re: Captain Sweatpants | 12:02 a.m. April 24, 2011 Funny things is;
If Urban did not come to Utah then he'd still be at some 3rd rate mid-major in
the rustbelt. Frequently, begging his mentor (Lou Holtz) to get him
consideration for ST coordinator @ Purdue or Minnesota.
Three very significant quotes from the CBS Sports article:"Whenever it was Pac-10 expansion, Utah was always the school that they
talked about," BYU AD Tom Holmoe said. "It would always frustrate the
BYU fans." Tom HolmoeThere it is, Cougar fans who have been
denying that BYU wanted a Pac 10 invite. Your AD outed you and is man enough to
admit it. Why can't you? "I had no interest in Utah
whatsoever," Meyer said. "But I really liked the AD and [then]
president, Bernie Machen ... The amount of resources compared to everyone else
in the league, except BYU, was first rate. It was light years ahead of everyone
else in the Mountain West."There you go, Ute fans. Even after
McBride's renovation of Utah football, it was barely noteworthy in the eyes of
an outsider. And Meyer acknowledges that BYU was playing with more
"resources" than their conference-mates in the MWC.And
finallly:"I think these guys are ready for the Pac-12,"
Chow said. "We're not better than anybody but there's nobody better than
us."Let's hope Coach Chow is right.
black ShirtI'd be happy to regale you with my prediction. BTW your
guess was wrong and my predictions have as much worth as yours; which is
nothing.I expect Utah to be very competitive this year. The
defense should be awesome. Offensive rides on the O-line. If Utah can
establish the run, they will be able to shorten games, and less will be expected
of the passing game.No games are unwinnable, or un losableMontana St: winUsc: lossBYU: toss up, but I will go with my
UtesWash: winAsu: toss up but at RES I'll take the winPitt:
toss up: new coach, no offense, but on the road will be tough nod to PittCal: Toss up: game will be at Pac Bell so Cal won't have quite the home field
advantage, but I will still give the nod to CalOSu: winArizona:
Toss-up: Arizona replaces entire O-line, Stoops is a tool. I don't think
Arizona can reload, and ultimately Stoops loses his guys towards the end of the
season, nod to UtahUCLA, WSU, Col: winUltimately Utah goes
PocyTell me your prediction for the Ute's. Let me guess, 12-0 plus
PAC12 Champs and NC. Wynn throwS for 6000 yards and is the new JIMMER.
I know I'm tempting fate by responding to Black Shirts predictions before Sept.
17, but I'll risk it, hoping that I can deal with the ramifications of my
blatant disobedience. Black shirts is obviously someone who has power to see
all and know all so I'm sure here will be dire consequences to my actions. I take heart knowing that if I combine the worth of Black Shirt's
predictions with the dollar I have in my wallet, I still have at most a dollar.
I'm not going rule out the possibility that his predictions actually might be so
worthless that they subtract from my net worth, but this I know, they don't add
to it, nor to anybody else's
sammyg | 7:08 p.m. April 22, 2011 Springville, UT I agree.Wait a minute! There must be a mistake. The Utah Utes are not rank #1,
but they're in the PAC12. I'm sure they'll fix this and Utah will be #1
tomorrow. I hear the Running Ute's will be rank #1 also. Why are the Ute's
practicing? It's just practice, we are talking practice. The new PAC12 champs
dont need to practice.
Timing is everything and the Ute's timing is bad. The Ute's football team is
going the way of there basketball team, down. Remember BSU (fighting before the
game and quitting during the game,NO HONOR)! Here is what you win for getting
into the PAC12.MT Montana State = Win 1-0 (Good Job Wynn 4 int and
he hates BYU fans also)at USC = LOSE 1-1 (Crack)at BYU
= LOSE 1-2 (BYU by 20, Ute fans begin to jump ship)Washington =
WIN 2-2 (Maybe)Arizona State = LOSE 2-3 (Only 5000 tickets
sold)at Pittsburgh = LOSE 2-4 (Talk radio is quiet, Ute fans are
burning everything red)at California = LOSE 2-5 (Utah football has
become Utah basketball, terrible)Oregon State = WIN 3-5 (Every dog
get a bone)at Arizona = LOSE 3-6 (Back to normal)UCLA
= LOSE 3-7 (Recruits are not opening Ute mail)at Washington State
= WIN 4-7 (Wash St = Idaho St)Colorado = WIN 5-7 (Just being nice
here)Scheduling BYU this year was not smart, Hill. BYU is a lot
better and Wynn sucks. BYU BY 20!Dont respond until Sept 17 after
losing. See above!
