Comments about ‘Deseret News recruiting grades in for BYU, Utah and Utah State’

Return to article »

Published: Wednesday, Feb. 5 2014 10:15 p.m. MST

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Magna Ute Fan
Magna, UT

The rankings in regards to Utah are somewhat skewed for the worse. Perhaps that is true for USU and BYU as well? But some of the recruiting services are still not showing DJ Law as committed to Utah. And, I believe none of them are crediting Utah with Lowell Lotulelei, although he wasn't counted last year, because he didn't sign a LOI then. That's screwy in my opinion.

CougOrUte..Naah
Nibley, UT

It is nice that Utah did well as opposed to BYU and USU. But even the most rabid Utah fan has to realize that compared to the rest of the PAC 10+2 teams they are still falling behind. I don't get the big brag by Chris B and others that they are beating the other in state schools on the field and in recruiting. You are getting killed in your conference....that is what should matter to you. I get it that you are embarrassed by your lack of success in the PAC 10+2. It does not reflect well on you to try to sooth your conscious by beating down BYU and USU. With the absolutely monster of a schedule you have next year, and the athletes you are recruiting, it is going to be another tough year. Hey and I admit, with BYU and USU's recruiting, it would be just as tough or more so for them. Utah is 4 or 5 years away from competing in the PAC 10+2 even if they start getting higher ranked recruits. Good luck to you, but quit with the chest thumping until you win.

FT
salt lake city, UT

It's ironic that most national services graded Utah and BYU about equal but the DN gave BYU an "A" and Utah a "C". I guess the grades are given on what is expected vs what is attained.
As a Ute fan for over 40 years, I'll admit the program is headed downward and Coach Whit's tenure is probably on life support. Momentum has a lot to do with sucess and the Utes don't have much right now.

Cougsndawgs
West Point , UT

MyPerspective:
First off let me say I enjoy our back and forth and the insight you bring. You have shown me that respect so I return it.

To your point, BYUs struggles with Utah, in no way show how they would do in the PAC12, so you are in fact speculating. You can't do anything but speculate considering BYU isn't in the PAC12. BYU may match up better with other PAC12 teams. I will concede that BYU may do no better than Utah, but again that is by definition a speculation.

I'm glad to see that you agree that it's "obvious" that Utah has not shown they belong or have earned their place in the PAC12. That has been verified...BYUs success in a hypothetical situation is speculation. Surely you can concede that.

Area 52
Tooele, UT

@MyPerspective

This is starting to get real entertaining reading your replies and comments LOL

You got to be kidding yourself if you think Utah’s robust academic portfolio and research is the reason why. We all know BYU has a higher academic portfolio than Utah. You really want to go there? Just ask Star who has higer academic standards.

You still haven’t clearly detailed Utah’s reason to be invited to the PAC12 over BYU. I at least gave you some really good reasons why BYU did not. So, stop with all the side mumbo jumbo and tell me why Utah deserved to be in the PAC12 over BYU?

BeSmart
Cheyenne, WY

@ Myperspective
The Pac-12 expanded in order to renegotiate a tv contract. And what did tv want a championship game (some people have estimated this at 40-60 million dollars) so the Pac-12 would have added SUU to get to 12 if that was their only choice. But they added a good program in Utah.
Any person who says BYU has not been included in expansion for athletic reasons needs to read a little more, it is all over out there that BYU has very good athletics. See all athletic department ratings.
Sunday play is also an issue. 11 games were televised on ESPN networks on sunday. That is a large source of revenue that would stop with BYU.

BlueHusky
Mission Viejo, CA

Yawn. Another protracted pot-pourri of commenters repeating each other.

I don't agree with Chris B's assessment in its entirety, but certainly stars on average do matter. A little. But they are a rating of high school kids. A regression model predicting success based only on star rating would probably would not do much better than a 55% R-square (explaining 55% of the variance).

A better model would be based on a lot of factors.

