Quantcast
Sports

Matt Sanderson: Even with Utah Utes in the Pac-10, the BCS still needs to go

Comments

Return To Article
  • VegasUte
    Aug. 26, 2010 6:10 p.m.

    Welcome Jake Murphy to the Utes!!

    Go Utes!!

  • Tarheel Ute
    Aug. 26, 2010 2:01 p.m.

    Lets be fair; The BCS offers few benefits and exists primarily to justify or perpetuate its own existence — i.e. a self-licking ice cream cone. Utah by joining a BSC conference did not change that fact. We, (Utah Fans), can take whatever credit we want from this development, regardless of whether we consider it fair or unfair to BYU, the MWC or otherwise. But the BCS is still, if not more so, a detriment to the college football and its fans.

    The Utes may benefit financially from this exchange, but be careful what you ask for — or are happy to accept. Teams such as the South Carolina Gamecocks, Arizona State and Arizona, have joined BSC leagues and benefited financially. But aside from their being able to say they are in one of the prestigious conferences, they have not joined the football elite.

    I understand Utah’s decision, but I do not like what that decision has lead to with the MWC and WAC, or that it has lessened chances of getting rid of the BCS mafia. And I am not at all sure I will the results on the field.

  • Ravenal
    Aug. 26, 2010 10:54 a.m.

    Crispy Lips | 9:39 a.m. Aug. 26, 2010
    "These comments should be limited to teams that have actually played in a BCS Bowl. Sorry cougies, but you can't join our club until you make it to a BCS."


    And the first fan base to mention BYU into these comments was: UTAH!!! Just sayin'

    If they can't trash BYU, hedgehog, Chris B, Conference of ????, and others like them might as well not even come online.

  • Crispy Lips
    Aug. 26, 2010 9:39 a.m.

    These comments should be limited to teams that have actually played in a BCS Bowl. Sorry cougies, but you can't join our club until you make it to a BCS.

  • Blue Coug
    Aug. 26, 2010 9:20 a.m.

    SpanishImmersed

    A playoff would completely eliminate the need for the BCS. Give back control of major college football post season to the NCAA and resign the BCS to the scrap heap of failed experiments.

    The bowls can continue with the quarter-finals played in what used to be the big New Years Day bowls--Orange, Sugar, Fiesta and Rose. You could also throw in the Cotton for semi-finals and finals.

  • Duh
    Aug. 26, 2010 8:32 a.m.

    I did find it interesting that in the 12 year history of the BCS Championship, only 12 teams have played. 12 teams in 12 years? I bet that doesn't change much this year either.

  • Jealous U
    Aug. 26, 2010 12:10 a.m.

    Enjoy the BCS conference basement UteMan.

    It you can't finish ahead of the Cougars, U must be a Ute. (see Washington State next season)

  • UteMan
    Aug. 25, 2010 11:44 p.m.

    My thoughts on the BCS:

    If you can't beat it, join it.

    If you can't join it, you must be a cougar!

    Go Utes!

  • royalblue
    Aug. 25, 2010 11:18 p.m.

    There's no reason why a 16-team playoff couldn't peacefully co-exist with the remaining bowls, just like the NCAA and NIT tournaments co-exist.

    Play the first games of the playoff beginning the first Saturday after Christmas, which would be New Years Day this season.

    Take the champions of every conference (currently 11) and the next 5 highest ranked teams (both polls combined).

    Seed the teams just like the NCAA basketball tournament with first round games played on the home field of the higher seeded team.

    Play the quarter-final games in the Rose, Fiesta, Sugar and Orange Bowls.

    Play the semi-finals in two of those bowls, and the final in one of them.

    Any other bowls could be played on any day except the Saturdays when the playoff games were scheduled.

    If the lower divisions can hold a 16-team championship playoff, there's no reason why major college football couldn't, especially if all of the games were played on Saturday.

    The fans of the eight teams that lost in the opening round wouldn't get to go to a bowl. Small tradeoff for being able to crown a champion on the field.

  • Duh
    Aug. 25, 2010 10:32 p.m.

