Reader comments
AP: Utah Utes — Irony illustrates need for playoff

The BCS is great!! If you can remeber the way it was before you will agree with me. It makes it so we have the best team are in the championship. Not the two best records. I'm a huge MWC fan. I grew up in Utah and still live here. Do I think Utah had a shot against Fla, OK, or Tex? NO!! It would have been a bad game out of ten times. Hawaii proved that last year. The only good win by a mid-major in the BCS is Boise State.

The best way to settle this is to have Utah Senator Orin Hatch mudwrestle either of the Florida Senators.

I'd put my money on Orin because neither of the Florida senators is a female.

Remind me. What was the Florida vs. Alabama score and the Utah vs. Alaabama score? Perhaps that info will tell us something.

To get to the title game, you have to be ranked #1 or #2 at the END OF THE REGULAR SEASON, not after the bowl games.

Utah wasn't the only unbeaten at the end of the regular season, so the "we haven't lost" argument didn't impress much.

with the worst TV deal in the history of TV, and a stadium that gets filled twice a year. Mnt Worst teams will be on the outside looking in.

What reality are you living in, "No we can't"? Did you even watch the Sugar Bowl? (And no, I'm not a Utah fan, but a died-in-the-wool Cougar!) For anyone to say that Utah wouldn't have a chance against Florida, USC or Texas is just plain ridiculous! They outplayed Alabama in EVERY aspect of the game--perfection personified.

You're in major denial, my friend...I fear you're one of those warped BYU fans who can't admit that Utah might have a truly outstanding, national-championship-caliber team. And all because they beat us...truly sad!

I think we might be overdoing how good Utah is.

Given: They always play big for the big games, and Alabama wasn't too keen to be where they ended up.

13-0 is an outstanding season.

The reason the Utes didn't finish number 1 is because they didn't look like national contenders before the Alabama game. I'm still not convinced that Utah is the best team in the MWC. I still think TCU is a better team. Utah did not have a dominating season, but got through a few nail-biters and figured out how to win. If they had seemed unstoppable before the Alabama game, then they probably deserved national championship contention.

The problem is, nobody thought they had a chance going into Alabama because of how they won their season.

Our current age of College Football, like it or not, isn't just about how many you win, but how you look when you do it. If you looked like you got lucky for half of your games, you aren't going to beat out the team that looked like studs in their wins.

Well if Utah would get beat by ALL those teams, then what is the problem with having a playoff. Talk is talk but until they are actually matched up and put to the test it's a shame.

I say PROVE IT you overly pompus BCS conference teams, if you are so superior than why are you afraid of a playoff. Prove us "mid majors" wrong, because as has been shown, we have proved otherwise 3 out of 4 times, I'll even convert that to a percentage for all you BCS lovers. Mid Majors have beaten BCS teams in BCS bowls 75% of the time.

The BCS basically boils down to a beauty contest. Utah could certainly beat Florida, Oklahoma, Texas, or USC. Maybe it wouldn't be more than 5 out of tens times, but even if it were only 2 or 3 out of tens times, they still deserve a shot having done a remarkable thing going undefeated.

Since when do you have to be the best team in the nation to win a national championship? The Giants weren't the best team in the NFL last year, but still won the Super Bowl. NC State and Villanova in the 80's would not have been voted the best teams in the nation by a long way, but still won national championships. What about Joe Namath and the huge underdog Jets beating heavily favored Baltimore? There have been tons of upsets over the years.

Maybe we should not play any games at all and just have a vote at the first of the season and end it there so the players have plenty of time to study. Yes, the BCS is better than the previous system, but it still has a long way to go.

Barack playoff system? Many people have been calling for a playoff systems for years. Whether it's 6,8, or 12 it'd be 10 times better than what there is now. Deseret bandwagon system?

Ute fans, the arguments you use to build up your impressive accomplishment in 2008 includes the same arguments you use to try and belittle BYU and their less impressive-but-respectable 10-3 this year and the previous 2 superior to Utah seasons.

Example? Out one side of your mouth "We beat 4 ranked teams." The other side? "BYU is pathetic. Overrated. Terrible team. Makes MWC look bad." etc. etc. Which is it? Did BYU make you look good or were they just another of the Weber State's you padded your resume with???

