Is it really a better system?

[Slow Hand]

Not Freaking out by any stretch of the imagination. All I am doing is making a case for why I believe the Spread is a better fit for a mid level talent like Wyoming. It allows you to get the few high caliber athletes you may have in space and helps them make plays. I understand that we are in transition and I realize that we are not going to change that. I am just trying to offer up an opposing side of the coin.

You mean like Herron busting out big catches for big gains last year? If that's the case what about the opposite, in the pro style we watched Wick excel almost every game! Big plays for big gains. Probably just as many as Herron. Our WRs have shown that they can't do what we were doing last year as well. Blame a new offense, or new QB, or whatever, but theyve had their opportunities this year and dropped passes and acted slow as can be. Rufran is a clear example. I like the kid, but if he caught a deep ball last year, he was taking it to the house. He's had opportunity after opportunity game after game, and he has yet to even get a td this year! Is that Bohl? The pro style offense? No. It's the fact that he severely underachieved. Claiborne and Gentry are in the same boat. The only receivers that I've seen progress is TE Hollister.

Again, we probably would've been worse off this year with a third string Spread QB, and WRs that were underachieving this year. Your spread probably would've produced worse results. You play to your strengths. What's ours? Runningback. So it would stand to reason that we need to run the ball.[/quote

[Slow Hand]

Not Freaking out by any stretch of the imagination. All I am doing is making a case for why I believe the Spread is a better fit for a mid level talent like Wyoming. It allows you to get the few high caliber athletes you may have in space and helps them make plays. I understand that we are in transition and I realize that we are not going to change that. I am just trying to offer up an opposing side of the coin.

You mean like Herron busting out big catches for big gains last year? If that's the case what about the opposite, in the pro style we watched Wick excel almost every game! Big plays for big gains. Probably just as many as Herron. Our WRs have shown that they can't do what we were doing last year as well. Blame a new offense, or new QB, or whatever, but theyve had their opportunities this year and dropped passes and acted slow as can be. Rufran is a clear example. I like the kid, but if he caught a deep ball last year, he was taking it to the house. He's had opportunity after opportunity game after game, and he has yet to even get a td this year! Is that Bohl? The pro style offense? No. It's the fact that he severely underachieved. Claiborne and Gentry are in the same boat. The only receivers that I've seen progress is TE Hollister.

Again, we probably would've been worse off this year with a third string Spread QB, and WRs that were underachieving this year. Your spread probably would've produced worse results. You play to your strengths. What's ours? Runningback. So it would stand to reason that we need to run the ball.[/quote

Here is where you and I disagree a little. I firmly believe that Rufran, Herron, and Gentry all achieved because of the system. People were forced to cover us with zone packages and they were very good at finding seams and room to run. This year most all coverages were zero. Your logic doesn't make sense to me. Are you suggesting that they got slower or weaker this year? I can attest to you first hand that they are not slower fact is they are faster and CONSIDERABLY stronger. So you tell me what is the difference? I will agree that we are not nearly as good at the Qb position but we were most certainly adequate.

[kansasCowboy]

Not Freaking out by any stretch of the imagination. All I am doing is making a case for why I believe the Spread is a better fit for a mid level talent like Wyoming. It allows you to get the few high caliber athletes you may have in space and helps them make plays. I understand that we are in transition and I realize that we are not going to change that. I am just trying to offer up an opposing side of the coin.

You mean like Herron busting out big catches for big gains last year? If that's the case what about the opposite, in the pro style we watched Wick excel almost every game! Big plays for big gains. Probably just as many as Herron. Our WRs have shown that they can't do what we were doing last year as well. Blame a new offense, or new QB, or whatever, but theyve had their opportunities this year and dropped passes and acted slow as can be. Rufran is a clear example. I like the kid, but if he caught a deep ball last year, he was taking it to the house. He's had opportunity after opportunity game after game, and he has yet to even get a td this year! Is that Bohl? The pro style offense? No. It's the fact that he severely underachieved. Claiborne and Gentry are in the same boat. The only receivers that I've seen progress is TE Hollister.