Preseason rankings, who cares? Doesn't put points on the board. Who
would've been invited, who cares. Who plays whom come fall. That matters. Mindless speculation among athletic supporters who've never actually
Preseason rankings, who cares? Doesn't put pints on the board. Who
would've been invited, who cares. Who plays whom come fall. That matters. Mindless speculation among athletic supporters who've never actually
Naval VetTo see you and your friends get all riled up and obsess
over something as trivial as your old invitation story is humorous.No amount of spin will change the obvious that 'Plan B' was implemented after
'Plan A' failed. Plan B = A contingency plan to make a conference
championship structure work, nothing more, nothing less. Implemented as a result
because of a greater plan's failure to launch.It's like being picked
last for the sandlot game. Somebody has to pick little 'peewee'.
Nice twisting of the Holmoe quote by insecure ute "fans" here. Holmoes
quote had nothing to do with the Big12 schools and their positions in relation
to utahs. It was specifically about BYU and utah and that for the pac10 utah was
considered the choice over BYU not that utah was consdiered the choice over any
of the Bgg12 schools because they absolutely were not.utah being
invited hinged on the pac10 only being able to get 5 of the 6 Big12 schools it
really wanted or else only being able to get colorado. utah was always the fall
back and utah knew that. Of course they were ok with it because they had no
position of power all they could do was simply hope things went their way and
eventually they did.Reality is a funny thing for some people. They
simply need to try and pretend things are other than they really are for their
mental well being and some of you ute "fans" are doing that here. The
truth is you really shouldn't care because ultimately it went your way anyway
but fragile egos need more than that I suppose.Little brothers
Dutchman is correct Utah signed a memorandum agreement with the PAC back in
2009. Utah going to the PAC has been in the works for a very long time and as
Holme said Utah was in the plans for expansion from the beginning.Why do you BYU fans think Utah has been upgrading their facilities. Opening a
new track and soccer venue and expansion to the stadium is in the top 5
projects. Utah will see an upswing in facility upgrades over the next 10 years.
Oregonian:Yes, I think the Pac-10 would rather have Kansas than
Okla. St. They didn't need OSU to grab Texas, and they knew if that had Texas,
they'd get Oklahoma. Furthermore, they weren't trading OSU for Utah. They were
trading OSU for Kansas. Utah was in no matter what.The Pac-10 did
not invite 6 schools. They were PREPARED to invite 6 schools. They were lining
up the commitments, but everything hinged on what Texas decided to do. Without
Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, and Kansas don't go to the Pac. Not because
they opted not to, but because without Texas, they would have received no
invitation. Look at how things are right now. Texas, Texas A&M, and
Oklahoma have feathered a nice little $20 million nest for themselves, plus got
to keep all of Colorado's and Nebraska's exit fees. If the Pac-12 gets the
estimated $220-250 million television contract, TT, Kansas, and OSU would make
more $$$ in the Pac than in the B12. Betcha they still don't get an invitation.
