Naval,You are correct. I was looking at the Sagarin rankings. The
whole point I was trying to make is that when it comes to last year's
schedule depending on whose sos rankings you look at, BYU had a better sos in
one and Utah in the other. What is so funny is how quick you always are to
dismiss something if it doesn't agree with your line of thinking. If you
had done a little research on schedules.com rankings, you would find out that
they have been around for a while and are known as a very objective poll whose
goal is to get rid of all subjectivity.It's also well known
that Sagarin can be a little subjective as they have a tendency to weigh schools
from BCS conferences stronger with no regard to how good they may actually be.
Of course I also find it interesting that you love to throw out
Sagarin's sos, but love to ignore the rankings which is the final result of
all the data they enter.BYU-26Utah-61
Cougars1:No those were the SOS rankings at the END of the
season...as in AFTER the final bowl game had been played.
Naval,Talk about cherry-picking. Those were the Sagarin sos rankings
BEFORE the season. The Sagarin rankings at the end of the season wereUtes=61BYU=26The only one I could find that calculates sos
at the END od the season is the one I gave you. Just because it doesn't
agree with your agenda, doesn't make it incorrect.
Cougar1:I don't keep my posts on file after they've been
posted. Just the ones that don't, so I can cut & paste them again once
the hypersensitive moderator turns over his/her shift. "I
googled "college football strength of schedule" second one down took me
to a site that has calculated the sos for all college teams after the 2012
season. Lo and behold BYU has an adjusted sos rating of 48 and Utah's is
82. These are adjusted based on how each team finished the season."Yes, I've seen your propensity for incorporating the yellowest selective
statistics in your debates with Howard over how poor your recruiting had been
since leaving the MWC. You throw out the data that doesn't support your
fantasy, and selectively cherry pick the ones that do. That site insists that
Kent St. and Arkansas St. played a tougher schedule than a Pac-12 one. We both
know that isn't true. Go look at Sagarin:For 2012 --Utes
= 41Cougs = 63For 2011 --Utes = 49Cougs = 90"Utah had a much stronger schedule in 2011. But not in 2012."Not so. Utah had a much stronger schedule in BOTH!
Naval,No. What I am saying is that I am ok with playing the weakest
teams in the WAC for a year or two until our athletic director is able to
schedule out far enough so that we can eventually have some amazing schedules.
Like this year. That is something that continually escapes the comprehension of
some Utah fans.So, I am still laughing that you referenced one of
your posts, then I remembered you keep a file of you posts at which point I
didn't just laugh, I blew my drink all over the computer screen. Nice.After the laughing I read your post and am puzzled. Utah had a much stronger
schedule in 2011. But not in 2012. I googled "college football strength of
schedule" second one down took me to a site that has calculated the sos for
all college teams after the 2012 season. Lo and behold BYU has an adjusted sos
rating of 48 and Utah's is 82. These are adjusted based on how each team
finished the season.The "we play a tougher schedule" is getting
old, tired and inaccurate. Frantic, emotional and whiny.
Gone fishin:"How is it that Ute fans claim to out recruit BYU
and yet the Utes hold down the cellar in their conference."What
does outrecruiting the Y have anything to do with our performance vs the other
teams in the Pac-12? Pac-12 teams recruit significantly better talent than our
little brother. Surely you're not suggesting that if we went 7-11 in the
Pac-12 these past 2 seasons, that implies we hadn't outrecruited the the
cougars. It just implies that we hadn't outrecruited the majority of the
other teams in the Pac-12. Don't be so frantic and emotional.
Cougars1:"Why don't you just relax like most cougar fans
...to be honest, I really don't care about as long as BYU keeps winning and
going bowling." So in other words, what you're saying is,
you LOVE lining up opposite the weakest teams in the WAC. But how are you going
to relax now that the IS no more WAC?"You still haven't
explained why Utah has steadily declined as their recruiting classes have gotten
better. That's the real mystery Holmes."Is it STILL a
mystery? It shouldn't be. That "mystery" had already been over a
YEAR ago, and repeated again by me just 2 days ago. If you REALLY don't
know the answer to that, but WANT to, go read what I told "Y Grad / Y
Dad" at the bottom of pg. 1 of the comment page in the DNews article
"Despite some fans' protests, BYU football and Friday night a winning
Howie,By the way, throwing out the 2 highest and 2 lowest numbers is
hair if you do the same for the Indy years. The problem is that leaves you with
1 number which goes back to the point I am trying to make that there isn't
a large enough sampling to make accurate comparisons.
