Speed and Strength.
Lookin good. I can't wait to see these proven athletes on the gridiron!! Go
Needless to say, the Utes are in the living rooms of some pretty high profile
recruits. They may miss on some of these guys but they will get their fair
share. I would much rather see them going after the best recruits and have fewer
early commits than sacrifice talent just to lock down a recuiting class before
Even the scraps that are left behind from the major programs when everything
shakes out later in the process will be guys the U couldn't previously
land. So I'm fine with their strategy of waiting on a lot of these guys.
Utah will end up with a solid class when all is said and done in Feb.
I got to be honest...I was hoping for a little more action at this point.I would assume instate players Barton, Lotulelei and Masina will all be
Utes within the next month or so.I'm really hoping Utah fills
the remaining spots with Texas and Cali recruits.
Who are these bums? How many stars does ESPN/everybody else give them? Who
else even lightly recruited them? Duke maybe, Iowa State, UNLV, Louisiana
Lafayette? Just kidding folks. As I have mentioned before,
Whittingham can get more out of whoever he signs than most of the high-profile
coaches in the PAC-10.2. If he could get some of the players the USCs, et al of
the college football world get, Utah would be a force with which to contend on a
regular basis. But as previously noted, those BYU Cougars paved the way for the
Utahs, Boise States and TCUs of the world. Good luck Utes.
@hedgehog"I would assume instate players Barton, Lotulelei and
Masina will all be Utes within the next month or so."Hopefully
you're right about the second two, but unfortunately we won't get
Barton. He'll go to Stanford.
@CA reader "But as previously noted, those BYU Cougars paved the way
for the Utahs, Boise States and TCUs of the world. Good luck Utes." That is really funny! Please explain how they "paved" the way for
all those schools. The only "paving" that BYU did, was in helping the
creation of the flawed BCS system we have today, which was a direct result of
their weak NC, that was in fact awarded to them and not earned. By barely
beating a very weak Mich. team and not beating a single ranked opponent that
season. So in actuality, BYU kept "the Utahs, Boise States and
TCUs of the world" from earning a much deserved NC those years that they
actually made it to a BCS game. So thanks for nothing BYU...
CA reader.:"How many stars does ESPN/everybody else give
them?"I don't know about ESPN, but Rivals lists Utah's
recruits as four "3-stars" and one "2-star".And, as
Wallbanger so astutely remarked, the Indy-WACers did NOT "pave the way"
for Utah, TCU, or BSU, so don't get all "Lewis and Clark" on US!
How could the Y have paved a road on which they've never trod? You make
absolutely no sense. The TRUTH is, it was UTAH who paved the road. WE were the
"original BCS buster (and winner)". We were ALSO the "original
'repeat' BCS buster (and winner)". Additionally, we were the
first BCS buster to play our way into a BCS conference. TCU and BSU were RIGHT
BEHIND us in pioneering THIS path. YOUR path was jumping out of the most
dominate non-AQ conference in the country, aligning yourselves with the WAC, and
then complaining about religious persecution when the Big 12 didn't call.
You've been a real "Trail Blazer" down THAT road. And it's a
no-brainer as to why nobody is following. USU, SJSU, UNR, FSU, and
Hawai'i' LEFT your new league.
Wallbanger and Naval Vet ...SPOT ON!!!!
The Utes just got another one today. Sam Tevi. Welcome Sam! I can't wait
to see you playing in Red!
Rivals lists 3 4* players in its 2013 top ten for Utah and the Utes won't
get any of them. Bateman is committed to Alabama, Stott to Arizona and Barton
will commit to Stanford. They picked up three 3* players from that group and
may get Lotulelei (another 3*). BYU got one (Shumway).
@WallbangarTexas Christian, Boise State, and Utah have been tearing
it up over the last decade, but in 1984 Brigham Young did something none of
those other "Little Big" teams have even gotten a legitimate shot at:
they finished #1. Unfortunately, BYU '84 differs from those other teams in
another way too: they did not play a single ranked opponent. The only so-called
"national champion" that didn't (though Oklahoma came very close in
1956).BYU's 1984 opponents went 61-85-3, placing their schedule
96th amongst 98 division 1A schools. And yet their performance was as weak as
their schedule. They won five games by a touchdown or less, from a 20-14 win at
3-7-1 Pitt in their opener to a 24-17 win against 6-6 Michigan in the Holiday
Bowl-- by far the worst bowl opponent ever faced by a so-called "national
champion." How bad was Michigan? They finished 6th in the Big Ten, and the
Big Ten was a horrid 12-15 against nonconference opponents and 1-5 in bowl
games. The only conference in the country that was as bad as the Big 10 was the
[Continued]--So how did BYU end up #1? Well, for one thing, BYU was greatly
aided by the weekly upset chaos of 1984. Look at the teams in the top 20 and you
see only one team with just 1 loss, and one other with a loss and tie. Everyone
else had at least 2 losses. The 1-loss team, Washington, lost the Rose Bowl bid
because Southern Cal beat them, so they were not viewed as a conference champion
(though they were, sharing the title with USC). And the 9-1-1 team, Florida, was
hit with probation in September for massive cheating, and no one wanted to
reward a "cheater." So the timing was right.Of course, in
2007 a 2-loss LSU team was rated higher than an unbeaten Hawaii team that looked
a lot like BYU '84, so in the end, what put BYU over the top in 1984 was a
zeitgeist thing. Or maybe a mass psychosis thing. In any case, it had never
happened before, and it has not happened since, even though there have been
quite a few better "Little Big Teams" than BYU '84 before and