    @ all BYU haters who use this article to continue to show hate. I sense some jealousy in all of you. Why would you bring BYU into this argument and trash them. You guys can't let it go. It must eat you up at nights that BYU is in a better position no matter what you do or where you go. You all must have had a "little brother" who didn't do all the things you did who wasn't as good as you but was talked about more and rewarded because of his intelligence. No he didn't win everything like you did and he was such a challenge to understand. The Stud in you became a dud and you always find someone else to always through your hate at because, you know you just can't do that to your real little brother. What a bunch of dorks. In 10 years, who is going to care about the Utah and BYU rivalry, it won't exist anymore, then who are you going to hate?..... I don't know, but just stating the obvious.

  • mussingaround
    Aug. 25, 2010 10:01 p.m.

    The truth:

    Utah in the PAC 10 = no longer relevant, late Saturday night FOX broadcasts, middle of the PAC, 7-5, seldom ranked, regular Las Vegas/Poinsettia Bowl

    BYU as independent = regular nationally televised ESPN games against teams like Notre Dame and Texas, perennial Top 25, variety of interesting bowls, including regular BCS appearances

  • GoUtah
    Aug. 25, 2010 7:52 p.m.

    Utah in the PAC 10 = Rose Bowl / BCS
    TDS independent = NO Bowl

    Utah cracked the BCS code, twice. For Utah, it's all good. It's SO good that Utah isn't rapped up in this messed caused by the tds' knee jerk reaction.

    BCS here Utah comes!

  • the truth
    Aug. 25, 2010 7:10 p.m.

    Does anyone really care who won the tostitos weed wacker bowl,

    or would they care more about who made the quarter-finals in the college playoffs?


    Would people care more about a 3rd place team from the east that won the orange bowl,

    or the compelling cinderalla story of a little university from boise making the final four?


    so really who needs bowl games?

  • the truth
    Aug. 25, 2010 7:02 p.m.

    Bowl games, shmol games

    who need bowl games,

    they should a quaint thing of the past and only for teams that don't make the playoffs,


    Playoffs will be the real deal, and obviously be organized around the biggest football venues,


    but bowl games and voting for winners? an outdated thing.


    People want tosee real meaningful games played by the best teams in the country, and a legitimate champion.

  • AZ Dave
    Aug. 25, 2010 6:45 p.m.

    Take a deep breath and put down the Kool-Aid. If you were in the BCS shoes, why would you let anyone else in the pool!

  • rvalens2
    Aug. 25, 2010 6:35 p.m.

    "What to do about the Bowls?"

    Let's face facts ... most of the Bowls do little more than pay the bills and send the teams home with a little pocket money.

    The only Bowls that really matter are:

    Rose
    Sugar
    Orange
    Fiesta

    Let's incorporate these major tradition Bowls into the playoff as the quarter final champions.

    Wouldn't we all like to see a semi-final matchup of:

    Rose vs Fiesta

    or

    Orange vs Sugar

    The bowl sponsors would be more than compensated by possibly having their regional champion play in two major games over the course of two weeks.

    The advertising and exposure would be worth million$ to them and the buildup to those semi-final games would be incredible!

    Any teams not included in the playoff could still go and play in a bowl game; however, most of those bowls would deservedly die.

    The way it is ... we have too many meaningless Bowls. If you doubt that then tell me who won the following bowls last year (no cheating don't look it up):

    Holiday
    Sun
    Cotton
    Gator

    See what I mean?

  • hedgehog
    Aug. 25, 2010 5:32 p.m.

    I thinks now is the perfect time to re-ask the million dollar question....wait for it......

    DID THE BIG 12 CALL TODAY?

    lol

  • Dig Dug
    Aug. 25, 2010 4:47 p.m.

    Money will always be with the big name markets, that's not going to change. Texas fans and TV revenue aren't all of a sudden going to split their profits into 120 nice packets and mail them off to diddly-squat Tech.

    On the other hand, the national championship is non-sense. More often than not, the real #1 is always up for an objective debate. Since the BS system came into play, only a few times has there really been a champion that nobody could really complain about.

    Get rid of the BCS "Champion" and get a real championship going. Keep the bowls or dump, I don't care about the name on the game, just make it mean something.

  • SpanishImmersed
    Aug. 25, 2010 4:41 p.m.

    YouAreKidding is right. A 16 or 20 team playoff of conference champions of Div IA plus at-large teams is the best solution. It will make every regular season game relevant and exciting.

    Involve the bowls to keep them happy, and the BCS for the final games. It may have to start earlier than after Christmas. Rotate which bowls host, so all get a chance at the big money games later on.

    The BCS can spread out its money to cover winners and losers with a progressive payout or bonus for getting further in the playoff.

