Yes, it reminded us of WAC days, as did Utah's loss to Arizona.
As with Utah's loss to ASU, unfortunately. RIP, Frank Kush!
Got to admit this season has had its ups and downs so far, which is what makes
this game so much fun to watch and cheer for. I do feel that something great is
start to grow with BYU. We will not see the full furits of that growth this
season, but I do have this feeling that the next couple of years with Hill as QB
and some of the young def player coming to their own that we will have a great
couple of years on in BYU football, our best days are ahead of us.
A lot of what BYU is doing schedule-wise lately is a reminder of the good old
byu's 2014 schedule has three BCS teams and 9 lower quality teams Looks like this quasi-WAC schedule is here to stay
@Chris B - just wondering, did the NCAA set a rule for independents that
whatever schedule they make for 2014 must be "here to stay" for the
program? Only programs affiliated with conferences have schedules that are
"here to stay." Whereas BYU has the potential to schedule all tough
opponents, Pac-12 teams will always be locked into playing Washington State,
Cal, Colorado, and Utah - which I know you count as BCS teams. And don't
kid yourself - they all schedule non-BCS patsies for the majority of their
One more example of our little friends from the hill demonstrating their massive
inferiority complex - the Utes were no more competitive in the WAC than
they've been in the PAC.
Chris B - Are you including Notre Dame, a national championship contender,
albeit not as good this year, in your "lower quality teams" category?
byu has a lot of non-conference games to schedule, thank goodness for the good
SportsFan"One more example of our little friends from the hill
demonstrating their massive inferiority complex - the Utes were no more
competitive in the WAC than they've been in the PAC."True.In 37 years, the Utes only won 2 WAC championships, yet now
they have the audacity to demean the "old WAC". LOL!What's really ironic is that in their desperate attempt to marginalize
the WAC, now MWC, they're simply marginalizing the only accomplishments the
Utes have ever had on a national scale. Even more evidence of just how
meaningless Utah's 2004 bcs busting season really was. The Utes only beat
three teams with winning records to qualify for the Fiesta Bowl, and two of
those teams were "weak" 7-5 teams from the "old WAC".
When was the last time you won a football game vs your Little Friends On The
When was the last time U finished with a better record and higher ranking than
your big brother?
USC's 2014 schedule has three or four quality teams and 2 patsies. No need
to schedule Montana or Idaho when you have the two new PAC teams to beat up on
and you get to keep all the money in the PAC.
Hey Chris have a look at the 2016 schedule.
In 37 years, the Utes only won 2 WAC championships, yet now they have the
audacity to demean the "old WAC".Ironic statement from one
who incessantly demeans the team that they lose their most important game to
No sweat, folks, Utah had their bowl game this year in Provo and their signature
win in SLC. Stick a fork in them, they're done. At 1-3
I'd be looking for excuses as to how superbly strong their conference was,
too. Who'd have thought that Oregon State, losing to a lower tier team,
would beat the Utes in SLC? Then again, who's have thought Colorado would
beat them soundly two years ago?I guess the Utes miss the good old
WAC.....even though they didn't win that, either.
ekute"Ironic statement from one who incessantly demeans the team
that they lose their most important game to every year."Ironic
statement from a fan of a team that supposedly "moved on" from BYU over
three years ago - BYU is still THE most important game on Utah's schedule.
It's the ONLY game Utah fans have talked about incessantly since joining
the PAC.Unlike U, BYU fans don't base BYU's entire success
on the head-to-head with Utah.
ekute, don't kid yourself; the U isn't the most important game on our
schedule, but BYU is the most important one on yours. I know it sounds cliche,
but with independence, the most important game is the one happening this week.
I hate the inexcusable loss to the U, and it was the most important game of the
season back then, but we've moved on, maybe you should too. As always, our
season is much more than one game; I hope your couch is comfy so you can watch
one Utah team play in December.
Once again "Chris" just because U reside in a BCS conference
doesn't mean U are playing BCS quality opponents every week. This is where
your logic is intentionally flawed. I realize you say this junk to
get a rise out of folks, but if you really believe that the utes face superior
"BCS" quality opponents every week from within the PAC12 then you are
deluded.And your utes have yet to prove they even belong in the
"conference of chumpions" having beaten only one winning team the
"Unlike U, BYU fans don't base BYU's entire success on the
head-to-head with Utah."Ironic statement when the first 2
comments under a byu article are demeaning to the Utes.
@ekute or ironic that U folks claim to have moved on but... well here U are
trolling articles about BYU trying to convince yourselves that U are 'all
that'.An in answer to your question: When was the last time BYU
beat the kids on the hill? The answer is 2009. I love how U guys
love to use the last 12 years as the measuring stick for ute success against
BYU. Nothing really exists beyond Y2001. If you were to start at the commonly
accepted beginning of the Common Era of NCAA Football (1970) the tally is still
BYU 29, utes 14
Surf is Up,Since I grew up in happy valley and Layton is as far as I
have ever lived from byu, I don't consider it trolling when I read a byu
article, unlike you, in Miami, trolling Utes articles.Today I'm
here in response to the first 2 comments on this board...Who's using who as
a measuring stick?
@Brave Sir RobinWhere have you been? This is the BEST SCHEDULE EVER! No
team from the old WAC, middle WAC, or new WAC has ever had a schedule like this.
I think that all we need to do is win 8 maybe 9 games and BCS here we come!
@Surf is UpWhy stop there?All time 31 W 59 L 4 T = 37.1%, that is
barely 1 win out of 3 attempts.
@love the kittiesI repect Utah's all time record but a lot of people
say "common era football" did start in 1970.
