@ worf"BYU wouldn't have lost Colorado. Don't be in
denial! Fluke!"BYU had 7 turnovers and 5 of those turnovers were
caused by Utah's defense. Don't better football teams
cause and capitalize on turnovers? There is no fluke worf! Utah was
the better team in 2011. 54-10 and your team QUIT! Man up and accept defeat. No
worfMcallen, TXMr. Fudd,BYU wouldn't have lost
Colorado. Don't be in denial! Fluke!_______________BYU is 3-8-1 all time against Colorado.BYU is 6-9 all time against San
Jose St.Don't be in denial! Fact!
Mr. Fudd,BYU wouldn't have lost Colorado. Don't be in
uteBusters said:WACpaddledCan you name a bcs conference
school that has lost TWO games to 10-loss teams in the last 5 years?It's no wonder that Utah has to schedule an opening week scrimmage
against a winless 1-AA opponent so the Utes can get over their opening game
jitters before having to face an actual team."Uhh what does your
comment have to do with BYUs schedule this season? Its ok, go ahead and deflect
the embarrassing situation that BYU is in.Regarding 10 losses. Not
sure but Minnesota, Indiana and Maryland come to mind. Could be wrong, but
I'm not the one throwing out the pointless information that has nothing to
do with this season like you did.
WACpaddledCan you name a bcs conference school that has lost TWO
games to 10-loss teams in the last 5 years?It's no wonder that
Utah has to schedule an opening week scrimmage against a winless 1-AA opponent
so the Utes can get over their opening game jitters before having to face an
I have a question for you worf.Can you name one BCS conference
school closing out its season with Idaho at home, and San Jose St and New
Mexico St. on the road?You won't find one.But I can name
a WAC legacy team riding the coattails of Notre Dame as an independent that
plays that very schedule.BYU!
@ worf"Utah's win last year was a fluke, and much of the
boasting of Ute fans are premature, and arrogant". I don't
know what game you were watching last year, but the Utah-BYU game the whole
nation watched witnessed BYU get dismantled by a superior Utah team. There is no
fluke in a 44 point beat down, but there is a complete domination by a better
Utah team on both sides of the ball. "Harping on games with
Idaho, while playing 0-11 Northern Colorado is silly".Well, BYU
is still playing Idaho. They dropped Idaho State from last year but they added
Weber State this year. BYU's schedule has improved a little bit this year,
but their schedule is still watered down by all those WAC and FCS teams.
I never claimed BYU was in the same class as Notre Dame, although both were in
the top six most watched college football teams last year.Utah's win last year was a fluke, and much of the boasting of Ute fans
are premature, and arrogant. Harping on games with Idaho, while playing 0-11
Northern Colorado is silly.
worfMcallen, TXMr. Fudd!What are you talking about?:* Revenue from the Oklahoma game was real* BYU kept the MWC
satellite station going.-greater national appeal than any other.* Utah is
not in the same class as TCU, just like they're not with USC, Stanford or
Oregon. Quit using others to build a reputation!Truth hurts, but
lets be real.>>>Another fellow BYU fan that
can't accept the fact we are riding the coattail of Notre Dame. A school
that made being independent so attractive that Idaho decided to join us.Are we in the same class as Idaho or Notre Dame? In no way is it ND.
Mr. Fudd!What are you talking about?:* Revenue from the
Oklahoma game was real* BYU kept the MWC satellite station going.-greater
national appeal than any other.* Utah is not in the same class as TCU,
just like they're not with USC, Stanford or Oregon. Quit using others to
build a reputation!Truth hurts, but lets be real.
@ worfIt was BYU who was dependent on Utah and TCU while they were
in the MWC. Both Utah and TCU were the bread runners for the conference and BYU
and others just sat back to collect their paychecks from Utah and TCU's BCS
money. So whose been dependent in the BCS era? It's BYU, because they
haven't done squat in making a BCS run like there two fellow conference
rivals have twice. BYU has been mediocre since Coach Edwards has retired and
they're no signs of the glory years coming back anytime soon for the cougs!
Enjoy your irrelevance, I mean independence.
It was BYU, and not Utah that hurt the WAC. Utah has mostly been dependent on
BYU for revenue, and national exposure, like the other WAC teams.Utah couldn't win half their PAC games last year, and like they were in
the WAC, be a bottom dweller in their new conference.
Earnest-no, you are wrong. BYU and Utah's relationship was much more than
football, it was the entire package. No doubt USU was the better of the three
football teams back in the 1960's. But to believe that the WAC was going
to admit 3 teams within a 100 mile radius (without the population to support it)
well, it wasn't going to - and obviously did not happen. You
talk as if the entire decision to accept or reject USU was up to BYU. Seems to
me that there were 7 other schools that had an equal say in the matter. BYU and
Utah might not have enthusiastically supported the admittance of USU (we will
never know), but even if they had, it would not have happened. As
for BYU's dominance over USU since the 60's chalk one up to one of the
greatest coaches of all time - LaVell Edwards. Thanks for preparing him to take
on the challenge at BYU - and succeed. The last 40 years of football at BYU
have been great!