Howard,Why choose those 3 years? That's what I am trying to
say. Which 3 years pre Indy will you or I choose that will be subjective? Why
don't you just relax like most cougar fans and give it a full recruiting
cycle before we conclude that Indy has hurt recruiting at BYU, which, to be
honest, I really don't care about as long as BYU keeps winning and going
bowling. A recruiting cycle at BYU is 4 years plus a two year mission. Throw out
a possible red shirt year to offset those players who don't go on a
mission.You still haven't explained why Utah has steadily
declined as their recruiting classes have gotten better. That's the real
Cougars1Since we're manipulating the data, it seems you want to
exclude 2002 and 2010 from the data set because they were uncharacteristically
good years.To be balanced let's also exclude 2003 and 2008
because they were unusually bad years.When you exclude two good
years and two bad years from the combined Rivals/Scout rankings the pre-indy
announcement ranking average is 54.Compared to the post-indy ranking
of 64 that represents an average ranking drop of 10 spots.But I like
your idea of comparing rankings for equal time periods.So lets
compare the three year average rankings post-indy with the three years
pre-indy.We've already calculated the three year post-indy
ranking at 64.The combined Rivals/Scout ranking for the three years
pre-indy (2010, 2009, 2008) is 49 resulting in a post-indy ranking drop of 15
spots.Now you will want to manipulate the three year data by
excluding 2010 because it was an unusually good year. That exclusion in
unnecessary because 2010 is offset by including 2008 in the data set which was
an unusually bad recruiting year.Whatever data set you use shows
that indy has hurt BYU recruiting.
Howard,I will be happy to explain why I left out those two years. Two
reasons, the top 25 year was an anomaly and not just out of the norm, but way
out of the norm. The 2002 year, as we all know was what happens when you relax
the honor code and academic standards. 1/3 of that class was kicked out due to
the fact that Crowton failed to educate them what was truly expected of them.One more thing, I figured since you were willing to ignore the rules of
statistics in coming up with your numbers, I would do the same. As in comparing
a sample size of 9 years against a sample size of 3 years. To make a fair
comparison you really need to wait another 6 years before drawing any
How is it that Ute fans claim to out recruit BYU and yet the Utes hold down the
cellar in their conference. BYU gets more out of their so-called lesser
recruits that Utah does out of their 12 star rectuits. Enjoy the basement one
Bronco/Kyle Era (2005 to 2012)Top 25 FinishesBronco 5 of 8
(63%)Kyle 3 of 8 (38%)Top 15 FinishesBronco 3 of 8
(38%)Kyle 1 of 8 (13%)Average Sagarin RatingBronco 30Kyle 37Ind/PAC eraTop 25 FinishesBYU 1 of 2 (50%)Utah 0 of 2 (0%)Average Sagarin RatingBYU 30Utah 50Despite the clueless spin from the usual suspects, it's quite
obvious that recruiting rankings are over-rated when it comes to predicting
@HowardWhat U SHOULD be concerned with is that in the past four
years, Utah has had 4 of its best recruiting classes in the past decade, and yet
in each of the past four years, Utah has finished worse in record and/or ranking
than the year prior. Utah2009-2010: Finished 10-3, ranked 24
in Sagarin. 2009 Recruiting Ranking (per Rivals): #442010-2011: Finished
10-3, ranked 26 in Sagarin. 2010 Recruiting Ranking (per Rivals): #322011-2012: Finished 8-5, ranked 39 in Sagarin. 2011 Recruiting Ranking (per
Rivals): #372012-2013: Finished 5-7, ranked 61 in Sagarin. 2012 Recruiting
Ranking (per Rivals): #28.So coming off of your best recruiting
class of the last four year, U had the worst record and ranking. Not a good
trend for Utah.This year (2013), U had a recruiting class ranked #44
(per Rivals). I wonder what will happen? My guess: 4-8.Go Cougars!
@HowieThis is an argument you're going to lose, my friend.
Cougars1 has shown BYU's rankings according to Rivals since 2002. The
average ranking for ALL of those classes is a 63 (that's including the best
two years and the worst two years). The average ranking for the classes from
2002-2010 (the MWC years) is ALSO a 63 (not sure where you're getting that
"47" from).That means that since BYU went independent, 2 of
their 3 classes have been slightly above their average, while one class was
slightly below.So much for your "worst recruiting classes in a
decade" comment. Moreover, this is who BYU is. BYU has higher
academic standards for its football program than most schools, not to mention
the honor code that every student who attends BYU must adhere to. BYU has a much smaller recruiting pool that almost every other college. Yet
the Cougs are doing just fine and are, in fact, excelling.
