Quantcast
Sports

Utah, BYU coaches respond to NCAA autonomy ruling

Comments

Return To Article
  • Rockwell Baltimore, MD
    Aug. 7, 2014 3:24 p.m.

    Bronco made it clear that BYU will do whatever is necessary and beneficial, within reason, to support student athletes.

  • WhoRtheUtes??? Elko, NV
    Aug. 7, 2014 3:43 p.m.

    How will this impact members of the 65 schools that are already operating in the red? Will they shutdown sports programs that don't make money and not carry so many student athletes?

  • Chris B Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 3:48 p.m.

    When you couple this with the ESPN article today about the continued talk of having the big boys play ONLY other big boys, this would be the END of any dreams that mid majors have of ever doing anything on a national stage.

    Goodbye to any playoff hopes. Goodbye to national titles. Its all gone.

    It's a bad bad time to be a mid major.

    Oh well, glad I don't have to worry!

    Bye bye mid majors. You're done.

  • JinaYi87 Norman, OK
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:01 p.m.

    I agree with Chris B on this much, "The divide is getting bigger and bigger between the power 5 and the mid majors."

    Never in my years have I seen so much pompous and hubristic chest beating about being a "power school." The divide IS widening. And it is not in level of play (See UCF just last year for example).

  • Crisco B Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:02 p.m.

    If the Utes are a Power 5 school, their source of power must be cold fusion.

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:04 p.m.

    Follow the money. It's always the problem. But it's NOT just the money because revenue and the abundance of it can be justified as what it is here in this college football power conference autonomy debate. And this largely comes from supply and demand. Basically, despite opposition from some fan bases, by and large sports consumers, many/most of us feed the beast here. Yes money is the problem, but it's the corruption and shady circulation and distribution of the money that gives the 'Good Ole Boys' the power. They use a bowl structure and minor tweak playoff system along with mass marketing to keep college football fans interested around the country, some who might firmly oppose them if they were say a fan of BYU.

  • talkinsports Gilbert, AZ
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:05 p.m.

    christina

    You obviously don't understand the golden rule here.

    He who has the gold, makes the rules.

    As soon the elite, big money teams get through cannibalizing the mid-majors, guess who they're going to cannibalize next.

    Do you really think that elite teams like USC, Ohio St, and Texas are going to allow teams like Utah to continue feeding at the trough when they no longer need you?

    Before you have time to gloat about BYU's demise, your own demise will be a foregone conclusion.

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:06 p.m.

    There are schools outside the power 5 in other conferences or independent teams like BYU that are more worthy of inclusion than the bottom half of the schools in the power 5 that feed off of and benefit from the conferences best and historic teams at the top. So, although there are intriguing and competitive positives that some sports fans can see with these changes of Power 5 economic and competitive dominance (of which I like as well), there is also an unbalanced prejudice of power. But such is capitalism historically.

  • CJ Miles Dallas, TX
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:06 p.m.

    College sports, especially football, is a business. It's about recruiting the best players and making huge sums of money off their ability to entertain people on Saturday afternoon. In return, the players can earn a degree for free. For the NCAA to pretend it isn't a business and is about the kids is ridiculous at best. However, it is free enterprise. If the Mountain West and other conferences wanted to put more money into marketing its programs and getting more people to watch them play, they could take advantage of this huge cash cow they call football. It's all about TV revenue and advertising drives TV revenue. The more people who watch your conference play, the more money your conference makes regardless of the 5 five or not. If I were the Mountain West, I would be hiring Donald Trump to run my conference. Not some jock.

  • patriot Cedar Hills, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:08 p.m.

    I think BYU's days in the NCAA are numbered.

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:09 p.m.

    Take the stock market for example, it changes and in some time cycles, profits the robber barons more. Right now in college sports we are seeing the kinds of problems with some worthy schools outside the Power 5 that compare on a smaller scale with persons of contribution (great inventors and scientists) during the 1920s that were negatively effected via loss of financial prosperity and grant reduction during the 1890s up until the 'Great Depession'. Back in that era (although it's still the case to a certain degree) it was easy for the big financial players and ultra wealthy controllers of the market to take all the money they could from those that help create it, leaving them with hardly a little to stew on. Tesla had much of his science repressed and his inventions patented by the richest profiteers that saw the stock market as their exclusive playground. Obviously there are still and probably always will be moral questions with the market core, but I think the 'Good Ole Boy' network in college sports is relegating those outside their circle as being free game for sack, pillage and plunder. Conservatives locally might realize that BYU could suffer here.

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:14 p.m.

    I have long despised the BCS and the 'Bowl Coalition' that preceded it. Although I was stoked and I still am about Utah being in the PAC 12, I never for a moment switched over into a BCS lover. What we are seeing now with the 'Power 5' autonomy situation disgusts me.

  • MacNasty Rexburg, ID
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:15 p.m.

    Gotta love Chris B deluded in believing his/her team is a Rottweiler when in fact it is a Chihuahua. Lots and lots and lots of barking and no bite. The Chihuahua is in the PAC not because of its athletic pedigree, but because it was needed as a place holder. It is in the PAC solely because Baylor was made a part of the deal by the Texas legislature and the PAC refused because it was a religion sponsored school. There was another religion sponsored school in close proximity with a much better pedigree, but likewise, the PAC didn't go for it because of its religious principles.

    Bottom line is that the Chihuahua is a little dog that thinks its a big dog.

  • still_thinking Draper, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:18 p.m.

    I think what Chris B and others miss is that not all 65 of the schools in the power 5 are operating in the black. In fact most are not. What this decision does is allow the top 10-20 programs in the nation widen the divide. It will cause some of the P5 schools to drop out of the P5 and continue to widen the gap within the P5 schools. Great, Utah is a P5 school. Do you really think they will be able to compete with Oregon or USC for athletic funding and increasing the benefits to players? Recall the difference in the NFL before the salary cap and free agency? This just ensures Utah will remain non-competitive in the PAC 12. The elitists that are cheering their separation from the mid-majors will soon find they've been separated from the winners in their own conference. But hey...you can still take pride in that PAC 12 shirt.

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:22 p.m.

    Want to hear a joke?

    "Today’s vote marks a significant step into a brighter future for Division I athletics," said Nathan Hatch, board chair and Wake Forest University president, who also chaired the steering committee that redesigned the structure. "We hope this decision not only will allow us to focus more intently on the well-being of our student-athletes but also preserve the tradition of Division I as a diverse and inclusive group of schools competing together on college athletics’ biggest stage."

    Okay let's break this down. First off it's Wake Forest. They deserve 'Power 5' autonomy about as much as Mickey Mousse. Moving on we have the contradiction of all time; "diverse and inclusive." Those two words go together like sardines on a chocolate cake.

  • Mildred in Fillmore Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:29 p.m.

    No worries if Tom and Bronco say things will be OK. We are a legacy program with all sorts of legends and 1 Billion people in China watching our games.

  • JDL Magna, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:31 p.m.

    Say what you want about the bigs and the littles or the haves and have nots, this experiment has been tried over and over throughout history and the conclusion is always the same.

    Proverbs 16:18
    Old Testament
    Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.

  • PDX_CougarFan Milwaukie, OR
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:40 p.m.