Kiboo: You're wrong. The Utah-USU rivalry was much bigger at that time than
the Utah-byu rivalry. byu's president was the one who blocked USU. Utah
just didn't stick up for USU.If it weren't for a USU alum
(LaVell Edwards), byu football would have never become better than USU.
Look at who is writing the article. Don't take anything seriously."BYU won the WAC championship last year, and many expect them to do
the same again this year."So that adds to yet another WAC
championship then. Way more than anyone ever in the WAC. So BYU is independent
and rivals still want to say they are winning championships? Interesting they
still see BYU as the WAC champion, as they should cuz all they did was win it
when they were there. By this same logic, if they win all their
games in the WAC this year, they'll win the WAC. If they win all their PAC
games, they'll win the PAC. Hey, it's not my logic. You better
accept this if it happens, cuz it's very, very likely to happen. Who wins
the WAC and PAC in the same year? BYU may be the first, according to BYU's
54-10: true comment is much appreciated. I wish I can 'like' your
comment more than 1
Swoop,Utah 54Byu 10Utah = PAC 12Byu = Indy
It was more than BYU and Utah of course. Half the WAC left to form the MWC.
Those same teams then bemoaned losing BYU and Utah last year. You can't
have it both ways.
Dutchman"Now Utah has emerged as the power."Power of what? You can't even beat lowly Colorado.
Karl Benson killed the WAC.He couldn't recognize a good deal
and ignored the bread winners of the conference. He still continues his mess
(I.e., see Sun Belt)
I was told another reason USU was held out of the WAC wasn't just BYU &
Utah. It was because the other teams didn't want 3 Utah teams in the WAC.
Anyone else hear this?
Nah, Arizona and Arizona State killed the WAC when they left in, what was
This is like trying to analyze why the allies didn't do more carpet bombing
in Normandy prior to D-day potentially saving thousands of lives. What happened
has happened. Prior to WW II Britain was the big world power. After the war
the United States was the unquestioned power. Sound familiar? During the WAC
years BYU and ASU were the powers. Now Utah has emerged as the power. Time to
May I suggest that Utah and BYU fans eliminate some silly finger pointing right
now by agreeing that when Utah plays Northern Colorado in week one and BYU plays
Weber State in week two, they both have very easy games against lower division
The comment by CordonBleu hits the nail right on the head. The WAC is not dead,
it is now alive as the new MWC. Beginning next year, Hawaii, Fresno St, San
Jose State, Nevada and Utah State will make up half of the MWC. Sure New
Mexico, CSU, Wyoming, AFA, and UNLV are also there but, remember, they were part
of the infamous 16 team WAC before the birth of the MWC. Rock should have
emphasized this in his story. Kind of missed the boat in his attempt to pick on
Utah and BYU.
@ ute alumniWho is BYU playing in week 2?Another FCS
cupcake for Bronco!
I don't think BYU and Utah killed the WAC. It was when they got expansion
happy and moved to 16 teams with those stinkin' 4 team quadrants that
killed it. They added teams that didn't add much value - just footprint.
Funny that the grand expansion going on now is focused on footprint and media
markets. Hope they don't go too far and forget what makes college sports
great. It may already be too late for the that hope though.
The whole premise of the "WAC" dying is silly. It completely ignores the
fact that the WAC that BYU and Utah helped create in 1962 no longer existed
after the MWC was created. Of the six founding members of the WAC - BYU, Utah,
Arizona, ASU, Wyoming, and New Mexico - not a single member remained after the
MWC was created, and UTEP, which joined with CSU in 1967, left the conference in
2005.The WAC of the late 70's and through early 90's
became the MWC, which still lives on, minus BYU and Utah.
Okay. lets see here1. Karl Benson is a good guy and Craig Thompson
is a bad guy2. Karl Benson made a mistake by adding some 8 more teams to
WAC.3. BYU and Utah would join the bcs league and Utah took the bait to
pac league and BYU want better exposers.4. Oh yeah, the mtn was a joke
including Craig Thompson.5. Very nice to Karl to let Utah State to join
the MWC.Don't know what to say Karl, thanks for the memory.
16 team WAC started the death, not long after BYU, Utah, and the rest decided to
start the MWC. But let's not forget the good that the WAC did for the
state of Utah, prior there were only odd conference affiliations.
So are you saying you wish Utah and BYU were still in the old WAC?? What a dumb
Earnest T Bass - you are wrong again. The proximity of Utah, BYU and USU killed
USU more than anything. Utah and BYU have always been connected at the hip
(until Utah bailed a few months ago). When the WAC was formed Wilkinson was
looking out for the best intersts of BYU just as the administration at the U of
U was looking out for their best interests. USU was simply the odd man out.