Cougars1Throw out the two highest?Manipulating the
data?If you must manipulate how about throwing out the best two and
the worst two as outliers?
Howie,Here are BYU's rankings per year.2013-70 2005-632012-61 2004-652011-62 2003-1082010-40 2002-362009-502008-832007-562006-67These are according to
rivals.If you throw out the two best years from rivals and scouts and
average out both you have an average of 64 after announcing Independence and an
average of 61 before. Some people like scouts better and some like rivals. What
is puzzling is what we are to do with all the walk-ons and 2 and 3 star recruits
such as Chad Lewis, Max Hall, Austin Collie, etc. Come on, the real
question is why are you so obsessed with proving that BYU should have not gone
Independent? As a Cougar fan I am flattered with your obsession over BYU.
Cougars1Return to normal?The facts are not on your
side.During the MWC years from 2002 to 2010 BYU's average
recruiting ranking was 47.After the announcement of Indy from 2011
to 2013 the average ranking was 63.A drop of 16 places is not a
return to normal.
sammy,Great point. I should give up trying to educate someone who
refuses to abandon preconceived notions and loves to make stuff up and pass it
off as fact.
Howie,If BYU is desperate as you say then Utah is as well. It seems
they went through some house cleaning of their own.
howieYour concern and knowledge in BYU recruiting is amazing. So
I'm still waiting for the excuses as to why the Utes can't out recruit
USC, Stanford, Oregon, etc. and also lose to a WAC team like USU. Then of course
that brings up the question about losing to the Buffs in 2011.And
then several of us are still curious as to how the Utes continue to recruit so
well and still manage to stay home for the holidays? How's that indicative
of superior recruiting?I think you should really ponder these
questions and provide some real solutions and bring them up to Whit and company
because there's not one BYU fan that cares about your silly remarks about
past BYU recruiting and so called downward trends, especially offered by a fan
of a cellar-dweller program like your precious Utes.ZERO credibility
howie. ZERO LOLAnd how is the panic attack on all fronts in
Uteville? Spring camp train wreck and even the fans are griping about the dismal
performance. Not the usual Rose Bowl hype we typically hear about
this time. Of course after two losing seasons the fans are growing impatient.
Howie,To answer your question, no. First of all, rather than a
downturn, I would look at it as a return to normal. For 1 or 2 years they just
happened to be above average. There is a lot more to being recruited to BYU than
just being LDS. Star is a perfect example. He originally committed to BYU but
was unable to meet academic requirements. I also believe that Utah has taken a
few recruits from BYU because of being in the PAC. But that has always happened
to a degree.(Manti Teo) Sometimes LDS athletes go to other schools because of
better opportunities, but you try to make it sound like the ESPN contract
doesn't help BYU at all in recruiting and that's just not true.As for Holmoe cleaning house. That had more to do with the poor
offensive output over the last couple of years despite having a ton of talent.
Holmoe understands better than you how difficult it is to recruit to BYU. I
guess we will find out this fall if Bronco and Holmoe are smarter than you. I
already know the answer.
Cougars1You think little fluctuations in the talent of BYU's
limited recruiting pool is the main reason for the 3 year down turn in
recruiting?Little talent fluctuations don't explain a 3 year
downturn.Utah's recruiting is on the upswing in the last three
years and part of that upswing is due to some very talented LDS athletes. These are athletes that in earlier years were locks for BYU. But now
these players have an opportunity to play in the PAC12 with the option (if they
choose) of an LDS environment.Utah getting players from the BYU
recruiting pool has more to do with the BYU recruiting downturn than talent
fluctuations. One down recruiting year is a concern.Two down
years is a crisis.Three down years is a disaster.Four down
recruiting years is a program killer.Tom Holmoe is well aware of the
danger that three bad recruiting years pose for BYU.That's why
he cleaned house. Cleaning house is what desperate managers do when faced with
a disaster that they don't know how to fix. It usually doesn't help
solve the problem, but it distracts attention from the disaster.
I don't know about the 2011 recruiting season, but I do remember the 2012
season. Last year they decided to offer wide receiver scholarships to Austin
Collie's little brother and some kid playing 3A ball in Arizona and passed
on the Texas 5A all-state standout. I remember BYU saying "You do your part
and we'll do ours." Well he did his part by receiving All-State honors
in 5A TEXAS! BYU did their part by telling him he had preferred walk-on status.