Again, we probably would've been worse off this year with a third string Spread QB, and WRs that were underachieving this year. Your spread probably would've produced worse results. You play to your strengths. What's ours? Runningback. So it would stand to reason that we need to run the ball.[/quote

Here is where you and I disagree a little. I firmly believe that Rufran, Herron, and Gentry all achieved because of the system. People were forced to cover us with zone packages and they were very good at finding seams and room to run. This year most all coverages were zero. Your logic doesn't make sense to me. Are you suggesting that they got slower or weaker this year? I can attest to you first hand that they are not slower fact is they are faster and CONSIDERABLY stronger. So you tell me what is the difference? I will agree that we are not nearly as good at the Qb position but we were most certainly adequate.

Our WRs are faster? I don't know. I've watched time and again Claiborne and Rufran being caught from behind. That didn't happen last year. Zone or man, last year Claiborne andRufran both broke off coverages. when Rufran did it and got into the open he was gone! No one would catch him. This year he's been caught multiple times. Just to name a few. Big pass against AFA this year. Also the pass at the end of the FAU game that he could've ran in, the defender started out 15 yards away and caught him. That is not bad luck, that is underachieving. These guys went from playmakers to possession type receivers. That's digressing.

[ragtimejoe1]

I'm not too worried about the "system" because we really haven't seen the "system". There is no way. In year 1, the playbook on both sides is limited not just by personnel but also the learning curve. I think Bohl is a good coach. I think at this point, if Bohl can't turn things around, nobody can and we will have to critically evaluate the importance of football at WYO.

With that said, I think the main areas of concern are:
1) Administration. Our budget has not kept up with inflation and peer institutions who win are rapidly passing us by. The sheep are going to eclipse us if something isn't done. Our AD himself said his only plan is to get more money from the State and if the State doesn't buy in, DI athletics at WYO will FAIL. We are seeing that trend now in football. Bohl is a good coach, but even good coaches can't succeed without money. If Bohl fails, it will largely be because of our Administration.

2) (this is just my concern) Loyalty to assistants. People like Stanard should be given time, but also be on a short leash. The guy has failed every time he has been a DC at this level. That doesn't necessarily mean he will fail now, but it is also reason enough to keep him on a short timeline if things are not progressing at a decent pace.

3) No effort at all in regard to rebranding. Just the same old Cowboy Tough, Powder River, etc. etc. Guess what? We've been getting our Cowboy Tough tails kicked for 15 years or better. However, our AD lacks the vision necessary to lead a rebranding of WYO athletics.

4) Will the State ever buy in. From fans to finances. Will we ever truly do, as a State, what is necessary to compete not just with CSU or within the MWC but nationally? I really don't know.

With the new format coming, it is difficult to tell what will happen. The old saying of "poop or get off the pot" has never been more relevant. For 15 years, we've blamed coaches and players. Maybe we will finally realize what our real problems are.

[Cornpoke]

I'm not too worried about the "system" because we really haven't seen the "system". There is no way. In year 1, the playbook on both sides is limited not just by personnel but also the learning curve. I think Bohl is a good coach. I think at this point, if Bohl can't turn things around, nobody can and we will have to critically evaluate the importance of football at WYO.

With that said, I think the main areas of concern are:
1) Administration. Our budget has not kept up with inflation and peer institutions who win are rapidly passing us by. The sheep are going to eclipse us if something isn't done. Our AD himself said his only plan is to get more money from the State and if the State doesn't buy in, DI athletics at WYO will FAIL. We are seeing that trend now in football. Bohl is a good coach, but even good coaches can't succeed without money. If Bohl fails, it will largely be because of our Administration.

2) (this is just my concern) Loyalty to assistants. People like Stanard should be given time, but also be on a short leash. The guy has failed every time he has been a DC at this level. That doesn't necessarily mean he will fail now, but it is also reason enough to keep him on a short timeline if things are not progressing at a decent pace.

3) No effort at all in regard to rebranding. Just the same old Cowboy Tough, Powder River, etc. etc. Guess what? We've been getting our Cowboy Tough tails kicked for 15 years or better. However, our AD lacks the vision necessary to lead a rebranding of WYO athletics.

