30 offense in points per game and yards per point (2016 Wyoming was 26th and 16th respectively). We saw improvement in offensive production from 2018 to 2019, and I bet we will see further improvement going into 2020. Like I said elsewhere, I think Bohl is a good coach, and would blow any of us out of the water coaching a pee-wee team, and I think 2020 will give us a good idea as to future of the Wyoming program for better or worse. :twocents:

A. If Vigen and Bohl's philosophy is ball control and limiting possessions, how many games this season did we win the time of possession AND the total plays run? I bet its less than 50%. I have no idea but that is my suspicion.
B. Vigen has shown, with a team of 8+ NFL talents, he can run an offense potent enough to play in a championship game and to get to a bowl game just to get handled by BYU. I guess thats a kudos to him. Does anyone TRULY believe the success that season was more of Vigens scheme/planning or because of the numerous NFL players on that roster? Maybe both, I dont know. If it is a combo of both, is wise to hang our hats on a scheme that requires team full of NFL players? Is that sustainable?

Well as for your first question Wyoming won the most important category 8 out of 5 times and was two missed field goals within 39 yards of making that 10 of 3 times. Wyoming has had four stretches of 4 years or more of 0.500 or better seasons that is 1901-1904, 1949-1969, 1993-1999, and 2016-2019. Bohl has given us the third (The 1901-1904 includes a couple of 1-0 type seasons so not counting that) most sustainable stretch of Wyoming winning seasons ever.

What? 8 out of 5 and 10 of 3? Huh? What do missing 2 field goals have to do with Time of Posession and Plays Run?

And I dont think anyone unhappy with Vigen is ignoring the success Bohl has had. Its been great. What drives us nuts is that it could be SO MUCH BETTER. With Top 90 offense this season we'd have won 10 games if not 11. That should not be ignored because the team has been at or above .500 4 years in a row. Thats great, but it can be (and should) be so much better.

 

[LanderPoke]

One positive thing I have noticed with Bohl's offenses is we are efficient in the red zone. A shortened field really doesn't seem to slow us down

 

[307bball]

Since his initial discussions about stepping down were in Dec, is there any documentation that it was because an AD was forcing his hand on coordinators or are Vigen fanboys running with internet rumors?

BoHl eQuALs vIgEN. VigEN iS GrEAt cAUsE hE rUnS BoHLs OFfenSe aNd bOhL iS tHe OnLy cOaCh wHo cAn wiN heRe. ThErEs nO wAY AnOthEr CoOrdiNaToR wOuLD HeLp OUr tERRibLE OffEnSe AnD iF wE TeLL bOhL hE hAs to gO bOhL wiLL bE SAD aNd rEtiRE LiKe LoNg wHo dEfiNeTeLy rEtiReD bECaUse oF tHaT aNd nOt bEcAuSe hEs 70 yeArS oLd. iF wE TeLL BoHl ViGeN haS tO gO WeLL nEvEr bE GooD eVeR aGaiN.

God it's hard to type like that. I don't know how lax does it so often

I'm only kidding around to those who feel like telling Bohl Vigen needs to put a decent offense on the field or pack his bags is gonna make Bohl leave. It's obvious he hasn't performed, and it's also obvious Bohl is never gonna make a change with Vigen no matter how bad our offense is at putting points on the board and passing efficiency. As long as we look good statistically at running we can brag and beat our chest about our hard nosed culture and Vigens not going anywhere no matter how bad we are at beating good teams and actually putting points on the board and sustaining drives.

I think its likely Long retired for a number of reasons, age being at the top of the list. He and Bohl may both be too stubborn to hear that their offenses suck and staff changes are needed for them to stop holding their respective teams back from greater successes. Perhaps Bohl and Long would leave if the AD tried to force them to make a change. Maybe their stubbornness and inability to make changes in order to have a successful offense when teams can force you to have a passing game is why both have been unable to win championships at the rate Boise State has. But what do I know, I'm just some dude who thinks I could coach little league and that we could be much better with a different coordinator given that the vast majority of teams are more successful on offense than us, even the ones that have challenges similar to ours.