    If the P5 teams were only to play with themselves, would it reduce the number of people watching college football? Would it reduce the value to the advertisers who inspire the enormous TV contracts? Would it actually decrease overall interest in and revenue that college football generates? Without mid-majors to play, many more P5 teams will end up with .500 or lower records and not be eligible for bowl games. Without bowl games and winning records, will boosters be willing to pay for the extra benefits that are coming? Don't forget another golden rule--don't kill the golden goose!

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:47 p.m.

    @JDL

    Say what you want about the bigs and the littles or the haves and have nots, this experiment has been tried over and over throughout history and the conclusion is always the same.

    ---------------

    The rich get richer, the poor get poorer, and the middle class gets screwed.

    Too Big to Fail comes to mind in recent history.

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:49 p.m.

    BYU has the resources to pay athletes rather they are independent or not. But ethically, this won't happen. The church won't place football over money spent on matters considered by them to be more spiritually important. There is no doubt that there is an 'exposure' element to missionary work via football, at least when the 'exposure' is positive, and it usually is. But this doesn't make football a spiritual matter.

    Personally, I think athletes should receive compensation for their part in revenue production. They ought to get more in return for the sacrifice of their bodies on the gridiron. But it's a slippery slope. Some schools (think SEC) will place so much value on football glory over education and moral principle, that they will go way overboard relative to what others can keep up with. There are boosters in certain regions with affiliations to certain universities (quiet on specifics) that make their money via corruption. These individuals will also donate their money wrapped in corruption because it comes full circle according to their own narrow minded selfishness. They spend money like they make it. It's all about them and their school.

  • SEC Rules Seminole, FL
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:50 p.m.

    Gone is the building of character of the student (football) athlete
    Gone are academics
    Gone are traditions
    Gone are years old rivalries
    Gone is the amateur

    Money is here, and it is here to stay.

  • BlueHusky Mission Viejo, CA
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:50 p.m.

    In the sense of providing total cost of education to athletes, this is a good deal for those who need it. Athletes even in olympic sports spend a great deal of time and resources. But this is primarily about football, which pays the bills. I'm certainly OK with giving athletes, working 30 or more hours per week during the season, to receive "walking around money." I know first hand how stressful it is to be a student with tuition and books paid, but not enough money to eat well, let alone date.

    However, the Power conference thing is nothing but creating a monopoly. They want to grab all the TV money and monopolize the college football TV time. Since only 10% of the P5 teams are operating in the black, I suspect that only the SEC and Big10 will really benefit. PAC12 is isolated on the left coast, so their coverage and payout will be less.

    This is not good, it is nothing short of a power grab by certain wealthy schools.

  • CougarSunDevil Phoenix, AZ
    Aug. 7, 2014 4:52 p.m.

    Whittingham says that he's in favor of it now. A year or two more of losing seasons and he'll be complaining about the system when he's coaching at Wyoming.

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:00 p.m.

    @ MacNasty

    Translation: " WHAAAAaaaaaa. Everybody picks on the poor, little (actually giant and wealthy) religious schools."

    Utah has the academic profile that fits the PAC-12. BYU does not. It's that simple.

  • Spokane Ute Spokane, WA
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:02 p.m.

    The dividing line between "Have" and "Have Nots" is becoming very clear. Karma!

  • SEC Rules Seminole, FL
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:03 p.m.

    @Chris B.

    So - - - Utah was once a mid major, in fact not long ago you were once a lowly nobody. You were able to rise above the basement that you once lived in, and by some good fortune you were able to play in New Years Day Bowl, and by some freak luck you were a desperation third choice to be a member of the PAC.

    And now that you are in, you gladly slam the door behind you, denying anyone else the opportunity that was once yours.

    Have you ever heard of Karma?

  • oldrunner Ogden, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:05 p.m.

    The end result of this is that there will be a new division created within the NCAA. This new division will have its own championships and rules. Because of our current laws, the new rules will have to apply to all of their sports equally. The ones that will be scrambling around, looking for a home, will be the rest of the FBS, D1 schools. The FCS, D1 schools already have this thing figured out. There may well be a move toward more consolidation between the non-B5, FBS schools and the FCS schools. All of which are D1 at this time. There are also a lot of non-football playing D1 schools out there to be considered.

  • Spokane Ute Spokane, WA
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:13 p.m.

    SEC Rules

    Karma? Yep, that's just what happened to BYU fans! I hope that helps!

  • CanuckFan Vancouver, BC
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:13 p.m.

    We know that economic/profit motives are driving most of these changes. It's still too early to say how this will ultimately impact strong non-P5 schools like BYU or the "weakest" of P5 schools such as Baylor or Utah. With so many gears in motion, it is not unrealistic to believe that ultimately the "top 64" (pick your number...) may not be the same ones currently in the P5 conferences. In other words, profitable (i.e. will garner advertising revenues) non-P5 schools (regardless of playing record) may end up displacing P5 schools that are uneconomic to operate. Free markets to tend to let the cream rise.

  • the greater truth Bountiful, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:22 p.m.

    @Two For Flinching

    "PAC-12" is an athletic designation not an academic designation, no matter how hard you and they want to pretend otherwise.

    "PAC-12" has no value or use in the academic world.

    PAC = pacific ATHLETIC Conference not pacific academic conference.

  • Tomahawk Red San Francisco, CA
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:23 p.m.

    talkinsports
    Gilbert, AZ
    christina

    You obviously don't understand the golden rule here.

    He who has the gold, makes the rules.

    As soon the elite, big money teams get through cannibalizing the mid-majors, guess who they're going to cannibalize next.

    -----------

    Ha ha ha. Thanks for the laugh.

    You tell me, why and how on earth are the big schools gonna cannibalize the other P5 schools? Do tell.

    The ruling allows P5 conferences to operate with more autonomy... NOT a few select schools from those conferences. The Pac 12, SEC and the others are going to be making the rules... not the Alabamas, USCs, LSUs and Oregons.

    You apparently think that Larry Scott and the other conference officials are going to enter into secret agreements with Oregon, USC, UCLA and Stanford in an effort to pump them up and deflate the rest of the conference?

    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! I've never heard such a ridiculous claim.

    If you believe that, you're even more clueless than I thought. It's in Larry Scott's (and the entire conference's) best interests that ALL programs in their conference are taken care of.

  • Tomahawk Red San Francisco, CA
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:25 p.m.

    CanuckFan
    Vancouver, BC
    We know that economic/profit motives are driving most of these changes. It's still too early to say how this will ultimately impact strong non-P5 schools like BYU or the "weakest" of P5 schools such as Baylor or Utah.

    ----------

    Yep BYU is a strong mid major program. So was Utah.

    Utah is in the bottom half of the P5 programs. So would BYU.

    Thus, your attempt at trying to make BYU look like Alabama or USC is a joke.

  • Bland Norman, OK
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:33 p.m.

    The pompous oak,
    must stand as I.
    Upon the ground,
    beneath the sky.

    The birch and beech,
    the same must do.
    Roots in terra,
    still bind them too.
    -T.R. Marriot
    I think that for all the laud and honor the Hill pontifically demands, this announcement ultimately does not look upon them well. I just do not see how the Alabamas, the LSUs, the Texases, the USCs...etc. will come to bat for them when the bottom line ($$$) is threatened by 4-8 teams. You might have a P5 membership in your wallet, but when you are asked for ID, all you can hand them is your buy 10 get 1 free card from the nacho stand at bowl season with only 1 punch. Punch your ticket repeatedly, then you will be P5.

  • Kralon HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:41 p.m.