4) Will the State ever buy in. From fans to finances. Will we ever truly do, as a State, what is necessary to compete not just with CSU or within the MWC but nationally? I really don't know.

With the new format coming, it is difficult to tell what will happen. The old saying of "poop or get off the pot" has never been more relevant. For 15 years, we've blamed coaches and players. Maybe we will finally realize what our real problems are.

Couldn't have said it better myself. 100% Agree!!

[Slow Hand]

Not Freaking out by any stretch of the imagination. All I am doing is making a case for why I believe the Spread is a better fit for a mid level talent like Wyoming. It allows you to get the few high caliber athletes you may have in space and helps them make plays. I understand that we are in transition and I realize that we are not going to change that. I am just trying to offer up an opposing side of the coin.

You mean like Herron busting out big catches for big gains last year? If that's the case what about the opposite, in the pro style we watched Wick excel almost every game! Big plays for big gains. Probably just as many as Herron. Our WRs have shown that they can't do what we were doing last year as well. Blame a new offense, or new QB, or whatever, but theyve had their opportunities this year and dropped passes and acted slow as can be. Rufran is a clear example. I like the kid, but if he caught a deep ball last year, he was taking it to the house. He's had opportunity after opportunity game after game, and he has yet to even get a td this year! Is that Bohl? The pro style offense? No. It's the fact that he severely underachieved. Claiborne and Gentry are in the same boat. The only receivers that I've seen progress is TE Hollister.

Again, we probably would've been worse off this year with a third string Spread QB, and WRs that were underachieving this year. Your spread probably would've produced worse results. You play to your strengths. What's ours? Runningback. So it would stand to reason that we need to run the ball.[/quote

Here is where you and I disagree a little. I firmly believe that Rufran, Herron, and Gentry all achieved because of the system. People were forced to cover us with zone packages and they were very good at finding seams and room to run. This year most all coverages were zero. Your logic doesn't make sense to me. Are you suggesting that they got slower or weaker this year? I can attest to you first hand that they are not slower fact is they are faster and CONSIDERABLY stronger. So you tell me what is the difference? I will agree that we are not nearly as good at the Qb position but we were most certainly adequate.

Our WRs are faster? I don't know. I've watched time and again Claiborne and Rufran being caught from behind. That didn't happen last year. Zone or man, last year Claiborne andRufran both broke off coverages. when Rufran did it and got into the open he was gone! No one would catch him. This year he's been caught multiple times. Just to name a few. Big pass against AFA this year. Also the pass at the end of the FAU game that he could've ran in, the defender started out 15 yards away and caught him. That is not bad luck, that is underachieving. These guys went from playmakers to possession type receivers. That's digressing.

And so you hit it right on the head. They are in fact possession type receivers now. With the pro style offense unless you have an elite receiver you will not see the big plays because they cannot get separation. In a spread you don't need to get separation because your routes are built to take advantage of seams and windows. I am telling you every one of them are stronger and faster than they were a year ago. Thanks to Coach Duval! But the problem is it doesn't transfer to the field because they cannot get separation from man coverage!

[McPeachy]

I think at this point, if Bohl can't turn things around, nobody can and we will have to critically evaluate the importance of football at WYO.

Oh poop. The exact same was said for Glenn, and then the exact same was said for Dickface. Now you curse Bohl with that same tired theory / line?

Bohl may only end up being as good as his parts - like Glenn was. Had Glenn had any resemblance of a staff on the offensive side of the ball, he would still (probably) be coaching at UW.

[TSpoke]

I think I agree with Slow Hand. Maybe. Here is my take. I also prefer the spread offense and believe it is better suited for a place like Wyoming. It allows us to take advantages of mismatches on the outside if we can get a couple of good athletes and expose soft spots on the defense. The pro style requires a great offensive line which has not been something we have had much luck recruitnig the past 10ish years. Alabama (and others) have had luck with it because they continually get great results. And in my opinion NDSU is like the Alabama of the FCS(they recruited players that should be playing in the FBS).
That being said I beleive Craig Bohl was the best coach we could have hired and was ecstatic with the hire. I have bought in fully and embraced the new offense and at times have really enjoyed watching it. So none of this is an insult to Coach Bohl and I dont think SLow Hand was either. He was just starting a discussion on which scheme he thought was better.

