Comments about ‘BYU schedules UConn in 2014, 2015’

Return to article »

Published: Monday, March 4 2013 2:30 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
skywalker
Palo Alto, CA

2fer

Obviously, BYU CAN beat Utah - they've done so 3 of the last 7 times the two teams have met.

It's funny how uptight Utah fans get when their own arguments are used to contradict them.

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

Lightening Lad:

"There is no reason why BYU can't pull a Notre Dame-ACC tie-in for entry into the new BCS bowls, using the former Big East teams."

Actually there is. For one, Notre Dame is a relevant school that relevant conferences would like to align themselves with. The cougars are not. Secondly, after the BCS' final season (2013), the Big [L]East will be demoted down to the "mid-major" ranks. Sportswriters are already dubbing the "Big Five" as the 5 conferences outside who will be on the outside looking in. And those 5 conferences are the MWC, C-USA, MAC, Sun Belt, and Big East.

The MWC won't take you, but C-USA might. And if C-USA would, that would make more sense than aligning yourself with another mid-major conference like the Big East with even worse travel.

TheSportsAuthority
Arlington, VA

navelvet

Ironically, Utah, as a member of the PAC 10.2, is no closer to qualifying for the new Big Dance (the major college football national championship playoff), than Independent BYU.

In fact, it's very likely that until the field is expanded to 8 teams, the PAC 10.2 could be shut out of the playoffs more often than not.

Two SEC teams, a B1G, a Big 12, an ACC, and/or a Notre Dame or other conference or Independent team, could easily occupy the four available berths, leaving the PAC 10.2 on the outside looking in.

There's no guarantee that Utah would be invited to the new Big Dance, even with a PAC 10.2 championship.

BCS bowls will become nothing more than the new NIT - a nice place to spend the post season when you're not good enough to be invited to the Big Dance.

Marked it Down
Park City, UT

skywalker

"BYU 1984 didn't beat a ranked team, but they didn't beat a Top 25 team, #24 Air Force."

Probably just a typo.

BYU 1984 didn't beat a ranked team, but they DID beat a Top 25 team, #24 Air Force.

Air Force was a very good team; the Falcons STOMPED Va Tech in the 1984 Independence Bowl.

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

skywalker:

"Michigan 1984 would have cleaned Pittsburgh 2004's clock, and that's not just hyperbole!"

Actually, that was. You provided no evidence to support a 6-6 Michigan team down to playing their 4th string QB would have dropped the '04 Panthers. How frantic and emotional of you.

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

TheSportsAuthority:

"...it's very likely that until the field is expanded to 8 teams, the PAC 10.2 could be shut out of the playoffs more often than not."

What a frantic and emotional thing to say. At present, there is no agreement on the criteria for who would play in those games. If "conference champion" becomes mandatory, the Pac-12 is in. Don't forget that the Pac-12 (and the BigTen) are keeping the Rose Bowl. That's a lot of leverage.

The cougars have zero leverage. Mid-majors forever.

MUSSing with U
Baltimore, MD

navelvet

"If "conference champion" becomes mandatory..."

You can stop right there because the SEC will NEVER go along with "conference champion" being mandatory, and without the SEC's participation, there's no point in even having a playoff.

As TheSportsAuthority said:

BCS bowls are destined to become nothing more than the new NIT - a nice place to spend the post season when you're not good enough to be invited to the playoff.

A team that has never beaten a single conference foe with a winning record has no business even talking about playing in the Rose Bowl, let alone thinking that they're "in the mix" for a possible playoff berth.

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

MUSSing with U:

Any team in the Pac-12 and BigTen IS in the mix for a Rose Bowl. Period. Nevermind the fact that I never said "Utah will be playing in the Rose Bowl." I said, "Don't forget that the Pac-12 (and the BigTen) are keeping the Rose Bowl. That's a lot of leverage."

You're mid-majors forever. I can't say I know what that feels like, but it must hurt really bad.

mussingaround
Palo Alto, CA

@naval

"Any team in the Pac-12 and BigTen IS in the mix for a Rose Bowl."

Being in the mix doesn't mean anything until you actually get there; Arizona has been waiting since 1979 and still hasn't made it to the Rose Bowl.

Controlling the Rose Bowl is M-E-A-N-I-N-G-L-E-S-S when it comes to the playoffs.

The only thing the PAC can do is use its limited influence to have the playoffs expanded to 8 teams as soon as possible to give the PAC a better chance of having a regular berth in the playoffs. Without that expansion, it's guaranteed, the PAC will be on the outside looking in at many championship playoffs.

ekute
Layton, UT

byu fans,
Your stats and numbers don't change the fact the Utes own you on the field. Your stats and numbers do prove that you're desperately trying to convince yourselves that going independent was not a mistake.

anti BCS
Anaheim, CA

Why is naval vet still so obsessed with "bcs" bowls?

The playoffs will supersede the "bcs" championship in 2014 and the old "bcs" bowls will revert back to being well-paid football vacations, but completely meaningless as far as the national championship picture is concerned.