The WAC couldn't justify 3 teams within a 100 mile radius given the limited
population in Utah at that time.As has been pointed out by many, the
real culprit of the demise of the WAC is greed. The same greed that lead Utah
to sever its ties with BYU.
BYU and Utah did not kill the WAC, the WAC killed itself. The 16 team, 4
division format never worked and was a bad idea from the start. It was a
knee-jerk reaction to the breakup of the Southwest conference, and resulted in
an expensive, unworkable setup. Ultimately, with no major TV contracts or bowl
tie-ins, the conference was more expensive to run than it was worth, and the
expanded conference died a natural death.And if the MWC hadn't
picked up Boise State, someone else would have. In the last two years
conference realignment has been a fact of life, and conferences have been cherry
picking each other for a while now. Where do you really place the blame when
the dominos start to fall?
Didn't BYU and Utah used to have better running mates in their conference,
i.e. Arizona and Arizona State? Those two left for greener pastures, helping
create a WAC conference with a lack of balance. BYU and Utah carried much of the
conference load then (and again in the MWC, along with TCU when they came along)
- eventually you knew it would have to end. No reason to throw blame around -
college football has not been ruined by conference changes, at least not yet. It
is alive and well.
Everyone is forgetting that it was Craig Thompson that killed the WAC. BYU and
Utah had nothing to do with it. Had Craigo not gone behind BYU's and the
WAC's back and slyfully added Fresno St and Nevada when BYU was working
their deal with the WAC and Independence, then the WAC would still be a solid
conference, with game agreements with BYU. The MWC would be struggling instead,
and this article would be titled "Did BYU and Utah kill the MWC?"
9er4lifeThe demise of the WAC won't affect BYU's
scheduling at all - BYU's scheduling agreement with the WAC ended with the
The demise of the WAC will hurt byu who is already struggling to schedule teams.
We already know their November schedule is the WAC. I just think they should
rejoin the WAC just to make things easier for them.
@bandersen:USU was better than byu in the 60s. It wasn't better than
Utah.It was byu's president who opposed adding USU to the WAC and
Utah went along with it.If the WAC never expanded to 16 teams, Utah &
byu wouldn't have left.
54-10who is utah playing next week?another sterling opening game for
Brad, you failed to mention the first sucker punch that BYU and UTAH threw, not
allowing UTAH STATE into the WAC in the 60's! At the time, USU was(hard to
believe, I know)far and away the best football program in the state, something
that BYU and UTAH did not like and were not about to make USU stronger by adding
them to the conference! No one was even close! It would have made the
conference stronger and made the rivalries between those schools amazing! The
result of not allowing them into the WAC eventually pushed USU into secondary
status as a football program, from which they have never fully recovered!
"Utah and BYU responsible for the WAC's demise", hold on a minute
Rock Monster. The Utes may have turned their backs to the WAC, but BYU won the
WAC championship last year, and many expect them to do the same again this
year.Clearly, the Y is trying to keep the WAC from folding.
College sports little by little started a slippery slope toward becoming and now
is completely dominated by the haves over the have-nots. They're now big business and will continue to grow until sports will
cease to exist as they once were as all schools will place money as the raison
d'etre.Utah and BYU did not slay the WAC, but greed, the very
love of money, will eventually decimate athletic competition altogether.
BYU and Utah left the WAC because it was a 16 team conference required to share
the wealth. Too many schools were making bank of the success of other programs.
Who wouldn't leave? Plus the WAC would be still a strong
conference today if Nevada and Fresno St. hadn't sold out BYU when the
Cougs had agreed to join the WAC again in all other sports but football. I don't understand why Rock chose this angle? I would be looking at
failed system of sustaining a conference rather than teams reacting to bad
The WAC and the other non BCS conference schools should have pursued legal
action against the BCSI hate to see the WAC go. The WAC should have never
pursued the 16 team format. Schools like Rice just never fit in. Let's
hope the MWC survives. I agree with the other posters.
If college football had had a true National Championship Playoff, with all the
conferences getting one seat at the table, then the WAC would have likely
survived. There would not have been the rush to get in with the "Big
Boys" before the doors closed.The BCS conferences knew that by
cherry picking the very best of their lesser brethren, they would squash true
financial equality between the leagues and still get to keep the biggest piece
of the financial pie for themselves.I can't really blame either
Utah or BYU for jumping ship and getting into a life boat before the SS WAC/Mtn.
West sank into the ocean.Do Utah and BYU share some of the blame?
Yes, but they didn't devise the system, they just knew when it was time to
either join it or get left out.The REAL reason for the demise of
college football, as we have known it, was GREED.
The BCS killed the WAC. The evidence was BYU and Utah leaving, but it was the
greed and inequity of the college football system that was the source of the
How's BYU responsible for the demise of the WAC? I thought they were
still in that conference.LOL