Define the eras how ever you want. There's just one era where byu had the
upper hand, LaVell's.He's been gone longer than he was head
Surf is up - you meant to say "delusional" not deludedBeSmart is correct that most college football pundits consider 1970 as the
delineation of the "modern" era. It is no coincidence that it also
corresponds to LaVell Edwards' forward pass revolution. College football
has changed a lot since 1970, and I wouldn't be surprised if a new
designation is given for the current modern era of uptempo, spread
offenses--which may be closer to 2001. But until then, 1970 is still the
marker.This last win was a long game with plenty of back and forth.
Definitely an exciting game, but not something I want to see every game (too
stressful). I like the scoring, but I would like it to keep increasing until it
develops into the likes of Baylor and Oregon, consistently in the 70's.
We're a long way from that, but I can keep dreaming.Go COUGS!
@ekute - I know math is hard, but Lavell Edwards was BYU head coach for 28
years, and has been gone for 13 years. For future reference, 28 years is more
than twice as long as 13 years.
LetsDebate,Math has never been hard for me, but I do make mistakes.
I do know what 4 in a row equals.
So if BSU beats BYU will it be remembered as the good old days of the MWC?
What 4 in a row equals:BYU's current bowl winning streak - the
Utes have won oneBYU's most recent AP Top 25 streak - the Utes have
never had more than twoBYU's most recent 10+ win season streak - the
Utes have never had more than threeBYU's streak of starting
quarterbacks to win the Sammy Baugh Trophy (nation's best passer)
Well, ekute, my comment (1st post) wasn't demeaning to Utah. It simply
reflected the fact that the headline stated that BYU's win over Houston was
a reminder of WAC days, and since Utah partisans are so quick to make fun of the
WAC, the Utes loss to Arizona also reminded me of the many years Utah lost to
one of the Arizona schools when all of the schools were in the "WAC"
together. I did not say "How can a powerful PAC 12 team that just beat the
#5 team in the country lose to lowly Arizona" or "Why did Utah play so
poorly last week" etc. I simply stated that the headline reminded me of not
only BYU's fortunes in the WAC but also Utah's. I think
the record comeback against a WAC opponent was Utah in the late 60's when
they were behind 0 - 27 going into the 4th quarter and they defeated Arizona 28
- 27 in SLC.There, feel better now? Because Utah's history in
the WAC is what BYU's history is in the WAC---It Is What It Is---and no one
can change it. Don't get offended by your team's history.
@LonestarRunnerAs Utah found out, winning lots of games in a season
against poor teams doesn't carry much water. The question asked 29 years
ago is as relevant now as it was then, 'Who did they play?" Strength
of schedule will be an important factor next year and the schedules that are
being put together so far will carry very little weight going forward. That IS
the price of independence.
LTK"As Utah found out, winning lots of games in a season against
poor teams doesn't carry much water."Unlike Utah, BYU
established a national reputation that produced a national champion, a Heisman
Trophy winner, 18 Top 25 finishes, 6 national Hall of Fame players, 15 national
individual awards, and a legacy program recognized as having one of the Top 25
"dynasties" of the AP era.Despite all of the boasting of
Utah fans, unrealized potential is meaningless. The Utes are no closer to being
a playoff contender than any of the other perennial power conference bottom
dwellers. Three years in the PAC and U still haven't managed to finish with
a winning conference record. Enjoy being the Indiana or Vanderbilt or Duke of
the PAC 12.
@LonestarRunnerI wish that I could apologize for my innocuous post
but I just can't. It is innocuous. Strength of schedule will be an
important factor for consideration to the playoff. If BYU does not beef up the
quality of their opponents to having 8-9 dynasty teams per year they will be in
the Kraft hungry bowl every year. With the fall of the BCS, the tradiational
big dollar bowls will go bask to their traditional conference matchups and your
dynasty will be cold in San Francisco. Maybe Utah will never go to another
'big bowl' but they will get money from those in their conference that
do go. But that is here nor there, if the rumors about new division are true.
Then BYU can continue to schedule a middle of the slate and get ranked and win
the Hungry bowl and ya'll will be happy. Just like Grand Valley winning
all those championships in the Champoinship series. All that marvelous history
will be a side note to mediocrity.
LoveTheKittiesIf Utah does not beef up the quality of their
opponents to having 8-9 dynasty teams every year, the Utes will never make the
playoffs.Please list the 8-9 dynasty teams on this, the toughest,
schedule in Utah history:Utah State - nopeWeber State - are
you kiddingOregon State - nopeBrigham Young - not according to Utah
fansUCLA - marginalStanford - lately, but historically, nopeat
Arizona - nopeat Southern Cal - yesArizona State - nopeat
Oregon - lately, but historically, nopeat Washington State - nopeColorado - nopeLaugh at the Kraft Fight Hunger if it makes you
feel better, nut the truth is, except for a little more money, the Holiday Bowl,
Gator Bowl, etc., etc., won't be any more meaningful than the Kraft Fight
Hunger Bowl as far as national prestige.The Major College Football
Playoff is the new Big DanceThe Orange, Sugar, Cotton, Rose and Fiesta
Bowls are the new NITThe other bowls are the new Aloha Classic and the
myriad other pre-season tournaments, only, for football, they'll be played
To people talking about the playoff.I think the 4 team format is doomed to
fail4 teams 5 power conference champions?It will probably expand to
8 and then they may do as the BCS did and take the Highest mid-major.until
then the playoff may be 2 sec teams acc and big 10 or any other combination.A lot of years the SEC will probably get two teams in.This system is
much worse than before.It destroys all chances of Underdogs reaching a
National Title game.Even the champion from one power conference (perhaps
2) will not make it to the playoff.BCS is great compared to the problems
this system already has.
OK everybody, go to your separate corners and come out when you can post nicely!