Two For FlinchingYou're missing the point about
"access".As soon as the playoffs start in 2014 (which will
quickly expand to 8 teams), not getting a playoff berth will be the equivalent
of playing in the NIT; a nice little post-season consolation prize, but no
chance to win the big prize. Watch and learn - the playoffs will COMPLETELY
overshadow the bowls, no matter how "prestigious" a particular bowl used
You think the PAC 12 won't be screaming if the Big 12 is allowed to have a
conference championship game with only 10 members when they just took on 2
schools which dilute their brand in order to meet the requirement? Yeah...Anyways, even though the Big 12 is unlikely to receive such a waiver I
wouldn't get too excited. While probably better than 8 in 10 BYU fans
wants to see them in a power conference with a larger TV contract, the BYU
administration absolutely loves independence.
@ Anti BCS and the other BYU fansI never said Utah was a contender
for the national championship. My whole point is that because of Utah's
conference affiliation they have better access than any of the teams not in the
Big 5. 11 of the 12 spots in the 6 major bowls will be going to teams from the
ACC, SEC, Big 12, BIG, and Pac-12. Yes they dropped the term "AQ", but
nothing has really changed from an access standpoint. But I'll say it
again because you all seemed to have missed this part; Utah still has a long way
to go before they are part of that conversation.
Utah better hope the NCAA does not let the Big12 have a Championship Game with
only 10 teams. The only reason the PAC went to 12 was so they could have a
Championship game. There is mega money is watching Stanford play UCLA, or
Oregon play USC one more time. If the NCAA allows a championship game with 10
teams, the PAC12 could be back to the PAC10 after shedding two teams who take
more money than they contribute. It's all about the money.If
the NCAA sticks with their ruling that a conference has to have 12 teams to have
a conference championship, I expect the BIG12 to move quickly to add two more
teams. They obviously see the value / money in a championship game. The conference championship game will become one more step in the move to a
more inclusive playoff system.It's also interesting that the
BIG12 is trying to strengthen their non-conference schedule while the Utes are
trying to make theirs easier.
The dream, er delusion, of competing in the Rose Bowl, in a national
championship, having greater access to inevitably nothing is quite humorous.
It'll be interesting to see how the PAC 12 reacts to the Big 12's
request to lower the required number of teams for a championship game from 12 to
10.If the proposal is approved, will the PAC 10 have buyer's
regret for acting too hastily in inviting Colorado and Utah?
twoferUtah fans are operating under the delusion that simply being
in the PAC 10.2 makes the Utes national champion contenders.I hate
to break it to you, but PAC 10.2 banners aren't considered national
championship banners by anybody living outside of Salt Lake Valley.Being a mid-major quality team in a major conference simply makes you a
convenient whipping boy, not a NC contender.
2fer"Utah will have its day in the sun. Even Washington St.
played in the Rose Bowl as recently as 2003."That day for Utah
could be a looooong way off. Arizona and ASU joined the PAC 10 in 1978. 2013
marks their 35th year in the conference. ASU has only played in TWO Rose Bowls
in those 35 years. The Wildcats are still looking for their FIRST Rose Bowl.
Oregon State hasn't played in the Rose Bowl in almost 50 years, since
1965.Don't be so certain that Utah's first Rose Bowl
appearance will be your lifetime.
Two For FlinchingYou seem to be under the impression that Utah has
been competing for national for a national title since the Utes busted their
first bcs bowl. That has NEVER been the case.Despite the frantic
chest beating from the hill, U were never a serious national championship
contender. The best U ever did in the final bcs standings was 6th place, which
wouldn't have gotten U into the four-team playoff, if it had existed back
then. At the height of your football success, you weren't a legitimate
contender, and from what we've seen in the PAC 10.2, it's obvious, U
never will be.------"The Utes are IN the Pac-12
which is currently an AQ conference and considered on of the "Big
5"."Sorry to break the news to U, but there are no AQ
conferences when it comes to the playoffs.
Re: Chris BYou speak of truth. The truth is Utah was invited as a
place holder to the PAC, nothing more. Utah's record in overall sports is
not a good as that of BYU. At present, a couple of religious bigots in the PAC
12 will kill any deal of letting any religion related school into the PAC. Hey,
the PAC wanted the Longhorns, but they were asked to take Baylor as well and
guess what, that killed it.Bottom line. Utah did not get into the
PAC because of sports excellence, it was invited in as a place holder so the PAC
could have a championship game.If the NCAA allows the Big 12 an
exemption to the rule, I think USC, Oregon, Stanford. et al will be seething
with anger in the realization that they would not have needed to share revenue
with two extra schools.
@ gchrisUtah will have its day in the sun. Even Washington St.
played in the Rose Bowl as recently as 2003. There is a lot of parity in the
PAC-12, which makes the week-in week-out grind difficult, but it also opens the
door for great opportunity because it gives everyone a chance.
