"How can a team that never played any of the top 20 teams claim to be the best
in the nation? In order to be the best don't you have to beat the best?"BYU never claimed to be the best in 1984, but they did the best, beating
everybody on their schedule, when teams like Oklahoma, Washington, Nebraska and
Florida couldn't.Both Nebraska and Washington were invited to play
BYU in the Holiday Bowl, but chose $$$ and playing in a "more prestigious" bowl
over playing the #1-ranked team for a chance at a national championship.If you want to blame someone for BYU winning a national championship
without having to beat a Top 20 team, blame the Huskers and the Huskies.BYU would have gladly played anybody in the country in 1984, and could
have beaten anybody in the country, but the Cougars were never given that
its not that i am a BCS homer. im not. i like the teams in your conf. i think
they r fun to watch and agree some teams might choose not to play u all. but
overall i still dont really trust that your teams would hang with the big boys
with the deep pockets of the south or north or teams like a usc or texas or
oklahoma..on a week to week basis. u did beat oregon st. and oklahoma. but both
finished 8-5. not all that impressive in the end. however byu DID scheadule
people..that u can not take away. they couldnt predict that it would be lesser
years for fsu or oklh. plus utah was not the team from the year prior..just
saying. just so u have back round on me though i am from tampa so all about the
little guy being able to do big things..USF..well shot at. but am a die hard
life long FSU fan deployed to kuwait who just loves college football peroid.
boise should go to the mwc for sure though..100%
Re BYU fans:How can a team that never played any of the top 20 teams
claim to be the best in the nation? In order to be the best don't you have to
beat the best?In 1984 BYU won the national championship on a
technicality.Out of all the non bcs confrence teams to have gone
undefeated only one had a record worthy of a national championship and that was
Utah in 2008.Beating 3 ranked teams in the regular season, and then
beating a #3 ranked Alabama team that was ranked #1 most of the season is a much
greater accomplishment than going undefeated on bunch of scrubs.This
argument goes to BSU fans too, your regular season last year was a joke. I don't
care how good your team was they never left the kiddie pool. Call me
crazy but I think the national champion should have to earn their way in.But since there is no playoff, I guess you have a right to speculate.
RE Armstrong, you can cheery picked the information that you post but to be
objective you should also include all the data. BYU lost to TCU and FSU at home
last year in what where very poor performances. They also went undefeated on
the road and in neutral site games last year, beating a ranked Oklahoma, Oregon
St and Utah team at the time that the Y played them. Few of the teams that you
mentioned above are going out of there way to schedule a home and away game with
BYU, BSU, TCU and Utah. You sound like a BCS homer, just saying.
im just throwing this out there, but u can not really believe that they should
be auto-qualifiers. BYU who was supposed to be so great last year faced a ACC
team in FSU that went 6-6. they were at home and just got crushed like no ones
business. boise's sheadule this year is the worst i have seen. yes VT is good.
not great. a top 15 at the end of the year maybe...but for that to be your only
game u play all year..and it is..its not that these teams r good, just get hyped
up more for one huge game..which is only huge to them i might add. if any of ur
so called big 4 go to a real conference. they will never sniff the BCS games
cause u will never compete for the titles. play texas,oklh,nebr..or
uf,ga,lsu,bama..or fsu,vt,gt,miami,nc,an clemson in a row then talk. u have no
shot. it might stink..but its the truth
RE Hedge"hmmmm, the 1996 BYU team gave up 72 points ( yes I said 72)
to Hawaii and lost- please take off the blue goggles." Nice
fact checking Hedge. You really out did yourself on this one? To bad the only
loss BYU had in 1996 was to Washington on the Road. They ended up beating a
ranked Kansas St team that year in the Cotton Bowl and ended ranked 5th in the
nation in both polls, 14-1. If you are going to talk smack please get your
facts straight you lose all credibility! Either way you are blatantly trying to
miss represent the facts or you are just clueless either way you are wrong!
