Quantcast

Comments about ‘Blue roundup: Does BYU belong in a superconference?’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Sept. 15 2011 11:44 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
nairbnosral
American Fork, UT

I think super conferences are a bad idea -- just like the current BCS system is a bad idea. They are designed to leave half of the FBS teams out in the cold. How can you crown a true champion when you already leave out half the competition?

Truth Machine
Salt Lake City, UT

"The 10 most obvious teams to include are Notre Dame, BYU, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Clemson, Florida State and Virginia Tech."

Except by whiney, jealous, BYU-hating little brothers, this list isn't even debatable.

TJ
Eagle Mountain, UT

Everyone that matters predicts that BYU, a program that ranks much higher than many BCS teams since the BCS was formed to keep BYU and similar teams out, is not only in the top 64 but in the top half of the 64.

I will be sad to see the current conferences go away if that is really what happens. I think if everyone took a step back for a year, they would realize that this is not the best thing for college football. 12 team conferences would allow a conf. championship game and be able to send a champ to an 8 or 16 team playoff. Throw in the rest of the highest ranked teams to complete the field and you would have an excellent end to the season. The teams left, who have a .500 or above record can still have bowl games for their fans and the nation gets a playoff.

Brave Sir Robin
San Diego, CA

Wait, I thought independence was the greatest thing since sliced bread? Why would BYU be all excited about joining a superconference is independence is the way to go?

Truth Machine
Salt Lake City, UT

Greed and power struggles are destroying college sports.

16-team superconferences will eliminate non-conference games and guarantee that half the teams in each of those conferences will finish with losing records every year; which means no bowl games on a regular basis for teams like Utah, which would rarily finish in the upper half of a PAC 16.

Utah, with a PAC 12 Power Ranking of 7th, would be ranked 11th if the Oklahoma and Texas schools were in the conference today.

PAC 16
1st tier - USC, Oklahoma, Texas
2nd tier - Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, Stanford, Oregon
3rd tier - Utah, Arizona State, Arizona, Washington, Oregon State, California
4th tier - Washington State, Colorado

Utah fans are only fooling themselves if they think that Utah would be competitive in a 16-team conference with USC, Oklahoma and Texas.

Once in awhile, maybe.

On a regular basis, not a chance.

Veritas Aequitas
Fruit Heights, UT

Sir Robin likes sliced bread...

TrollPolice
Salt Lake City, UT

Brave Sir Robin

Who said anything about BYU being "excited" to join a superconference?

Superconferences are the BCS on steroids -- an absolutely stupid idea, driven entirely by greed.

WhatsInItForMe
Orem, Utah

The geography of four 16-team superconferences, with the "Pac-16" NOT including BYU (for obvious reasons), leaves little chance of BYU getting into a superconference where it's travel is mimimized.

Four 16-team superconferences by default excludes the Big XII, and I doubt the Big Ten (16) would offer BYU.

Therefore, I believe independence is the future for BYU. And, no, they won't be excluded from BCS bowls via poor SOS because of not being able to play BCS teams in October and November. That'll not fly legally, so won't happen.

I also believe Notre Dame won't relinquish its independence. Notre Dame has it too good TV-wise to join any conference. And, Army and Navy won't loose their independence in favor of dropping current BCS schools of their status.

Who knows whether Texas ends up going Indy because of its love for its TLN.

Sad days are ahead for most of college football, it seems. Especially mid-majors. The three-tier college football landscape talked about could happen.

Or, litigation could mess everything up even worse, or better. Who knows?

IDC
Boise, ID

Troll bait.

nunya
sacramento, ca

@ truth machine....sorry man but what you're saying about the utes would actually happen to byu and bsu as well. however...give the utes byu and bsu about 3 to 5 years in these conferences to recruit and have access to the same type of athletes the big boys have...then we could compete. but then again...look at the bottom feeders in the big 12, pac 10.2 and the sec....I don't see them getting better so maybe we're just fooling ourselves. :)

WhatsInItForMe
Orem, Utah

One possibility is for the "top" mid-major football schools, plus some or all of the demoted BCS schools, to form a 5th 16-team superconference and DARE the other four to exclude them from the party.

The BCS knew that if the MWC had remained as it were, it would have either been added as an AQ conference, or replaced the Big East. They didn't want that, so getting Utah and TCU out of that conference, with BYU going Indy, helped the BCS to retain its status quo.

Now, with superconferences happening, and the demise of the Big XII, they're licking their chops that they'll be able to exclude the mid-majors even more.

Baylor's litigation threats to Big XII evacuees will pale in comparison to what'll happen if the BCS continues to try to exclude mid-majors.

belgie
Tualatin, OR

Everyone (except Utah fans) agrees that BYU deserves to be in the field of 64. Doesn't matter, though. They're a victim of bigotry and geography. One excludes them from the PAC, the other excludes them from all the eastern conferences.