While you've done a tremendous job at representing the UofU, Utah (the state), the MWC, and all mid-majors this year you are where you are due to a large dose of luck, more than once. I believe the commenter above is right who said it's not just your record at the end but how your wins looked along the way. Oregon State, New Mexico, TCU come to mind as being not the most impressive wins of your season.

I'll give you Alabama though. The Sugar Bowl is when you won me over and got my vote for #1. Stop making yourselves look bad with the BYU smack talk though!

And the BCS seem to have a lot in common. I remember the Russia/France/Canada controversy a while back.

To "The BCS works fine" @ 3:56. I'm sorry, but Utah was the only undefeated team at the end of the season! To all those who say "Utah didn't impress much". Remember what the Oakland Raiders said the years they won Super Bowls: "A good team sometimes only plays good enough to win". So the Utes didn't run up the score like other teams. Maybe they pulled their starters earlier. Maybe they are new to the big time and haven't learned you have to be classless like some teams.

Well, how does Utah over TCU by 3 compare to Florida LOSING to Ole Miss? Or Texas LOSING to Texas Tech? Last time I checked, an ugly win was better than a close loss.

You can "coulda, woulda, shoulda" Utah's close wins till the cows come home, but in the end, New Mexico DIDNT, Texas Christian DIDNT, and Alabama DIDNT beat the U!

And can we please put a sock in the "Alabama didn't want to be there" argument? Even if it's true, how is that Utah's problem?

RE: My $.02 | 8:23 p.m. Jan. 13, 2009

Nice quote "Utah (the state), the MWC, and all mid-majors this year you are where you are due to a large dose of luck, more than once."

Utah ran the table and it doesn't matter even if every win had been by a field goal or less. The BYU win was the least valuable of the wins over teams in the polls because they were probably one of the worst 10 win teams of all time.

Great teams find ways to win games. So you can throw BYU out of that catagory this past season because they didn't show up to play for three games. The 1984 BYU team was a great team because they found ways to win games--they weren't lucky just like Utah wasn't this past season.

Remember luck is what happens when opportunity meets preparation.

Does undefeated=best team in the country? How would you have determined the national championship if Boise State had won the Poinsetta Bowl over TCU? Would you have called for a shared national title? I think not. Why? Because like the Utes, Boise State plays in a weaker conference, they didn't have a signature win during the regular season, and they didn't look like national champions at any time during the regular season. Utah won a single game against a good team in a convincing fashion. As a result, most people do not believe that undefeated=best team in the country.

Question: Did you notice that Utah beat two teams in the top ten? Boise St. beat one team that finished ranked: Oregon. Utah had 4 signature wins this year: ORegon St, TCU, BYU and Alabama. Beating any of these teams, even squeaking by, is impressive. The MWC put 3 teams in the top 25 in the final rankings. I would hardly say that the MWC is the same as the WAC. You can talk all day about what if BSU beat TCU, but that didn't happen. Live with it. Boise was a good team this year, but not a top 10 team. BSu is young, they'll be in the mix again the next few years.

RE: Question at 11:20

I remember 1984. BYU had no signature wins (yes they beat #3 Pittsburgh to start the season but Pittsburgh ended the year with a losing record). Not 1 win over a team that was ranked in the final poll. They played in a weak conference (ironically the same one Boise plays in now). They beat a 6-5 team in a bowl game. And yes, being the only undefeated team did equal best team in the country that year.

I think if you start the season with a win over Michigan in the Big House. End it with a win over Alabama in the Sugar Bowl, go 11-0 with 3 (of those 11, 4 total) wins over teams that are ranked in the final poll in between, and are the only undefeated team in the country, that ought to get you a national championship. If a BCS conference school did that, they'd sure at least get a split national championship

How come everyone brings up Georgia blowing out Hawaii as a negative against mid majors. These same people never once sugest that the Big Ten dosen't belong yet Penn State this year and Ohio State and Illinois last year and Ohio State the year before were all blown outin BCS bowls(just like Hawaii) Considering the mid majors as conference have a 75% winning percentage in BCS Bowls. Can any of the BCS conferences claim that?

My question is where is the NCAA? Is the NCAA an organization or is it an idea? I think pressure needs to be put on the NCAA to come up with a post game tournament instead of them handing off at the end of the season to a bunch of money grubbing "good ole boys" called the BCS. Anybody have the email of somebody at the NCAA that pressure could be put on for CHANGE!