"I knew something had to be wrong there."Ducky:And you're it.
Ted Miller's post was awesome. He is probably one of my favorite ESPN bloggers.
I also love all the "best-case worst-case" stuff. True best case is
13-0 worst case is 0-11 but come on... I could see things coming
together and the Utes making it to the conference championship, and if you're in
the game you have a chance! I don't think they will win it, but it could
happen.I could also see some things falling apart, injuries, etc and
the Utes struggling to win more than 5 games. Both of those scenarios are a bit
of a stretch and the truth lies in the middle I think. I for one
would love to see the Utes represent well in the PAC.
So over the years football and sports has been promoted as money makers for the
schools, so why all of a sudden are they a liability to eduction funds? Can
these schools justify spending $30 million dollars of education funds to promote
costly football events that have no return or benefit to education? I don't
think we can justify it any longer, waste and excessive cost have to go,
including this extravagance.
Seriously, Ted Miller is hilarious. I couldn't stop laughing when I read the
best case worst case scenarios that he presented. 14-0 and national title and
0-12 are not realistic. Thus Ted posts somewhat reasonable best case/worst case
scenarios. However, he likes to joke around in it. We know that The Pie isn't
going to close.Although, from Ted's suggestion, I'm wondering if
someone is going to grab coach Embree daughter's bike and paint it red now.
@Mike JohnsonSo the figure in the last column is the revenue for the
fiscal year that just began? That makes alot more sense since none of them
showed much of an increase in revenue. I knew something had to be wrong there.
@ Eddie Would Go"7-5, Las Vegas Bowl.Anything
better than that would be a welcome surprise."For byu it's
11-1, Armed Forces Bowl.
Best case scenario 13-0 and a national titleWorse case scenario
0-11Utes will fall somewhere in the middle of this prediction. All
sorts of wackiness and lucky//unlucky bounces can happen to any team. Still I
am excited that it is only a few days more till the season kicks off. Utah
should at least make a bowl game and win 5-6 of their home games. The road
games on the other hand will test the Utes. I am not sure any of the road games
can be marked off as W. That is what I like about the Pac12.
One will see that Utah's athletic program as a whole is quite lacking in the
PAC-12 conference where the institutions strongly believe in having a total
sports programs. This is the "Conference of Champions" and I am
worried that the U. will need to step up its game quickly or it will be the
doormat, along with CU, in a lot of sports...
7-5, Las Vegas Bowl.Anything better than that would be a welcome
Utah reported to the the Department of Education for FY10 that they had revenues
and expenses from athletics of $31,859,038, 4 million more than the amount
reported here as budgeted for that year. Note, FY10 is July 2009 to
June 2010; FY11 is July 2010 to June 2011; and FY12 is July 2011 to June 2012.
So, this article is reporting the budget for the current year with the budgets
reported at the beginnings of the two previous years. It reflects what they
expect to receive and spend (or perhaps a conservative estimate, knowing they
could spend more than budgeted if more comes in). For the PAC-12, it reflects
the last year of the old PAC-10 contract (which Utah gets no part of), plus the
supplemental contract for the extra games (which Utah gets a share of).The new contract doesn't start until FY13 (July 2012 to June 2013).
SoCalUtahFanBest case: 11-1 regular season record. Rose BowlWorst case: 9-3 regular season record. Holiday Bowl. You
must be talking about Stanford or Oregon, because Utah doesn't have a prayer of
going 11-1.Best case: 8-4, Las VegasWorst case: 5-7, no
Please don't answer the duck?
Also that list of projected budgets for the pac10 has to be wrong. Doesn't the
new tv deal kick in during school year 2012? If so is not everyone supposed to
get somewhere in the vicinity of 20 million per year from that deal? Now I
understand that isn't an increase of 20 million from the previous deal but that
list only shows increases of just under 2 mil for colorado to about 8 mil for
Oregon St. I know the current pac10 tv deal doesn't pay that much so
why aren't all of their budgets jumping up 10 mill or more when that deal kicks
in in 2012?Either that was really shoddy journalism or else the new
tv deal is doing much for any of them.
Actually utah will not be closing the budget gap on WSU or anyone else in the
pac10 next year. utah gets a partial share of money next year while the others
all get full shares, that means the gap will widen, not narrow. If
everyone else gets 20 million more than they previously were getting and utah
gets 10 million more than they were previously getting that means that despite
the increase utah gets the gap still widens.They then close the gap
when they get the full share but they are still behind everyone else unless they
find some increases from sources the other schools aren't also getting them
from.Now that is not to downgrade the increases in rvenue utah is
getting, they are substantial, but they aren't closing any gaps on any of their
new conference mates, at best they are hanging at the same difference, all that
changes is the bottom for each begins higher.
Best case: 11-1 regular season record. Rose BowlWorst case: 9-3
regular season record. Holiday Bowl.
More money doesn't equate to better sports programs. Anyone from Utah would
Not The Pie!