2019 offense points per game 25.8 pts/game which was good for 80th in the nation. Definitely room for improvement. Yet lets take a closer look, at yards per point Wyoming ranked 49th in the nation. Bohl likes to run the clock and limit number of possessions. What this means is if you look at total yards or points, our offense is going to look mediocre to awful, but you look at other parameters that matter more than yards (ultimately it is score more points then you give up), our offense while definite room for improvement is not unfixably bad. Unfortunately while I could find points per play (don't care as it is weighted to favor big pass plays vs chewing up the opposing offense on consistent but smaller runs) I could not find points per possession. That statistic is what you really need to compare offenses, the closest I could find is yards per point but even that has some flaws.

I will get a points/game and a yards per point for coaches tonight after work. At a quick glance though Bohl is looking better than DC.

Yeah I want to see improvement on the offense, but Vigen has shown he can run a top 30 offense in points per game and yards per point (2016 Wyoming was 26th and 16th respectively). We saw improvement in offensive production from 2018 to 2019, and I bet we will see further improvement going into 2020. Like I said elsewhere, I think Bohl is a good coach, and would blow any of us out of the water coaching a pee-wee team, and I think 2020 will give us a good idea as to future of the Wyoming program for better or worse. :twocents:

A. If Vigen and Bohl's philosophy is ball control and limiting possessions, how many games this season did we win the time of possession AND the total plays run? I bet its less than 50%. I have no idea but that is my suspicion.
B. Vigen has shown, with a team of 8+ NFL talents, he can run an offense potent enough to play in a championship game and to get to a bowl game just to get handled by BYU. I guess thats a kudos to him. Does anyone TRULY believe the success that season was more of Vigens scheme/planning or because of the numerous NFL players on that roster? Maybe both, I dont know. If it is a combo of both, is wise to hang our hats on a scheme that requires team full of NFL players? Is that sustainable?

Well as for your first question Wyoming won the most important category 8 out of 5 times and was two missed field goals within 39 yards of making that 10 of 3 times. Wyoming has had four stretches of 4 years or more of 0.500 or better seasons that is 1901-1904, 1949-1969, 1993-1999, and 2016-2019. Bohl has given us the third (The 1901-1904 includes a couple of 1-0 type seasons so not counting that) most sustainable stretch of Wyoming winning seasons ever.

What? 8 out of 5 and 10 of 3? Huh? What do missing 2 field goals have to do with Time of Posession and Plays Run?

And I dont think anyone unhappy with Vigen is ignoring the success Bohl has had. Its been great. What drives us nuts is that it could be SO MUCH BETTER. With Top 90 offense this season we'd have won 10 games if not 11. That should not be ignored because the team has been at or above .500 4 years in a row. Thats great, but it can be (and should) be so much better.

I don't think your statement is correct that with a top 90 offense we would have 10 wins. It should be "With a top 90 offense...and no drop-off in any other category..". It's not obvious that you can change things like offensive style/pace/philosophy without also impacting the results on the other side of the ball...in fact...it stands to reason that the more times you expose your defense, no matter how good it is, the numbers will worsen.

Just do a thought experiment...Lets say that Wyoming allowed opponents to score on X% of their possessions where "N" is the number of opponents possessions. If "N" increases..X will increase as well....Defensive stats will have to diminish over a whole season. Now...I don't have the answer (and this is a super low-resolution way to view this) but I'm sure that expecting changes in offensive style/pace/philosophy to have no impact on defensive results is a non-starter.

Also...there is a sort of zero-sum game that college coaches have to play when it comes to spending developmental and prep time with their team. There are literal limits to practice time, not to mention attention spans of 18-23 year old men. Maybe a coach could put a focus on an aspect of the game that is deficient and improve it...but whose to say that is the best use of their focus? What if the cost in the areas that were above average is too great?

These are just general observations/thoughts....and incomplete at that.

Here is what i'm sure of:

• Wyoming's offense must improve to get to the "next level"
  This improvement will almost assuredly come at some cost to defensive level
  The trick is to maximize offensive improvement and minimize defensive drop off.