Not without Texas anyway. And why? Because the Pac never really coveted those
Naval Vet,Thanks for the thoughtful remarks. But we may be
overthinking this thing. Utah in the PAC10 is a great fit, but it wasn't the
conference's first (or second, third, fourth...) choice. The PAC10 invited six
schools. One said yes, five said no. They then invited Utah. I also
don't think you can say the PAC10 can claim they were looking for high academic
standards and then also say they were willing to drop its academic standards
just to get Texas. I'm sure there were dozens of options on the table, but after
the Texas legislature was going to nix the deal because of leaving Baylor out
(religious school), do you think the PAC10 would withdraw their offer from OSU
and risk losing Oklahoma too?The bottom line is if the PAC10 had
their original choice, there would be a PAC16 right now and Utah would be
looking in from the outside. All other scenarios are based on what was happening
as that dream scenario was crumbling. Once that happened, Utah moved into the
top spot. ps, thanks for your service to our country.
sammyg:I don't know what you're nitpicking at. The Indy-WAC cougars
weren't on that list either. In fact, they're not on any list that I've seen
for that matter. At least Utah made the Top 25 on Andy Staples' January 2011
Sports Illustrated's preseason poll.
Oregonian:The only reason the Pac-10 entertained the idea of
inviting schools such as Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, Kansas, or Baylor was
because they wanted Colorado, Texas, Texas A&M, and Oklahoma. A&M had
been flirting with the SEC going all the way back to the early 90s when LSU and
Arkansas were lobbying them for admission. The SEC wanted Texas too, but Texas'
disdain for the academic infrastructure of the SEC kept them away.The Pac-10 was looking for schools who fit their profile academically,
athletically, and culturally. Neither TT nor Okla. St. fit the Pac's academic
profile, and really, only Texas and Colorado were cultural fits [well, and Utah,
but I was only referring to the Big XII schools]. But the Pac wanted Texas
enough to all them to bring their less desirable friends with them.Chip Brown also reported that in the 11th hour of the Pac-16 deal, the Pac was
working to nudge OSU out in favor of Kansas....the better academic fit [and
their Basketball didn't hurt their case]. Kansas IN[?] and Okla. St. OUT[?].And athletically, academically, and culturally, Utah was still in.
Comments on Storey in ESPN.Storey is very talented with the ball in
his hands. He creates tempo from baseline to baseline, plays very strong with
the ball, and has unrelenting energy and attacking energy. He has dependable
three-point range off the catch and the dribble, creates offense north to south
as well as east to west, and can pick up the ball for the entire length of the
floor defensively. While Story is an unrelenting attacker and scorer, it
sometimes comes at the expense of his teammates or the team's offense. He
monopolizes the ball, hunts shots, and has a very hard time making good
decisions. It remains to be seen if he can play in structure at the next level,
especially in a half-court game. Storey has the college ready body and
playmaking skills to play at a high level, but may be better off going to a
lower level in order to play the game the way he wants to.This kid
might make an impact. Coach will need to make sure he works hard all the time.
Sorry Dutchman. Regardless of who said it, the conclusion is wrong. If you
invite someone to a party and they say no, you can't go back and say we actually
wanted someone else anyways. Looking forward to seeing the Utes up
in Oregon country.
royalblue,And you know more than Chip Brown who covers Texas and has
interviewed AD DeLoss Dodds many times on this subject. Go ahead. believe what
you want but your own AD Holmoe basically said in his quote that Utah was always
in. Frustration is hard to deal with.
@royalblue:Call it lucky, call it preparation to answer the bell when your
number is called, call it whichever you like.I'll take lucky if it
appeases you and call it a great thing.I'll also reiterate; Many
people with strong strong ties to Chris Hill and the AD always pointed to
mid-June for the official invite. Mid-June it was. They knew all along. I wish
the Cougars well, why can't the Cougar fans wish the Utes well?
Yawn, what an old story.Here's the big news.ESPN's
"College Football Live" preseason top 25 football rankings... PAC-10.1.1beta or 10.2 teamsNo. 1-5 Oregon (the top-5 hasnt been
released yet, but Ducks are in it)No. 7. StanfordNo. 25. Arizona
StateRut roh, our team is not listed. Wonder why?