Ultimately, it is success on the field that validates a star rating. But the star rating is probably a poor predictor of success when applied to an individual.

Elementary statistics, Mr. B.

RealBlue
Holladay, UT

@MyPerspective

You realize that your "Landmark TV deal" is only seen in a regional area, right? Nobody on the midwest, east coast has access to or is interested in your pac12 network. Have you seen the ratings of your ute football games, its non-existent. The pac-12 network is a joke. Everybody but you knows that.

Rdub
Salt Lake City, UT

Good for BYU, they definitely need all the help they can get. It's made the rivalry much weaker beating them year after year. Sadly it looks like Snow may be their new up and coming in state rival. Even the gap is widening for the basketball team. Surely BYU can stay competitive on that front.... can't they?

Cougsndawgs
West Point , UT

MyPerspective:
Also to your point to Area 52, it is true that BYU did not meet the bar established by the PAC12 for being a tier 1 research school...BYU is more geared toward training than research. Utah deserved their invitation because they are in fact a tier 1 research school. That being said BYUs large fan base and national following were what attracted the Big 12, but BYUs desire to maintain tv rights and their exclusive relationship with espn (as well as Sunday play) nixed that deal.

In terms of landmark tv deals, you do realize that the Big 10 will make a bigger deal for TV money bringing in powerhouses like Rutgers and Maryland right? The tv deals have to do with major tv markets not the quality of the programs, as these additions show. Yes, Utah brought more money in terms of a championship game and the SLC tv market...neither of which infers that the additions were great athletic programs. Again, Colorado, Rutgers, and Maryland are all examples of this.

Christine B. Hedgefog
Salt Lake City, UT

1. Pac 12
2. pac 12
3. Pac 12
4. pac 12
5. Pac 12
6. Pac 12
7. Pac 12
8. Pac 12
9. Pac 12
10. Pac 12
11. Pac 12
12. Indy byu
13. Pac 12 Utah

So, is this an attempt to show that Utah didn't do quite as well as BYU, or a glaring comparison of how you stack up against your peers in the rest of the PAC?

Either way, who (in their right mind) would purposely point this out as a Ute fan??? I'd be shaking my head if I wasn't so busy LOLing (as Chris B would say)

Chris B
Salt Lake City, UT

BlueHusky

"But the star rating is probably a poor predictor of success when applied to an individual."

You coudlnt be more wrong. Its proven to be on AVERAGE a very good indicator.

ON another article I pointed to a recent article on NFL.com that said in a recent study(or call it a review or whatever you want if you dont like the term study) of a span of 10 draft classes I believe that 44% of 5 stars were drafted.

An uninformed person would conclude that the star ratings are not good. But that person wouldnt know what they are talking about.

The article points out that only 1% of all recruits are given a 5 star rating, and yet 44% of them get drafted.

isn't it interesting that it wasn't just 1% of 5 stars who got drafted even though only 1% of the college population of footblal players was 5 stars.

This particular article didnt mention the percentage of 3 and 4 star recruits who get drafted, but I have seen other articles that show indeed the higher the star the higher the proabilty of being drafted.

1% of population
44% of them drafted

Chris B
Salt Lake City, UT

@BeSmart,

Sunday play is not really an issue - its something that can be worked around.

If Notre Dame wanted to join the pac 12 or Big 12(which also doesn't want byu) and if they had a no sunday rule, we'd bend over backwards to accomodate them and welcome them to the conference. We'd happy work around their sunday issue(if they had one) and we'd invite them to the conference.

so no, sunday play is not the issue.

Utes Fan
Salt Lake City, UT

I don't know why the Deseret News gives so much a higher grade to BYU than to Utah. Here are the national rankings:

Rivals, Scout, ESPN, and 24/7:

Utah # 68, 69, 64, and 63
BYU # 70, 62, 62, and 66

I would say that they are pretty even. Yes, Utah needs to improve if they want to compete in the Pac-12. No doubt about that. But head-to-head, player-to-player, BYU and Utah were very even.

