Quantcast

Comments about ‘Tom Holmoe working to shore up BYU's future in athletics’

Return to article »

Holmoe shares insight on future of Y athletics

Published: Wednesday, May 29 2013 9:25 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
truecoug1
Provo, UT

@MyPerspective "No, you are not happy for them. You are bitter and disgruntled."

Oh, okay. Thanks for telling me how I feel, glad we cleared that up, lol!

"Step out of Utah County some time and walk around the U campus. I've spent lots of time at byu...they are not the same."

Exactly, which has been my point all along. BYU and Utah are not the same, especially on a cultural level. Utah is a much more liberal school than BYU. That doesn't make them better or worse than BYU. But it makes them a great cultural fit for the PAC.

"You and I are faithful members of the same religion. I am asking you to please stop using our religion as a scapegoat for byu's weaknesses."

I'm not using OUR religion as a scapegoat. I have shown how other writers around the country all know and understand that the PAC will never invite any religious-based institution (not just BYU, Baylor was on the list as well). And that's fine, that's who the PAC is, and I love that BYU is independent.

truecoug1
Provo, UT

@Wiscougarfan

Thanks for the information, I didn't know that the 'tier 1' research classification had changed.

@MyPerspective

Just in summary, I really am happy for the Utes. The PAC is a great fit for them, and I hope that they are able to eventually have success on an athletic level as well.

But saying that Utah got in because they are a better academic school than BYU, or because they are a research university, or because their athletic prowess is superior to that of BYU is complete spin and hogwash.

I love BYU as an independent. I love the exposure that BYU has gotten since going independent, and the positives that that is having for the university and for the LDS faith.

I think it's great that Utah is in the PAC. It's a perfect fit, and it automatically raises the reputation and stature of the state of Utah while enhancing the profile of the University of Utah.

I wish both schools the best of luck going forward.

Go Cougars!

MyPerspective
Salt Lake City, UT

truecoug1

"...Exactly, which has been my point all along. BYU and Utah are not the same, especially on a cultural level. Utah is a much more liberal school than BYU."

Actually truecoug1, what I was referring to are the buildings and programs at the University of Utah dedicated to research. You will not find anything remotely similar to that at BYU. Take a stroll around the U campus, particularly upper campus where the hospital is located. Observe the assets dedicated to advancing our body of knowledge and quality of life (cancer, genetic diseases, new medications and treatments, inroads in molecular biotechnology, etc., etc.). That is what research institutions do and you will not see that at BYU. I know because I've looked.

Out of necessity, research programs generate graduate and PhD fields of study which is exactly the reason, Wiscougarfan above acknowledges, as does BYU and everyone else who understands that the University of Utah is a research institution. And a darn fine one at that. Which, coming back full circle, is one of the must haves Pac-12 wanted.

Finally, you are indeed using our religion as a scapegoat.

truecoug1
Provo, UT

@MyPerspective "Out of necessity, research programs generate graduate and PhD fields of study which is exactly the reason, Wiscougarfan above acknowledges, as does BYU and everyone else who understands that the University of Utah is a research institution. And a darn fine one at that."

And again, I have never disputed that. I think that the U is a fantastic institution and that it does some great research. But the whole point of my initial argument was to show that even for all of that, and for the great graduate programs that the U has (which the USNWR took into account), BYU was still ranked as a higher NATIONAL academic institution than Utah.

And if a research institution was a must have for the PAC 10, then why on earth were they considering Texas, Oklahoma, and OSU as expansion candidates BEFORE Utah?

You have yet to respond to that question.

MyPerspective
Salt Lake City, UT

Wiscougarfan
Thanks for bringing common ground to this conversation.

Your post:

"I don't think many BYU fans dispute that the U has a higher reputation than BYU for research....you have inferred that BYU is inferior academically, which it isn't."

Followed by...

"BYU does not have a medical school nor does it have dozens of graduate programs like the University of Utah."

