Walker's never played a Single down as a PAC player. Either DNews's Dirk Farcer
or ESPN"s Ted Miller are way too far ahead of themselves. Utah's rowboat
hasn't left the dock yet.
Be nice. They stamped "PAC 10.1.1beta Certified Beef" on
his forehead and now he's an elite player.
Guys, the blog is a list of returning tacklers for each team. Or possible
replacements for a team's returning tackler who is not returning. That's it.
Not a list of who will be the best tacklers next year.Seeing as
Walker was the leading tackler last year for Utah, he returns this year, and
Utah will play in the Pac-12 this year, what doesn't make sense about that?I wish the Y would start teaching reading comprehension.
250 million per sounds just about right....It's great to be a UTE!!!
Ann..."Great to be a Ute!!!"Why?The respect factor? "Athletic prowess"? Or just the ability to ride
everyone's coattails?==="Have to say, in all my
conversations with industry analysts and sources familiar with the negotiations,
I have not once heard anyone say: Utah and Colorado have helped raise the
price.Not once.......The question remains and I think
its an important question :Will Utah and Colorado increase the
leagues revenue TV revenue enough to make a 1/12th split of the pot greater than
a 1/10th split of the pot.In other words: If the conference could
get $200 million annually with 10 teams (for example), will it get $240.1
million with 12 teams.Are Utah and Colorado, and the
inventory/programming/cable households they bring, worth an extra $40.1
million?Many industry analysts Ive talked to are highly skeptical
about the value-added that Colorado and Utah bring to the table. They believe
the per-school split would have been greater without expansion."===Wow-- That must have left a mark...
Of course FOX turned the deal down. They are too busy trying to prove President
Obama dose not have a US Birth Certificate.
Interesting part in the negotiations article about doubts as to whether Utah and
Colorado even bring in an additional 40 million of value. The writer thinks that
the PAC10 would have likely brought in 240 million without Utah and Colorado and
questions whether it was a good idea to bring them in. I would have to agree. I
live in Colorado and there aren't many watching Buffs games (only in Boulder
because of years of futility). And Utah is a small market with MANY alums of the
U still residing in the area. It is definitely a commuter, local school without
any national following. I'd be interested to see the PAC12's commissioner
explain why other teams piece of the pie is getting diluted. I think
they were bummed that they had to go for their 5th and 6th choices for teams
(and markets) and had to pull the trigger because they didn't want to look
foolish not having landed a championship game. I see more upheaval in future
years when USC and the other powers are tired of sharing their money with Utah
and Colorado (similar to how the MWC was with BYU and Utah).
continued . . . BYU and Utah were demanding the lions share of
viewers in the MWC yet getting an equal cut. However, I think Utah and Colorado
(although Colorado has a big enough market to do it when they are playing well)
won't be able to bring in 20million each of value and will seem like a leech
instead of a contributor. There will be conference realignment
issues again in about 5 years I bet. The bigger revenue earners will not want to
support the smaller PAC12 schools any longer (and the same with other
hedgehog"250 million per sounds just about right...."Is that microbes per liter of that black swamp water in Michigan?Impressive.
Interesting comments on the San Jose Mercury article forums. I know one article
isn't imperical proof, but I'd say most PAC-10 fans, at least those in NoCal are
very supportive of CU and the UofU joing the PAC and recognize they bring value.
What a breath of fresh air to read.
Veritas AequitasFor someone without a horse in the race, you sure
spend a lot of time pointing out the potential negatives of Utah and CU joining
the PAC, well I mean paraphasing and cutting and posting the peices that support
Ahh, Hedgehog it's great to see you came out of your hole long enough to see
your own shadow. Will be another several weeks of bitter comments.It'll be interesting how the pac-12 plays out this year with the expected
adjustment to the divisions. Sad to see Colorado in the mix as they seemed to
be invited for the Denver market rather than the product they market in their
Re: hedgehog"250 million per sounds just about
right...."Larry Scott has interlarded his conference with two
schools that add no aggregate market value. So, not really."It's great to be a UTE!!!" One wonders how true this
can be if you have to keep telling yourself that.