    And all of the needless other bowls like GMAC whatever playing after Jan 1st will hopefully go away, or host their games as usual as the meaningless consolation bowls they already are.

    Everybody goes home happy...and the BCS has a real national champion decided on the field.

    Oh but fans won't travel to more than one game, you say. Yes they will, just like in like the basketball tournament. Build it and they will come. The weekly build-up and frenzy for tickets and TV viewers will be incredible.

  • SoCalUtahFan
    Aug. 25, 2010 4:25 p.m.

    @Pickle Juice, The Key to a BCS
    ...It's simple. The BCS needs to change so schools like Boise, TCU, Utah and BYU can have the opportunity to go to a BCS Bowl...

    They have opps to go to a BCS bowl game.
    Utah, BSU, TCU all did. BYU has been able to go yet.
    It's the opportunity to go to a NC that is not quite fair for the mid-majors yet.

  • hedgehog
    Aug. 25, 2010 4:01 p.m.

    Pickle Juice,the key to a BCS.

    I like your user name. And suspect "pickle juice" is about the only BCS hope the kewgs have.

  • Pickle Juice, The Key to a BCS
    Aug. 25, 2010 3:40 p.m.

    It's simple. The BCS needs to change so schools like Boise, TCU, Utah and BYU can have the opportunity to go to a BCS Bowl.

  • buzman
    Aug. 25, 2010 3:28 p.m.

    All the ute hypocrisy is suffocating!! U were all crying so loud when you didn't win the title when you whipped Alabama - BCS. Your esteemed president was totally committed to the anti-trust law suit against the BCS a mere two months ago. Now he says, "I will hold judgment until I have a chance to see it from the inside." A cesspool is a cesspool whether you are swimming it or not.
    The BCS is not and never will be about the best college football team in America. Ever. It will always be about money.
    You only have to look as far as the NCAA Tournament to see that. Sure, the big boys usually win but Butler was in the final and almost won it all.
    Boise State in the NC this year? Ain't gonna happen, the BCS will find a way. Mark my words.

  • ute4ever
    Aug. 25, 2010 2:30 p.m.

    re: ibleedcrimson

    How can you tell me that the BCS system didn't treat Utah fairly in 2004 and 2008? We played to perfection and won a huge share of the BCS pie. Does the BCS need tweaking to figure out who is the national champion....probably. But that can be done within the BCS system. A simple playoff between the BCS bowl qualifying teams would have perfected 2008 and 2004.

    Is it perfect? No, but what is? But by and large, the money (which is what this is about, right), is being split up correctly to the teams that earn the money.

  • YouAreKidding
    Aug. 25, 2010 1:59 p.m.

    @MUSSDad

    Are you serious, a 16-team playoff is too difficult for these "men"? Get real. Get a job.

    The NCAA already holds a 16-team playoff for Div. 1-AA and is looking at expanding it to 20 teams. It holds a 24-team playoff for Div. II. It holds a 16-team playoff for Div. III.

    So, unless you are suggesting that the players in Div. 1-A are morons and can't handle it, how is it that every other division of NCAA football has a 16-team (or more) playoff and Div. 1-A doesn't?

  • Big_Ben
    Aug. 25, 2010 1:57 p.m.

    The BCS needs to go. As a ute fan, Ill continue to fight it. @ hedgehog, its always great to be a ute!

  • SoCalUtahFan
    Aug. 25, 2010 1:51 p.m.

    @Andy Tomasso
    ...at least you have that hope that maybe one day you'll play in the rose bowl...

    Ute fans will hope that Utah will go to the Rose Bowl, the NC game and win it all.

    BYU fans will hope that BYU will go to the 1st BCS bowl game --any BCS bowl game. Otherwise, they will continue to talk about the game that happened a quarter of century ago. hahaha.

    Did someone just write...it's soooooooo goooooooood to be a Ute???

  • Ibleedcrimson
    Aug. 25, 2010 1:41 p.m.

    Conclusion: BCS is fairly compensating the best teams.

    Out of curiostiy, and please be honest. How many Utah fan's felt this way in 2004 and 2008? I know I didn't.

    The system still needs to go.

  • hedgehog
    Aug. 25, 2010 1:26 p.m.

    Andy Tomasso,


    Yea, I got my feet up on the desk smoking a big fat cigar … it’s good to be a Ute……Sorry about your BCS angst but as I said, it’s sooo good to be a Ute.