    So, what it looks like is there will be professional college football and amateur college football.

    Personally, I don't watch professional sports. I would love the karma of more people watching the college football games below the P5 than those watching P5 games!

  • 81Ute Central, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:45 p.m.

    The future of college football is already set. It will take a little more time to get there.

    There will not be a 'culling' of current P5 schools (wishful thinking within the sour grapes crowd), if that were to occur who will the powerhouses play when all P5 games are within the P5?

    As for 'we operate in the black, therefore we deserve inclusion' obviously none of the P5 seem to care about that.

    There have been a few that have been prognosticating of this eventuality for some time 'Y' aren't you listening. Again, my heart goes out to the college football fans that cheer for BYU.

  • Vanceone Provo, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:45 p.m.

    Look, teams like USC and Auburn said, "If we play a mid major, we might lose. Boise State, BYU, Navy, Air Force--all good teams. But if we say, 'no mid majors' then we can schedule automatic wins like Utah and Kentucky and Wake Forest. Sounds great!"

  • PDX_CougarFan Milwaukie, OR
    Aug. 7, 2014 5:47 p.m.

    @Kralon I used to cheer for the Utes because they were on our schedule and when they did well, it reflected on us (if we beat them). This year, I don't care how they do because they aren't on our schedule. In the past, I thought BCS games were interesting because they could feature a non P5 team against a P5 team. If this change sparks a more significant division in the competitiveness of teams I doubt I will be interested in any P5 game even though I live in PAC 12 country.

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 6:02 p.m.

    @ Canuck fan

    Utah and Baylor are not the weakest of Power 5 teams. Baylor has done some nice things. Utah is in the bottom half but they are not awful. The SEC and PAC 12 are the two best P5 conferences in my opinion. The BIG 10 and BIG 12 have their argument. But if Utah were in the ACC, I believe they could compete for a conference championship relatively often. Utah will turn around their play this year. I would like to have that result in some respect coming from the blue, but it's unlikely. Being better, if Utah is this year, still makes it tough to BYU fans to notice because with Utah's schedule, reaching 6 or 7 wins is solid. That win total will be mocked because many a BYU will pound their chest over beating 8 cupcakes and reaching 10 wins. Again, the schedules are not comparable between the red and blue anymore.

  • Striker Omaha, NE
    Aug. 7, 2014 6:07 p.m.

    I have never seen so much pride in an organization. How the NCAA or any organization can allow such arrogance, haughtiness, and selfishness is beyond me. This is a sign our culture truly is corrupt and totally messed up. "I am not sharing my cookies any more with my brother" is the childishness this has come to. Unfortunately, there are many worse things in the world than this to make knots in my stomach not so tight.

  • SoonerUte Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 7:43 p.m.

    PDX_CougarFan
    "Without mid-majors to play, many more P5 teams will end up with .500 or lower records and not be eligible for bowl games."
    That depends on if 6 wins remains a bowl requirement. ESPN has an article on P5 coaches who prefer a P5-only schedule. The poll question was asked with the caveat that teams would not have to reach 6 wins to play in a bowl. 46% of P5 coaches prefer P5 schedules only.

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 8:45 p.m.

    @ Rockwell

    That's not really up to Bronco. If you pay football and MBB players stipends, then you also pay female athletes stipends. I obviously don't know, as an outsider, but that could be a huge issue for the BOT and/or the WCC

    @ the greater truth

    To be a part of this athletic conference, certain academic standards must be met. University presidents vote on expansion, not Ads.

  • CaliCougar Claremont, California
    Aug. 7, 2014 9:03 p.m.

    Hmm..."cost of attendance"...interesting new term. Sounds like a soft way to say "professionalism" to me at this point, at least as it pertains to college football. Much more detail around what this new term means is needed though. Time will tell like it always does.

  • Cali blue Coalinga, CA
    Aug. 7, 2014 9:16 p.m.

    There are a few things our friends in red May want to ponder. The free market system works, it is not problem free, but it works. If Texas can generate $100 million in revenue per year for their sports program; why shouldn't USC & UCLA do the same? Why shouldn't large market teams pursue independence and increase their revenue by getting true market value for the product they produce and not be forced to share revenue with small market teams? There is a possibility of conference implosion...

  • truth_avenger Lehi, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 9:45 p.m.

    It's sad, all 3 are great schools, and while Utah is part of the power 5 sorority they will continue to be the ugly sister allowed to play along but they will never be named prom queen. It's not that Utah is not a great school; Coach Whittingham is a coach’s coach. The problem is competing for talent--if you are a blue chip recruit and you need to choose between USC and Utah you aren't likely to choose the inversion over the sunshine. Utah doesn’t compete in the PAC 12, it plays in the PAC12. Yes, thanks to an amazing motivator and leader Utah pulls off some miracles and wins games but the great talent will go to schools that don't have cold winters. And Ute fans are loyal enough and smart enough to hang on to Coach Whittingham because the minute they fire him there will be a line of schools who can attract talent who will snap him up. Utah State and BYU will get to play for the consolation bowls, but unless global warming eliminates the January inversions players who have a real choice will go to a Sunbelt school.

  • Scores Idaho Falls, ID
    Aug. 7, 2014 10:09 p.m.

    Truth...you are probably right. In fact, I see no way the u can complete year in and year out in their conference. 63 percent of the top 300 kids have committed to their schools. USC, UCLA and Oregon have 15 commits. Every school in the Pac 12 have top 300 talent committed except Utah, Cal and Oregon St. If you're going to compete, you need to have the players, and Utah isn't going to get 'em.

  • backpacn Sandy, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 10:11 p.m.

    Uteology

    Tiny fish swimming in a shark tank also comes to mind.

    The Utes are only fooling themselves if they think they have a chance of competing in a strictly P5 on P5 environment.

    First, there would be no Big Sky team to ease into the football season with an tuneup game and an automatic win.

    Second, No P5 would even think of scheduling a one-and-done or a two-for-one at RES, so the Utes would always have at least 6 road games against P5 teams, where the Utes have already proven that they struggle to compete.

    Third, without any automatic wins, the Utes would be forced to sweep their home schedule every year just to break even, which would mean sweeping USC, Oregon, Arizona, and two P5s from other conferences this year.

    Bottom line:

    Utah would be relegated to perpetual conference bottom dweller, perpetual losing seasons and no bowls.

  • BCMom Brigham City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 10:16 p.m.

    No this is not all about the student athlete. It is nothing more or less than all about the money.

  • Whatsnu Sandy, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 10:27 p.m.

    2fer

    "That's not really up to Bronco. If you pay football and MBB players stipends, then you also pay female athletes stipends. I obviously don't know, as an outsider, but that could be a huge issue for the BOT and/or the WCC"

    You're forgetting, there are schools in the PAC 12 that would have the exact same problem.

    UCLA, USC and Stanford, for example, have outstanding men's volleyball programs, but they compete in the Mountain-Pacific Sports Federation against:

    Brigham Young, Cal Baptist, Cal State Northridge, Hawai'i, Long Beach State, Pepperdine, UC Irvine, UC San Diego, and UC Santa Barbara

    As you can clearly see, the majority of the teams in the best men's volleyball conference in the country aren't from P5 conferences, in fact, many of them don't even have a football program.

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 10:30 p.m.

    @ truth_avenger

    Schools with cold winters can't compete? That's bad news for UW, and Oregon, and pretty much the entire Big 10....