Can someone please explain to me as to why so many byU fans are so interested
and concerned with the Utes future? We'll be fine, and thanks for your concern.
And where is sammyg? I'm absolutely shocked he hasn't commented on here yet. I'm
a little bit worried about him.
Wilner isn't stating anything everyone, except for deluded ute fans, didn't
already know. Of course utah adds no value to the pac10 other than being a 12th
team so they can have a championship game. There is little in the way of a
fanbase and outside of utah and one lonely ann arbor basement utah fans are no
existant.But the truth is utah fans don't need to care about that.
They got in and they are going to (eventually) get a peice of whatever pie the
pac10 gets. If I was a utah fan I wouldn't care about the facts either other
than the logo on the field.
From the article"Have to say, in all my conversations with industry
analysts and sources familiar with the negotiations, I have not once heard
anyone say: Utah and Colorado have helped raise the price.Not
once."Utah and Colorado are anchors not sails. With USC on
probation, not a lot of interest in the PAC 12. Re; wallbanger- You
may want to pose the same question the hedgehog, what's his fixation with BYU?
It's funny that the Utah sports are going to continue to be broadcast on Versus.
Holy cow,Lot's of ignorant rhetoric on the board. Not signing with
Fox was the first step to getting the deal on the open market, which is what
Scott said would happen all along.The statement that Utah and
Colorado don't increase the value of the contract is a little short sighted, and
it has already payed off in millions of dollars to the Pac-12 with just the
addition of next year's championship game. Remember the game that wouldn't have
been possible without the addition of Utah and Colorado.It AMAZES me
the lengths that BYU trolls go through to tear down Utah going to the Pac-12.
We've hear everything from Utah will be bottom feeders, to they were the
Pac-12's booby prize, to the fan's will stop going, won't ever get a BCS bid, to
now, Utah adds nothing to the Pac-12 t.v. deal.Hey trolls, get over
it, Utah is in the Pac-12.
Ibleedcrimson | 3:30 p.m. Cottonwood Heights, UT Veritas Aequitas"For someone without a horse in the race, you sure spend a lot of
time pointing out the potential negatives of Utah and CU joining the PAC, well I
mean paraphasing and cutting and posting the peices that support your
agenda." ===I have and "Agenda"?LOL!!!What makes you think I have no horse in the race?I have
followed Utah basketball and football, have had many friends and relatives and
play and coach there, have been too many games, and will probably attend more
games than many Ute Posters.Speaking of horses, it's not that I have
no horse, it's just that I like to point out the horse fertilizer that
over-zealous, arrogant Utah fans that live in hedges and bleed crimson
constantly post (they never cut and paste, because that would show they read...
and heaven forbid someone read the articles, so I'm very sorry if I bring the
facts to you...)===Wallbanger | 4:06 p.m.Why do
Utah fans believe if you enjoy BYU sports, you are forbidden to have and
opinion, or enjoy UofU sports (or the lack thereof)?
doesnt really matter where the Pac 12 goes I dont have any interest in watching
them play there are so many college teams out there it is impossible to have it
come down to 2 seperate teams at the end of the season and have it come down to
winner take all. and as far as the teams that get picked for the bowl games
thats another nightmare its not how good they played its based on who likes
which school the NCAA needs to be thrown out the window and its time for a
change so that a college can get into a bowl game based on their winning record
and not how well liked they are.
I'm glad my teams leading tackler wasn't a free safety last year...
@ sid 6.7 ... Has ANYONE seen Obama's birth certificate?If he has
one and is withholding it to make his opponents look dumb, then he's pretty
smart. If he doesn't have one, then well...@ everyone else...The Pac-10's recent football follies and failures are coming back to
bite them. Their pickup of a non-AQ school and another down-and-out BCS football
school didn't help their image one bit. Losing out on Texas really showed the
West Coast Pac-?? their place.So much for all those millions the
Utes were counting on.An open market means they'll have to settle
for a lesser deal from somewhere else. And, where might that be? I doubt ESPN is
licking their chops.Maybe the conference can start winning their way
back into favor, now that the mighty MWC has been basically disbanded---you
know, the conference that's had a winning record over the Pac-10 for some years
I'm moving to Ann Arbor....Cheaper housing...