  • ute4ever
    Aug. 25, 2010 1:12 p.m.

    I don't understand all the sour comments from Cougar fans. Seriously, they have the same access to BCS games as Utah does. The only difference is Utah has done it twice and BYU is still aching for "perfection."

    Really is the BCS that unfair? My example, Wise Guys in SLC (a comedy club) charges a premium price when they have a preimium comic coming into town. They both do the same thing, but one gets paid more because he is gets more attention. College football is the exact same, the more interesting teams that draw a national audience like Texas, USC, Notre Dame, Florida, Alabama, and Utah draw the crowds and are the national names so they should get paid accordingly. At the same time, why should the less talented and teams with less following be paid the same as the top names?

    Conclusion: BCS is fairly compensating the best teams.

  • Andy Tomasso
    Aug. 25, 2010 12:51 p.m.

    This is funny. 6 months ago U fans and BYU fans could agree on how lame the bcs is. now that the U hit the lottery by going to the pac all these lame U fans (hedghog, chris b) think its great. the bcs is a joke. Ute fans talk how they were robbed of a NC, and it was because of the BCS! enjoy winning six games a season and fighting for that Vegas bowl appearance, at least you have that hope that maybe one day you'll play in the rose bowl.

  • Ravenal
    Aug. 25, 2010 12:29 p.m.

    Mid-Major Cougars | 10:47 a.m. Aug. 25, 2010
    @Ravenal

    "BYU is quite irrelevant in BCS system"

    And yet, Ute fans are the first to bring them into the conversation. You claim BYU is irrelevant but it appears they will always be relevant Utah fans.

    ------------
    hedgehog | 10:49 a.m. Aug. 25, 2010

    and like pavlov's dog - you ring the bell.

    It's just soo easy."

    Hedge, you missed on the application of Pavlov's expiriment. Let me fix it for you. Pavlov would ring the bell and the dog would come. Just like how you and other Y haters are now conditioned to come running and post about BYU whenever there is an article about college football.

    You're right hedgie. It is soo easy.

  • MUSSDad
    Aug. 25, 2010 12:28 p.m.

    Big Hapa | 8:42 a.m. Aug. 25, 2010

    So, Mr. "POLY" Cougar Nation...

    "Always fallow the money that will lead you to the culprits."

    Yeah, you're right. You must have been paying close attention as BYU nearly destroyed the WAC in general and Utah State athletics specifically for exactly the reason you cite.


  • mussingaround
    Aug. 25, 2010 12:25 p.m.

    The more comments I read from Utah fans, the clearer it becomes:

    Utah may have moved on to AQ BCS land, but Utah's fans will always be mid-major.

  • JohnInSLC
    Aug. 25, 2010 12:03 p.m.

    Ordinarily, nobody would have a logical beef about the schools that draw more eyeballs to TV sets getting more of the TV revenue. But the thing about the BCS that will continue to create controversy is the so-called "BCS national champion." The BCS championship game and the BCS agreement w/ the coaches poll to require the voters to declare the winner of the BCS championship game as the national champion is a thorn in the eye of anybody who realisitically has no shot at being voted in, AQ or not. The poll voter's objectivity is suspect, as a dispropertionate percentage of AQ coaches and AQ-covering media types are voters in the various polls.

    The NCAA will remain toothless on this issue, so Congress will have to step in and require that the term "national champion" in college athletics be used only to designate the winner of a playoff that at least includes a representative of each conference. The so-called AQ conferences would still find a way to keep more of the money, but at least it wouldn't be at the expense of on-field performance.

  • MiP
    Aug. 25, 2010 12:00 p.m.

    Pros of the BCS:
    ---MWC and WAC teams can still get into BCS games, as they have done it 6 times now. And with 5 BCS bowl games, it's even easier than ever before.
    ---"Mid-major" teams are just as appreciated (and equally scoffed at) as before the BCS came about.
    ---Fans of the SEC can crow about them being so freakishly awesome, even when they play cup-cake out of conference schedules.

    Flaws of the BCS:
    ---No playoff to crown a true champion.
    ---Big East is a BCS conference.
    ---MWC is not a BCS conference.
    ---Haters of the SEC (me) see them as monopolizing everything. And by monopolize I mean pay their payers outrageous sums of money while the power brokers look away and blame "rogue agents."
    ---The President of the United States hates it.
    ---Orrin Hatch hates it.
    ---Urban Meyer and the Ute faithful hat...wait, I don't know anymore.