  • Chris from Rose Park Hartford, CT
    Aug. 7, 2014 10:56 p.m.

    It will be interesting to see where extra money will come from to pay for extra support of the student athlete. I would sure hope all money for this will come from boosters and others donating to athletic departments. I would hate to see an increase in student tuition to cover costs. That just wouldn't be right. As a citizen, I would also have a hard time being taxed more so that money could trickle down into paying athletes. As for the case of BYU, I don't think it would be right for tithing money to be used to pay athletes. If all this extra money comes from the athletic department alone then I think something could work. Otherwise, it has to be subsidized by something and I don't like it.

  • gdog3finally West Jordan, Utah
    Aug. 7, 2014 10:57 p.m.

    A Sun Belt school? That is a huge stretch.

  • wer South Jordan, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 11:04 p.m.

    Yet another step in the continual slide to implosion. NCAA football generates $Millions upon $Millions of revenue and it's never enough. Only 25 of the 65 so-called power schools actually operate within their budgets. Most of the coaches of these power schools get paid more than the university president. In some cases, they get 10 times the president's salary.

    For those who say, in effect, "Well, the football program brings in more money and prestige than the president.." While there may be truth in that observation, it really means the universities are losing they way in the scheme of things. In reality, just about all the extraordinary amounts of money get funneled back into the athletic programs. The cash really isn't helping the educational process for which the school was established.

  • high school fan Huntington, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 11:17 p.m.

    This signals the beginning of the end for college football, the majority of fans across the country won't care, television contracts will shrink with no one watching and unfortunately there is no going back.
    The university of Utah should be worried since half the country just got eliminated from contention. If they make cuts, then they will make more and who is next to leave? The ACC and all bottom feeders in each conference will be shown the door. The ultimate result will be 32teams left standing. So long college football.

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 7, 2014 11:20 p.m.

    @ Whatsnu

    I have no idea how this is going to play out, but if it becomes a problem don't be surprised if UCLA, USC, and Stanford drop men's volleyball. Football is king.

  • WACPaddingOurSchedule pocatello, ID
    Aug. 7, 2014 11:33 p.m.

    gdog3finally
    West Jordan, Utah
    There are schools outside the power 5 in other conferences or independent teams like BYU that are more worthy of inclusion than the bottom half of the schools in the power 5 that feed off of and benefit from the conferences best and historic teams at the top. So, although there are intriguing and competitive positives that some sports fans can see with these changes of Power 5 economic and competitive dominance (of which I like as well), there is also an unbalanced prejudice of power. But such is capitalism historically.

    ________

    Can't BYU fans like yourself find something else to complain about? That is getting old. Same complaint over and over again. If BYU was worthy, they would already be in a P5 conference. They are not, get over it. BYU is feeding off ESPN to get any recognition they can. Because it sure is not happening with their scheduling as an independent.

  • WACPaddingOurSchedule pocatello, ID
    Aug. 7, 2014 11:37 p.m.

    CougarSunDevil
    Phoenix, AZ
    Whittingham says that he's in favor of it now. A year or two more of losing seasons and he'll be complaining about the system when he's coaching at Wyoming.

    ________

    I think Wyoming is in good hands with their new coach. Would not make fun of them. Interesting how they can schedule Nebraska, and bring Texas to play in Laramie. Don't hear them crying about scheduling opponents like BYU does.

  • WACPaddingOurSchedule pocatello, ID
    Aug. 7, 2014 11:44 p.m.

    backpacn
    Sandy, UT
    Uteology

    Tiny fish swimming in a shark tank also comes to mind.

    The Utes are only fooling themselves if they think they have a chance of competing in a strictly P5 on P5 environment.

    First, there would be no Big Sky team to ease into the football season with an tuneup game and an automatic win.

    Second, No P5 would even think of scheduling a one-and-done or a two-for-one at RES, so the Utes would always have at least 6 road games against P5 teams, where the Utes have already proven that they struggle to compete.

    Third, without any automatic wins, the Utes would be forced to sweep their home schedule every year just to break even, which would mean sweeping USC, Oregon, Arizona, and two P5s from other conferences this year.

    Bottom line:

    Utah would be relegated to perpetual conference bottom dweller, perpetual losing seasons and no bowls.

    ________

    Meanwhile BYU carrys on the tradition of losing to ranked teams on ESPN. And replayed on BYUtv.

    Bottom line:

    BYU is relegated as an outcast by P5 conferences. Nobody wants them as a member. BYU is a perpetual signee of prearranged bowl games.

  • poyman Lincoln City, OR
    Aug. 7, 2014 11:51 p.m.

    Anti-trust is the twin sister of this transaction...

    The truth is that the P5 folks think that this will enhance their recruiting (most of these institutions and programs couldn't care less about academic achievement)... This definitely will help some of the wealthy programs (i.e. ND, SC, Texas) but the weaker P5 programs will suffer just like the mid majors... Pressure will be brought to bare on the lower echelon of P5 teams (i.e. the utes) and the schools will turn to their Benefactors (the taxpayers) to dig even deeper into their pockets so that they can buy competitive recruits...

    I do not understand why the NCAA and selected Government bodies allow this disparate activity to take place... They need to stop trying to fix what's not broken and quit looking for more unfair advantages... In a free market, players (meaning universities in this case) need to be able to compete on an even playing field...

    What's next? A draft for College Recruits? The best will go to the highest bidders.

  • Daddiooh Orem, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 2:27 a.m.

    If you are a true fan of the amateur sports model that has been a part of college athletics for over 100 years, then this is a sad day.

    If you feel that college athletes should be compensated by whoever can pay the most money (i.e. Texas), then I guess you are happy today.

    I am sad. I have loved college sports my whole life, but it is something I love less and less as I get older. And that is what makes me sad.

    I don't care what the argument is, Athletes get scholarships that pay for tuition, books, food, tutors, while every other student has to pay for it out of their own pockets.

    Maybe the NFL should change its draft rules to emulate the NBA and just let high school kids go right to the pros if they want. A handful might cut it, while the rest will realize they need college to mature to the level that they can compete in the pros. And maybe then they would be grateful for the scholarships they get instead of whining that they are unfairly treated. If that happened then stupid rulings like this wouldn't pass.

  • xert Santa Monica, CA
    Aug. 8, 2014 2:50 a.m.

    Lots of sour grapes here. Well eat those grapes up and wash them down with a refreshing glass of its good to be in the Conference of Champions and.not on the outside looking in. Ps-there isn't really a beverage called that.

  • Capsaicin Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 6:12 a.m.

    Wait, didn't the power 5 create the BCS? Follow the money. There you'll find where the power lies and who wields it, and where it will be in the future. Way to roll over and play dead NCAA. Nice tactic. Wonder who fattened your wallets behind the scenes!?

  • Cali blue Coalinga, CA
    Aug. 8, 2014 6:28 a.m.

    All of the ranking systems have multiple "mid-major" schools ranked higher than many of the P5 schools. Even in the state of Utah there are two "Mid-Majors" ranked higher than the lone P5 school.

  • JohnInSLC Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 7:00 a.m.

    It's more than ironic to see Y fans scolding Utah fans for having exactly what Y fans covet--P5 membership.

    Given all the coug chest beating about "legacy program", "individual awards", "national brand", "ESPN clout", "exposure" and a great HD truck, it's kind of pathetic to see their noses pressed against the glass, on the outside looking in!