BYU's deal with ESPN is looking better all the time!Texas has
already shown signs of envy.
The only thing Utes and Buffs bring to the PAC is the opportunity for a
conference championship game, that neither of them will likely be in. If it
weren't for the championship game, neither would have received an invite.USC and Texas will be independent within a couple of years. When USC
goes independent, the PAC deal will lose 25 - 30% of it's value. But don't get
me wrong, the PAC deal will still be a lot better than The MTN deal a.k.a. the
deal that killed the MWC.
'the PAC deal will still be a lot better than The MTN deal a.k.a. the deal that
killed the MWC.'kewgfan,nooo, the PAC12 deal will be the
biggest in the Nation. bigger than the SEC, BIG12 or Big10.Actually
nothing is even close to what the PAC12 will bring in.
"the PAC12 deal will be the biggest in the Nation. bigger than the SEC,
BIG12 or Big10"bwahahaha!
As I recall, Colorado was invited and Larry hoped the Big-12 would implode and
they'd suddenly be the PAC 16....(SEC wannabe's). When that didn't happen,
well, they still needed another team to get to be the "PAC 12" so then
Utah was the last eligible team to invite. It took Utah about 1/5th of a second
to accept. (I don't blame them for that.) I guess they thought they could win
the PAC 12 since that league seems to be floundering at present and they no
doubt wanted to get away from Air Force, TCU and Boise State because it would be
too embarrassing to lose to them each year. Utah showed their true strength
last year when they met Notre Dame. Arizona has never played in the Rose Bowl
and we have no reason to believe Utah is any better than them; Colorado isn't
either, for that matter.So yes, Utah was a needed commidity to equal
12 schools; they bring nothing else except tied for smallest stadium in the
conference. Cheer now, weep later, Utes!
Serious?Fox turned down a $300 million deal to show the Utah vs.
Colorado game?Come on, what were they thinking???I would
have paid $15 for fifty yards seats on the first 10 rows for that brawl... (on a
Thursday, if there were no new episodes of The Office on that particular
Thursday)....Not a Friday or Saturday, though...I have
things to do then....
Did Scott price themselves out of the market? This league isn't that good.
hedgie, can you remind me, how much of the PAC loot do the Utes get next year
and the year after? By 2013, USC will be independent, and the loot will
dwindle.Prediction: Utes played in more BCS games the past 10 years
out of the MWC than they will in the next 10 years out of the PAC.
RealbassYour comments continue to show your ignorance regarding
sports, your prejudice against the University of Utah, or your insecurity
regarding their success.
I think scott purposely asked for far more than he knew FOX was willing to pay
so that it would open up the contract for bidding. I still think he
overestimates the value of the pac but to be honest with you even if he thinks
it's worth $220 mil and they only wind up getting $180 mil it is still a huge
bundle of cash.
CougFaninTX how does the comment "Prediction: Utes played in more BCS games
the past 10 years out of the MWC than they will in the next 10 years out of the
PAC" reflect on BYU? Every Cougar fan on here posting how aweful the Utes
will be in PAC-12 rips their own team. Do you honestly think BYU would fair any
better overall year in and year out considering BYU hasn't gone to the BCS once
playing MWC competition? I hope both schools do well both as an indpenedent and
in the PAC-12. The MWC was HORRIBLE period. Both schools are better off and will
actually have meaningul competition win or lose.
BYUCOLORADO,You and John Wilner are both missing one very important
point. Without two more teams the PAC-10 wouldn't have a championship game,
which stands to be a big draw even before the new TV deal gets done. Regardless
of added value as far as TV market goes, Utah and Colorado made that possible.
Most of us Ute fans are well aware we weren't first pick, but that doesn't mean
we aren't happy to be there.
belgie,Most of us are hoping Comcast/NBC doesn't win the bid.
