Comments about ‘BYU football: Cougars, Cincinnati agree to home-and-home series in 2015-16’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Nov. 1 2012 11:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
pocatello, ID

Orem, UT

"So I guess every other conference can be blamed for dispicable prejudice according to your standards."


The PAC 12 is the only conference that has openly demonstrated that they don't want any religiously-based school in their conference. It's reason Colorado was hastily invited to block Baylor from being included in the PAC-Big 12 South merger, and it's the main reason Utah was invited instead of BYU.

Requiring a school to be a "research" university was simply the excuse that the PAC 12 fed to public. Some of the Big 12 South schools are on the same "research" level as BYU.


LOL! This is what happens when you think the world revolves around your program!
If you believe what you say, then how come BYU has not officially been invited to a power conference the past 40+ years?

Can you say "openly demonstrated" again! 40+ years proves that! LOL!

Your side needs to do RESEARCH before posting what you say. Baylor was an attempted forced throw-in by Texas politicians. They were never part of the original deal to join the PAC-12.

pocatello, ID

Orem, UT

BYU 10-3 #25/#26 (#34 in Sagarin) with a bowl win over #35 Tulsa

is better than

Utah 8-5 unranked (#39 in Sagarin) with a bowl win over #56 Georgia Tech

last season


BYU 5-4 is better than Utah 3-5

this season

That's just the way it is.

btw, BYU BEAT the lowly WAC team that BEAT U this season.


Yep that's the way it is. Utah plays in a conference with ranked teams.
BYU loses to ranked teams.

Lindon, UT

Here is the quote from Jeff Call's article about Tom Holmoe's WCC meeting: "Two contests that the Cougars were planning on for next season, including one that was already contracted, have fallen through recently, he said." Does that mean that one of them is one we do not know about? It appears that Holmoe would need to find two more games, or maybe three, if they are planning for 13 games next year (playing in Hawaii means you get an extra game if you wish). The schedule, as it now is, has eight games with dates and three, MTS, Utah, & Wash. St., without dates. MTS & Utah would be home games and Wash. St. would be an away game. The extra game would probably be another home game. There are 6 away games on the schedule, if you include the Wash. St. game, which is the away game without a date.

Lindon, UT

I wonder if the one uncontracted game could be the 13th game?

Lindon, UT

From Greg Wrubel's article from Cougar Tracks

Regarding the 2013 schedule, which has yet to be released despite indications it was all but complete, Holmoe had some news on that front, and it wasn't necessarily good news.

"We had the schedule relatively set; we were done," said Holmoe, "and two teams, one of them under contract, asked to get out--which we did--and one team that was not under contract, but for all intents and purposes, it was was done...(they) bailed out."

Holmoe said after the recent developments, he has had to move quickly for replacements in 2013.

"I'm not even going to say 'scrambling,' because we had things on the back burner, so it was just a matter of sliding a few teams on to the front burner. We have one game that we are looking to finalize, and if we do that, it should be...it will be done."

Holmoe adeed quickly that "I said that about a month ago, and about a week later, I put the curse on myself, and this one team bailed out, and that really put us back a month."

Springville, UT


How did Utah, a resurch skool, with really smart resurch skool athletes, lose to a WAC skool like USU?

Couldn't Utah just outsmart anyone on the field? Guess not at 1-4.

Those resurch skool credentials mean nothing on the field.

The arrogance is amazing.

No Conference Will Take Us

sammyg the cougars outsmarted themselves in all the loses.

I see where Ohio St. today signed up San Diego St. for 2013. Would have been interesting if that was BYU. Apparently we are not as appealing as once thought.



You have no idea what you are talking about. Colorado and Utah have been the two teams on the PAC12 list since the Arizona schools joined the conference. Colorado and Utah both have high quaility research that goes on. Between the two schools they both conform to the other schools that are in the league. BYU is a great school and it has it's own purpose but a religious school does not and will not be accepted by PAC12 Presidents. Purely by the fact of what is taught, that is neither a good thing or bad it is what it is. For you byu fans to think that it is only athletics you are wrong. You are who you are, the LDS religion keeps you out of things, but so what you choose to be kept out, and the PAC12 is one of those things.

Cincinatti on your schedule is great I personally enjoy seeing the y get better opponents you fans deserve it, plus if not the best he is one of the best football players in our state is going there it will be fun to see him come back here and play the y.

Orem, UT


It's nice to see a Utah fan admit that the quality of your athletic program had absolutely nothing to do with the Utes being invited to the PAC 12.

Unfortunately, your "fact" are a little off.

Utah wasn't didn't become a potential PAC expansion candidate until years after the Arizona schools joined. As far as academics, the PAC was more than willing to accept schools in the PAC 10-Big 12 South merger that were on the same research level as BYU.

Ultimately, by the time the PAC was ready to expand, the religious bigots of the PAC had already decided that no religiously affiliated schools would be allowed to join the PAC, which is why Colorado was hastily invited to join the PAC, before the merger was finalized, to shut Baylor out of the merger.

Utah simply benefitted from being a good fit geographically and culturally.

If the decision had been left up to the PAC 10 Athletic Directors, most of them would have picked BYU over Utah because of BYU's superior athletic program.

Bottom line:

BYU could have easily handled joining the PAC 12, but it would have been impossible for Utah to successfully pull off Independence.


Sports Fan

I'm sorry but you have your facts wrong

The talk of Utah and Colorado to join the PAC10 started in the 80's before Chris Hill was the Athletic Director. The Goal of the PAC10 Presidents was to create a Conference that was equal to the Ivy League on the west coast as far as academics but much more competitive in athletics. If the decision would have been left up to the athletic directors they would have stayed at 10, but commisioner Scott being hired by the Presidents not the AD's proceeded to try and make the PAC12 more powerful than just athletics, the Big12 south thing was NEVER going to happen, that was created by the media and ESPN. They brought in the two schools that worked well with the others established in the conference. If you think there is money in football, you cannot believe the money in mmedical research, engineering, and business. University Presidents got the PAC12 together, not AD's, Brigham Young was never a consideration nor was Baylor.

Bottom Line:

Utah and BYU are where they should be. Don't just think athletics all the time.

PS I was there, I know


These debates about conference affiliation are meaningless when the teams in discussion play around .500 ball...

to comment

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