Quantcast
Sports

Red roundup: Where would Utes land in Pac-12 shake-up?

Comments

Return To Article
  • Mormon Ute Kaysville, UT
    Aug. 18, 2011 2:31 p.m.

    What I don't like about the possible division alignment is the Utes wouldn't be playing in Southern California as much and that would hurt recruiting. I would prefer to keep the North and South divisions by putting a couple of the midwest schools in the North. We'll see what happens.

  • WhatsInItForMe Orem, Utah
    Aug. 17, 2011 4:00 p.m.

    The Pac-12 might have the advantage in 16-team expansion over the Big 12 because the Pac-12 has proactive Scott while the Big 12 has reactive Beebe.

    If the Big 12 had any brains, they'd be the first BCS conference to expand to 16 teams. That'd leave the Pac-12 without any good expansion options.

    For sure, A&M is leaving the Big 12 for the SEC. Just a matter of how soon.

    Lucky Pac-12. What with having Scott instead of Beebe.

  • Dutchman Murray, UT
    Aug. 17, 2011 10:10 a.m.

    mussingaround,

    My original comment: "No room for independent BYU on the schedule. With 16 team conferences comes requirements to play probably 10 or 11 conference games instead of the obligatory 9 games in a 12 team conference. There won't be room on the schedule for teams to play BYU even if the games are on Espn. BYU better give up the fantasy of doing everything their own way and not be dictated to by getting into one of the super conferences. That is the only way to a national championship and filling up the schedule."

    You veered off course bringing Utah into the discussion. I didn't mention anything about Utah but they do have a path to a national championship game. Tell me how BYU in a 64 team set up in four 16 team conferences gets a path to the national title game and how they fill a schedule as an independent when most teams will be playing 10 or 11 games in their own conferences. Stay on subject and answer the question if you can.

  • Moderate Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 17, 2011 9:51 a.m.

    Utes shouldn't take Montana State lightly even though they've never lost to them. Montana State has beaten the Cougars 6 times, so magic happens.

  • Cougar Blue N. Las Vegas, NV
    Aug. 17, 2011 9:49 a.m.

    bla bla bla bla bla bla and more bla bla bla......from both sides. Grow up!

  • Naval Vet Philadelphia, PA
    Aug. 17, 2011 9:34 a.m.

    SportsFan:

    "the Utes finished 4th in the official BCS final poll, the Coaches poll."

    The Coaches poll is not "the official BCS...poll". It is a "contributor" to the BCS Poll; along with the Harris, and a bevy of computer polls. The The Final BCS Poll is tabulated BEFORE the bowl games. That is done because the sole purpose of this poll is to determine who will play for the NC. After all the bowls have been played, they do not re-rank the teams. There is nothing "more official" about the final Coaches poll than the final poll in the AP.

  • MiP Iowa City, IA
    Aug. 17, 2011 9:04 a.m.

    SportsFan,

    My argument was that Utah has come close to "playing for" a national championship, not that they won one.

    Even in the BCS era, there have been split national champions. In 2003, LSU was crowned the BCS national champion, by means of the coaches poll, and USC was crowned AP national champion. (As an aside, I find it ironic that some BYU fans would pick a poll AP/coaches when it's convinient---Utah finished ranked in the coaches poll last year, yet most Coug fans will quote the AP, in which Utah would have been unranked/"26"...but I digress).

    You are right, the Utes were 6th in the final BCS poll of 2008, meaning they wouldn't play in the BCS NC game (how close 6th is to "playing for the NC" is debatable). But by beating Alabama they made it very interesting in the final AP which, as mentioned before, is not afraid to split the NC. I'd say second qualifies for "close." If you think playing in a "NC game" is the criteria, then 1984 wasn't legitamate as BYU played in the Holliday Bowl. But it was, because of voting---as you said.

    My logic stands.

  • Classless Ute Fan Magna, UT
    Aug. 17, 2011 3:04 a.m.

    SportsFan,

    ***Your argument completely destroys every claim jealous Utah fans have made that BYU has no chance of winning a national championship as an independent.***

    Didn't you just explain exactly why BYU has no chance of winning NC as indy when you stated:

    ***First of all, the Utes finished 6th in the final BCS standings -- not even close to qualifying for the BCS championship game.

    Second, the Utes finished 4th in the official BCS final poll, the Coaches poll.***

    So, if Utah couldn't get into NC game being undefeated more than once, then why would byu? I haven't even mentioned that the best team byu could beat in the last 13 years was Utah at #18. What makes you think they could beat a #1 team?

    I'm not trying to "hate byu", I just don't understand why the popularity contest vote of 1984 is so much better than Utah's 2004 and 2008 undefeated seasons. Yes, I understand Utah wasn't VOTED #1 in the polls as byu was lucky to do. Yes byu has a pretty little trophy. Did byu deserve it? No more than Utah deserved an NC in 2004 and 2008.

  • gonefishn Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 17, 2011 1:45 a.m.

    Full respect to teams like tcu or Pitt who have multiple NC' s but don't put it in your face. You see, these two teams know their NC's are important but simply not relevant as it pertains to the modern era and especially the bcs era. These two teams have however been to a bcs game, something that is currently relevant.

  • SportsFan Orem, UT
    Aug. 17, 2011 12:06 a.m.

    SouthernUtahUte

    A national championship is always a huge accomplishment; a concensus national championship is an even bigger accomplishment. EVERY major selecting organization of the day selected BYU as the national champions of 1984.