Uteology | 1:30 p.m. May 30, 2010 I will quote one of your heroes:
"You Lie." Please tell me where I keep talking about "playing in the Rose
Bowl".-------------------I give you a chance to "clarify"
where you have obviously stated two different positions, and you ignore.Then you claim I "lie" (stong word), when you talk about playing in the
Rose Bowl.Tell me:When you Utah fans say that Heaps and
Quezada chose BYU because they have no desire to play in a BCS game, and talk
about going to play in the PAC-12 so you can play in a BCS game, which BCS game
are you talking about besides the Rose Bowl?Dude, be civil...Uteology | 2:58 a.m. May 29, 2010 "Like the article said non-BCS
team will never play in a title game."BSU and TCU "might" have a
chance"--So we can ignore your assertion that they will "never" play
in a title game?So, you are asserting that there may be another
non-BCS winner of the NC, just like 1984?So, to get out of BYU's
shadow, Utah really needs to win a NC...Cool.
@Buster | 11:44 a.m. May 30, 2010I will quote one of your heroes:
"You Lie." Please tell me where I keep talking about "playing in the Rose
Bowl".@Buster | 11:44 a.m. May 30, 2010I
bring up BYU vs. Postseason because to most fans playing in the postseason is
more important. I guess it's not for you.Congrats to Buster and his
team please do enjoy your success of 3 of 4 and 1 of 8 over Utah. But remember being "consistent" and "elite" you have to do something on the
national stage not only the Desert Dual.Buster | 4:54
p.m. May 29, 2010 BSU and TCU "might" have a chance using "what if"
analysis but in reality "never" considering Baylor has a better chance just by
playing in a BCS conference. Also, "never" considering Cincinnati went from #5
to #3 in the final BCS standings while #4 TCU did not move up.It
seems you have more faith in the "corrupt" system then I do. The only good
thing about BcS is a team like 1984 with a 104 SOS will never be champion.
@UteologyUteology | 12:54 a.mYeah, but you have to admit, the
extra information did shed light on the subject, since you keep talking about
"playing in the RoseBowl" which the U of AZ never has."3-2 in Vegas
and 1-5"You bring up BYU vs. others and not head to head against
Utah...Why is that?Oh, you must have missed ny
post at | 4:54 p.m, It's the one where two of your quotes are side by side,
where you definitively say one thing, and flop to say something else. You have a chance to clarify...
Buster|12:47 a.m. May 29, 2010The question I replied to was about
"winning the PAC". Tie or no tie Arizona has a PAC title.They also
have a national title in basketball playing in the PAC 10. So it seems only the
football program had issues."PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE... BYU has it
all locked."3-2 in Vegas and 1-5 in the dance would indicate that
the only thing BYU has locked is postseason failure. Unless I am missing
something here and the Desert Dual is how BYU measures success today?
@UteologyUteology | 2:58 a.m. May 29, 2010 "Like the article said
non-BCS team will never play in a title game. I tend to agree because if they
did the monopoly will crumble specially if a nonAQ team wins."Uteology | 4:20 p.m. May 29, 2010 "Assuming TCU and Boise run the table.
Assuming there is no more than one undefeated BCS team. Then TCU and Boise might
have a chance at the title."------------Never, or might have a
chance. Could you please clarify your position?Or is it a fluid
thing, which is OK...
@SportsFanAssuming TCU and Boise run the table. Assuming there is
no more than one undefeated BCS team. Then TCU and Boise might have a chance at
the title. TCU finished #7 in 2008 yet in 2009 could not make it to
the title game even after humuilating 2 top 20 teams. I believe even
Cincinnatti leapfroged them in the final BCS standings.
Naval VetUtah is the classic example of a one-hit wonder.The Utes win a few big games, but Utah also consistently loses little games.
Despite their BCS success, Utah has never come close to winning a National
Championship. Their #2 final AP ranking in 2008 was a DISTANT second.The key to winning a National Championship is positioning from the previous
season.The most likely non-BCS teams to play in a BCS title game are
BYU, Utah, TCU, and Boise State. When was the last time those
teams1. won a conference championship2. finished in the Top
253. finished the season with 2 or fewer lossesin back-to-back
seasons?Do 1, 2 AND 3 the previous season, then have an undefeated
season and the Utes might have a shot at a BCS title game.TCU and
Boise State have a shot at the title game this season, because they did 1, 2 and
3 last season.If BYU only had 1984, yes, they would be resting on
their 26-year-old laurels. Unfortunately for BYU haters, BYU has also done 1, 2
and 3 back-to-back in the last four years.Consistency!