Pac 10 Non BCS games last yearNew MexicoPortland StateSacramento StateBYUHawaiiTCU Boise StateNorthern
ArizonaToledo CitadelUC DavisHoustonMontana
StateSMUThe conferences represented here are Big Sky, Pac
West, USA, WACThe Pac 10 lost three of those games, want to try and
guess which ones.The TV deal will depend on how well the pac
commissioner can convince the bidders that they will be a strong conference and
able to win those games outside their friendly home confines. Michigan and
Appalacian State (remember that one) Utah beat mich that year also, but the App
state win took some glitter off the ute win.Looks like a tough
sell.The article doesn't give Utah and Colorado much value to bring
to the table. either, perhaps this is why the Pac 12 has determined to not
give a full share right away. When USC goes independent who will
they be able to bring into the conference to keep a championship game. Boise
State (small market)BYU(not interested, too much to loose). The future is very
uncertain for the Pac 12.
mr. j,Neither was ours. Chaz Walker has always been a linebacker.
I thinky you are confusing him with Brian Blechen.
Does Veritas even know anything about sports? Makes this site very unpleasant
and must be jealous of anything good that happens to Utah. Utah and
Colorado don't care at this point whether they bring the value because they are
in a great conference and without them, there is no Pac 12 championship game.
There's the value proposition. That game alone will bring more revenue to Utah
than the MTN network paid per year. Question: Would BYU brought more
value to the Pac 12? It doesn't matter because they will NEVER be invited.
@mormonutei'm talking about Andrew Rich.
Will you guys leave the Utah State Bubble for a sec and go read the actual blog
post by Wilner, including the comments? Most of the comments question Wilner's
statement about what Utah and CU bring to the table. On commenter made a good
point that without 12 good TV markets, a good Pac 12 Network deal would not be
easy to sell. But with 12 TV markets in the top 30, the bidders will likely
bring what is needed to the table to buy the rights to network, cable, Pac 12
network, and radio broadcasts.$300 M was a pie in the sky request to
see if FOX would buy rights to network, cable, and radio rights and burying the
chance of a Pac 12 network. I'm sure neither side really expected to see it go
through with both sides wanting it to go to open bidding.And to
those that think the big teams are going to go independent, you haven't been
keeping up with what the Pac 12 as a conference plans on doing with their
network. I'd like to see USC try to do that on their own.
Whatever TV deal the PAC gets, it will be better than the Mtn. I tried watching
several U games (like ISU) last year and couldn't find it anywhere-in SLC!.
Hopefully that will never happen again. I'm assuming Scott overpriced the bid
because the PAC wants to be on ESPN. What's really crazy is that
Texas landed a 300M deal (over 20 years) for one FB game a year (and some
basketball games)! The entire PAC plays more than 20 games a year, and they
can't land an equivalent annual TV deal? I wonder if ESPN would pay the 300.
Fellow Cougs, You're embarrassing! Utah is in a great position in the Pac
12. Get over it! BYU is in a great position with independence. Be
grateful! All you belittling Utah sound like insecure little
children. BYU would have jumped at the chance to join the Pac. But, didn't
happen. We did, however, get a great deal with ESPN. I'm quite excited! Seriously... get over it! Be glad your not Utah State stuck in the WAC.
In light of this new information the Mtn. retracts its earlier bid and now bids
Is that what the Deseret News has come down to now, just a listing of links to
other articles? I miss the real reporting.
Why shouldn't the other PAC teams welcome Utah and Colorado. As was pointed
out, it gives the PAC a championship game which translates into more moeny.I apologize if I don't see an elevation in the quality of the sports,
except for the lady Utes gymnastic team. Other than that, I don't see this move
helping "The conference of Champions" a great deal.
Here's why Scott is crazy with his estimates of PAC-10 values: He thinks his
conference is worth more than the Big Ten or SEC, but that defies simple math.
Schools in the Big Ten are huge, and their fan bases are huge, and the media
markets they occupy are huge. Ohio State is literally twice as big as the
University of Utah or USC or Oregon State or Stanford. Likewise, three of the
four biggest stadiums in the country are in the Big Ten.