    Bottom Line:
    Combine the two and have a "BCS playoff."
    7 AQ bids from the "BCS conferences" (incl. MWC)
    4 remaining conferences (Sun B., MAC, WAC, C-USA) play play-in games to decide two more spots.
    7 At-large bids.

    = "Sweet Sixteen" of College football.


  • SoCalUtahFan
    Aug. 25, 2010 11:50 a.m.

    @Ernest T. Bass
    ...The only real complaint is the fact that they haven't won a National Championship. Utah deserved to be awarded the Championship in 2008. That is the only real complaint...

    Points well taken. I agree.
    This year, there's been talk that BSU being ranked high early and with its schedule may break into the NC game. I am hoping that with Utah's strength of schedule, and if Utah can remain unbeaten, Utah can be in the NC game.

  • Igualmente
    Aug. 25, 2010 11:29 a.m.

    Ute fans can crow all they want now that they will share in PAC10 BCS earnings from the Rose Bowl.

    However, earnings from one of their associates participating in the BCS title game will probably not occur in the near future for the now-weakened PAC10.

    So, it is indeed in their best, and only, interest to keep the BCS intact, as is.

  • hedgehog
    Aug. 25, 2010 11:28 a.m.

    BCS conferences will always need “mid major” filler to round out their bowl games. The “Conference of Champions” has extend tremendous kindness in allowing the “mid majors” access to their programs during bowl season — what else do you want?

    BYU should feel honored to “possibly” have the chance to play on the same field as a PAC 12 team

  • Ernest T. Bass
    Aug. 25, 2010 11:21 a.m.

    Mid Majors have proven the BCS is fairly easy to get in to. With non-BCS teams making BCS bowls 6 times it certainly isn't impossible.

    The only real complaint is the fact that they haven't won a National Championship. Utah deserved to be awarded the Championship in 2008. That is the only real complaint.

    As an idependent byu will have a more difficult time reaching a BCS bowl than by going undefeated in the MWC. byu should be treated like other independents, Army & Navy and they have to be in the top 2 in order to go to the BCS. byu should have to do the same.

  • Las Vegas Cougar BCS Bowl
    Aug. 25, 2010 11:08 a.m.


    BCS is a joke if teams like BYU can't go to it.

  • Ibleedcrimson
    Aug. 25, 2010 10:54 a.m.

    It's going to be difficult for the U of U to support a highly visible anti BCS campaign now they are part of the process.

    It's either going to be construed as biting the hand that feeds you or as disengenous lip service to non AQ schools still feeling left out.

    That being said they need to continue to support changing the system. It's just as unfair now as it ever was.

  • hedgehog
    Aug. 25, 2010 10:49 a.m.

    "Not surprising, that Ute fans are the first to mention BYU in response to an article about Utah and the BCS. I didn't even see BYU mentioned in the article"

    Reavenal,

    and like pavlov's dog - you ring the bell.

    It's just soo easy.

  • Go Big Blue!!!
    Aug. 25, 2010 10:48 a.m.

    Ute4ever you made my day. That's the best post I have seen in awhile.

    Seriously though, the BCS is no worse than any other major player in the American free enterprise system. The members of the BCS created the teams, conferences and bowl games that represent the best in the country. There are reasons that the Vegas bowl doesn't have the same draw that the Cotton, Rose and Sugar bowls have.

    This year if BSU goes undefeated they will most likely play for the NC. They had to earn it.

    The Orin Hatch crybaby constituants should worry more about creating a better product than complaining about not getting the love they think they deserve.

  • Mid-Major Cougars
    Aug. 25, 2010 10:47 a.m.

    @Ravenal
    ...I didn't even see BYU mentioned in the article...

    BYU is quite irrelevant in BCS system

  • Old Gregg
    Aug. 25, 2010 10:39 a.m.

    @ ute4ever,

    I'm not even surprised you feel that way.

  • Chris B
    Aug. 25, 2010 10:34 a.m.

    ute4ever,

    Well said. Little brothers will always be jealous now that big brother is rightly represented amongst the big boys

  • Mid-Major Cougars
    Aug. 25, 2010 10:27 a.m.


    BCS needs to allow mid-major schools like BYU to play in its bowl games regardless of its record.