Bullbugele307...love your statistical analysis...keep it up. One stat I would love to see is percent positive offensive plays where a positive play is defined as having gained 50% of the necessary yards to gain on 1st down, 70% of the yards to gain on second down, and 100% of the yards to gain on 3/4th downs. I would imagine Wyoming would be average at best (or just bad) in this stat.

 

[fromolwyoming]

One positive thing I have noticed with Bohl's offenses is we are efficient in the red zone. A shortened field really doesn't seem to slow us down

Helps having dual threat QBs, including one that can seemingly out run even power QBs.

 

[ragtimejoe1]

307, walk me through the improved offense results in a certain drop off on D.

An O that can move the sticks makes it easier to flip the field on non scoring drives and helps keep the D on the bench during scoring drives.

I'm not at all understanding the rationale that a good offense somehow comes at the expense of a defense...especially in a slow ball offense.

 

[307bball]

307, walk me through the improved offense results in a certain drop off on D.

An O that can move the sticks makes it easier to flip the field on non scoring drives and helps keep the D on the bench during scoring drives.

I'm not at all understanding the rationale that a good offense somehow comes at the expense of a defense...especially in a slow ball offense.

Full disclosure... I'm no expert... And I fully admit that.



Basically it's just the observation that the more you expose a defense... The less statistically impressive the defense ends up being. How many points have the Oregon ducks given up since Chip Kelly coached there? I would imagine more than you'd think based on how good they've been. So the question becomes, what risks do you take as an offense to maximize the chances of winning? The answer to that question is all over the place depending on the system with coaches like Mike Leach at one end of the spectrum and coaches like Troy Calhoun at the other. I don't think there is a "right" answer.

One interesting thing is the relative lack of high end success for teams at the ends of that spectrum.... Balance seems to be a better indicator of success.

It's not that a good offense makes for a bad defense... Heck the football factory programs seem to have both all the time. It's that programs like Wyoming have more limitations and end up having to prioritize what to focus on. For what it's worth...I would like to see the staff spend more resources on making the offense more dynamic.

 

[kdwrightuwyo]

To the whole "If you control the clock, you keep your Defense on the sideline and not wearing them out and seeing significant drop-off in defensive productions" folks....You're absolutely right! BUT Our offense hasn't won the time of possession with our offensive performance as much as we'd like to admit. I don't know the exact numbers (some of you stats dudes may be able to find it), but I remember being surprised by how many times we were behind in that category despite winning. That means that we've kept our D on the field longer because we couldn't move the ball. Our D would have seen the field LESS, and likely would have been stronger at the end of games than they were. Perhaps, if our offense held onto the ball a little longer (even if we didn't score), our D would have had a bit more gas in the tank and would not have allowed the other teams to score at the last minute...keeping us in the win column. The idea that football is a zero sum game is false. You can improve in several different categories without a drop-off in another.

 

[laxwyo]

We CoUlD hAvE bEeN 12-0 WiTh A tOp 10 OfFeNsE!

That was for bull bugle

We sound worse than the Bills fans talking about hosting a playoff game had they not choked.

We just don’t know. Fuck, maybe Vigen is maximizing our talent right now. It’s hard to tell. Take more risks and all of a sudden our D is giving up 10 more points per game. TOP isn’t a great stat by itself. Even turnovers sometimes aren’t great. Throwing a pick on your own 20 and giving up a TD on the first play does nothing for the other teams TOP. Hell, you can win the TOP if your defense gives up big plays but you still lose. Or the other team has lots of TOP because you’re making them go the long way and you’re scoring fast. All these stats are meaningless by themselves.

It’s obvious we need to pass better. That’s it. We pass anywhere near 60% with a good defense still and we’re winning a conference championship.