'He thinks his conference is worth more than the Big Ten or SEC, but that defies
simple mathOHBU,Its not math....it's timing. When the
SEC and Big10 renew their contracts they will exceed the PAC12. But as it stands
now, the PAC12 will be awarded the largest network contract in the nation.Deal with it.
re: hedgehogDon't count on it. What does the PAC have that the B12
doesn't? The Big12 landed a good contract, but it couldn't catch the B10 and
SEC. Texas is way bigger, marketing-wise, than USC. The Big 12 got a combined
130M between Fox and ABC/ESPN. They need to clear at least 200M to catch up the
the bigger conferences. Is the PAC going to be able to blow the Big 12 out of
the water? The championship may give them an edge over the B12, and timing may
give them an advantage, but I don't see this higher than 170M...and that's a
Ever wonder why Hawaii games are not broadcast nationwide even when they were
11-0?An important point to consider if you are a TV executive
bidding on contracts with the conferences. The SEC, Big 12, ACC are in the half
of the country with 2/3's of the population. People watch TV from 7:00 PM to
10:pm generally. No amount of pizzazz, hoopla or charisma can drag the PAC12
into the right time zone for advertisers for that 2/3's of the country. Hence
they will not command the same level of money no matter how much Mr. Scott
thinks they should.This not an attack on the PAC 12, Utah(for those who
think every comment is about them) or quality of competition. It's just what a
TV executive has to deal with. A PAC 12 Network will work for only
1/3 of the country at most (Don't know the exact amount of population for the
Mountain and Pacific time zones so I am over estimating here.) It just won't
command the same money.
@SLCWatch"Ever wonder why Hawaii games are not broadcast
nationwide even when they were 11-0?"Hawai'i does not have
nearly as large of a fan base as the PAC-12 has. That's the REAL reason, or at
least one of the major drivers, that Hawaii games are not and will not ever be
broadcast nationally. And, yes, the time difference does have an
affect on viewership, but that has not stopped many of the national networks
from being interested in signing a PAC-12 deal.
DevilishUteThe Hawaii example was an extreme-No one watches games that
start at 2:00 AMYes the PAC 12 has a fan base. The point isn't fan
base, talent, great competition or wonderful schools. The point is an TV
executives point in out all the time. No one wants to watch games that begin at
10:00 pm on the East coast. 33% of the population is going to bed.Again the point is the PAC12 can't be unrealistic and think they can get SEC
money for games no one is going to stay up to watch. Yes there is interest, not
nationwide (everybody stay up to see Stanford vs Cal) but interest.Football can schedule games to come on as East coast games end. But you don't
get day long coverage like the east coast. Even avid football fans quit after
6-7 hours in a day.The PAC12 will get adaquately compensated to be
sure. It's just not going to be more than the SEC as an example.
DevilishUteYou're missing SLCWatch's point. No matter how good a few
teams in the PAC 12 may be, the PAC 12 will never be as valuable a television
sports property as the SEC, Big Ten and Big 12. It's all about location. Games
in the SEC, Big Ten and Big 12 are naturally going to be played/televised
earlier in the day, which takes up most of the television time slots when most
of the country is watching. By the time when most PAC 12 games are played, in
the evening, Pacific Time, the majority of fans in the Eastern and Central time
zones have tuned out.
Hedgehog,Seriously?No matter the timing, the PAC12 will never
hold any weight to the Big10 or SEC. I cannot believe anyone who lives in
Ann Arbor would even dare to argue the point. I can guarantee you that
the PAC deal will not exceed that of the Big 10 or SEC, because the ratings are
not even close, and nationally the PAC does not hold much more respect then the
MWC, WAC, or Big East, besides USC and Oregon.The PAC network would
certainly do well on the West Coast, spreading inland to about Colorado. But
back East, the only PAC games anyone watches are the ones played against a BIG
10 or SEC school. So really what does any East Coast network have to gain in
signing with the PAC? Nothing. I think the PAC deal will end up
somewhere between 160-200 million, which is awesome. But It absolutely will not
eclipse the Big 10 or SEC tv contract. Any network would be completely insane
to pay more for a lesser product.