One last thing, this year it appears that CSU is having plenty of success using a pro style offense so my thoughts on how successful it can be here are also changing.

[kansasCowboy]

Not Freaking out by any stretch of the imagination. All I am doing is making a case for why I believe the Spread is a better fit for a mid level talent like Wyoming. It allows you to get the few high caliber athletes you may have in space and helps them make plays. I understand that we are in transition and I realize that we are not going to change that. I am just trying to offer up an opposing side of the coin.

You mean like Herron busting out big catches for big gains last year? If that's the case what about the opposite, in the pro style we watched Wick excel almost every game! Big plays for big gains. Probably just as many as Herron. Our WRs have shown that they can't do what we were doing last year as well. Blame a new offense, or new QB, or whatever, but theyve had their opportunities this year and dropped passes and acted slow as can be. Rufran is a clear example. I like the kid, but if he caught a deep ball last year, he was taking it to the house. He's had opportunity after opportunity game after game, and he has yet to even get a td this year! Is that Bohl? The pro style offense? No. It's the fact that he severely underachieved. Claiborne and Gentry are in the same boat. The only receivers that I've seen progress is TE Hollister.

Again, we probably would've been worse off this year with a third string Spread QB, and WRs that were underachieving this year. Your spread probably would've produced worse results. You play to your strengths. What's ours? Runningback. So it would stand to reason that we need to run the ball.[/quote

Here is where you and I disagree a little. I firmly believe that Rufran, Herron, and Gentry all achieved because of the system. People were forced to cover us with zone packages and they were very good at finding seams and room to run. This year most all coverages were zero. Your logic doesn't make sense to me. Are you suggesting that they got slower or weaker this year? I can attest to you first hand that they are not slower fact is they are faster and CONSIDERABLY stronger. So you tell me what is the difference? I will agree that we are not nearly as good at the Qb position but we were most certainly adequate.

Our WRs are faster? I don't know. I've watched time and again Claiborne and Rufran being caught from behind. That didn't happen last year. Zone or man, last year Claiborne andRufran both broke off coverages. when Rufran did it and got into the open he was gone! No one would catch him. This year he's been caught multiple times. Just to name a few. Big pass against AFA this year. Also the pass at the end of the FAU game that he could've ran in, the defender started out 15 yards away and caught him. That is not bad luck, that is underachieving. These guys went from playmakers to possession type receivers. That's digressing.

And so you hit it right on the head. They are in fact possession type receivers now. With the pro style offense unless you have an elite receiver you will not see the big plays because they cannot get separation. In a spread you don't need to get separation because your routes are built to take advantage of seams and windows. I am telling you every one of them are stronger and faster than they were a year ago. Thanks to Coach Duval! But the problem is it doesn't transfer to the field because they cannot get separation from man coverage!

Wow! Just, wow! I even used two perfect examples and still you went with the excuse that it is pro style... Rufran had is man beat by 15 yards against FAU. He was caught after a clear 15 yard separation.
I see what you're getting at. But it's wrong. A pro style offense does not make you a possession WR. If you don't believe me then watch the highlights of each game and watch Claiborne and Rufrans catches. They have plenty of opportunity to get up field but Rufran either stutter steps, or Claiborne is caught and thrown out of bounds like a rag doll. Faster? Stronger? Both of them indicate this year, no.
I'm in no way saying I'm better than you. But, I am a coach and I do see this crap from a coaches perspective before I do a fans. And I really see underachieving here. You don't believe me, watch one of Rufrans interviews from last year compared to this year.