 

[307bball]

To the whole "If you control the clock, you keep your Defense on the sideline and not wearing them out and seeing significant drop-off in defensive productions" folks....You're absolutely right! BUT Our offense hasn't won the time of possession with our offensive performance as much as we'd like to admit. I don't know the exact numbers (some of you stats dudes may be able to find it), but I remember being surprised by how many times we were behind in that category despite winning. That means that we've kept our D on the field longer because we couldn't move the ball. Our D would have seen the field LESS, and likely would have been stronger at the end of games than they were. Perhaps, if our offense held onto the ball a little longer (even if we didn't score), our D would have had a bit more gas in the tank and would not have allowed the other teams to score at the last minute...keeping us in the win column. The idea that football is a zero sum game is false. You can improve in several different categories without a drop-off in another.

The zero soon game comment was not so much about the game of football as it was an observation about resource allocation. It's literally impossible to be great at everything. The best of us at any particular thing (not just football) are matters of identifying what economists call "comparative advantage".

Take Sean Chambers play as a qb as an example. His advantage is the ability to run. He may be able to improve his passing to the point that he's above average but that would end up being an overall loss as a qb due to the opportunity cost of what he could have accomplished as a running qb.

It turns out that sports can be analyzed using economic methods...the analytics crowd has pretty much revolutionized this. Everybody is trying to find "market inefficiencies" in sporting strategies. It's obvious in the pros where certain skill-sets get highly valued until it becomes overvalued and then the next thing comes along. In College it is less obvious from a player standpoint due, in large part, to it being a more developmental contest. However, coaches have long identified areas of advantage and dominated due to being correct in their identification. Look at what Nebraska did in the 90s...they were early buyers of the strength/conditioning revolution and it payed out in spades for them....that is no longer an angle that gives them an advantage currently and they are now mediocre. What is Wyoming's "comparative advantage"? I'm trying hard to identify it.

 

[ItSucksToBeACSURam]

To the whole "If you control the clock, you keep your Defense on the sideline and not wearing them out and seeing significant drop-off in defensive productions" folks....You're absolutely right! BUT Our offense hasn't won the time of possession with our offensive performance as much as we'd like to admit. I don't know the exact numbers (some of you stats dudes may be able to find it), but I remember being surprised by how many times we were behind in that category despite winning. That means that we've kept our D on the field longer because we couldn't move the ball. Our D would have seen the field LESS, and likely would have been stronger at the end of games than they were. Perhaps, if our offense held onto the ball a little longer (even if we didn't score), our D would have had a bit more gas in the tank and would not have allowed the other teams to score at the last minute...keeping us in the win column. The idea that football is a zero sum game is false. You can improve in several different categories without a drop-off in another.

The zero soon game comment was not so much about the game of football as it was an observation about resource allocation. It's literally impossible to be great at everything. The best of us at any particular thing (not just football) are matters of identifying what economists call "comparative advantage".

Take Sean Chambers play as a qb as an example. His advantage is the ability to run. He may be able to improve his passing to the point that he's above average but that would end up being an overall loss as a qb due to the opportunity cost of what he could have accomplished as a running qb.

It turns out that sports can be analyzed using economic methods...the analytics crowd has pretty much revolutionized this. Everybody is trying to find "market inefficiencies" in sporting strategies. It's obvious in the pros where certain skill-sets get highly valued until it becomes overvalued and then the next thing comes along. In College it is less obvious from a player standpoint due, in large part, to it being a more developmental contest. However, coaches have long identified areas of advantage and dominated due to being correct in their identification. Look at what Nebraska did in the 90s...they were early buyers of the strength/conditioning revolution and it payed out in spades for them....that is no longer an angle that gives them an advantage currently and they are now mediocre. What is Wyoming's "comparative advantage"? I'm trying hard to identify it.

The argument could be made as well that becoming an above average passer would actually far surpass his value as a runner. Let me explain. There is NO doubt that he is an electric runner. One of the best running QBs I have seen in the college game. Legit. For his size he is special with his legs. What has that gotten him the last two seasons? Two catastrophic leg injuries prematurely ending two very promising seasons. Keep him in the pocket more, keep him on the field more. If you can reduce the hits he takes every game by even 25% then he can be the leader we need him to be. Yeah he is a real weapon running but he does us no good on the sideline in a hoodie.

He absolutely has to improve his passing not only for the Cowboys success but for his personal health.