National media says that Utah and Colorado brought one thing in one sport to the
PAC. The ability to play a conference championship in Football. I believe Utah's
womens gymnastics is also a positive for the PAC although they compete out of
conference more than they do in conference.300 Million is dreaming but I
do think that the PAC will get between 150 and 200 Million per season. The
networks have been overpaying the other conferences according to the experts so
the PAC should be able to get a good deal. That is a good chunk of change that
Utah will get and hopefully it will be enough to get them close to the level of
BYU or at least to the level of the average PAC team.
@ Sports Authority and SLCWatchObviously you didn't read my full
post, otherwise you wouldn't have felt it necessary to make additional comments.
I understood your point in the first place about the time difference. Please
re-read my initial comment in its entirety. To repeat, I
acknowledge that the time difference is and will be a factor in whatever new
deal is struck, but it hasn't stopped major networks from being interested in a
PAC-12 deal. We'll have to wait and see how lucrative the deal is. One thing
for sure is that it will beat what the MTN had to offer.
@SLCWatch"The SEC, Big 12, ACC are in the half of the country
with 2/3's of the population."That is kind of true, although it
is shifting. According to the latest census in 2010, the population is divided
evenly on the east and west in Plato, MO. The west outgrew the east by 13.8%.
If that trend continues, we may see the dividing line of the country move even
more west than Missouri. The other thing you didn't consider is
that while over half to 2/3 of the country lives in East, South, and Midwestern
states, there are 5 major conferences that cover that segment of the population.
There is only one major conference in the west that covers or
creates interest to nearly 100 million people, or 12 states (I included Hawaii
in that figure because they have a lot of Pac 12 alumns there). That type of
'monopoly' might attract a premium if the deal is done right.
utesovertideYour population comparison includes one serious flaw;
west of Plato, MO puts Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas, Nebraska, Arkansas, Missouri,
Louisiana, Iowa and Minnesota into the mix of "western" states --
those are all Big 12, Big Ten and SEC dominated states. It's doubtful there's
any significant interest in any of those states for PAC 12 football and they
certainly wouldn't be included in the marketing footprint which advertisers will
be looking at.A more realistic population base for the PAC 12 is
less than 50 million -- California, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, and to some
extent, Colorado, Utah, Nevada, and Hawaii.
@phoenixThere is some pac10 interest in the east simply because some
people are simply fans of college football. I watch all sorts of college
football including teams from back east simply because I like it.But
you are absolutely correct that outside of the pac10 footprint the interest
isn't great. I'm not even sure the state of Utah will watch that much pac10
football. Obviously utah fans will watch their games, and a few BYU fans will
watch utah games in the hope they will be able to see them lose, but for the
most part college football fans in Utah will watch BYU games much more than any
pac10 games and fans of the other pac10 schools will mostly watch their team and
that is it.Not many people will care to watch utah play washington
st. or any other mediocre pac10 team. Next to no one but fans of those 2 schools
will watch that game and that isn't very many people at all. There are maybe 3
team in the pac10 that anyone but fans of their school will care to watch and
utah isn't one of them.
I hear that Versus and the mtn are both really interested.
@PhoenixThe Missou thing was just to show where the dividing line
is. The 100 M estimate was based on the 1/3rd claim by SLCWatchBut,
you piqued my interest and so I went through and actually added up the state
populations I want to include and listed them below:Arizona6,392,017California37,253,956Colorado5,029,196Hawaii1,360,301Idaho1,567,582Montana989,415Nevada2,700,551New Mexico2,059,179Oregon3,831,07Utah2,763,885Washington6,724,540Wyoming563,626Grand
total: 71.5 Million people in the Western states. Take the total US population
(313 M), subtract 71.5, and you have 214.5. Divide that by 5 (number of large
leagues covering non-western population), and you have an average of 48.3 M
people per league. That possibility of 20 M extra people in the Pac 12 covered
west may add a premium.@DuckhunterLately, you have been
totally downing the Utes. I don't know what they did to you lately, but
seriously, get real.
I just love how the PAC-12 logo has Utah located in about Cedar City and CU in
Re: utesovertideHow many of those "20 M extra people" (a
specious number) do you think actually care about the Pac 10.1.1beta, let alone
the U of U?How many people outside of Salt Lake County actually care
about the U of U?Not a lot.