Naval VetShouldn't the argument about consistency really be over on
the comment board about the Deseret Duel.Wow, talk about a program
that put a yearlong beatdown on their rival.Last year BYU didn't
seem to be resting on anything.
SportsFan:"Utah's problem with ever playing in the title game is
inconsistency."ybU's problem with ever playing in a BCS Bowl is
their consistency. As in consistently losing big games. Consistently failing
in their quests for perfection. Consistently resting on the laurels of an
accidental title 26 years ago.I'm glad Utah doesn't seem to have
that problem.Go zoobs.
Uteology | 2:58 a.m."The trophy is 25 years old, the shine has faded."Man, I've see it, It shines, It Shines, It shines... And
sCoReBoArD is last year, 3 out of the past 4 years.Deseret Duel was
BYU 45.5 - Utah 14.5 LAST year.PAST, PRESENT, AND FUTURE... BYU has
it all locked.Let's just stick with now, though.-------------"Like the article said non-BCS team will never play in a
title game."ANY newspaper sportswriter that predicts the future...
could makea lot more money working out of a sportsbook. Never is a long time,
and putting quotes around something will not make it a factBut,
sure... Ute-ol-o-gy is a field that neve cared about facts or logic.
Boise State and TCU both have realistic chances of playing in the title game
THIS YEAR.Boise State will be ranked around #5 to start the season
and plays two likely Top 25 BCS teams, Virginia Tech and Oregon State. Win those
games impressively and the Broncos could be ranked #1 or #2 before the end of
September with a realistic chance of staying there if they run the table.TCU will be ranked around #7 to start the season and also plays Oregon
State as well as two other likely Top 25 teams, Utah and BYU. Beating Oregon
State and Baylor could vault TCU to #3 or #4 by the end of September and give
TCU a realistic chance of finishing #1 or #2 in the final regular season
polls.Utah's problem with ever playing in the title game is
inconsistency. Utah can't seem to put together more than one or two good years
in a row so the Utes never start the season highly ranked. Maybe with a great
showing against Pittsburgh the Utes could make an early leap in the polls, but
Utah has no chance of climbing to #1 or #2 in the polls.
That, or Heaps and Quezada figure their best shot would be at BYU.Maybe they were blinded by the Crystal Trophy, LaVell Edwards Stadium, with
its 64,045-seat capacity, huge video scoreboards and immaculate press boxes, the
Heisman and Doak Walker Trophies in the Trophy Case.-----------The trophy is 25 years old, the shine has faded. Just like the talent level
at BYU. The Doak award was 9 years ago. The Heisman was in 1993 when they were
in diapers. BYU has put 9 players in the NFL under Bronco, same time Boise with
8 and Utah with 19. BYU talent last cracked the top 5 14 years ago.Like the article said non-BCS team will never play in a title game. I tend to
agree because if they did the monopoly will crumble specially if a nonAQ team
Uteology is correct:"According to wikipidia Arizona won the PAC 10
in 1993 with their "desert storm" defense at 10-2."There was a three
way tie with UofA, UCLA and USC. (UofA also won the WAC in 1964 and 1973.)No Rose Bowl, but beat the Miami Hurricanes in the Fiesta Bowl by a
score of 29—0.They were ranked Number 1 in 1994. However,
Arizona was stunned by Colorado State and the rest of the season went down along
with it.U of Arizona has played in 15 Bowl games since 1921,
going 6-8-1. ------------Even with the information you
provided Uteology, I'd say this point still goes to Scenic View. Utah is not
really wanting to replicate Arizona's sucess in the Pac 10.----------------Actually, DFW aside, the talk is that the PAC-10
and Big 12 will be "aligning" without expanding.---------Hedge"zealot LDS athlete"No need to sound like a religous
"bigot"...---------------So getting back on topic:
Joining MWC wouldn't get Boise State any closer to title...They
might get there on their own this year. They are pretty loaded. If everyone
stays put, might be good add for the MWC...