  • Cletus from Coalville Coalville, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 7:09 a.m.

    We are big boys now so we don't need to worry anymore and we will build a wining tradition.

    Go Utes!

  • still_thinking Draper, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 7:42 a.m.

    For all those who think this helps Utah and they can pay for this out of all that money they are making from the Pac 12 TV Money - Oklahoma has taken the first step (with the ruling that schools can provide unlimited food to athletes) to set up a fund of $1M/year to feed athletes. Colorado has followed suit. $1M/year on food! How far do you think that Pac 12 TV Revenue is going to go for a school already operating in the red? P5 Football is killing college athletics.

  • cmsense Kaysville, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 7:57 a.m.

    The other 55 , "non power 5" Division I football schools need to start thinking about starting our own football playoff system perhaps similar to the NIT. It may be a premature idea, and hopefully won't be needed if the current playoff plan expands to 8 teams and guarantees at least 2 spots to the best of the other 55 Div. I schools. If the "Power 5" schools can pretty much shut out the other schools out of the fun, we need to have our own fun and personally I"m not too interested in watching Alabama play for a championship every year.

    Just think if they could do the same thing to basketball. There would be no Bradley's, no Wichita St or San Diego St. etc, just Kansas, Duke, UNC, AZ and UCLA every year. Personally, its a lot more interesting and fair and fun if they let everyone have a shot and I'm sure they get a lot more viewers. I think the "power 5" veiwership will suffer if they essenially shut out close to half of Div. I teams, at least I'll tune out.

  • Solomon Levi Alpine, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 8:18 a.m.

    JohnInSLC

    "it's kind of pathetic to see their noses pressed against the glass, on the outside looking in!"

    As opposed to seeing the Utes with their noses pressed against the glass ceiling, on the bottom looking up?

    While you're pre-maturely yucking it up about the "demise" of BYU football, the big boys have just upped the ante and U have nothing with which to respond except to continue being a convenient punching for the big boys of college football.

    9-18 (33%) versus PAC 12 teams will soon become 4-8 yearly versus an all P5 schedule.

  • Ltrain St. George, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 8:24 a.m.

    I am amazed that Hatch actually made somewhat of a coherent comment. I'm at the point of not caring a bit about the NCAA and what they do. Starting with the conference realignment fiasco, the NCAA has only proven that they care nothing about students. They are driven by greed. When they get rid of the Cinderella stories in football, people will stop caring. How many years are people going to care if Alabama wins the title, or if FSU, OSU, ND, USC, or maybe some other SEC team will win. It will get stale and boring.

    The utes need to realize that they will be left behind. If the church decides that giving athletes tithing dollars isn't in the best interest of the church, then our legislature will be forced to do the same or we'll get them out. No more dollars for a power 5 team that is running millions of dollars in the red every year. Give that money to "real students" and stop subsidizing athletics in these universities. No one goes and watches mens soccer or girls softball. Should be club sports.

  • wendell provo, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 8:29 a.m.

    As much as it hurts to say it, Utah is in a much better position than is BYU,and any of my fellow Cougar fans who can't admit that have issues. I would trade places with the Utes in a heartbeat. Regardless of why or how they got invited to the party over BYU does not matter anymore - they are a member of the big boys group and BYU is not.

    As for the proposal that all games must be played against other Power 5 teams, I don't know if that will fly or not. Many of the teams in the big conferences often play 7 and sometimes 8 home games in a season. I doubt very seriously that teams like Florida would be willing to give up those extra home games. And what about the lesser teams in those 5 conferences, would they be willing to play only 4 or 5 home games in a season? I don't know.

    Hopefully BYU is not eventually left out in the cold by all these changes, but I would not be one bit surprised if that's what happens.

  • JohnInSLC Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 8:35 a.m.

    Solomon:

    What was missing from your rejoinder is that you'd rather see BYU stay independent than be invited to a P5 conference. If you can't say that with a straight face, then all your stone-throwing is pretty hollow.

  • Y-Ask-Y? Provo, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 8:43 a.m.

    Wow! So much angst, overreaction, cynicism, and attacking the NCAA and others. C'mon, Cougars, let's show some class.

    This is not the end of college football, much less the end of the world. Let's stop the hyperbole and hand-wringing. BYU has a solid (mid major) football program. That won't change. Nobody in the NCAA is out to stick it to BYU out of spite or hatred. Give up the persecution complex, people!

    These changes are improvements for student athletes and for the integrity of college football overall. Student athletes work hard, and now they get a little extra help. We all wanted a legitimate National Champion. This will help.

    Steady as she goes. Let's get into a Conference, improve our schedule, and play ball!

  • 65TossPowerTrap Salmon, ID
    Aug. 8, 2014 8:54 a.m.

    Sorry Utes, but you'll never keep up with the likes of USC, UCLA, Stanford, Washington, Oregon, et al when it comes to $$$$. You'll always be at the bottom looking up.

  • Bluto Sandy, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 8:58 a.m.

    @ Y-ask-Y

    If BYU is a mid-major (a pejorative term first coined for basketball) then over 2/3 of the so called P-5 teams are also mid-majors.

    BCS, P-5's, mid-majors, non-equity leagues etc., are just crafty marketing techniques used to create a "Caste System", out of whole cloth, without merit.

    Suspend playing into their spin and nix the whole "persecution complex" cliché, when someone disagrees with you.

  • TaipeiModerate New Haven, CT
    Aug. 8, 2014 9:37 a.m.

    I am a BYU fan, but I don't think the argument is correct that Utah will be left in the dust due to autonomy and exclusive P5 scheduling.

    This will kill BYU football and help Utah. Maybe your average fan sitting in Utah County will be happy to watch BYU play in D2 (or non P5 D1). However, money will dry up from boosters, sponsors, and ESPN who just won't see the pay off in subsidizing a D2 team at a D1 level of $$$.

    Do you really think that the top athletes will come to BYU if 1)they won't get the same bennies such as adequate insurance and cost of attendance/pay, or 2) can't play for an actual championship?

    Athletes will go to Utah, the sponsors will switch to Utah, and over time, there will only be one real team in the State.

    To put it frankly, BYU football is dead if they aren't either included in a P5 conference or get P5 independent status. THE END. In 30 years you will have to tell your kids and grandkids something like "did you know that BYU used to have a D1 football program?"

  • WA_Alum&Dad Marysville, WA
    Aug. 8, 2014 10:07 a.m.

    The most interesting quote in the article was from Orrin Hatch. How many senators are from states with the 20 "Have" schools that are driving this, versus the many more "Have-not" schools who struggle to keep up? Attacking the accelerating disparity in college sports is a much easier case to make than defending it. I wager there'll be huge unintended econimic--and legal--consequences in college sports if this system is launched. And in the end, public schools in smaller markets will not be the winners, regardless of current conference affiliation.

  • Y-Ask-Y? Provo, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 10:11 a.m.

    Bluto

    I'm so sorry you are feeling picked on.

    But you are not.

    Get over it.

  • imcrimson Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 10:14 a.m.

    MacNasty - You used the word Pedigree. Let's just say, for the sake of argument, that the Pac 12, when expanding a few years ago, was strictly looking at football pedigree and not research education or anything else. That wasn't the case but for the sake of this argument let's say it was. I need you to just look at this with your mind and not your heart for a moment and I promise to do the same...