"That possibility of 20 M extra people in the Pac 12 covered west may add a
premium."You're only kidding yourself if you think Idaho,
Montana, Wyoming and New Mexico are PAC 12 country. As I said
before, a more realistic population base for the PAC 12 is less than 50 million
-- California, Oregon, Washington, Arizona, and to some extent, Colorado, Utah,
Nevada, and Hawaii.There is no premium for the PAC 12 when you
consider that most of the games in the PAC 12 occur after the Eastern and
Central time zones have tuned out, so there's very little spillover of fans from
those areas watching PAC 12 games, while there's a lot of spillover from PAC 12
country watching games in the SEC, Big Ten, and Big 12.
The Disillusionist,Don't kid yourself. So few local kids get into
BYU now that Ute fans in my neighborhood are about the same number as BYU fans.
BYU fans may be spread all over the nation, but the U is rapidly becoming the
school of choice throughout Utah.
re: belgie | 4:32 p.m. April 20, 2011 Versus is owned by
NBCUniversal (formerly Comcast) and last I checked Comcast is a Media
Conglomerate much like ESPN/ABC/Disney.I'm not saying that Vs will
take off but as a broadcast medium is better shape than ESPN. Don't
forget ESPN was a regional network like NESN; people were skeptical of its
transformation back in the early to mid 80's.
WOW the greed of the PAC-12! After closing a deal with the Big 12, Fox could
care less. Time to embrace Comcast and the new Pac-12 channel, only available to
premium subscribers! Rumor has it, they will be leasing space right next to the
MTN channel. Congratulations!
"but the U is rapidly becoming the school of choice throughout
Utah."I highly doubt that!
"but the U is rapidly becoming the school of choice throughout
Utah."Which of course explains why BYU has had a 65,000 seat
stadium for 30 years, and Utah still only has a 45,000 seat stadium.You're delusional Mormon Ute if you think the Utes are even close to BYU in
fan support in Utah. BYU's fan base in Utah is at least twice as large as
Utah's, probably even larger than than.
M ute... Don't kid yourself.While the ESPN bus drives on by and
heads to more storied programs in the PAC 10.1.1 beta you can keep telling
yourself that the university will be catering to the locals while they try to
increase their numbers in out of state and int'l enrollmens and raising academic
enrollment standards.And while this is going on BYU continues to
grow nationwide, oops I meant to say worldwide.And finally... what
local channel will you be on for the 'locals' U so much love and cater to?
Re: Mormon Ute"Don't kid yourself. So few local kids get into
BYU now that Ute fans in my neighborhood are about the same number as BYU
fans."And, as we all know, Kaysville is a perfect cross-section
of the rest of the state of Utah. :) I hold to my earlier point.The
U of U is the "school of choice" for Salt Lake County
twenty-somethings (and thirty-somethings) who wish to live at home while
pursuing their undergrad degrees on a 10-12 year plan. They can even join a
fraternity/sorority without leaving the comfort of their mothers' basements.
The Disillusionist,You must have lived out of state too long. Two
kids on my street with parents who graduated from BYU are currently attending
the U. It was hard on their parents at first, but they came around and accepted
that it was the best choice for their kids. I see this happening more and more.
When I was growing up in Davis County there were far more BYU fans than Ute
fans, but that has changed and continues to evolve. Those of you who have left
Utah have lost touch with what is happening.It is acutally easy to
see how. As I said, it is so hard to get into BYU that fewer local kids go
there now and the kids from our of state or international students often go back
home when they're done at the Y. As far as the not living on campus idea, both
the kids from my neighborhood live on campus at the U and the U has begun
construction on another dorm building to accomodate the rising demand for on
campus housing. Checking your facts helps avoid foot in mouth disease.
Just the FAX,I didn't say the U has been the school of choice
historically, yet your comment refers to history. Yes, BYU built their 65,000
seat stadium more than 30 years ago when the U couldn't even fill a 30,000 seat
stadium. Now we sell out our 45,000 seat stadium for every game and my bishop
gets letters from BYU offering seats for our youth at $1 each to help fill that
65,000 seat stadium in Provo. That's the trend I am talking about and it is
happening right now.