scenic view|11:58 a.m. May 28, 2010Sure, the Utes will be
"guaranteed" an invite to a BCS game if the Utes win the PAC 12, but there's no
guarantee that the Utes will ever win the PAC 12.See Arizona.-----------According to wikipidia Arizona won the PAC 10 in
1993 with their "desert storm" defense at 10-2.My other alumatter
ASU has three titles.I work in the DFW area and the news their is
saying TCU going to the Big 12 if it gets raided. If Utah gets the invite
that's great if not then KW needs to keep raiding Texas and California for
@Big ute Fan" What kid doesn't want to play USC every year..c'mon! I would
be worried Yners, real worried......... "Kids like Quezada and
Heaps...@Naval Vet | 6:37 p.m. May 28, 2010 "bigutefan,
hedgehog:""He could have went to virtually anywhere," "Either way, Heaps
demonstrate[d] he had no designs to seek an opportunity to play in a BCS bowl
game or Nat'l Championship."That, or Heaps and Quezada figure their
best shot would be at BYU.Maybe they were blinded by the Crystal
Trophy, LaVell Edwards Stadium, with its 64,045-seat capacity, huge video
scoreboards and immaculate press boxes, the Heisman and Doak Walker Trophies in
the Trophy Case.Maybe they just don't like palying on a FieldTurf
Too all of the people trying to compare the historic teams just understand that
the way the game is played today is faster and harder then how they played it
@ moodyblue77 | 3:30 p.m. May 28, 2010 "The Utes would be so far
behind in overall budgets and facilities that it would take decades for them to
be competitive"Budgets? In the MWC, yes. In the PAC 10, the
revenue sharing would close this gap significantly.Facilities?
There are few (if any) PAC 10 schools that have the basketball facilities that
Utah has. And football facilities? They are right on par with the PAC 10
teams.The gap is not as wide as you may think it is.
@ hedgehog | 8:50 a.m. May 28, 2010 PAC 10 splits TV revenue equally
... always has. Washington State gets as much as USC.As for bowl
game revenue, I am not sure how this is split, but I suspect bowl game
participants keep the majority of the revenue.
I find it oh so amazing the number of Ute fans who think they are still going to
make the PAC-10 the PAC-12 with Colorado, when all the marketing studies done
have pointed to diminishing returns if the Salt Lake City TV market were split
between Utah and BYU in different BCS leagues (the Big-XII would grab BYU in
such a scenario). Utah State fans amaze me even more when nothing, not even
Boise State staying put in the WAC will save their bankrupt football program.The PAC-10 and Big-XII among other things are discussing an alliance TV deal
since they are the only BCS leagues comprising exclusively of territory west of
the Mississippi River. This will better enable both leagues to better compete
with the Big-Ten and SEC which have the best overall TV deals of any leagues.
It might actually prove to their advantage to keep the MWC together in the end,
so they're likely pushing the MWC to add Boise State as well, since this will
put the 4 most powerful non-AQ programs at this time in one single league.
Why would 4-star LDS athletes want to play for Utah, when they could just as
easily play for USC or Oregon where they'd have a much better chance of actually
playing in the Rose Bowl, rather than simply playing for a team in an AQ
conference?At least Utah fans will have Arizona fans to commiserate
with.BYU, btw, will continue to get great LDS athletes in whichever
conference the Cougars are in.
bigutefan, hedgehog:I once heard another poster cleverly refer to
"why?" recruits as one born with a road map to Provo. Look at Heaps for
example. He could have went to virtually anywhere, but when he narrowed his
choices down to 2, it was hometown favorite Washington [who had just come off of
an 0-12 season] and ybU. Either way, Heaps demonstrate he had no designs to
seek an opportunity to play in a BCS bowl game or Nat'l Championship.My point is, the only noticeable difference the tdS would most likely see from
their recruiting base would be a slight reduction in winning the IN-STATE
recruiting battle. The Utes would see a runaway difference however, and THAT's
where the gap would be defined.
Lets get one thing strait, BSU would upgrade the MWC in ONE sport, Football. If
that's all the conference cares about, then cool, invite Boise. Not being a
jerk, I wish the best for Boise, they are my second favorite WAC school.
Bigutefan,BYU will still get the zealot LDS athlete no matter what
the relevance of the BYU program. But I think we've all seen the 4 star (or
higher) mormon football player drop BYU for the bright lights of a BCS program.