[Slow Hand]

I think I agree with Slow Hand. Maybe. Here is my take. I also prefer the spread offense and believe it is better suited for a place like Wyoming. It allows us to take advantages of mismatches on the outside if we can get a couple of good athletes and expose soft spots on the defense. The pro style requires a great offensive line which has not been something we have had much luck recruitnig the past 10ish years. Alabama (and others) have had luck with it because they continually get great results. And in my opinion NDSU is like the Alabama of the FCS(they recruited players that should be playing in the FBS).
That being said I beleive Craig Bohl was the best coach we could have hired and was ecstatic with the hire. I have bought in fully and embraced the new offense and at times have really enjoyed watching it. So none of this is an insult to Coach Bohl and I dont think SLow Hand was either. He was just starting a discussion on which scheme he thought was better.

One last thing, this year it appears that CSU is having plenty of success using a pro style offense so my thoughts on how successful it can be here are also changing.

Thank you TSpoke....that is exactly what I was trying to do. I would prefer to see a spread for stated reasons but we have a great coach in Coach Bohl who happens to think the Pro style is the way to go. Obviously he has a little more merit than I do! LOL

[Slow Hand]

Not Freaking out by any stretch of the imagination. All I am doing is making a case for why I believe the Spread is a better fit for a mid level talent like Wyoming. It allows you to get the few high caliber athletes you may have in space and helps them make plays. I understand that we are in transition and I realize that we are not going to change that. I am just trying to offer up an opposing side of the coin.

You mean like Herron busting out big catches for big gains last year? If that's the case what about the opposite, in the pro style we watched Wick excel almost every game! Big plays for big gains. Probably just as many as Herron. Our WRs have shown that they can't do what we were doing last year as well. Blame a new offense, or new QB, or whatever, but theyve had their opportunities this year and dropped passes and acted slow as can be. Rufran is a clear example. I like the kid, but if he caught a deep ball last year, he was taking it to the house. He's had opportunity after opportunity game after game, and he has yet to even get a td this year! Is that Bohl? The pro style offense? No. It's the fact that he severely underachieved. Claiborne and Gentry are in the same boat. The only receivers that I've seen progress is TE Hollister.

Again, we probably would've been worse off this year with a third string Spread QB, and WRs that were underachieving this year. Your spread probably would've produced worse results. You play to your strengths. What's ours? Runningback. So it would stand to reason that we need to run the ball.[/quote

Here is where you and I disagree a little. I firmly believe that Rufran, Herron, and Gentry all achieved because of the system. People were forced to cover us with zone packages and they were very good at finding seams and room to run. This year most all coverages were zero. Your logic doesn't make sense to me. Are you suggesting that they got slower or weaker this year? I can attest to you first hand that they are not slower fact is they are faster and CONSIDERABLY stronger. So you tell me what is the difference? I will agree that we are not nearly as good at the Qb position but we were most certainly adequate.

Our WRs are faster? I don't know. I've watched time and again Claiborne and Rufran being caught from behind. That didn't happen last year. Zone or man, last year Claiborne andRufran both broke off coverages. when Rufran did it and got into the open he was gone! No one would catch him. This year he's been caught multiple times. Just to name a few. Big pass against AFA this year. Also the pass at the end of the FAU game that he could've ran in, the defender started out 15 yards away and caught him. That is not bad luck, that is underachieving. These guys went from playmakers to possession type receivers. That's digressing.

And so you hit it right on the head. They are in fact possession type receivers now. With the pro style offense unless you have an elite receiver you will not see the big plays because they cannot get separation. In a spread you don't need to get separation because your routes are built to take advantage of seams and windows. I am telling you every one of them are stronger and faster than they were a year ago. Thanks to Coach Duval! But the problem is it doesn't transfer to the field because they cannot get separation from man coverage!

Wow! Just, wow! I even used two perfect examples and still you went with the excuse that it is pro style... Rufran had is man beat by 15 yards against FAU. He was caught after a clear 15 yard separation.
I see what you're getting at. But it's wrong. A pro style offense does not make you a possession WR. If you don't believe me then watch the highlights of each game and watch Claiborne and Rufrans catches. They have plenty of opportunity to get up field but Rufran either stutter steps, or Claiborne is caught and thrown out of bounds like a rag doll. Faster? Stronger? Both of them indicate this year, no.
I'm in no way saying I'm better than you. But, I am a coach and I do see this crap from a coaches perspective before I do a fans. And I really see underachieving here. You don't believe me, watch one of Rufrans interviews from last year compared to this year.