"Checking your facts helps avoid foot in mouth disease."Your very informal survey of Davis County/Kaysville demographics leaves me
sammyg,First of all, BYU's student body hasn't grown in over 20
years. That is the main reason their local influence is erroding. Second, yes
BYU will always have a stronger national and international draw than the U, but
it has very little to do with the growth of the University and everything to do
with the growth of the Church. There are millions of people cheering for BYU
all over the world whose only connection with the school is their LDS Church
membership. Many of them don't even know a person who has attended the school.
The U is basically dependent on alumni and relatives of alumni for a fan base.
So comparing fan bases is an apples to oranges comparison and isn't worth
arguing about.I have no idea what local channel we will be on and
won't know until the TV deal is done. If FOX wins the bid for the PAC-12
there's a very good chance we'll see some games on FOX-13. We'll have to wait
and see. Anything is better than the mtn.
The Disillusionist,Okay, so check out these numbers from the Harvard
College Sports Analysis Collective for the 2010 football season:Utah
led the MWC in sellouts averaging 100.98% per game while BYU sold and average of
95.84% of their tickets per game. Utah was also 2nd nationally among non-BCS
schools in sellout percentage.Those numbers indicate the trend is up
for Utah and down for BYU. That backs up what I'm saying and is not limited to
Re: Mormon UteNo. It means that Utah had a better year than BYU last
year up until Utah's TCU debacle. You cannot extrapolate the demographic claims
about fanbases that you are making based on that single statistic. Sorry.
The only thing that BYU can hang their hat on is an affiliation with ESPN. Is
that really what you want as the most recognizable thing in your
program..."we have a contract with ESPN and will be seen on ESPN, ESPN2, or
ESPNU at least 3 times a year." Well congratuations, because Cougar fans
have arrived. Nothing their program has done in the past 20 years promotes
national attention, but at least their TV deal will.Contrast that to
Utah where 2 BCS banners hang in the stadium and two new logos appear on the
field......the contrast couldn't be more stark. Who wouldn't give up
an ESPN contract for a Sugar Bowl victory of Alabama?
@ute4everAnd who wouldn't give up a sugarbowl win over alabama for
an actual NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP.You see we can play that game all
day and the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP will always win out no matter what else you
try to compare it to.
"Contrast that to Utah where 2 BCS banners hang in the stadium and two new
logos appear on the field"Congratulations to the utes for have
2 great years out of the last 50! We'll measure the utes again to see what type
of success is generated in another 50 years or so...
"You see we can play that game all day and the NATIONAL CHAMPIONSHIP will
always win out no matter what else you try to compare it to."Ducky,You do understand that outside of the bubble sportsfans roll
their eyes concerning that *NC ( that is the few sportsfans that remember). It
kinda goes down as to what shouldn't happen or novelty as oppossed to any type
warrented achievement.Secondly, it's a pitty the Y couldn't
capatalize on such a glowing achievement, maybe a follow-up BCS bowl appearance
would have taken the Y to a much different place it see's itself today.
Well Hedgie, now that we know that BYU has a shot equal to Army and Navy for BCS
access it shall be interesting to see how things develop in the future.By the way, speaking of the future, I ran across this list and need your help.
I know that because of BYU's horrible season last year it's obvious they are
rebuilding this year which explains their absence from this ESPN's College
Football Live Pre-Season Top 25.Am I'm missing something on Utah or
is the following list a mistake? Please advise.1 Alabama2 Ohio
State3 Boise State4 Texas5 Virginia Tech6 TCU7
Florida8 Iowa9 Nebraska10 Oregon11 Wisconsin12
Oklahoma13 Miami14 LSU15 USC16 Pittsburgh17
Georgia Tech18 Arkansas19 Penn State20 Oregon State21
Florida State22 Cincinnati23 Georgia24 Stanford25 North
@wedgieThere is a cold and lonely ann arbor basement where that
National Championship is a daily source of aggravation, frustration, and near