DutchmanWith Colorado already invited to the PAC, Texas COULD have
decided to join the PAC 12 without the other Big 12 south school, which would
have culminated the PAC 10 expansion plan talked about before the Big 12 even
existed.Dodd is absolutely correct. Utah could have been left out in
the cold if Texas had decided to join the PAC 12. Utah was simply in the right
place at the right time and got lucky that the cards fell in the Ute's favor.
Kwhitt : "I weighed everything out," Whittingham said. "Where was
the best opportunity long-term? I thought there was more upside here. I thought
this program was coming of age."Great coach, smart man.
Oregonian,It isn't my conclusion. It is Chip Brown's who covers
Texas and the BIG 12 and is considered the authority on the matter. Go talk to
BYU, even while running the two-headed QB monster, still beat Washington last
season. BYU and Utah won their bowl games against PAC-10 teams the year before.
Utah got a lucky draw having Oregon and Stanford off their schedule. Those are
obviously top two in the league. It's pretty open-ended for the PAC-12 south.
Colorado is the weakest I'm sure and UCLA is probably 5th. The other four though
(Utah USC ASU AU)... I can see any of them winning the PAC-12 south (then
getting beaten by Oregon or Stanford in the championship). As long as Wynn is
healthy throughtout the season Utah should be fine.
Dutchman-Your conclusions don't match your logic. Texas A&M was
invited to join the PAC10 along with the other 5 teams from the BIG12. Your
comment, "The only scenarios that were ever actually possible were PAC-16
with Utah or PAC-12 with Utah" is true now only because Texas A&M was
going to reject the invitation. If we used your logic, we could also make the
following conclusion, "Utah was the PAC10's choice all along because the
other schools didn't want to join." Also, what would have
happened if Baylor, instead of Colorado, was included in the original offer. The
story could be completely different if that happened. But Baylor is a religious
school and that wasn't going to happen. BYU was never on the table for the same
"You really think if Texas had been invited that Utah would be where they
are today??? "Isn't this you being; "insecure with what
might have happened had the cards not come up the way they did???"
You really think if Texas had been invited that Utah would be where they are
today??? The myopia of some Utah fans never ceases to amaze me. But as I said
earlier, if it makes you feel better, go for it!
Balan,My point is Dennis Dodd got it wrong in his article and it
needed to be corrected. You guys then started making suppositions that needed
to be responded to.
Balan why are you on here with you little brother attitude trying to stir things
up? What's your point? Utah is in the PAC, BYU isn't so get over it; I'm tired
of jealous ankle biters. In terms of Meyer, he was good but he
didnt start it (McBride did) or keep it going (Whittingham); Meyer walked into a
pretty good thing as McBride had left him with good players which he did know
how to utilize. All Ute fans should never forget that it was Coach McBride who
got things back on track.
Be patient Balan, I hear the circus music in the distance, the little car should
arrive soon and the revisionist crowd with the bulbous noses and big shoes will
impart their wisdom on the subject!!All kidding aside you have a
relevant point, we are in they won't take it back let the games begin!!!
Right on Mount Olympus. Utah IS in the PAC12. So why the insecurity with what
might have happened had the cards not come up the way they did???What's your point, Dutchman?
Utes are in the Pac-12.The would have, could have, should have is
all speculation.Did I mention that the Utes are in the Pac-12?
Balan,If Texas had gone to the PAC 10 it would have been Colorado,
Utah, Texas, Texas Tech, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma State making it the PAC 16.
Does this help you understand it now? Even Tom Holmoe so much as admitted it
when he was quoted as saying, "Whenever it was Pac-10 expansion, Utah was
always the school that they talked about," BYU AD Tom Holmoe said. "It
would always frustrate the BYU fans." Dennis Dodd, CBSSports.com
--4-21-2011--Are you one of those frustrated fans?
Correct all you want - it still comes across as insecure. And by the way, no
one knows what would have happened had Texas gone to the PAC10. But, if it
makes you feel better, rationalize away!
B,That "piddy little stadium" as you call it is a state of
the art facility that sells out. The "tin can" in Provo was built in
1964 and expanded in 1984 but it was not the design BYU wanted because the
nearby neighborhoods complained and Provo Mayor Jim Ferguson sided with the
neighbors and thus those hideous end zones were built instead of going higher.