When the playoffs expand to 8 teams, inevitable, most of the "bcs" bowl winners won't even finish in the Top 10.

With proposals already being introduced to tie bowl payouts to bowl attendance, the payouts for future "bcs" bowls could shrink dramatically.

In other words, "bcs" bowls will generate much less money and even less prestige.

The most important non-playing day in college football will no longer be national LOI signing day, but national college football playoff selection day.

Two For Flinching
Salt Lake City, UT

@ SLCWatch

How do you know what my interests are? I actually do have an interest in BYU based on the fact that I am interested in local sports and because have friends and family who attend school/play there. I am not allowed to post on a public forum just because BYU isn't my team? My opinions are not invalid just because I see things from a different perspective.

I'm sure you'll have fun traveling. You'll have the best experiences in South Bend and Camp Randall, imo.

I think you might be flattering yourself a little bit towards the end of your post. Most of the old WAC schools see BYU as a rival due to the history. I guarantee you that MTSU and GT do not see BYU as a rival.

TrueBlue
Orem, UT

ekute

"Your stats and numbers don't change the fact the Utes own you on the field."

Actually, the stats prove that despite the one-game successes the Utes have had during the Bronco/Kyle era, BYU has owned U in overall success - more Top 25 finishes, more Top 15 finishes, more conference championships, more bowl games, more total wins, and no ugly losses to 10-loss teams.

Nationally, fans see BYU playing teams from throughout the country and finishing in the Top 25, and Utah playing west coast teams and finishing in the conference basement.

ekute
Layton, UT

@TrueBlue

Nationally fans see Utah kickin' byu's butt every year and playing in a prestigious major conference.

Your stats and numbers do prove that you're desperately trying to convince yourselves that going independent was not a mistake.

Snack PAC
Olympus Cove, Utah

ekute

No need to try convince ourselves that going Independent wasn't a mistake.

Every time a BYU article as mundane as the announcement of a future BYU opponent is inundated with jealous sniping from the hill crowd, it's further confirmation of just how jealous you are that BYU is proving to be more successful as an Independent than you've been as a big boy conference tag-along.

ekute
Layton, UT

@Snack PAC

Go back to the first page off the comments. Who's fans start calling out Utah and the Pac12 by name? Every time a BYU article as mundane as the announcement of a future BYU opponent you guys immediately start comparing it to Utah and the PAC12. Why?...you're desperately trying to convince yourselves that going independent was not a mistake. 5 pages of spinning stats and numbers trying to convince yourselves that byu is a better program than who? Utah. So I stand by my comment that "Utah owns you on the field". The Utes and their fans are secure and delighted with their position in the Pac12. Tis the byu fans who are jealous and insecure. Worried???

Beck to Harline
Provo, UT

@ekute

U've got two different arguments going on. One of national relevance, and two, of head-to-head domination.
Yes, Utah owns the head-to-head series with BYU (in football), and even more so the past few years, despite a few extremely close games. Attribute these wins to recruiting advantages, the participation award U (somehow) get for being in the prestigious PAC 12, or whatever U want. Congratulations- head-to-head, U have had a huge edge over the past 10 years. I concede defeat. It would be ignorant and naive to say that BYU is better than Utah (HEAD-TO-HEAD).
However, national relevance is an entirely different discussion. U've seen all the rankings from national sources. I need not remind U of the difference between 54-10 (one game) and the final poll rankings (whole season). Don't pretend that PAC 12 = more relevant. Not true.
Finally, to say that BYU's independence was a mistake is simply unfounded. The teams BYU has filling their schedules out for the next 10+ years look promising so far. Far more promising than before. Less WAC's every year. It's a process not an instant transformation. Allow it. Go Cougs!

ekute
Layton, UT

@Beck to Harline

"It's a process not an instant transformation"
Does that not apply to the Utes and the Pac12?

"Don't pretend that PAC 12 = more relevant. Not true.
Finally, to say that BYU's independence was a mistake is simply unfounded"
Who are you trying to convince?

Who called out who first? who's doing the name calling? Who's spinning the stats and numbers?

I stand by all my comments. Go Utes

Naval Vet
Philadelphia, PA

mussingaround:

"Without that expansion, it's guaranteed, the PAC will be on the outside looking in at many championship playoffs."

Uh..."guaranteed"? What a 'feel good' frantic and emotional thing to say. The Pac-12's inevitable access to the new playoff system has seriously effected you. I can see that you're in a lot of pain right now. You know full well that even IF Utah and/or the Pac-12's access to the playoff IS limited, it's still a far greater access point than what your mid-majorness will afford you.

You're also most likely very aware of the fact that with schools like USC and "Phil Knight U" in the conference, the Pac-12 will be well represented. Haha! You may wipe your tears now.

Jealous U
Alpine, UT

2011 #25/#26/#34 BYU(10-3) > unranked/#39 Utah(8-5)
2012 unranked/#26 BYU(8-5) bowl winner > unranked/#61 Utah(5-7) no bowl

No spinning needed; the end results/rankings say it all.

Go Cougs!

to comment

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