The Big 12 should be forced to change their name if they are never going to
expand to 12. Asking for special consideration has been a trademark of the
Longhorns for quite some time.
Does anyone living outside Salt Lake City really believe that the Utes will ever
contend for a PAC12 football championship? Their "championship" was
getting invited to a conference that only invited them because they needed two
more teams to 1) enable the PAC to have two divisions and a championship game,
2)an easy in-conference win in all sports for the top tier. The PAC10 could have
accomplished those goals by inviting almost any other "also ran," which
Utah, with the exception of a few good years, has been.
Anyone still talking about BCS bowls and AQ conferences must enjoy driving their
Edsel. The BCS is dead. It's the NIT. Once the playoff starts in 2014
all non-playoff bowl games will be fungible. Moving to a four team
playoff was the crack in the dam. It won't be a crack for long. The whole
dam is coming down. Smart money is on the under if the over/under for moving to
8 or more teams in the playoff is 2016.
@ talkinsportsYou seem to be under the impression that BYU has been
competing for national titles. That hasn't been the case since the Bowl
Coalition was implemented. BYU has had success, but finish in the 20-25 range
and being a mid-major is a far cry from being a legitimate contender.I also think your comment about Utah being on the outside looking in is
incorrect. The Utes are IN the Pac-12 which is currently an AQ conference and
considered on of the "Big 5". Utah still has a way to go, but winning
the PAC-12 means stepping into the national title conversation. Last
point, only one spot is open to the best team from outside the Big Five
conferences. That means out of the 6 major bowl games, 11 of the 12 spots will
go to teams from the ACC, SEC, BIG, Big 12, and Pac-12; including the four
semifinalists. Utah is in a much better position than BYU to access the major
bowls in the new system.
You can just feel the angst growing inside christy as the reality of being a
perennial conference bottom dweller begins to settle in on her. Thinking she was
going to on the inside looking out, but now finding herself at the bottom of the
barrel looking up has been a terrible shock. Hopefully she'll find some
solace in being a well-paid punching bag for the PAC 10.2.
ChrissyRegardless of what changes there may be in the future to the
college landscape, there will be two constants:1. BYU will always be
one of the big boys competing for ANOTHER National Championship2. Utah
will always be on the outside looking in at the big boys of college footballEnjoy being a PAC 12 whipping boy!-------btw,
Access to the only truly important games, the playoffs, will be open to every
team that's good enough; no more secret formulas and automatic entries for
members of "special" conferences.The only teams that will be
locked out are those that aren't good enough.
Chrissy.... It doesn't matter if you rid the coat tails of the Trojans,
Cardinal, or Ducks. Your Yeewts will still finish behind the buffs and cougars
for doormat supremacy in the PAC 10.2Go Trojans!
WOW, THREE frantic and emotional responses from our resident BYU-hater in the
first five comments.Teams that can't even beat conference foes
with winning records effectively lock themselves OUT of the playoffs.Starting in 2014, BYU will have just as much "access" to the games
that really matter, the playoffs, as any member of any conference. And
that's what worrying our little friend on the hill. No more
secret computer formulas. No more automatic berths awarded to members of some
secret society of "special" teams. If you're good enough,
you'll be IN. If you're not good enough, you'll be OUT.
Why don't they just call teams like Boise, byu, or Usu and make 12?Interesting indeed.
It appears that at least for now, this game of musical chairs has stopped. Utah has a seat. Regardless of what changes there may be in
the future to the college landscape, there will be two constants:1)
Utah will be IN2) byu and usu will be OUTSorry. The truth
does hurt. Oh wait, no it doesn't.
If Bowlsby gets what he wants, that could impact BYU's chances of ever
getting into that league. However, by the same token, Bowlsby's desire to
get Big XII teams to play OOC games in Oct/Nov could help BYU as an
independent.Also, what kinds of interconference deals are made, and
between whom, could either help or hurt BYU's independence scheduling. Keep
in mind that Holmoe hinted they're trying to get such deals as an
independent with some conferences. That'd likely be BCS conferences, as MWC
and the like wouldn't make sense as those conferences would schedule BYU
any time anyway.Fun times we live in!
If the BIG 12 won't let BYU in, they should atleast agree to have the BIG
12 team with the best record play BYU at the end of every football season to
determine who should play in the BCS national championship. The ESPN ratings for
the annual game between the BIG 12 team with the best record and BYU would be
through the roof.
You mean the Big 12 would rather stay as an odd 10 team league, when all other
noteworthy conferences are at least 12, rather than invite 2 more teams?There must not be any noteworthy teams not alredy in a real
conference.P.S. byu fans - you guys keep telling yourselves Holmoe
wouldnt jump at the big 12 if they called.But they haven't.And they wont