That's exactly the point. A medical school and dozens of graduate programs is superior to no medical and few graduate programs especially when those graduate programs are deemed to be of high quality. BYU does a tremendous job with the programs they have particularly at the undergrad level, no question. Research can be a double edge sword. You are correct that research can detract from teaching, I've seen it. On the flip side, it opens opportunities to introduce cutting edge knowledge into the classroom.

"[BYU] isn't a research focused school, which was a major reason it was not considered for the PAC12." Thanks. I wish all BYU fans and LDS members would acknowledge that. Calling people "bigots" because we are disappointed is hardly reflective of what we claim to stand for.

truecoug1
Provo, UT

@MyPerspective

And finally, I'm not using religion as a scapegoat. U have stated that Utah's standing as an academic institution, their athletic prowess, and their status as a research institution are what got them in to the PAC instead of BYU.

I have simply pointed out that BYU ranks higher as an academic institution than Utah, that BYU's athletic prowess and legacy is far greater than Utah's, and the fact that the PAC was willing to invite Texas, Oklahoma, and Oklahoma St throws the research institution difference out the window, since none of those teams are research institutions and the PAC wanted them before Utah.

So then what is the biggest difference remaining between the two schools? One is a church-based institution, the other is a more liberal university, which is much more conducive to the PAC 10

That's the perception of the PAC 10, as evidenced by several national writers. Which is fine. But that IS the perception.

U can believe what U want. I'm done with this argument. I'm happy for Utah and their situation and I'm happy for BYU and where they're at as an independent.

Go Cougars!

Wiscougarfan
River Falls, WI

RE: MyPerspective

"That's exactly the point. A medical school and dozens of graduate programs is superior to no medical and few graduate programs especially when those graduate programs are deemed to be of high quality."

We'll have to agree to disagree on this point. I believe the "academic" prestige that we've been discussing comes from the experience the students have at the institution, not the reputation and research production of the faculty. BYU is known around the world for producing students who go on to accomplish great things while Utah is well known for the advances made by their faculty through the medical school and other graduate programs. I understand that I am biased in these regards (as a BYU grad) but there are many other measures that seem to support this assertion... BYU is among the top 10 schools for producing students who go on to law school, med school, dental school, and PhD programs. BYU grads are heavily over represented in politics, education, and as small business owners (to name a few). Meanwhile, Utah has several nobel winners on their faculty and have made several notable contributions in medicine, engineering, and science. Apples and oranges?

MyPerspective
Salt Lake City, UT

Wiscougarfan
Actually, I think we have reached the point where we are in agreement.

"BYU is among the top 10 schools for producing students who go on to law school, med school, dental school, and PhD programs."

The point is, those BYU students who move on to these aspirations do so at other institutions. Why? Because BYU cannot meet the needs you list (except Law - which according to USNWR is very good). So, if you were a President or Chancellor in the Pac-10 and you were looking for new additions with a reasonable geographic foot print to meet criteria of 1) academics, 2) research, and 3) athletics...what would you do? Invite a school that students have to leave achieve what they want? Of course not. That isn't what the Pac-10 is about. Truecoug1 is right, Utah is a good fit but not for the reasons he continues to assert.

Btw...always enjoy reading your posts. Generally fair and insightful. I assume that "Wiscougfan" is Wisconsin. The Badgers...there's a campus I would like to visit! Enjoy the BYU game, should be a great one!

Go Cougs!

Wiscougarfan
River Falls, WI

Re: MyPerspective

Cheers, I enjoy civil debates as well. Though I've never been a UofU fan I did grow up in Utah and several of my friends and family went to the U, often for the reasons you have cited. As I've attended and taught at various universities across the country I've become increasingly grateful for the educational opportunities available in Utah and the unique atmosphere I enjoyed at the Y. I hope my children might consider BYU, UofU, or USU when they leave for college.
Go Utes! (and of course, go Cougs!)

Cougars1
Bluffdale, UT

"But I think Utah is a great fit for the PAC and I'm happy for them." No, you are not happy for them. You are bitter and disgruntled. Step out of Utah County some time and walk around the U campus. You will be surprised at how incredibly wrong you are. I've spent lots of time at byu...they are not the same.

perspective,
That comment is very insightful as to who you really are.

Riverton Cougar
Riverton, UT

Research and academics are two different things. To say a school is good academically because of its research is like saying a school is a high research institution because of its academics. Utah focuses on research; BYU focuses on academics.

This debate is very interesting and good points have been brought up, but one question still remains unanswered:

If research is so important to the PAC, then why did they invite the schools mentioned such as Oklahoma State?

U 90
Corona, CA

Truecoug, Insights learned from your posts:
1- BYU is getting owned by a "small time" football program
2- Said small time program has more BCS bowl success than BYU, not to mention other small time programs like Boise State and TCU. Even "tiny-time" Hawaii has more BCS success than BYU
3- The Big East is a major football conference (WOW, check yourself on that one Bro)
4- In your imagination the BIG12 had an invite ready to be extended to BYU. Please provide evidence

Lets go back to your original post that started all of this. You said, "it wasn't that long ago that BYU had taken 3 out of 4 from Utah and the shoe was on the other foot. Utah's got scoreboard over the last three years, but.... Two of the last three wins were given to you on a silver platter."

I've got news Truecoug, Utah owns BYU over the past 20 years. To use you approach.... had it not been for the gifts of 98, 00, 01, 06, 07 and 09, Utah would own a 19-1 record over BYU over the past 20 years.

truecoug1
Provo, UT

@U90

Things I learned from your post:

U agree that Utah is a small-time program

U still use beating BYU as your metric of success. Wow...that's as little brotherish as it gets.

I've got news for you U90. Boston College has owned Notre Dame over the last 11 years. Do U think BC is a better, more relevant program than Notre Dame?

One more thing: U said in your original post that BYU had been completely ignored by major conferences. I then pointed out that BYU had been in discussions with the Big East and Big 12, thereby refuting your point that they were 'completely' ignored by major conferences. I never said anything about invites, and U didn't either.

And the Big East has retained their status as a 'BCS league' and automatic BCS-qualifier through all of the changes that have occurred. Do I think they're a great conference? No. But they will still have their champion go to a BCS game this year.

Enjoy your small-time program. Oh, and keep comparing yourself to BYU. It's cute.

Go Cougars!

Cougsndawgs
West Point , UT

Riverton Cougar:
Actually the PAC 10 (12) never wanted Oklahoma State, but would have taken them if it meant getting Texas. The best evidence of this is that even when Oklahoma wanted into the PAC 12 in 2011 (Oklahoma is a tier 1 research school), the PAC 12 wouldn't take them if it meant including Oklahoma State. Most reports from 2010 pointed to the PAC trying to work some deal out with Kansas instead of Oklahoma state even though OU wouldn't come without them. In the end it was about Texas, and the PAC would have swallowed ok st unwillingly ONLY if Texas was a part of the deal.

U 90
Corona, CA

True,

The only reason a comparison to BYU was made is because a Y fan is calling Utah "small time". Don't you find it a bit ironic that you are hating on the same team your Cougars can't beat? Enjoy throwing those stones from your glass house.

Utah must measure itself against PAC 12 competition which so far isn't going as well as hoped (.388), but certainly better than BYU's record vs. Utah over that same period (.000), and also better than BYU's record vs. the Utes over the past 20 years (.350). Given those percentages vs. Utah I don't see why you feel the need to put down the Utes.

I'm completely happy if Utah can achieve middle of the PAC status with occasional strong showings leading to a big time bowl game. I personally wish BYU all the best, I cheer for them to make it in to a big conference because it would make Saturdays in the Fall that much more fun. I just think a pot needs to be notified when he is calling the kettle black.

truecoug1
Provo, UT

@U90

Don't U find it a bit ironic that you're complaining to me about trash-talking the Utes when YOU'RE the Ute fan on a BYU board who has been trash-talking the Cougars?

Utah has scoreboard. That's fine with me. It's part of rivalries, they swing one way and another. Utah has won 13 of the last 20 against BYU. Again, that's fine with me. Utah's had the edge over the last 20 years, mostly by a couple of plays here or there.

So congratulations.

But Utah is small-time. U compare yourself to BYU and use beating BYU as your metric of success because BYU is the top dog in the state. They drive the ratings, the media, and have the larger fan base.

And the Utes are viewed as small-time outside of Utah as well, as I showed in previous posts. That's not opinion, it's fact.

So enjoy the scoreboard. But quit whining about my trash-talking or "the pot calling the kettle black" when U started the whole thing in the first place.

If U can't take it, don't dish it out.

Go Cougars!

Wiscougarfan
River Falls, WI

RE: Cougsndawgs

"The best evidence of this is that even when Oklahoma wanted into the PAC 12 in 2011 (Oklahoma is a tier 1 research school), the PAC 12 wouldn't take them if it meant including Oklahoma State."

This is only half true. Oklahoma is considered "tier 1" by US News & World Report, which gives that designation to ALL ranked schools in any given category (approximately 200 national schools). Under that definition BYU is also considered "tier 1." What the PAC 12 is interested in is the Carnegie classification of "very high research activity" (they quit using "tiers" a few years ago). Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, Texas Tech, and BYU are all "high research activity" schools, making them a bad fit for the PAC 12 profile. Now that didn't stop the PAC from inviting the Big 12 schools so obviously there's more to it than "academics, research, and athletics."

U 90
Corona, CA

TC1,

Go back and look at the timeline. Before I even came on here you posted twice about (1) Utah being a little brother (2) Utah's wins were lucky because BYU served them up up a silver platter. Who started this?

I entered the conversation only to point out how flawed your thinking is. First, Utah isn't behaving like a little brother (the Utes own head-to-head, 2 BCS bowl wins, invitation to PAC etc.), and (2) if 2010 and 2012 were lucky wins for Utah then I guess 09, 07 and 06 were lucky wins for BYU... see how that balances out?

truecoug1
Provo, UT

@U90

I "started" all of this responding to Clark Griswold, another Ute troll on a BYU board who was trying to bash the Cougars. U jumped into the fray and talked about how Utah 'owns' BYU. I reciprocated.

Not sure why you're still whining about that, especially since U are the Ute fan on a BYU board commenting about how the Utes own BYU.

And I'm not arguing that Utah had a great run from 2004-2008 and that they currently own scoreboard. But if you'll notice in my original post to U, none of that is what makes U the little brother.

It's the fact that your fan base is less than half the size of BYU's, your 'legacy' consists of a run of 5 years that resulted in 2 BCS bowls (a great accomplishment, but hardly legacy worthy), and that U constantly use beating BYU as your metric of success, and even tout that more than your BCS wins.

THAT'S what makes U the little brother to BYU.

truecoug1
Provo, UT

@U90

And sure, '06, '07, and '09 can all be considered 'lucky' wins for BYU if U want to lump every game decided by a TD or less in that category.

As I've mentioned before, that's what makes the rivalry great! It'll be sad to see it go away for 2 years.

My initial point was to show Ute fans who say that "BYU can't beat Utah" or "Utah dominates BYU", and who apparently believe that there is a vast talent discrepancy between the two teams, that that's not true. Most of these games come down to one or two plays, which is why it's such a great rivalry.

The trash-talking is also part of what makes it a good rivalry.

But your whining about my trash-talking makes me glad that we'll have a two year break from 'fans' like U, people who can dish it out all they want, but can't seem to take it when BYU fans bite back.

It's all in good fun :) If you're taking it this seriously, then it really IS good that the rivalry will be on hiatus for a little bit.

to comment

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