    BYU's Pedigree that Utah doesn't have: Undefeated National championship season 30 years ago, a Heisman trophy winner 25 years ago, higher quantity of conference championships, more time in the top 25 during the BCS era.

    Utah's Pedigree that BYU doesn't have: 2 undefeated seasons in the BCS era. 2 BCS bowl wins, a Heisman finalist in the BCS era, a #1 draft pick in the BCS era, higher quantity of NFL players in the BCS era. More bowl game wins in the BCS era.

    MacNasty my argument isn't that BYU wasn't as deserving as the Utes to get invited. They were. My argument is your comment that Utah's pedigree was not a part of the equation. It was.

  • Teakwood Wilsonville, Oregon
    Aug. 8, 2014 10:15 a.m.

    "Power Five" = Baloney, it's NFL minor league.

  • oddman ,
    Aug. 8, 2014 10:24 a.m.

    Gdog, Your impress me with your intelligent comments. I lean your way in how this step will turn out in the end. And I am aware that the two most corrupting influences are money and power. Both are the goals of this move. I am sympathetic to the schools who are in these 5 conferences because of their geographical location or the need to fill all 12 slots so a conference playoff can be held (also driven for more money).

  • Two For Flinching Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 10:55 a.m.

    This is from Stewart Mandel

    "The financial disparity between those five and everybody else is now so wide that starting next year former Mountain West member Utah will make more annually from the Pac-12’s revenue distribution (at least $20 million) than the entire Mountain West averages in annual TV revenue ($18 million)."

    Utah is in a great spot.

  • Stringer Bell Henderson, NV
    Aug. 8, 2014 11:50 a.m.

    Cali blue "Why shouldn't large market teams pursue independence and increase their revenue....?"

    Yeah, like that's ever going to happen. What, follow the BYU model and have their Homecomings with Savannah State?

  • YOGI46 SALT LAKE CITY, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 11:55 a.m.

    Here we see the advent of greed and unfair play from the super 5. It goes to show the money can buy anything. They are wanting to pay their student athletes more. Which student athletes? Only football and basketball? So it's not enough to pay for their education, room, food. Now a car and what else? a House? These " Pro-Athlete-Students" are already given soo much during their playing years and when they walk away with a degree so much after.

  • Stringer Bell Henderson, NV
    Aug. 8, 2014 11:57 a.m.

    Cali blue "All of the ranking systems have multiple "mid-major" schools ranked higher than many of the P5 schools. Even in the state of Utah there are two "Mid-Majors" ranked higher than the lone P5 school."

    So what? That's a problem with the rating system. Drop any of those schools, including Boise St. and BYU into a major conference and have them play nine conference games week in and week out and guess where they'll end up? They don't have the overall talent and as Utah and TCU has learned, don't have the required depth. BYU fans like to make fun of and ridicule the lower P5 schools but everyone cannot be a winner. Getting up for one or two big games a year is nothing like playing a nine conference game grueling schedule. When you're on the outside looking in I guess it's too difficult to understand this.

  • DrUte Woods Cross, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 12:02 p.m.

    If wishes were fishes.....

    Lots of Blue naysayers commenting recently that Coach Whitt is done, Utah will fail, on and on.

    Don't know where all these prognostications are coming from, other than Blue Wishful Thinking.

    Clearly the P5 are making a move, and those who are not P5 are going to have to figure out how to deal with it.

    Reality Check: The PAC12 gap has been there for some time. Now it's just more visible, more palpable, and whether folks like it or not some teams are on the P5 train and some are not.

    Another Reality Check: The media's reports RE the recent influx of new players, depth, & speed on The Hill is not reflective of competition with other teams in Utah --- it's reflective of Utah's competition within P5/PAC12.

    And just wait until January when the P5 Big Boys meet again to make their own rules, to include "whether or not a P5 conference has to have a championship game" which some believe might have motivated the B12 to add additional teams..... Not.

    Good luck out there. 'Pears like the train has left the station.

    That's just the way it is.

  • Schnee Salt Lake City, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 12:18 p.m.

    Utah gains 20 million a year being in the PAC rather than the MWC, and the proposed changes would only cost at most 2 million a year for Utah's 500 or so athletes (10k each which is much more than the proposed stipends and health insurance would be so the 2 million is most likely higher than expected). Utah'll be just fine.

  • not in utah anymore irvine, CA
    Aug. 8, 2014 12:32 p.m.

    What's the big deal, a school can sign roughly 25 football players and 5 basketball players. I don't see this putting the other 6 or 7 colleges in Utah out of business

  • Seldom Seen Smith Orcutt, CA
    Aug. 8, 2014 12:35 p.m.

    As a UU alum and previously an avid Ute fan, upon seeing that the Univ. of Utah pays assistants coaches for an extra curricular activity (football) over $500k per year, that did it for me. D-I basketball is likewise perverted. Increasingly the significance of major college athletics to an even greater degree is the epitome of misplaced priorities and decadence.

    If you live in the Salt Lake Valley and can afford it, and they offer your curriculum, Westminster is the way to go.

    BYU (Provo) shoud emulate their Idaho and Hawai'i campuses with regard to athletics Chasing a corrupt Big5 system is an exercise in futility.

  • CWEB Orem, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 1:16 p.m.

    Better wake up sports fans, the way the world is going, sports will be the least of our worries...it really already is. Sports may cease to exist if the world doesn't get its act together soon...the toilet bowl is where we all will be playing soon.

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 8, 2014 1:19 p.m.

    @backpacn

    Bottom Line:

    A) Revenues
    Utah Football (last reporting year 7/1/2012 - 6/30/2013): $27,640,267
    BYU Football (last reporting year 1/1/2012 - 12/31/2012): $18,639,413

    B) versus P5 Teams
    Utah 11-18 (37%)
    BYU 5-11 (31%)

  • FT salt lake city, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 1:21 p.m.

    Just to be clear, Chris B speaks for himself and not the University of Utah. Anything that further seperates the have from the have nots is bad for college athletics.

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 8, 2014 1:30 p.m.

    Cali blue
    Coalinga, CA

    All of the ranking systems have multiple "mid-major" schools ranked higher than many of the P5 schools. Even in the state of Utah there are two "Mid-Majors" ranked higher than the lone P5 school.

    -----------

    What?

    As of today, the USA Today Coaches Poll Top 25 has:

    * TWENTY-FIVE P5 Teams ranked
    * ZERO mid-majors

    Even UCF which was a top 10 team last year is not ranked in the preseason poll this season, that's one example of the difference in talent level between P5 and mid-majors.

    That is why even in the State the mid-majors (Utah State/BYU) can't compete with the P5 team (Utah).

  • USNGary San Diego, CA
    Aug. 8, 2014 1:42 p.m.

    I did not read all of the comments so this may have been said already but you will start seeing more players drafted from FCS schools more now than before. This will ruin college football because the price for tickets will definitely go up just like pro football. Won't be affordable to the average college fan who still have $30000 of school debt to pay back.

  • CougFaninTX Frisco, TX
    Aug. 8, 2014 1:47 p.m.

    Can someone remind me - when "mid majors" were invited to BCS bowls, what percentage of them did they win?

    In basketball, how many years did a "mid major" make it to the sweet sixteen or even the final four?

    Seems to me, they are really not "mid" at all.

  • royalblue Alpine, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 2:07 p.m.

    drute

    "Lots of Blue naysayers commenting recently that Coach Whitt is done, Utah will fail, on and on.