And you know this because you are in the weight room with them and at practice with them everyday right? Dude I am telling you all of their lifts are up and their 40 is faster plain and simple. Physically they are faster and stronger than they ever were last year!

Now if you will read my response again I said pro Style Offenses rely on great athletes at the receiver spot to get separation. Spread offenses do not. My point is that our receivers are not good enough in a pro style offense to get the separation they need. Did Dom get ran down yes, did he last year yes. It happens, however it does not mean he is slower or weaker this year.

Finally I know you are a coach...I know who you are I even watched you coach in Kemmerer so maybe we shouldn't throw that piece into the equation. Just sayin.

[ragtimejoe1]

I think at this point, if Bohl can't turn things around, nobody can and we will have to critically evaluate the importance of football at WYO.

Oh poop. The exact same was said for Glenn, and then the exact same was said for Dickface. Now you curse Bohl with that same tired theory / line?

Bohl may only end up being as good as his parts - like Glenn was. Had Glenn had any resemblance of a staff on the offensive side of the ball, he would still (probably) be coaching at UW.

What I'm getting at is that I doubt over 15 years of failure is a symptom of hiring the wrong coaches every time or a coaches mistake every time.

Point being that we have underlying problems which are causing coaches to fail. If we refuse to identify and fix those problems, then we must consider the importance of football at WYO.

In the Glenn example, is it because he couldn't identify good O coaches or he couldn't afford them? Was his loyalty really loyalty or was it loyalty due to circumstance?

[McPeachy]

I think at this point, if Bohl can't turn things around, nobody can and we will have to critically evaluate the importance of football at WYO.

Oh poop. The exact same was said for Glenn, and then the exact same was said for Dickface. Now you curse Bohl with that same tired theory / line?

Bohl may only end up being as good as his parts - like Glenn was. Had Glenn had any resemblance of a staff on the offensive side of the ball, he would still (probably) be coaching at UW.

What I'm getting at is that I doubt over 15 years of failure is a symptom of hiring the wrong coaches every time or a coaches mistake every time.

Point being that we have underlying problems which are causing coaches to fail. If we refuse to identify and fix those problems, then we must consider the importance of football at WYO.

In the Glenn example, is it because he couldn't identify good O coaches or he couldn't afford them? Was his loyalty really loyalty or was it loyalty due to circumstance?

Agree - we have underlying problems. We can either poop, or get off the pot. Bad part is, the longer we think about getting off the pot (or poop) - the cloudier things get.

As far as Glenn - he couldn't afford them on his weak tit budget. He could pay one side, but not the other - essentially is what it came down to. He only had so much $$ to work with, and he invested where it thought it would best serve his goal - defense.

[Slow Hand]

I think at this point, if Bohl can't turn things around, nobody can and we will have to critically evaluate the importance of football at WYO.

Oh poop. The exact same was said for Glenn, and then the exact same was said for Dickface. Now you curse Bohl with that same tired theory / line?

Bohl may only end up being as good as his parts - like Glenn was. Had Glenn had any resemblance of a staff on the offensive side of the ball, he would still (probably) be coaching at UW.

What I'm getting at is that I doubt over 15 years of failure is a symptom of hiring the wrong coaches every time or a coaches mistake every time.

Point being that we have underlying problems which are causing coaches to fail. If we refuse to identify and fix those problems, then we must consider the importance of football at WYO.

In the Glenn example, is it because he couldn't identify good O coaches or he couldn't afford them? Was his loyalty really loyalty or was it loyalty due to circumstance?

I agree with you whole heartedly. The issue is we can not get top level talent in Laramie, Wyoming. Nothing here is attractive to them. So it doesn't matter what philosophy you have until you can get top tier talent in Laramie nothing we do will be great!

[fromolwyoming]

I think at this point, if Bohl can't turn things around, nobody can and we will have to critically evaluate the importance of football at WYO.

Oh poop. The exact same was said for Glenn, and then the exact same was said for Dickface. Now you curse Bohl with that same tired theory / line?