As long as BYU recruits on nepotism and not athletic performance BYU will
continue to be mediocre at best.
Naval,I would be happy to give some explanation. Not in an attempt
to refute, but to simply bring to light the fact that going from the MWC to
having games on ESPN is not the reason for the drop off in recruiting. It
actually has a little to do with what you say about playing a WAC heavy
schedule.(believe it or not, that really makes a lot of sense to me) You play a
weak schedule, recruits may shy away. One more thing(which I tried to explain to
Howie but went over his head), when you play a lot on ESPN and you lose to all
the good teams you play, that can't be good for recruiting. But, the
biggest explanation may have something to do with the fact that BYU has a small
recruiting pool to begin with and the talent level in that pool only has to
fluctuate a little bit to have a big affect on a recruiting class in any given
year. Bottom line, it's tough to recruit to BYU. Most BYU fans realize this
and are ok with it.
@Nasal VetNo, I am not agreeing with you and Howard. I was simply
referring to your use of Indy-WACey as a derogatory term in an attempt to put
down the team that you seem to have so much contempt for. For someone whose team
is supposed to be the "big brother" and is supposedly far superior to
BYU, you sure seem to have an unhealthy obsession with everything that happens
at BYU, everything that is reported about BYU, and anyone who is associated with
BYU. What happened to cause so much angst and insecurity?
IRS Agent:So in other words, what you're saying is, you agree
with Howard and I that the depth and quality of your recruiting classes had
plummeted since leaving the MWC for the WAC? It sure sounds like it. Afterall,
you had nothing of substance to support any argument to the contrary.
Has "Indy-WACey" replaced "Fail" as the new "hip" phrase
used by intellectuals in an attempt to put down something they don't
understand or agree with? Man, it's hard to keep up with all this new
Bluto:You seem to be under the mistaken Indy-WACey assumption that
everyone who thinks the Y's recruiting classes had plunged to depths not
seen in over a decade must be the same person. But we're not. Howard S,
Scout, Rivals, and I are all entirely unrelated.
sammygSpringville, UT"Does it matter? Does anyone care
about this?"Does it matter?Well... It must matter
because BYU just hired a recruiting coordinator.I don't think
Martzen was hired to continue 3 years of low ranked recruiting classes.
howiehow many times are we going to be reminded about your obsession
of past BYU recruiting classes? Does it matter? Does anyone care about this?What many of us are really curious about is how Ute fans think they will
ever Rose Bowl when they will never out recruit USC, Stanford, Oregon, etc.
Howard, out of curiosity, what Utah recruiting class were you part of?
Martzen has a lot of ground to make up...Since announcing
independence and its ESPN contract BYU has signed its three lowest ranked
recruiting classes since 2002.
Monsieur,That is a great question. He and Doman were favorites of
some kids I know. They were very well liked by the kids. I thought he was
perfect for the position even if they took him away from his coaching
responsibilities. I understand the Atuaia hire from a coaching standpoint, but
Dupaix was a great recruiting coordinator.
Why was Joe Dupaix fired? And why did they wait so late to let him go, after the
deadline when most other universities were looking for new coaches? From what
I've heard, he was not only very capable and an excellent example, but also
well-liked by the players. Why didn't they just keep him on as this
personnel person instead of letting him go?
Am I from generation Y or Z?
Naval Vet, right now the NCAA is looking to throw out A LOT of the limitations
on the amount of coaches contact during recruiting (phone calls, visits, etc.).
This would open the floodgate to daily contact with highly sought-after recruits
from the Universities. Many Universities have spoken openly about hiring a
non-coach person to work fulltime in this role of keeping daily or regular
contact with recruits (among other things...I hope).
"So, why did Mendenhall hire Martzen and not a former player or coach
connected with BYU who needed a job?"Great question that still
remains unanswered by the end of the article. No disrespect to Martzen, but I
would think that someone connected with BYU in the past or the present is going
to add more in terms of selling the BYU program to potential recruits than
someone who comes in from Boise State and Alabama, especially when BYU is
competing against former players who have gone to other places and now try to
denigrate the program.
"Pending the outcome of current NCAA legislation, BYU has not named a
full-time coach as a recruiting coordinator to replace Dupaix..."Pending the outcome of current NCAA legislation? What does the NCAA's
legislators have anything to do with whether or not a school decides to hire a
I hope Martzen plans to take recruits to the Creamery when they visit campus.
I'm surprised that Harmon didn't mention that recruiting edge that BYU
has, given how often he gorges himself on that soft, smooth ,creamy