The only hope is that the Big 12 survives.

royalblue
Alpine, UT

It would be interesting to see what the PAC would do if Oklahoma and Oklahoma State joined the PAC, Texas and Texas Tech joined the ACC, Kansas and Kansas State joined the Big East, and Missouri joined the Big Ten or SEC.

Who would the PAC 14 invite to become the PAC 16 and from a football and marketing perspective, how could they possibly justify inviting anybody besides BYU and Boise State?

San Jose State, Fresno State, San Diego State, UNLV, Nevada, and Hawaii aren't exactly known for their high academic standards, and none of them comes close in long-term football achievement.

phoenix
Gilbert, AZ

For Utah fans who think having Oklahoma and Texas in the PAC 12 would be good for Utah, I'd love to hear WHY.

Certainly, it would strengthen the conference, probably making the PAC 16 close to as strong as the SEC, but how would that help Utah?

There's no guarantee that the PAC 16 would generate any more revenue on a per team basis, and even it did, there's no question Utah's chances of being competitive would take a severe hit.

As far as bowls go. Even if they relaxed the rules to allow a 5-7 team to play in a bowl, how many fans would care about attending a bowl game to watch two 5-7 teams go at each other? And without the relaxed rules, yearly trips to a bowl would become a thing of the past for Utah.

If Utah fans were smart, they'd be lobbying Dr. Hill to do everything he could to prevent the PAC 12 from expanding to the PAC 16.

Mormon Ute
Kaysville, UT

If super conferences happen, BYU should be in and would be crazy not to want it. With that said, I don't like the super conferences. Traditional rivalries are already being torn apart and I only see that getting worse. Super conferences makes college sports look too much like the pros and takes the student out of student-athlete.

WhatsInItForMe
Orem, Utah

@ royalblue,

You're right on the money! That's why Scott won't let the Pac-12 slip on this opportunity to grow to 16 again.

If he does, then the Pac is stuck at 14, while the rest are free to get to 16. And that would mean 2 more BCS schools get demoted!

Fun times ahead.

WhatsInItForMe
Orem, Utah

The interesting thing about SOS (how it's currently determined by most computer polls used by the BCS), is that it's nearly MORE important who your opponents played than your opponent's own record.

In other words, too much weight is given to being in a BCS conference than simply what the record was of the team you played.

Sure, some credit SHOULD be given for having a tough schedule so that teams that play you get credit for playing a team from a tough conference. But, how it's currently figured isn't correct, or fair.

THEREFORE, independent teams (like BYU) could easily gain decent SOS scores by filling their schedule with the lower half of teams from BCS conferences.

For example, BYU with its help from ESPN, could easily get plenty of BCS teams on its yearly schedule because those bottom-feeders would not be getting as much air time as the top-feeders. They'd jump at the chance to get on the air NATIONALLY.

That's why I don't see BYU having trouble getting a decent SOS as an independent should top-tier BCS teams shun playing them in October and November.

WhatsInItForMe
Orem, Utah

@ Mormon Ute,

I don't like the idea of superconferences, either. But, Texas A&M and the Oklahomas are ensuring that it'll happen.

BYU would certainly accept an invitation to a superconference, unless they got concrete assurances that independent scheduling of BCS teams during October and November wouldn't be an issue. (Not sure if that's possible.)

Then, independence for BYU is best. Same for Notre Dame. Not so much for Texas.

Duckhunter
Highland, UT

I really don't care if "super" conferences are formed or not. But if they are I do not think they will last.

All top feeders need bottom feeders. With a higher number of smaller conferences more teams get to be top feeders. If all of the current top feeders band together to form a smaller number of conferences some of the teams currently on top will no longer be on top. They can't be as the math simply won't allow it.

Now I know there have been utah fans on here for the lat year saying they would rather be a bottom feeder, or maybe a mid tier team, in a better conference than a top team in a "lesser" conference and I think most of them truly believe that. For now.

But when the reality of mediocrity sets in, and not just for them but the majority of "used to be's" I think that will change. Fanbases long accustomed to 9-19 win seasons will not be saitisfied with continual 4-5-6-7 win seasons. They will stop attending. It will happen.

Then things will change again.

UoU 1991
Park City, UT

Interesting Questions:

Would the PAC X invite Oklahoma and Oklahoma State if Texas wasn't part of the package?

Would the PAC X invite Texas if the Longhorns insisted on keeping their Longhorn Network?

Would Arizona, Arizona State, and Colorado torpedo an invitation to Oklahoma and Texas, if Arizona, ASU, Colorado, and Utah were almost certain to end up in a PAC X East division with the Oklahoma and Texas schools?

There are still alot of variables in play here that make a PAC 16 far from a done deal.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments