Comments about ‘Dick Harmon: Dick Harmon: Offseason conditioning pleases BYU offensive coordinator Brandon Doman’

truecoug1:

Silly frantic and emotional little brother. Last year's television contract was inked a decade before Utah was invited. We were lucky to get even ONE nationally televised game on the Pac-12's old TV deal since those games were ALREADY reserved for the all the OTHER teams not-named Utah and Colorado.

And STILL, I was able to watch 7 of our 12 games on TV back here in Philadelphia, with 2 ADDITIONAL games being broadcast that I DIDN'T watch on TV because I was right there in the stadium at Heinz Field [Pittsburgh] and the Sun Bowl [El Paso]. I wlouldn't know anything about KJZZ broadcasts since we don't watch those over here.

Next year, our facilities will have been completed, and we'll be moving out of that trailor park. On the OTHER hand, next year, YOU'LL still be a weak-SOS mid-major that no other relevant conference wants, and unlike your big brother, will have no access to the proposed college Football Final Four. And THAT's what you Duckhunter, sammyg, Bluto, et al. are so bitter about.

Haha!

Go Utes!

I remember last offseason when BYU fans were commenting on a daily basis about Bronco's offseason regimen - eating more veggies and wearing Shape-Ups. Now Harmon is bragging about Doman's offseason conditioning program. This is cute.

Big fat unathletic offensive linemen have been the bane of BYU Football since the Roger French days. Making them slim down and get lighter on their feet and more athletic is a good thing. Good for Doman.

NV - until you can beat Colorado late in the season, at home, I think your beloved kewgars have a better chance of making the final four than U. Hard to be one of the four best if you aren't even in the top 25.

Rise and Shout!

@NavalVet "We were lucky to get even ONE nationally televised game on the Pac-12's old TV deal since those games were ALREADY reserved for the all the OTHER teams not-named Utah and Colorado."

Lol, really? Can you explain, then, why the PAC 12 was able to air six of Colorado's games on its networks, while they only squeezed Utah into four? Or why Colorado's game vs USC was featured on ESPN while Utah's first ever PAC 12 game against the Trojans was relegated to MWC Lite (Versus)?

Face it, bro, your conference doesn't respect U, nor do they think U're worth using up their TV times. A 3-10 Colorado team got more air time from the PAC 12 than U! U got on ESPN2 because of your big brother in Provo and BYU's RUGBY team had as many appearances on ESPNU as U did.

U got invited to the 'big boys' table, and then got stuck in the high chair (or in this case, a trailer park, lol!). I'll take my independence and ESPN over irrelevance and KJZZ any day.

Go Cougars!

Holy cats it took a long time today before the first idiot chimed in about winning the offseason.

Wayne, the Miners need your support.

Naval Vet and other Utah fans....

Please tell me what is so great about Utah football?

You keep telling BYU fans that BYU is irrelevant. Irrelevant to whom? Please qualify...

Your argument is that BYU is irrelevant and by some strange voodoo Utah is?

Please tell me in what universe Utah is relevant?

Take BYU out of the equation....

On what list is Utah more relevant than the other schools now comprising the PAC 12?

We were undefeated... so what? USC has done that 16 times, Washington 12, so have five other teams in the PAC 12

We won 2 BCS games.... So what? USC has 6

We weren't in a BCS conference... The rest of the BCS world says "So? What's your point? You didn't go undefeated in a BCS conference. Nope! Who did you play again?"

Now take all that and go one step further, to the rest of the nation...

No one cares.

Utah is irrelevant... You weren't even in the top 25 last year.

Everyone has forgotten about u.

"BYU is still irrelevant..."

Whatever helps you sleep at night.

This is going to be a great year for BYU. The line is in shape, and Doman is calling the plays for a quarterback that plays his style. Riley Nelson is a solid quarterback. He's not the best deep passer, but he can complete enough to keep the defense honest. The Cougars will be able to have a strong running game and dominate time of possession and wear the opponents out.

I predict big things. This band of brothers is fully invested this year!

One a sidenote: Utah is in the process of signing a home and home with Michigan. Both games will be opening week (thursday) on ESPN starting 2014-15

I agree with Provo4Life that BYU needs to get into the 21st century in their training and conditioning philosophy. They seriously need a state of the art conditioning program and maybe this is the beginning of change.

In the post season when all these graduating big guys got faster and trimmer with a different trainer, it really begged the question, "Why couldn't these guys do that when they were playing for BYU?"
That should have been real telling for Bronco. I think Ohmer should be fired.

I am not as optimistic as my fellow cougars about the upcoming season. We'll do OK but I'd be surprised if it is 10 win. WSU will have us scouted and analyzed inside and out and we'll have NOTHING on WSU with the new coach. We all know that Leach can make offenses extremely explosive. Bronco has his work cut out for him. Let's hope he is better prepared than he was with Utah last year.