It happens year in and year out. Utah going into the a BCS conference just might
fix this problem. Who knows we might even get some of you kewgs to convert to
As soon as the Utes make the switch to the PAC-12, you will see mormon athletes
who wouldn't consider Utah, suddenly start to look at Utah for a chance to play
in the BCS and for a National Championship. When the Yners do not receive an
invitation to anything, which they won't, your program will decline
FAST........... as all those mormon boys you guilt into playing for you, decide
play for the Utes who present much better opportunities. What kid doesn't want
to play USC every year..c'mon! I would be worried Yners, real worried.........
Re: hedgehog"hmmmm, the 1996 BYU team gave up 72 points ( yes I said
72) to Hawaii and lost- please take off the blue goggles."Actually
hedgie, it was the 2001 BYU team that gave up 72 points to Hawaii. Guess you
didn't do YOUR homework.
Yes, hedgehog, BYU would have a better chance of winning the PAC 12 and going to
a BCS bowl, simply because, unlike Utah, BYU knows how to consistently win
@Royal Blue and HedgieHaving the benefit of watching them all
play:#1 BYU 1984#1 BYU 1996#1 Utah 2004#1 Utah
2008I would have them all tied for first as best team from the
state. 1984 Was the first to break through from the area and won the
National Championship. They had a target on their backs, had all of the media
distraction from Gumble and Switzer and still came through.1996 14
win season. That's tough to do anytime.2004 Was the first to break
through for Utah, and the BCS. Great coach.2008 Probably had the
weakest team all season, but caught the breaks, and probably the biggest
surprise in in the Bowl Game, and got Kyle out of Urban's shadow.If
they could assemble all teams and play each other, they would all be a
tossup.You could rank them on paper, but they don't play on paper.
They all had intangibles.As a BYU fan first, Utah second, I would be
tempted to pick the BYU teams first. I still need to give props Utah's
accomplishments.If I had to choose, though, who can argue with a
moodyblue77,Sounds like a lot of sour grapes. I wonder what your
story would be if BYU was being courted by the PAC10 instead of Utah.Let me guess, BYU would be primed for a Rose bowl win within two
If TCU and Utah leave the MWC, BYU would be in the same position as BSU is. In
a conference allowing them to go undefeated and to BCS bowls every few years.
Utah will be lucky to finish 3rd in the pac 10.
Royalblue,"This is how I would rank those four teams:#1 BYU
1996#2 BYU 1984#3 Utah 2004#4 Utah 2008"hmmmm, the
1996 BYU team gave up 72 points ( yes I said 72) to Hawaii and lost- please take
off the blue goggles. '84 played no end-of-season ranked teams and pulls
out a tight bowl win against a 6th placed non-ranked team.We all
know this is delusion.
An awful lot of people have confidence that the Utes will be able to compete in
the PAC 12, whenever it happens.I don't see it. The Utes would be
so far behind in overall budgets and facilities that it would take decades for
them to be competitive. No Rose Bowl. No BCS. No taking people by surprise.
Lots of losses.No one has even asked how much the Utes would have to
pay in order to join. It won't be cheap. They would have only partial revenue
sharing with other league teams for 5 to 10 years. This is not about prestige
for the Utes, it's about more money for the rest of the PAC 12.You would definitely see more good teams come to the state.
Unfortunately, most of them will leave as winners.
Wrong again Rock.If the big 4 can stick together, meaning BYU, Utah,
TCU, and BSU (that might be a big if), then the pressure will be too much for
the BCS and they will yield to giving them the automatic. I agree that it is
very unlikely they allow entry into the championship, however. Besides the fact that BSU has actually beaten BCS teams, the main reason the
MWC should add them is that they are an ESPN darling, and even some of their
analysts might, just might, start aknowledging that the MWC deserves an
automatic. Last I looked, the Big East and ACC are not meeting all 3 BCS
criteria either, and MWC is ahead of them overall. So does the BCS have the
guts to allow them to stay at the party, while not inviting the MWC? We may
see, or if Utah or another changes conferences back to square one for whoever is
left. The real thing the MWC needs to do is kick out WY and NM. They are
dragging down big time since they stick so bad.
it's all about the money. the MWC will never get into the BSc. as teams get
raided and go from one conference to the next, the non-players (non-BSC teams)
will be forever silenced as they lose the top tiered teams of their non-AQ
conferences. As these Boise's, Utah's and TCU's are quietly added to the big
boys club the BSC loses a few dollars to dilution but the preservation of the
MACHINE of MONEY (BSC) is intact. "The Plantation" of 40 million dollar slaves
remains in effect.
