Red roundup: Dennis Dodd explores Utes' jump to Pac-12


Return To Article
  • Wally West SLC, UT
    April 24, 2011 5:37 p.m.

    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.

  • Captain Sweatpants Hampstead, NC
    April 24, 2011 12:02 a.m.

    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 Holmoe

    There 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.

  • pocyUte Pocatello, ID
    April 23, 2011 9:57 p.m.

    black Shirt

    I'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 losable

    Montana St: win
    Usc: loss
    BYU: toss up, but I will go with my Utes
    Wash: win
    Asu: toss up but at RES I'll take the win
    Pitt: toss up: new coach, no offense, but on the road will be tough nod to Pitt
    Cal: 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 Cal
    OSu: win
    Arizona: 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 Utah
    UCLA, WSU, Col: win

    Ultimately Utah goes 9-3, 8-4

  • Black Shirts South Jordan, UT
    April 23, 2011 8:31 p.m.


    Tell 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.

  • pocyUte Pocatello, ID
    April 23, 2011 6:24 p.m.

    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

  • Black Shirts South Jordan, UT
    April 23, 2011 4:02 p.m.

    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.

  • Black Shirts South Jordan, UT
    April 23, 2011 12:45 p.m.

    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!

  • In My Humble Opinion South Jordan, UT
    April 23, 2011 10:49 a.m.

    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 worn one.

  • In My Humble Opinion South Jordan, UT
    April 23, 2011 10:48 a.m.

    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 worn one.

  • sammyg Springville, UT
    April 23, 2011 10:46 a.m.

    Naval Vet

    To 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'.

  • Duckhunter Highland, UT
    April 23, 2011 8:47 a.m.

    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 always. LOL

  • UteFan123 Sandy, UT
    April 23, 2011 8:02 a.m.

    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.

  • Naval Vet Philadelphia, PA
    April 23, 2011 12:56 a.m.


    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 other schools.

  • Oregonian Sherwood, OR
    April 22, 2011 11:34 p.m.

    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.

  • Naval Vet Philadelphia, PA
    April 22, 2011 10:22 p.m.


    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.

  • Naval Vet Philadelphia, PA
    April 22, 2011 10:10 p.m.


    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.

  • Tommy2Shoes Lehi, UT
    April 22, 2011 8:01 p.m.

    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.

  • Oregonian Sherwood, OR
    April 22, 2011 7:35 p.m.

    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.

  • Dutchman Murray, UT
    April 22, 2011 7:33 p.m.


    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.

  • MESOUTE Karchaj, A.V.
    April 22, 2011 7:14 p.m.

    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?

  • sammyg Springville, UT
    April 22, 2011 7:08 p.m.

    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 teams

    No. 1-5 Oregon (the top-5 hasnt been released yet, but Ducks are in it)
    No. 7. Stanford
    No. 25. Arizona State

    Rut roh, our team is not listed. Wonder why?

  • royalblue Alpine, UT
    April 22, 2011 6:23 p.m.


    With 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.

  • hedgehog Ann Arbor, MI
    April 22, 2011 6:20 p.m.

    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.

  • Dutchman Murray, UT
    April 22, 2011 5:44 p.m.


    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 him.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    April 22, 2011 5:05 p.m.

    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.

  • Oregonian Sherwood, OR
    April 22, 2011 4:52 p.m.


    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 reason.

  • Ibleedcrimson Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 22, 2011 4:29 p.m.

    "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???"

  • Balan West Jordan, Utah
    April 22, 2011 4:09 p.m.

    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!

  • Dutchman Murray, UT
    April 22, 2011 3:58 p.m.


    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.

  • Rock Of The Marne Phoenix, AZ
    April 22, 2011 3:57 p.m.

    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.

  • Ibleedcrimson Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 22, 2011 3:48 p.m.

    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!!!

  • Balan West Jordan, Utah
    April 22, 2011 3:34 p.m.

    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?

  • Mount Olympus Provo, UT
    April 22, 2011 3:24 p.m.

    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?

  • Dutchman Murray, UT
    April 22, 2011 3:02 p.m.


    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?

  • Balan West Jordan, Utah
    April 22, 2011 2:48 p.m.

    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!

  • Dutchman Murray, UT
    April 22, 2011 2:40 p.m.


    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.


    We are not insecure. We are correcting an inaccurate statement made by the news media which is not surprising.

  • B Logan, UT
    April 22, 2011 2:01 p.m.

    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?

  • hedgehog Ann Arbor, MI
    April 22, 2011 1:54 p.m.

    "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.

  • TJ Eagle Mountain, UT
    April 22, 2011 1:33 p.m.

    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.

  • Ibleedcrimson Cottonwood Heights, UT
    April 22, 2011 1:30 p.m.

    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!!

  • Balan West Jordan, Utah
    April 22, 2011 1:27 p.m.

    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, embarrassing.

  • PAC 12 loves U Sandy, Utah
    April 22, 2011 1:19 p.m.

    @ Dutchman

    Great 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.

  • Kiboo West Jordan, Utah
    April 22, 2011 12:44 p.m.

    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.

  • MESOUTE Karchaj, A.V.
    April 22, 2011 11:48 a.m.

    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.

  • Dutchman Murray, UT
    April 22, 2011 11:13 a.m.

    "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.