@stufoo

Nobody is more relevant than any of the other Pac-12 schools; right now everybody in conference is 0-0. ESPN has been saying a lot about Utah's match-up with USC though...

Utah has more BCS bowl victories than any other Pac-12 school, except USC.

This season, Utah will be competing for a Pac-12 championship, and a spot in the Rose Bowl (or possibly a bid in the MNCG if everything goes perfect)

BYU will be playing for...exposure. You tell me who is irrelevant.

@naval vet

utah didn't get paid for the previous pac10 tv contract, colorado did though which kinda tells you where utah stands in that conference, but they were still part of the pac12, played 9 pac12 games actually, and any of them could have been chosen to be shown by the networks that had that old deal. They simply chose not to show them because utah is not any dort of a draw or a ratings boost. Just the way it is.

LOL!

@two for flinching

utah will not be competing for a pac12 championship, a rose bowl berth, and certainly not a bid in the MNCG. Just being in the conference doesn't mean they will compete. Don't be so delusional.

@truecoug1

"I'll take my independence and ESPN over irrelevance and KJZZ any day."

Sounds like someone still doesn't want to accept the reality of Utah's new situation going forward. Last year was a tweener year ... this year is where things start to get silly-awesome for the Utes.

Enjoy your misguided perception of BYU's new found "exposure" with little else to play for. You definitely have us Ute fans feeling jealous of that situation. Ummm, yeah.

Y Grad / Y Dad:

"Hard to be one of the four best if you aren't even in the top 25."

And it's just as hard to be in the Final Four if you aren't even in the Top-10. How many Top-10 finishes have the Indy-WACers had during the BCS-era?

Answer: ZERO!

ESPN published a "what if" scenerio as to who would be in the Final Four had that system been implemented all along, and both the '04 and '08 Utes would have been included under the "Conference Champions Only" model.

Fail on your part.

truecoug1:

"Can you explain, then, why the PAC 12 was able to air six of Colorado's games on its networks, while they only squeezed Utah into four?"

I think so. With the exception of the CU @ Utah game, those other 5 CU and 3 UU games...were all vs. Pac-10 teams. Remember, that television contract was a Pac-10 contract; not a Pac-12 one. Utah wasn't the ONLY team who was lucky to get ONE game. CU was too. I'm sure the Pac-12 was throwing the Utes and the Buffaloes a bone by giving us our season finale, and helping with the build up of the rivalry, and it certainly didn't hurt that at the time of that game, Utah was one win away from representing the Pac-12 South in the CCG.

Two For Flinching

If by "competing for a Pac-12 championship", you mean the same as every other team in the PAC-12, then yes, I'll give you that. Gonna have to get by Colorado first though, if you mean possibly winning the championship.

So, just for hypothetical, and yes we all know that if BYU loses one game it's the Mac & Cheese Bowl for them, but let's suppose that Utah got a mulligan and this time DID back into the PAC Championship, and, supposing because we know that while Kyle can lose to real losers, he also can really play up for the big games, supposing Utah beats Oregon, Stanford or USC and goes to the Rose Bowl as an 8-3 or 7-4 team.

And suppose, just for supposing, that BYU goes undefeated. POSSIBLY BYU still gets mac & cheese, but possibly ends up in a BCS bowl, whatever that now means.

Who would be more relevant?

Duckhunter:

"utah will not be competing for a pac12 championship..."

Don't be too sure of that just yet. According to Phile Steele's 2012 Preview magazine:

"TY's [read "This year's"] Utah squad is even stronger...With superior QB play and RB John White the Utes might just be an upset away (USC Thur night at home on Oct 4th) from contending in the P12 South."

Don't forget that with a D-II QB running the show, we were 8-5. And THIS year we not only have Wynn back [with even MORE capable backups than Hays], but also 4 MORE returning starters than we had LAST year.

Check Lindy's, Athlon, the Sporting News...ALL publications have the Utes competing for a Pac-12 South title. And if we are competing for a Pac-12 South title, we are competing for a CCG. And if we're competing for a CCG....we ARE competing for a conference title, AND, a Rose Bowl berth.

"LOL"

Every year byu gets all hyped up for their season and almost every year they lose to UTAH...
All i know is that in the last decade Utah has beat byu 7 out of 10 times and absolutely humiliated them last year! It's so good to be a UTE!!

Y dad/grad

An at large BCS bid and earning a Pac-12 title w/ a bid in the Rose bowl are both excellent accomplishments.

Getting caught in the semantics of who would be more "relevant" seems silly to me.