Bohl may only end up being as good as his parts - like Glenn was. Had Glenn had any resemblance of a staff on the offensive side of the ball, he would still (probably) be coaching at UW.

What I'm getting at is that I doubt over 15 years of failure is a symptom of hiring the wrong coaches every time or a coaches mistake every time.

Point being that we have underlying problems which are causing coaches to fail. If we refuse to identify and fix those problems, then we must consider the importance of football at WYO.

In the Glenn example, is it because he couldn't identify good O coaches or he couldn't afford them? Was his loyalty really loyalty or was it loyalty due to circumstance?

I agree with you whole heartedly. The issue is we can not get top level talent in Laramie, Wyoming. Nothing here is attractive to them. So it doesn't matter what philosophy you have until you can get top tier talent in Laramie nothing we do will be great!

Bohl had considerably less to work with at NDSU, but look what he did there. He turned that team into a better team than a good number of FBS schools, including some P5 schools. You NEED to give Bohl a chance before you throw him under the bus, but of course, you're not. That is my problem with your posts. Your willing to judge Bohl on year 1 with a team that had been recruited for a completely different kind of offense, not to mention a freak number of injuries to numerous starters, and compare that too DC last year, when not only he had 5 years worth of recruiting to his system, but also both the first and second string QB to work with (and still had a losing record).

[djm19]

Tap the brakes peeps. I am the first to be frustrated with the Pokes football program, but I have to give Bohl time.

Utah moved up from MWC to Pac12. TCU moved to the Big 12. And, agree or not, that jump is as big (if not bigger) from NDSU to UW. It took Utah and TCU years to get the caliber of people they needed to succeed. Granted, they weren't new coaches, but they still were suddenly competing with teams they were not used to. And guess what. They are. Bohl and his system will work here. I am sure Patterson and Whit were shocked for years in their new conferences. It is panning out for both of them now. Although I do agree though, that U and TCU have been given blank checks for their sports. I do agree that UW is sucking hind teet in this regard.

Year, Conf, Record (Conf), Record Overall
Utah
2008 MWC, 8–0, 13–0
2009 MWC, 6–2, 10–3
2010 MWC, 7–1, 10–3
2011 Pac-12, 4–5, 8–5
2012 Pac-12, 3–6, 5–7
2013 Pac-12, 2–7, 5–7
2014 Pac-12, 5-4, 8-4 (projected)

TCU
2009 MWC, 12–1, 8–0
2010 MWC, 13–0, 8–0
2011 MWC, 11–2 7–0
2012 Big 12, 4-5, 7-6
2013 Big 12, 2-7, 4-8
2014 Big 12, 7-1, 10-1 (projected)

[djm19]

Let me repeat.... TCU was 4-8 last year. Wonder how many people were calling for Gary's job.

[Slow Hand]

I could be wrong here but I don't think anyone is calling for Bohls job here. Just the opposite I think everyone is on board with him and willing to give him the time he needs to be successful. I just wanted a discussion about the two different offensive philosophies. It is okay to have a different philosophy. I respect Bohl and his record. Obviously the guy knows how to get it done at a lower level. All I am after is a meaningful dialog about the spread offense vs the Pro Style. It is apparent that they both work it the right situations. This is what makes college football such a fantastic and passionate sport. We all think we have it figured out. LOL So let me make this very clear for everyone on this board. I LIKE BOHL, I THINK HE IS A GREAT COACH AND A EVEN BETTER HUMAN BEING, AND I THINK HE WILL BE SUCCESSFUL IN WYOMING. I am just a "spread" guy and I think it is a better fit for a mid-level talent like UW.

[djm19]

Yeah, I didn't mean to make it sound like people were calling for his head...I meant it more that we need to give it time to get his guys and his recruits here before overreacting and changing things up. Offense, etc.

All coaches go through this

[Slow Hand]

Yeah, I didn't mean to make it sound like people were calling for his head...I meant it more that we need to give it time to get his guys and his recruits here before overreacting and changing things up. Offense, etc.

All coaches go through this

I agree and I think he will be fine. I just like the dialog. He is an incredible person. He really cares about this players.