  • BYU-Virginia
    Aug. 25, 2010 10:26 a.m.

    I agree, every regular season game should count, and all conference champions of the FBS(I-A) should be in a playoff.

    But what to do about the bowls and all that bowl money, whoa nelly!

    The bowls are the problem. They reward nearly 80 teams with an extra practice season (coaches love that), then send home 40 bowl champions with some cash in their pockets and send home 40 losers with some cash in their pockets.

    The fictional opinion-poll-based BCS contrives a champion by pitting the two highest vote-getters in their game, and they call it a done deal.

    The few perennial powers at the top share the loot and the balance of teams are locked out before the season begins, by the so-called pre-season polls.

    It's big business, and the only way to break this financial monopoly is by legislation or FTC litigation.

    Some will say there are more important matters with our economy and our nation is at war on several battlefronts, but, we will be playing college football until they turn the lights out. Amen.




  • BYU-Virginia
    Aug. 25, 2010 10:26 a.m.

    I agree, every regular season game should count, and all conference champions of the FBS(I-A) should be in a playoff.

    But what to do about the bowls and all that bowl money, whoa nelly!

    The bowls are the problem. They reward nearly 80 teams with an extra practice season (coaches love that), then send home 40 bowl champions with some cash in their pockets and send home 40 losers with some cash in their pockets.

    The fictional opinion-poll-based BCS contrives a champion by pitting the two highest vote-getters in their game, and they call it a done deal.

    The few perennial powers at the top share the loot and the balance of teams are locked out before the season begins, by the so-called pre-season polls.

    It's big business, and the only way to break this financial monopoly is by legislation or FTC litigation.

    Some will say there are more important matters with our economy and our nation is at war on several battlefronts, but, we will be playing college football until they turn the lights out. Amen.




  • BYU = Best Little Brothers
    Aug. 25, 2010 10:23 a.m.


    BCS needs to go because BYU can't get into a BCS bowl game. It's totally unfair that a team with rich football history (1984 NC; Lavell's football dynasty in the 80s, 90s) has never been allowed to play in a BCS bowl game.

  • Utes = Cougars' Big Brothers
    Aug. 25, 2010 10:20 a.m.


    The reasons that BCS needs to go:

    1) BYU can't beat both Utah & TCU (2011 & after: both TCU & BSU) in the same season --> BYU can't stay unbeaten to crack into BCS

    2) BYU is not BCS caliber team --> can't get into BCS

    So, we all need another way (easier for BYU) to get into (sort like 1984)

  • Otis Spurlock
    Aug. 25, 2010 10:18 a.m.

    Can I just say that I now completely LOVE the BCS. What a great system. BYU fans need to remember that they have access to the BCS every year also. Utah and Boise, TCU and Hawaii know how to get to the BCS.

    I love the BCS and I love the Conference of Champions, baby!!!!!!!!!! No more sour grapes about the BCS from me.

  • Ravenal
    Aug. 25, 2010 10:08 a.m.

    Not surprising, that Ute fans are the first to mention BYU in response to an article about Utah and the BCS. I didn't even see BYU mentioned in the article.

  • ute4ever
    Aug. 25, 2010 9:32 a.m.

    I used to hate the BCS. But now that my team in on the inside looking out, I can see the logic in having the BCS formed. You don't want the cellar dwellars like Louisianna Tech, Idaho, Wyoming, Bowling Green, or BYU stealing some of the pie that is baked by the big name BCS programs like Florida, Texas, Ohio State, USC, or Utah. It just makes sense that the people that bake the pie get to eat the biggest piece.

  • AFCoug
    Aug. 25, 2010 9:29 a.m.

    Hey anti. BYU beat TCU 2 years in a row a couple years back and won the MWC both years. The last 2 yrs TCU has had BYU's number but the Y has proven they can beat anybody on any given day. Since TCU entered the league in 2005 the Y is 2-3 against them with one game a thrilling 51-50 TCU victory in Provo. What a game! Gotta love what's fast becoming a heated rivalry!

    Just for records sake the Utes are 3-2 against TCU during that same time. Additionally the Y is 3-2 against the Utes over that same time while winning 49 games and 2 conferance championships to the Utes 47 games and 1 conferance championship. The utes put together a solid team every year and once in a while get a great team and got into a BCS game going undefeated. The Y has been more consistent winners since the Mendenhall/Whittingham era (not by much) but have failed to get the perfect season like the Utes. Who's the better team? Certainly that is debatable and skewed by who you root for. Good luck in the PAC ?? GO COUGARS!

