Comments about ‘Underneath the logo: BYU contract with Nike delivers recruits in addition to apparel’

Return to article »

Published: Friday, March 29 2013 11:00 a.m. MDT

  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Bluffdale, UT

"That hasn't changed. You left the MWC, and aligned yourselves with the WAC. You hauled in WAC-ish recruits. Perhaps it is YOU who needs to do a little research. My facts are straight, and irrefutable."

Research? Irrefutable facts? The only FACT is that you are continually on BYU articles coming up with names to call your rival, and making up stuff that is generally very juvenile and childish.

As for recruiting, I love that Dave Rose continues to own that team on the hill with PAC recruits with his WCC recruits. The same goes for soccer, track, volleyball, et all.

This year is actually the first year Utah should see the benefits of recruiting in the PAC. The kids recruited from their first year in the PAC should be Juniors or Redshirt Sophomores. I hope they are able to have a breakthrough year in the PAC.

BYU will not see the results of Independence for 2 more years because of missions. It will be interesting to see how they do as they have not done as well recruiting.

Silent Lurker
Cottonwood Heights, UT

How can this makes a big difference to recruits? Nike has 75-80 percent of all schools under some kind of agreement or contract. It's not like BYU is the only school with a Nike contract.

Bluffdale, UT


We could probably have a civil dialogue, as I happen to agree with you on many issues.

1.Utah has a much bigger advantage over BYU recruiting because of PAC membership.
2.That is shown by their steady separation in recent recruiting classes.
3.BYU has played a WAC heavy schedule for the last few years.

The only problem is that it is difficult to have such a dialogue with someone whose only goal is to denegrade and name call when talking about the team I support and cheer for.
Good luck to Utah in the PAC-12. They need to do well for all the other mid-major teams. We need a true playoff in football.

River Falls, WI

RE: Motorbike

"Please take a minute to clarify which teams were part of the "several" you mentioned."

Unlike trolls (who never respond to the point made in any reasonable post) I am happy to clarify for you. The PAC 12 invited Texas, Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, and Colorado before they invited Utah. Yes, Utah received one BCS invite, just like BYU did. Congratulations. The difference is that Utah welcomed the opportunity to become a conference doormat, because it meant more money and exposure (which, by the way, are great reasons--they did the right thing). Meanwhile, BYU turned down the opportunity to be at the top of a declining conference in favor of independence--also a good move.

Orem, UT


"If that were true, playing Alabama and 11 FCS teams would be considered an extremely difficult schedule."

Two word: Reading comprehension

TheSportsAuthority mentioned TEAMS, as in plural, as in FIVE Top 25 teams.


"Army and Yale both completely dwarf BYU in every single category you mentioned."

True, but the luster of their legacies faded over half a century ago.

Unfortunately for U, you have no legacy, past or present.

BYU has been a perennial Top 25 program since 1977 (18 Top 25 finishes in the last 35 years - over 50%)

Utah has NEVER been a perennial Top 25 program, EVER!

Las Vegas, NV

@ WACPaddingOurSchedule

Nah. BYU opponents will refer to them as a WAC team next year. If you want real respect, win games against ranked teams on a regular basis.

BTW, San Jose St. owns BYU.


BTW, Utah State owns Utah.

Frisco, TX

Navy - U are right that BYU built its brand in the WAC and MWC. Unfortunately, Utah is still trying to build a brand. U had 0 good years in the WAC and 2 good years in the MWC.

Cottonwood Heights, UT


Go ahead and show is all where all the teams you mentioned denied an invite to the PAC-12.

Sorry but you're doing what many of your brethren do, stretch the truth. While its certainly true that the Pac-12 wanted Texas, and would've liked Oklahoma to join them as a natural rival, there were never official invites to the other schools you mentioned. In other words, the PAC-12 was interested first and foremost in Texas, without them they had other primary objectives which is where Colorado and Utah came into the picture.

Even with your stretching of the truth, that sure isn't a long list of teams "invited before Utah" now is it?

By the way, I'm awfully curious as to which BCS conference "invited BYU." We've been told by BYU officials that no invitations have ever been made. Stretching again?

Ernest T. Bass
Bountiful, UT

The Nike on the jersey have delivered so many top notch recruits. It's been huge. Top recruits just love Nike more than about anything else.

deductive reasoning
Arlington, VA


Beating ranked teams doesn't mean much when you're seldom able to finish the season ranked.

BYU has almost as many AP Top 25 finishes in the last 7 years, as the Utes have in the ENTIRE history.

btw, didn't you spend bowl week watching from the couch because you weren't capable of beating the ONLY WAC team you played.

BYU opponents will refer to BYU as a nationally respected program with a host of great quarterbacks, a great fan base, and a previous national champion.