Big_Ben, you asked me how old I am. Ask Brad Rock which he might be able to tell
you, Brad and I use to be in the same Ward.
hey scott, calm down. first of all, I have no idea what you are talking about.
second, get over myself? ok, here we go, and......im over myself! only for you
OK, weird thought that has not been addressed.Joining the PAC-12 or
BIG-10 (12) would seperate BYU and Utah. Now that is an interesting question for
a sportsfan, athlete, or coach... but.What about the decision
makers?Didn't the President of the U go to BYU, and BYU's president
the U?What about the LDS General Authorities that (dare I say it)
have the ear of many of the decision makers at Utah, and are other decision
makers acverse to that influence at the U? I know the GA's would have a say at
BYU.I mean, an invite comes out to either school... Would the
decision makers really seperate the two schools?
Utah's chances of playing in a BCS game will actually go down by joining the PAC
12.Sure, the Utes will be "guaranteed" an invite to a BCS game if
the Utes win the PAC 12, but there's no guarantee that the Utes will ever win
the PAC 12.See Arizona.
Who appointed you blog police Big_Ben?Get over yourself.
Moving the best/better football team debate from the Henderson article to a
football article:Trying to argue which team is better/best all-time
is an exercise in futility.Bottom line, it really doesn't matter
which team was better, what matters is which team finished higher.Phi Slama Jamma was much better than North Carolina State, but the Wolfpack
won the National Championship. At least in basketball, better/best is decided on
the court.Utah 2004 or Utah 2008 could have been better than BYU
1996 or BYU 1984, but BYU 1984 won the National Championship.BYU
1984 #1/#1Utah 2008 #2/#4Utah 2004 #4/#5BYU 1996 #5/#5The final results are in the record books. Fans can argue all they want
to, but nothing is going to change the final results.This is how I
would rank those four teams:#1 BYU 1996#2 BYU 1984#3
Utah 2004#4 Utah 2008
jealous u= first person to fall into my trap. some of you are far too easy.
I believe the MWC has 5 or 6 bowl tie-ins; the Humanatarian might have changed,
but, if it did, it would certainly follow Boise State to the MWC.Mountain West1. Las Vegas2. Poinsettia3. Independence4. Armed Forces5. New Mexico6. Humanitarian
If logic ruled up on the hill, the Utes would change their fight song since
women's gymnastics is Utah's premier sports program.Chances of Utah
finishing with a better record than BYU for 2010-2011:Football -
50/50Men's Basketball - 0
Brad Rock speaks the truth about the BCS. But just thinking outloud about the
MWC, is the addition of Boise State that automatic? Last time I checked it
takes a majority of votes to get BSU in. And if the MWC is not an automatic
qualifier, why would Wyoming, SDSU, CSU, UNM, Air Force and UNLV vote to admit
another school that makes it nearly impossible for them to ever go to a bowl
game again? If Utah, BYU, TCU and then Boise State tie up all the bowl games,
what's in it for the other six? I just don't think the MWC can get the votes
they need from the originators of the conference (Wyo, CSU) or the other four
schools named. It does nothing but marginalize their programs, unless the BCS
comes calling, which it won't ever do because it doesn't have to. It already has
most, if not all, the money. Like Rock said.
Hedge, thanks for the homework.Google this to se where I am coming
fromm.Let's discuss... not be antagonistic.That's
getting old...Pac-10 expansion: Scott won’t seek change in
NCAA legislation … for now
lets all just admit the obvious here, utah rules and byu is inferior. logic
It would be nice to see all of this work out, but Utah is not going to the Pac
10 unless better options fail. Utah would be an early choice if they "have" to
take a non AQ, but they are working very hard to not take one.