    Don't know where all these prognostications are coming from,..."

    4-5, 3-6, 2-7, back-to-back bowl less, losing seasons.

    ----------------

    Uteology

    Don't kid yourself; BYU and Utah State have both been very competitive with Utah head-to-head, and both have done BETTER overall than Utah the last 3 years.

    Bowl Games
    BYU 3
    USU 3
    Utah 1

  • Uteanymous Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 8, 2014 2:21 p.m.

    Uteology

    "As of today, the USA Today Coaches Poll Top 25 has:

    * TWENTY-FIVE P5 Teams ranked
    * ZERO mid-majors"

    It's hilarious how U have to piggy back off of the accomplishments of other P5s, because you have absolutely no accomplishments of your own since joining the PAC.

    As of today, the USA Today Coaches Poll Top 25 has:

    * BYU receiving the 38th most votes
    * Utah receiving absolutely ZERO votes

    It's interesting how you completely ignored those little details while you were busy spouting off.

  • Uteanymous Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 8, 2014 2:31 p.m.

    Uteology

    It's interesting, that with all of your spouting off, you failed to disprove Cali blue's statement, that "Even in the state of Utah there are two "Mid-Majors" ranked higher than the lone P5 school."

    Here' just one example from RealTimeRPI

    NCAA Men's Football - Team Power Rankings (2014-2015)
    Last updated - Thu Jul 31 22:30:49 PDT 2014

    #39 BYU
    #42 USU
    #48 Utah

  • Flashback Kearns, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 2:34 p.m.

    This is nothing more than a money and power grab.

  • worf Mcallen, TX
    Aug. 8, 2014 2:36 p.m.

    Utes have made a living, from decades of BYU TV revenue, and now ride the coat tails of conference teams which are much stronger then they are.

    Yikes! This is nothing to find pride in.

  • catanimuss Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 2:50 p.m.

    "#39 BYU #48 Utah"

    Anymous:

    Too bad those rankings haven't put enough points on the scoreboard for you.

  • JohnInSLC Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 2:59 p.m.

    "Utes have made a living, from decades of BYU TV revenue. . . . This is nothing to find pride in."

    worf:

    It was all paid back with BYU's share of Utah's BCS bowl game revenue. I noticed your cougs weren't too proud to refuse it.

  • Uteanymous Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 8, 2014 3:21 p.m.

    catanimuss

    Too bad scoreboard didn't help you qualify for a bowl.

  • GoDevils Gilbert, AZ
    Aug. 8, 2014 4:04 p.m.

    Here's sobering information for Ute fans who believe money from the PAC-12 media deal means paying athletes won't be a financial problem. ASU athletics runs a $6M annual deficit-after $20M in TV revenue and $9M student fees, not to mention ticket sales and merchandise. $20M sounds like a lot of money, but there are expectations that your university will spend that money trying to keep up with USC/Stanford/UCLA/Oregon. It's a losing battle, because they have bigger donors and bigger athletic endowment, so you will never keep up. Look at Oklahoma-they announced they will now add $1M/year to the athletics budget just for more/better food. And once USC/UCLA prove the cost of living in LA is higher than Salt Lake or Tempe, then they will offer better "cost of living" payments than Utah or ASU can make, so they will continue to get better recruits. Any belief that they will support you because "that's best for the conference" is delusional.

    At the same time that sports are a drain on university funds, an in-state resident now pays $25k/year at ASU. Priorities in college athletics are a mess.

  • Hank Pym SLC, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 4:51 p.m.

    to JohnInSLC on pg 4...

    Agreed. Its a riot to see Cougar nation spin how being on the outside looking in is better than where they project the Utes to be.

  • Hank Pym SLC, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 4:56 p.m.

    to Uteanymous

    Preseason polls? Really?

    Sorry? I forgot byu is to Aug & Sept what an SEC team typically is come Mid Jan?

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 8, 2014 5:42 p.m.

    @Uteanymous: "It's hilarious how U have to piggy back off of the accomplishments of other P5s, because you have absolutely no accomplishments of your own since joining the PAC."

    -------------

    We have one Sun Bowl win going 6-5 vs P5 teams in 2011 (4-5 in the PAC 12). Nothing great, but it is still MUCH better than:

    * BYU was 2-5 vs P5 last year
    * BYU is 5-11 31% vs P5 teams since going Indy

    FYI for comparison Utah has a 37% winning percent vs same teams.

    When you guys worry less about what irrelevant polls like RealTimeRPI say and more about what the scoreboard says you might actually beat Utah this decade. Good luck!

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 8, 2014 5:46 p.m.

    @Uteanymous
    Salt Lake City, Utah

    catanimuss

    Too bad scoreboard didn't help you qualify for a bowl.

    -------------

    BYU vs P5: 2-5
    BYU vs others: 6-0

    Too bad you didn't play a real schedule, if you did you would stop talking about OUR bowl game. Just like:

    "In the early years, I think BYU felt that they had outgrown the conference and their people were talking about how BYU would go to the Big 12 or the Pac-10. They used to come into the Utah game always talking about who they would be playing in their bowl game....

    When we started beating them, they stopped talking about their bowl game."

    -- Ron McBride

  • Bluto Sandy, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 6:34 p.m.

    @Uteology
    You're making things up.

  • catanimuss Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 8, 2014 7:45 p.m.

    Anymous:

    Yep, that conference schedule is tough. But as my old pappy used to say: Better to aim for the stars and miss than to aim for a cow pie and hit it.

  • poyman Lincoln City, OR
    Aug. 8, 2014 10:20 p.m.

    @uteology...

    What's your source on the revenue reporting that you offered in an earlier post???... You showed Utah earning more than BYU... Which I believe is highly doubtful for two reasons: 1) BYU has no reporting obligation since it is a non-profit religious institution and up till now they have protected that tax positioning and have not reported revs to anyone or any entity; and 2) BYU kills Utah in attendance and TV revenues... Their gate is a good 100,000 more rear-ends in seat per year, and they have far more national television exposure with higher ratings...

    So again, tell us your source so we can verify it... Or, is it like other uteology facts and figures reported... "far more fiction than truth".

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 9, 2014 12:49 a.m.

    @Bluto
    Sandy, UT

    @Uteology
    You're making things up.

    --------------

    How? I never claimed BYU was a legacy program, with a world-wide brand.

    @poyman

    The source is U.S. Department of Education.

    Search for "Equity in Athletics Data - U.S. Department of Education", then click the link "Get data for one institution", from there the query should be straight forward. Look under "Revenues and Expenses" for each school.

    The numbers I put were the last reported by each institution.

    BYU football: $18 - $14 = about $4 million profit

    Utah football: $27 - $14 = about $13 million profit

    And that's with Utah only having a partial share from the PAC-12. That partially explains why Bronco wants a Big 12 invite so bad.

  • Wiscougarfan River Falls, WI
    Aug. 9, 2014 1:45 p.m.

    RE: Uteology

    "FYI for comparison Utah has a 37% winning percent vs same teams."

    I don't understand why anti-BYU trolls have recently started using this 31-37% statistic. They obviously weren't against the same teams. Since 2011 BYU and Utah only have 6 common opponents and only 4 common P5 opponents. Against all common opponents BYU is 8-2 and Utah is 6-6. Against all common P5 opponents BYU is 4-2 and Utah is 4-5.

  • JohnInSLC Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 10, 2014 8:35 a.m.