  • Old Gregg
    Aug. 25, 2010 9:18 a.m.

    @ Anti Bush-Obama,

    Really? That is why you think BYU is going independent. Out of all the possible reasons that have been said in dozens of articles the last 2 weeks (non of which even talk about your belief) you think the reason why BYU might go independent is because they can't beat TCU. Nice logic....

  • Blue Coug
    Aug. 25, 2010 9:14 a.m.

    "A 16 team playoff is asking too much of college kids who have to deal with academics in addition to a demanding football schedule. Two teams will end up playing four additional games."

    Why is that?

    Every other NCAA already does this, so why is it too much to ask of the major college football programs.

    The BCS championship game will be played on Janunary 10th, 2011 this season. TEN teams will play in five bowl games every night from January 6th through January 10th.

    A 16-team playoff beginning the 1st Saturday after Christmas would have been played January 22nd.

    Since Christmas Day is Saturday this, the playoffs could also be started the Saturday before Christmas.

    Teams already play games every Saturday for an entire semester, so why would four teams play an extra 2 or 1 weeks put any significant burden on them?

  • Anti Bush-Obama
    Aug. 25, 2010 8:52 a.m.

    Re: livehard.

    The reason BYU is going independant is because they can't beat TCU and can't go undefeated. Of course they will never admit it, but it's true.

  • Big Hapa
    Aug. 25, 2010 8:42 a.m.

    Stating the obvious does not enhance the argument.
    Money, T.V. money is what is pulling along this BCS wagon plain and simple.

    This loyalty to tradition this and tradition that means nothing. The real underlying issue to me is the administrations that will loss there jobs when these super conferances do become a reality.

    Hum I wonder who the real fly in the ointment is ?
    Always fallow the money that will lead you to the culprits.

    "POLY" Cougar Nation

  • dj2
    Aug. 25, 2010 8:40 a.m.

    The minute the NCAA makes the statement that the BCS is not the National Champion and that it requires a playoff to crown a champ - BCS is done

  • MUSSDad
    Aug. 25, 2010 8:10 a.m.

    Live Hard |

    First BYU takes over the WAC, then the BCS (hugh??), then the NCAA, then the WORLD and all the GLORY that comes with it!!!

    Now, back on topic...

    A 16 team playoff is asking too much of college kids who have to deal with academics in addition to a demanding football schedule. Two teams will end up playing four additional games.

    How about this...existing conferences combine into four super conferences and each decides a conference champion. The field of four has a playoff. Two extra games at most.

  • hedgehog
    Aug. 25, 2010 7:48 a.m.

    Exactly who will "get rid" of the BCS?

    The weak, powerless "mid-major" programs can stomp their feet and scream all they want - But unless someone can figure out a monitary reason Y a team like Florida should be on equal footing as a Wyoming, this fussing will go nowhere.

  • skywalker
    Aug. 25, 2010 7:13 a.m.

    It may take legislation or a lawsuit to end the BCS monopoly. The NCAA seems powerless to do anything and the power teams in the power conference have a vested self-interest in preserving the BCS, no matter how broken or unfair it is.

  • rvalens2
    Aug. 25, 2010 5:58 a.m.

    You're right Matt!

    Get rid of the biased BCS and settle it on the field with a 16 team playoff.

    All 11 league champions, plus five at large teams.

    That way all we have to argue about are the at-large spots.

  • Cajunzoobie
    Aug. 25, 2010 1:22 a.m.

    Decide it on the field! Dump the BCS and the polls. Let every conference regular season champion compete in a playoff. That way, every game will count, and every team will have access. Do it now!

  • Bugoff
    Aug. 25, 2010 12:37 a.m.

    The BCS is not going away. It is going to adapt and morph into an even bigger monster. It may even replace the NCAA for the big revenue teams.

    Conferences are going to make more changes. They are going to add teams or dissolve existing conferences and merge the best parts into new conferences.

    The Big 12, Big East and ACC are especially vulnerable. The MTN is already toast with the defection of Utah. The TX agreement may change the path of the morph somewhat.

    Eventually there will be some type of minor playoff but it will be run by the BCS.

    You are right about UT. They did not join Nirvana. However, they are better off in the PAC than in the MTN.