Buster,Is this how you’re getting through life? Having others
do your homework? "Big 12, Pac-10 and SEC have hybrid splits
in which a percentage of revenue is split and the remaining amount is divided
based on the number of television appearances for each school."Sport
Business Journal 2010
HedgeEvery conference has their own rules regarding individual deals
and spits.I was referring to the TV Deal.Sorry, in this
case you were right the way I worded it.
Hedge Hog.Tell you what, Hedge. Read up on what the Pac-10 schools
are saying in their local papers.Read Larry Scoot's interviews about
the split going to 1/12th.Read ESPN. Read what they say about the
ACC TV deal and it's impact, and get back to me.MMMMMMM'K?
stay put with MWC - no matter how the pie goes. If those two splitting up in
different direction - the pie will still be small. Look at Missouri what I read
- they too only got a small pie with big12. Either way - stay put or split up
and the pie will still be small. Boise St might look good wit MWC while the WAC
will be in the dump. This BLUE Turf need to go!
Buster,"Every team in every conference in the country gets an equal
split... but Utah???" hmmmm, do you really need to get busted again?
Really ,Buster?Tell you what, a little homework assignment for you
over the long holiday weekend. Research what the conference football revenue %
takes for Ohio State and Michigan vs. Minnesota and Indiana.Get back
to me, m’k.
Typical Hedge"Utah wouldn't get a 1/12 slice of the PAC(12) pie."Every team in every conference in the country gets an equal split... but
Utah??? Do you think that little about Utah.Wow, what you come up
with."UtahUtes1 | 7:51 a.m.""BYU?? Where did that come
from?BYU to BIG 12 -- Same rumors that have Utah going PAC-12. Do
they have newspapers in the Crimson Bubble?
@UtahUtes1Everything is pure speculation at this point. And yes,
there has been talk of BYU possibly moving to into the big10 after everything
goes down out there. I know the utes are a "lock" for the pac12 but BYU has been
talked about as well. I personally will not get sucked in or excited until the
dotted line in signed, because lets be real, its all speculation at this point.
If the BCS doesn't give the MWC the same consideration they gave the Big East
when doling out automatic qualifications, then they would face a lawsuit and
most likely lose.I keep hearing that the BCS will change the requirements
for being an automatice qualifier, making it more difficult. If that happens
Orin Hatch will have his case made for him.
"The Mountain West won't be worth much after BYU...leave for bigger
conferences."BYU?? Where did that come from?
Buster,Utah wouldn't get a 1/12 slice of the PAC(12) pie.I suspect a payout would be based on seniority, power and clout, most likely
putting Utah at the bottom of the revenue grab. Having said this, Utah would
still be collecting a considerable larger pool or revenue then there current MWC
arrangement. Plus they’re guaranteed the opportunity of playing in a BCS
bowl(s) EVERY yearIf offered, Utah needs to jump to the PAC(12) and
never look back. Let BYU and Boise be victimized.
The Mountain West won't be worth much after BYU, TCU and Utah leave for bigger
conferences. I wouldn't be surprised to see the WAC raid some of the MWC teams.
Sad, but probably true, I'm afraid. I would like to see Utah stay in the MWC if
it's a automatic qualifier. On the other hand I'm far from sure there is an
invite coming. Either way, I'm looking forward to college football season. Go Utes!!!
"The BCS is a five-game showcase of college football. It is designed to ensure
that the two top-rated teams in the country meet in the national championship
game, and to create exciting and competitive matchups among eight other highly
regarded teams in four other bowl games."Not my words, but those
from the BCS website.No interest in pitting the top ten teams in the
bowls. No interst in letting the MWC in. Dr. King(not comparing to
civil rights movement in any way) said "Justice delayed is justice denied" when
the Birmingham ministers asked him to "Wait".The BCS says "Wait". No
intention to invite the MWC unless it gets big government off their back, but I
don't think they feel threatened, and I don't think it happens without BSU and
Utah in the MWC.But, still wait.Utah would be smart to
go PAC-12 if invited, but I'm not sure PAC-10 wants to go from 1/10th split to
1/12th unless they are motivated by BCS to break up the MWC.It's
more drama than Junior High, raging hormones and all.Going to need
to "wait" on this one.