MyPerspective
Salt Lake City, UT

Cougsndawgs
West Point , UT

"To your point, BYUs struggles with Utah, in no way show how they would do in the PAC12..."

Agreed, it's a data point. Nothing more. My comment was in response response to a statement of fact that byu would be competitive in the Pac-12 and we simply don't know that. Given the results of Utah/BYU match ups the last few years there is nothing to suggest that BYU would be any more competitive today than Utah is and potentially even less. Again, it's only one data point.

"That being said BYUs large fan base and national following were what attracted the Big 12, but BYUs desire to maintain tv rights and their exclusive relationship with espn (as well as Sunday play) nixed that deal."

If I remember right, there was a little more to it than that. Wasn't the question of the Big 12's survival also giving BYU pause? I might be wrong. Bottom line...the Big12 used different criteria and byu was a better fit for them. However, fan bases don't just "will" themselves into a conference and certainly not based on one recruiting class as Area 52 suggested.

LeftCoastUte
DANVILLE, CA

The real issue for Utah is on the field performance for 2014.

If the team gets back to a bowl and achieves a winning record in conference, then the coaching staff can point to progress, stay in tact and next year's recruiting improves.

If the team is 5-7 or worse again next year, then I think we have a coaching change and a complete rebuilding process begins, which could take years.

2014 recruiting class won't have much impact on what happens next fall. The issues that really matter are the quarterback situation and the brutal schedule. 3-9 is a real possibility.

Cougsndawgs
West Point , UT

Chris B:
Stop saying "we would invite them". You have no affiliation with these conferences and no say whatsoever in who they chose to bring in and leave out. You also have no idea what their real objectives or reasons are for taking certain programs over others unless you sit in the board room with them.

Btw, ND wouldn't want U or the PAC12. I think their absence from any conference is a clear indicator that they don't need or want U so don't worry about bending over backwards for them, especially since you wouldn't be...the PAC12 officials would be, and they have no need or desire for your input or opinion.

And BYUs happy where they are and don't need U either...our recruiting is improving, we can schedule all over the country any day we want without big brother telling us what to do, and we aren't getting abused and torn apart in a conference like U are. I'm perfectly happy without U, thank you very much.

MyPerspective
Salt Lake City, UT

BeSmart
Cheyenne, WY

"Any person who says BYU has not been included in expansion for athletic reasons needs to read a little more, it is all over out there that BYU has very good athletics."

I never said that. I said that for decades byu is about sports, sports, and sports and that it takes more than that for the Pac-12...also well documented.

Area 52
Tooele, UT

@MyPerspective

"You got to be kidding yourself if you think Utah’s robust academic portfolio and research is the reason why. We all know BYU has a higher academic portfolio than Utah.

"You still haven’t clearly detailed Utah’s reason to be invited to the PAC12 over BYU."

I'll make it clear for you...
1. Academics
2. Research
3. Athletic prowess (Success in the BCS era)

The criteria was very clear.

I'm sorry but an undergrad institution like byu is fine and has a specific purpose and mission but it is not Pac-12 caliber. Even USNWR shows that...look at their assessment of byu's graduate programs. I won't even bother bringing up the Medical School and research AGAIN.

BeSmart
Cheyenne, WY

@ My perspective
I agree that Utah has a a lot more research wise and graduate program wise and that is a big reason for the invite.

Cougsndawgs
West Point , UT

Area 52:
Actually Utah's academic standing and tier one research status were absolutely huge in their PAC12 invitation. They are a great school that has large research grants and a research emphasis. BYU is a great school also but as MP stated their mission is more for professional training programs than research...just saying.

MP:
You are correct. The tenuous situation if the Big 12 was also an issue for BYU. In hindsight BYU shouldn't have balked but hindsight is 20/20.

to comment

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