Quantcast

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

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

Wiscougarfan:

"...the only BCS conference to invite Utah was the PAC 10, after several other teams declined and the PAC was desperate to get a companion school for Colorado, another cellar dweller. I have not heard of any other BCS conference even considering Utah."

First of all, Utah's invitation to the Pac-10 was not predicated on what Texas ultimately decided to do. The Pac-16 would have been the Pac-10 + (11)Texas, (12)Tx. Tech, (13)Oklahoma, (14)Oklahoma St**, (15)Colorado, and (16)UTAH.

Secondly, what difference does it make that the only relevant conference to invite Utah was the Pac-10? Think about it. If Utah had been invited to join the Pac-10, Big 12, BigTen, Big East, ACC, or SEC, who do you think would have been our first choice?

Answer: Pac-10.

So essentially, your point is that you had no point.

**Chip Brown from Orangeblood reported the Pac-10 was maneuvering to drop OSU in favor of Kansas. But Utah was still in.

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

Mark321:

"BTW, Utah State owns Utah."

WACPaddingOurSchedule was referring to SJSU's all time record vs. the Y. And they DO own the Indy-WACers. What is Utah State's all time record vs. the U? Care to respond, or will you be running away in the face of truth and accuracy?

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

CougFaninTX:

"U had 0 good years in the WAC and 2 good years in the MWC."

What a frantic and emotional thing to say. Utah won the Liberty Bowl, and back in '64, and also had a Top-10 finish in '94 -- where they beat 4 teams finishing ranked in the final polls. And that was just our WAC years. Utah also won 4 MWC championships, so obviously, we had more than just 2 good ones.

However, what you don't seem to understand is, there ARE no "legacy" teams from the WAC. And there ARE no "legacy" teams from the MWC. Utah and TCU were the most successful MWC football programs with 4 conference championships, and 2 BCS bowls. Both teams have now moved on to relevant leagues, and neither are "legacy" programs. The cougars are only legendary in their own minds.

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

Wiscougarfan:

"The PAC 12 invited Texas, Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, and Colorado..."

Not so. Texas A&M had never received an invitation to join the Pac-10. A&M was very clear from the beginning that it was Big 12 or SEC for them.

Chip Brown at Orangebloods.com detailed the following:

"...Scott and Weiberg...in the courtship of the Big 12...wanted to substitute Kansas for Oklahoma State late in the process...Scott and Weiberg were looking to dump Oklahoma State in favor of Kansas...the Pac-10 would add Utah."

It's also important to note that the Pac-10 was looking to add Tier-1 Research Institutions, and neither Tx. Tech nor Okla. St. fit that mold. However, Texas did, and they were the big fish. If adding TT and OSU got them the Longhorns, the Pac-10 would acquiece. Make no mistake, the Pac-10 didn't want TT or OSU. They wanted Texas and Oklahoma.

They also wanted Utah and CU. We both DID fit within their academic, athletic, and cultural conceptual model.

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

Wiscougarfan:

Per Graham Watson at ESPN (MWC plays waiting game with Utah, June 15, 2010):

"This is what we all talked about when conference expansion first became a trending topic. Colorado and Utah were the logical choices for the Pac-10, and with Colorado already committing...it's just a matter of time until Larry Scott and Co. come knocking if they haven't already."

Back up plan?

Nope. Sure doesn't look that way.

motorbike
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Naval Vet,

Way to lay it down, you speak the truth and leave little room for question marks - yet our blue brothers will still deny everything you've said. Oh the jealousy from down south.

SportzFan
Salt Lake City, UT

motorbike, "Oh the jealousy from down south" -- on a BYU article? Seems like the obsession here is obvious to all but the oblivious.

Naval Vet, "Join the Navy and see the world," but focus and obsess on BYU...

Cougars1
Bluffdale, UT

As is stated in the article I referenced; Texas A&M was on Scott's original wish list with Kansas as an alternate if A&M bolted to the SEC. By the way, it took me 1 minute to find that article and there are more articles that back it up.

Cougars1
Bluffdale, UT

Naval,
Not to be misunderstood. I am happy for Utah and their new place in the PAC-12. I will be the first to say they earned it outright. As a BYU fan, I wish BYU were in a power conference, but I am a realist and don't see that happening anytime soon. On the other hand, I love Independence and the schedule that Tom has put together for 2013. I just hope he can keep it up. Props to the Utes.

Cougars1
Bluffdale, UT

Gotta love the double standard of the moderator;)

Naval,
The article referred to in the above comment is in the SB Nation. Written by Avinash Kunnath and published on June 16,2010. It's a good read. You using Chip Brown as a source is very amusing as he was the first to report that the Big-12 would be offering an invite to Air Force and BYU. I don't even have to tell you how that turned out.

motorbike,
Talking smack? As you can see, there are plenty of holes in the comments made by your buddy.

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

Cougars1:

What was the title, date, author, and publication that listed Kansas as A&M's first choice? Because the article I read that mentioned Kansas was the Chip Brown article I referenced. And in that article, Kansas was the the team the Pac-12 was trying to dump Okla. St. for, with Utah still a patty of the original Pac-16 (Tex, TT, Okla, OSU, CU, Utah).