    The rules for winning the AP national championship in 2008 were identical to the rules in 1984.

    BYU finished #1

    Utah finished #2

    #1 > #2

    always has been; always will be

    despite the feable efforts of jealous naysayers on the hill to try to rewrite history

  • SportsFan Orem, UT
    Aug. 16, 2011 11:59 p.m.

    MiP

    "2008, when after they clobbered Alabama in the Sugar Bowl they finished #2 in the AP"

    Your argument completely destroys every claim jealous Utah fans have made that BYU has no chance of winning a national championship as an independent.

    First of all, the Utes finished 6th in the final BCS standings -- not even close to qualifying for the BCS championship game.

    Second, the Utes finished 4th in the official BCS final poll, the Coaches poll.

  • MiP Iowa City, IA
    Aug. 16, 2011 11:17 p.m.

    mussingaround | 6:46 p.m. Aug. 16, 2011
    Palo Alto, CA
    "When has Utah ever been in contention to win a national championship?"

    2008, when after they clobbered Alabama in the Sugar Bowl they finished #2 in the AP, the only undefeated team in the country. They had 16 first place votes a a total of 1,519 points to Florida's 1,606 (who incedently beat Alabama by fewer points a few weeks earlier---their only common opponent).

    More questions from Palo Alto?

  • Rational Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 16, 2011 10:46 p.m.

    The Utes are in good shape, and possibly lucky to have the Big 12 implode AFTER their marquee teams first spurned the PAC. Otherwise the Utes might not have been invited to the PAC as numerous articles at the time mentioned (though it is hard to believe that in the long run, a team from the Salt Lake market wouldn't be invited as one of the top 64 teams).

    BYU being or not being invited to the party would still be based on Sunday play and religious issues, rather than on record or popularity. BYU easily falls into the top 32 schools based on record and/or rankings and/or ratings. (Though not being included to a NATIONAL group based on a religious reason would be justifiable and winnable cause for a discrimination lawsuit. The PAC can get away with it as a regional organization.)

  • SouthernUtahUte Hurricane, UT
    Aug. 16, 2011 10:38 p.m.

    @ mussinaround

    You have to remember that your "National championship" was really no accomplishment. BYU went undefeated by beating no one ranked in the top 25 at the end of that year. Beating the worst Michigan team in 30 years in the Holiday bowl is nothing to beat your chest about.

    Oh, and go search google and type in "top ten most undeserving national titles" and BYU is number one.

    I don't get why BYU fans beat their chests so hard about this monumental achievement (haha) that was last century. Anyone with a brain could tell you that even Utah's 2008 team was better than BYU's 1984 squad.

    Keep on saying that BYU has accomplished more than most teams in the PAC-12, we all need a good laugh.

    GO UTES!!

  • sammyg Springville, UT
    Aug. 16, 2011 7:30 p.m.

    The Utes would end up something like the Washington Generals in a Harlem Globetrotter game... on several weekends.

  • royalblue Alpine, UT
    Aug. 16, 2011 6:54 p.m.

    "Where would Utes land in Pac-12 shake-up?"

    Similar place - middle to bottom of the PAC.

  • mussingaround Palo Alto, CA
    Aug. 16, 2011 6:46 p.m.

    Dutchman

    When has Utah ever been in contention to win a national championship?

    There's only one team in the PAC 12 that has ever won a concensus national championship (finishing #1 in both the AP and Coaches polls).

    BYU has more concensus national championships than the other eleven PAC 12 teams combined.

  • Who am I sir? Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 16, 2011 5:16 p.m.

    So many questions, so few knowns.

    What I am most grateful for is, from all articles I've read, Utah is part of the future. Regardless of whether there is any change, whether the Big 12 disintegrates or becomes the big ?, whether there will be four sixteen team conferences, whatever, Utah is a part of it. They are not faced with the possibility of being left out or left in obsecurity playing Idahos on ESPN.

    Whatever the future of college football, the U on the Hill will shine bright.

  • Dutchman Murray, UT
    Aug. 16, 2011 4:16 p.m.

    No room for independent BYU on the schedule. With 16 team conferences comes requirements to play probably 10 or 11 conference games instead of the obligatory 9 games in a 12 team conference. There won't be room on the schedule for teams to play BYU even if the games are on Espn. BYU better give up the fantasy of doing everything their own way and not be dictated to by getting into one of the super conferences. That is the only way to a national championship and filling up the schedule.

  • WestCoast1 Escondido, CA
    Aug. 16, 2011 3:58 p.m.

    Johnny Triumph posts "Utah would become irrelevant, is what it means."

    No, that's only what you hope.

    Sour grapes, byu fan.

  • Naval Vet Philadelphia, PA
    Aug. 16, 2011 3:03 p.m.

    The Utes would end up NOT playing a WAC regular season schedule for the right to play a C-USA postseason.

    So it's looking pretty stable for Utah.

  • 10CC Bountiful, UT
    Aug. 16, 2011 2:28 p.m.

    Much better to fight this new, insidious, exclusionary college football club from the *inside*, not the *outside*. ;)

  • Johnny Triumph American Fork, UT
    Aug. 16, 2011 1:58 p.m.

    Utah would become irrelevant, is what it means.

  • Mildred in Fillmore Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 16, 2011 1:53 p.m.

    Utah in an expanded PAC 12 wouldn't be even close as good as being independant.