Utah opponents will refer to Utah as a program that had a couple of great seasons, but is no longer anymore competitive than they were during their WAC days.

River Falls, WI

RE: Motorbike

Trying googling "PAC 10 invites_______ (name of any of the schools I mentioned)" and you will find numerous articles detailing what direction the PAC was going prior to Utah's invitation. Typical is something like this (from ESPN)... "While Colorado is in and Utah is a top alternative candidate [to the five schools mentioned earlier], it's also possible that the Pac-10 would make a play for Nebraska or another Big 12 school instead of Utah." True, the PAC was most interested in Texas, but that doesn't mean they preferred Utah to any of the other schools.
Also, I never said it was a "long list of teams", I said "several" and I still believe that six could be considered "several." As before I applaud Utah for getting an invite and accepting it.
You can also google "BYU Big East invite" and find several articles that discuss that reality as well. I know that all the national media syndicates must be wrong and all the anti-BYU trolls must be right, but I at least try to stay objective.

Bluffdale, UT


Asking an anti-BYU troll to be objective is like asking a fish to stay out of the water.


A healthy debate is great, but at least be realistic...or better yet, at least act like you were around and reading the paper, or listening to the radio when the invite to Utah went down. It is common knowledge that Larry Scott's primary objective was to create a 16 team Super Conference with the original PAC-10 members and 6 members from the Big-12. Everything hinged on the decision Texas made.

Layton, UT

Trade schedules and Utah would of been in a BCS bowl last year and the year before. Go Utes

Two For Flinching
Salt Lake City, UT

@ TrueBlue

Five ranked teams, and four others that finished ranked well over 150. BYU basically had 5 bye weeks last year. My point still stands.

@ CougfaninTX

Utah won 4 MWC titles and finished ranked 5 times, just like BYU. Plus Utah held a 7-5 series advantage over BYU during the MWC era. From 1999 to 2010 BYU was building a brand as the second best team in the state. That trend seems to be continuing judging by the results of the last two Holy Wars.

@ Mark321

Utah holds a 70-28 advantage over U-State, and Utah has won 12 of the past 13 games (with an average margin of victory of 24 points). The one loss was on the road in OT. You have a weird definition of the word "owns"

Cottonwood Heights, UT


You're hilarious. Again I ask you to point me to an exact source that states an ACTUAL invite (not speculation as you've been talking about) that was made to any of the schools you listed.
AGAIN I'll state that the PAC-12 wanted Texas. With Texas they'd have likely invited others before Utah. This would've been to satisfy Texas and made sense because of natural rivals. However, when Texas didn't jump, the PAC-12 went a different direction rather than inviting the teams Texas would've likely brought with them.
Now those are the facts.


See above comment.

Bluffdale, UT


You can't dismiss history on a technicality. Were there official invites? Nobody knows. The point is(and well documented) that inviting Utah was, in actuality, an alternate plan. But, have fun in denial. I hear it's hot this time of year.

Provo, UT

I believe the problem about arguing over official invites is that official invites generally only come once the conference knows that it will be accepted. Does anyone really think that there was no discussing before the invitations were made? It's kind of like asking someone to marry you -- you've generally had lengthy discussions beforehand and decided to follow that path before making it official by asking. I imagine the same thing happened with the conference realignment, although there is no way to really ever know.

Salt Lake City, UT


With Texas they'd have likely invited others before Utah. This would've been to satisfy Texas and made sense because of natural rivals.


And the PAC wanted Colorado and invited Utah as the consolation bundle when the liberals wouldn't accept BYU...

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

Y Grad/Y Dad:

"Did you note that some of your precious loot depends on actually playing in a bowl?"

That depends on which "precious loot" you were referring. Utah gets paid whether or not we play in a bowl game via our ESPN/FOX television contract. However, if you were referring to our Under Armor contract, our contract is estimated to be near $2M. Our lack of postseason last year cost us a whopping...


Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA


"If by 'Power Conference' you mean 'BCS' than BYU has exactly the same number of invites as the Utes"

WACPaddingOurSchedule wasn't talking about the BCS. The conference nicknamed the "Big [L]East" is not a power conference. Back when the Indy-WACers were being vetted for admission, that conference's BCS status was in serious jeapardy. At that time, the Big [L]East had lost every charter member school save Temple, and were desperate to bring in....Boise St. However BSU required a travel partner, and that's when the Big [L]East acquieced to the cougars. However, it's important to note 2 things here:

(1) The Big [L]East didn't want the cougars. It wanted the Broncos. The Broncos wanted the cougars, and insisted the Big [L]East allowed you to ride in on their coattails.

(2) The Big [L]East lost their "power conference" designation. So to that point, you do NOT have the same number of power conference invitations as your big brother. You have 0.

to comment

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