Mt Rushmore
Arlington, VA

navelvet

What was the title, date, author, and publication that said that being a perennial conference bottom dweller in any conference made U relevant?

The truth is, the Utes haven't done anything to make the PAC 10.2 more competitive. In fact, the ONLY Utah program that has added anything to the conference is the Red Rocks.

In the two major sports, the Utes are 7-11 in football, and 8-28 in men's basketball, nothing more than well paid whipping boys for the big boys of the conference.

Utah was invited as the last choice filler, when all of the teams that the PAC 10 really wanted turned their backs on the PAC.

motorbike
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Cougars1

You have spun yourself in silly circles and are trying to put words in my mouth that I never uttered.

I have continually talked about ACTUAL invitations. I could care less about articles of endless speculation. We all read the countless articles and some of that info was true and some has been the furthest from the truth. This is exactly why I've been dealing in FACTS on this thread whereas you, Sportzfan and Wiscougarfan continue to spin away from those facts.

I'll ask you all one more time ... find me proof that any institution had an ACTUAL invite to join the PAC-12 other than Utah, Colorado and Texas. That's right, there aren't any. Anything else beyond that is rumor and speculation - to which I'm sure some is true, but never materialized to an INVITATION.

Let me make myself absolutely clear, my only reason for piping in was to correct Wiscougarfan on the misleading phrasing of his comment. BYU has not had an invite from a BCS conference, and there were not several invitations prior to Utah in the PAC-12. Sorry, just dealing in facts.

Cougars1
Bluffdale, UT

motorbike,

The only one spinning is you and your buddy from back East. Need I remind you that you are on an article about BYU's Nike contract for apparel trying to argue a technicality in wording. I have never said schools were invited. If I did I apologize. I have only stated who Larry Scott's first choices were for expansion and Utah was never his first choice.

I think sky2k1 gives a very good explanation as to how invitations to join conferences go down. You are just trying to confuse "official invitation" with how the whole process really works.

Cougars1
Bluffdale, UT

Speaking of spin. Wiscougarfan never anything about actual, or official invites. You were the one who spun that in after the names of "several" schools from the Big-12 were provided per your request. I am afraid that your obsession is getting the best of you. Remember, YOU are the one on a BYU article obsessing over what teams have received ACTUAL invites.

Mt Rushmore
Arlington, VA

motorbike

The Utes are proving that it's possible to be completely irrelevant even in a big boy conference.

motorbike
Cottonwood Heights, UT

Cougars1

You said: "Speaking of spin. Wiscougarfan never anything about actual, or official invites. You were the one who spun that."
_____

Uh, let me help you out ... here are actual comments by Wiscougarfan:

"...the only BCS conference to INVITE Utah was the PAC 10, after several other teams declined..." - Obviously this reads as declining an INVITE since that's what he was talking about.

Another: "BYU, on the other hand, also had one invite... from the Big East." - Again, the word INVITE, even though Tom Holmoe made it clear no invitations have happened.

Another one: "The PAC 12 INVITED Texas, Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, Oklahoma State, and Colorado before they invited Utah." - There's that word again ... INVITED.

Can I be any more clear? I know it's convenient for you to spin it as though I'm obsessed with BYU, but like I said, I had no need to comment until I saw some of the garbage coming out of BYU fans' mouths about Utah. So who's obsessed? I don't think it was me who was spinning that my team got an invite that they never received.

I hope that helps.

WACPaddingOurSchedule
pocatello, ID

SportzFan
Salt Lake City, UT
motorbike

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...

________________

The PAC 12 did not want BYU because they are not a research institution. Go ahead and play the anti-religion card. It's important to point out here the there are LDS students at every PAC 12 school. And very likely people working at most if not all of them as teachers and staff. So you can only play the anti-religion card to a point.
Like it or not, the PAC 12 has a set of guidelines for membership. Same with the BIG 10 and others.

BTW. Colorado owns BYU. The Cougars are 3-8-1 all time against them!

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

Mt Rushmore:

"Utah was invited as the last choice filler, when all of the teams that the PAC 10 really wanted turned their backs on the PAC."

You're too late to the party. I had already proved that Utah was the original option to be invited to join the Pac-10 before the Big 12 schools were even thought up (see Graham Watson article), and also provided you proof that the Utes would have joined the Pac-10 had they opted to expand to 16 teams as well (see Chip Brown article). Your silly little outburst was nothhing more than pure bitter, frantic and emotional jealousy. How embarrassing for you.

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

Cougars1:

That Jun. 13th blog you referenced by Avinash Kunnath stated the following:

"Texas Tech and Oklahoma State remain firm in their commitment to the Pac-10, but they're pawns in this game. If Texas and Oklahoma make a surprising about-face and leave for the SEC, then it's hard to say whether the invitations will stay open or commissioner Scott will look elsewhere."

Chip Brown's article was dated Jun. 15th. In other words, it was the more RECENT article; written when more facts were present. Chip Brown was also featured on Sports Illustrated ("How Chip Brown stole the Big 12 spotlight; Erin Andrews' payday", by Richard Deitsch, Wed, Jun. 23, 2010) for his accurate coverage of the whole Pac-10/Big 12 South courtship. Nobody wrote anything about Kunnath's (clearly less accurate) musings.

Brown > Kunnath

to comment

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