Good luck with any future expansion of that dinosaur.Balan,We are not insecure. We are correcting an inaccurate statement made by the
news media which is not surprising.
Obviously Colorado will be the Washington State of the South division. Who will
Utah be? And by the way, are they ever going to expand that piddly little
stadium beyond 45,000?
"Whenever it was Pac-10 expansion, Utah was always the school that they
talked about," BYU AD Tom Holmoe said. "It would always frustrate the
BYU fans." Go ahead trolls,I'll give you extra time
to come up with your spin.
Diddn't Utah's invite come after the the Big 12 teams made their final
decisions? Seems like if Utah was part of the plan from the beginning they would
have had the invite before or at least the same time as Texas and the other big
12 teams. I think the PAC was waiting to see how many, if any big 12 teams were
coming. If they ended up with 6 they would already have their 16 for a playoff.
Utah would not have gotten an invite then. The PAC may have already had good
indications that 6 teams would not have come and was preparing Utah for the
possibility. I do think that based on recent success(6 years) Utah would likely
have gotten invited before Colorado.
Who knows what really went on behind closed doors, but my suspicion is Utah was
always in the plans. No less an authority, Tom Holmoe's comments support
this:"Whenever it was Pac-10 expansion, Utah was always the
school that they talked about," BYU AD Tom Holmoe said. "It would
always frustrate the BYU fans." Now I'll sit back and wait for
the little clown car to show up and the usual 6 or 7 clowns to pile out and put
thier usual spin on the above comment!!
What a bunch of INSECURE fans Can't you just accept the fact that you were
invited - for whatever reason???Trying to rationalize that you would
have been selected anyway - when you already have been selected - is, well,
@ DutchmanGreat comment! I would just like to add on one thing about
Texas A&M. The SEC extened them an offer to join their conference. Texas
A&M doesn't want to follow and do everything Texas wants to do. The Aggies
would say no to the Pac 10 invite and thats why Utah has always been the
candidate for Plan A and B for Larry Scott. Texas A&M agreed to stay in the
Big 12 because of the deal Dan Beebee (Big 12 commissioner) presented. Whatever way you look at it Y fans! Utah would join the Pac 12 or Pac 16.
BYU will NEVER be invited to the PAC12. There is too much disdain for what BYU
purports to be. Utah jumping to the PAC12 and BYU opting for independence has
essentially killed one of the best rivalries in the country.It will
be interested to look back after 20 years and see who really got it right.
Dutchman is absolutely correct. Utah and Colorado were always in. People with AD
contacts at the U reported it early in February, 2010, and Chris Hill acted as a
go-between for the PAC 10 and CU. Scott wanted a PAC 16 with the scenario
Dutchman presents here. We always knew that mid-June would be the time of the
announcement since February of that same year, and perhaps it was not mere
coincidence that the PAC extended the official invite in mid-June, as expected.
Personally, in five years I would like to see the PAC go to 16 teams and include
BYU, Texas, and whichever two that would make the league even better. I want BYU
and Utah in the same conference, it means much more to both schools and their
respective fan bases.
"If Texas said yes to Scott and the Pac-10, the Big 12 is dead and Utah is
still in the MWC". Not accurate and these kind of misleads need
to stop. According to the reporting done by Chip Brown of Austin, Texas who
covers the Longhorns and the Big 12 Utah was in, no matter which way it would
have played out. If Texas said no it was going to be the PAC-12 with Utah and
Colorado. If Texas said yes it was going to be the PAC-16 with Texas, Texas
Tech, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Utah, and Colorado. Texas A&M was NEVER
going to join the PAC under any circumstances, so it's irrelevant to consider an
impossible scenario. The only scenarios that were ever actually possible were
PAC-16 with Utah or PAC-12 with Utah. Scott was never going to invite Kansas.
That was a rumor of desperation floated by the Kansas athletic department and
was never going to happen.