    Wiscougarfan:

    Since records against common opponents are important to you, how about the record against the most common of opponents , each other?

    Yep, 4-0 Utes sounds right.

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    Aug. 10, 2014 11:03 a.m.

    JohnInSLC,

    If head to head record says everything, then Utah is worst than Army and Air Force and San Diego State and YMCA, among many others. I know you guys like to believe you were better than Stanford last year, but nobody's buying it just so you know.

    Records against each other, records against common opponents, overall records (with strength of schedule considered) are some indicators used to determine the best team. Neither in itself is a trump indicator that proves one team is better than the other.

    Last year the rankings determined that Utah and BYU were neck and neck (with Utah actually ahead of BYU in one of those rankings by a single point), which is the first time in about 5 years where rankings actually considered Utah to be at the same level as BYU.

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 10, 2014 2:53 p.m.

    Wiscougarfan
    River Falls, WI

    RE: Uteology

    "FYI for comparison Utah has a 37% winning percent vs same teams."

    I don't understand why anti-BYU trolls have recently started using this 31-37% statistic. They obviously weren't against the same teams. Since 2011 BYU and Utah only have 6 common opponents and only 4 common P5 opponents. Against all common opponents BYU is 8-2 and Utah is 6-6. Against all common P5 opponents BYU is 4-2 and Utah is 4-5.

    ------------

    We've had 6 common opponents?

    Are you counting common opponents over multiple years? If so, that makes no sense. There's nothing "common" about a given team from one year to another.

    For example, losing to a ranked team in Logan with Keeton is not the same as beating a un-ranked team without Keeton in Logan a year later.

    There were only 8 common teams over three years:

    2011: Utah/BYU, Oregon State
    Utah 2-0
    BYU 1-1

    2012: Utah/BYU, Utah State, Oregon State, Washington State
    Utah 2-2
    BYU 2-2

    2013: Utah/BYU, Utah State
    Utah 2-0
    BYU 1-1

    Utah 6-2 (75%)
    BYU 4-4 (50%)

    Anything else?

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 10, 2014 3:01 p.m.

    Riverton Cougar
    Riverton, UT

    JohnInSLC,

    If head to head record says everything, then Utah is worst than Army and Air Force and San Diego State and YMCA, among many others. I know you guys like to believe you were better than Stanford last year, but nobody's buying it just so you know.

    -------------

    No, we have clearly said that we are better than BYU not Stanford.

    BYU was 2-5 vs P5 teams last year, Stanford was 9-3.

    Stanford beat 4 ranked teams last year, BYU hasn't beat 4 ranked teams over 18 years combined.

    See the difference between BYU and Stanford?

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 10, 2014 6:07 p.m.

    Wiscougarfan
    River Falls, WI

    RE: Uteology

    "FYI for comparison Utah has a 37% winning percent vs same teams."

    I don't understand why anti-BYU trolls have recently started using this 31-37% statistic. They obviously weren't against the same teams. Since 2011 BYU ... Against all common opponents BYU is 8-2 and Utah is 6-6. Against all common P5 opponents BYU is 4-2 and Utah is 4-5.

    --------------

    What?

    I have no idea how you are defining "common opponents". Here's the "same teams" that we played each year.

    Common Opponents Including Head-to-Head:

    2011: Utah/BYU, Oregon State (Utah 2-0, BYU 1-1)
    2012: Utah/BYU, Oregon State, Washington State, Utah State (Utah/BYU 2-2)
    2013: Utah/BYU, Utah State (Utah 2-0, BYU 1-1)

    Utah 6-2 (75%)
    BYU 4-4 (40%)

    If you ignore the head-to-head then and only then Utah 3-2 and BYU 4-1. The difference, we played Utah State at Logan and lost in OT and you beat them at home by 3. Congrats!

  • Cougsndawgs West Point , UT
    Aug. 10, 2014 9:22 p.m.

    Uteology:
    "The difference, we played Utah State at Logan and lost in OT and you beat them at home by 3."

    I just love the cherry picking ute fans do. Yes the year before last U lost in OT and we beat USU by 3. You conveniently don't address last year where you had to con USU with an onside kick at home to win a game you shouldn't have, while BYU dismantled USU in Logan from the opening whistle. And please spare us the "Chuckie got hurt". BYU was owning them with him in the game...it was Keeton that threw the pick six against Van Noy, it was Keeton's offense that couldn't move the ball on BYU while they racked up yardage against your "P5" utes. And when you take head to head out, yes BYU has a better record since going Indy (and head to head isn't counted in assessing common opponents by any Vegas bookie or any sports statistician...that's why it's called head to head instead of being lumped with common opponents).

  • Riverton Cougar Riverton, UT
    Aug. 10, 2014 11:20 p.m.

    "No, we have clearly said that we are better than BYU not Stanford."

    Ute fans clearly state that Utah is better than BYU because of head-to-head. Since Utah beat Stanford last year, by that logic Utah was better than Stanford.

    There's no need for a straw man in comparing BYU to Stanford; I never once suggested BYU was better than Stanford. I'm just pointing out the flaws in Ute fan logic that "Team A beat Team B therefore Team A is better".

  • Uteology East Salt Lake City, Utah
    Aug. 11, 2014 12:25 a.m.

    @Cougsndawgs

    I clearly said "congrats" on beating Utah State, what do you want airport celebrations?

    * BYU is 31% vs P5 teams.
    * Utah is 37% vs P5 teams.

    No need to look at common opponents or ignore head-to-head, the original statement stands on it's own considering on average Utah has played tougher schedules, in a real league.

  • Wiscougarfan River Falls, WI
    Aug. 11, 2014 9:59 a.m.

    RE: Uteology

    Didn't realize that point out facts would make you so uncomfortable. Since you insist on coming back to the "BYU is 31% vs P5 teams, Utah is 37% vs P5 teams" statistic let's at least give those numbers some context.

    Winning % of the P5 teams BYU has beat since 2011: .395 (30-46)
    @ Ole Miss, @ Oregon State), WSU, @ Georgia Tech, #15 Texas, Georgia Tech

    Winning % of the P5 teams Utah has beat since 2011: .384 (53-85)
    Pitt, Oregon St, AZ, UCLA, WSU, Georgia Tech, Cal, WSU, @ Colorado), #5 Stanford, Colorado

    So congratulations to Utah, you’ve played more really bad P5 teams than BYU has. Any use of the 31-37% statistic simply reinforces that fact. Also, I couldn’t help but notice that Utah only has one road win against a P5 team, their 2012 victory over a 1-11 Colorado team. Both BYU and Utah have a lot to work to improve road performance.

  • JustGordon Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Aug. 12, 2014 4:05 a.m.

    I am amazed at the jealousy of some who post. Every school in Utah gets to choose its own path. BYU chose independence, Utah the PAC12, USU the WAC and now the MWC. Those three roads all lead in different directions. Be supportive of your school's choices, cheer for them. The only constant is change. Embrace it!

  • AZUTE1 Mesa, AZ
    Aug. 12, 2014 8:55 a.m.

    "So congratulations to Utah, you’ve played more really bad P5 teams than BYU has."

    What u fail to acknowledge is the enormous difference in playing against p5 schools in a back to back weekly grind, such as our annual 9 game conference schedule, as opposed to playing against p5 schools at random, w/integrated scheduling breaks. This is precisely the reason that byu's sos finished ranked a full 35 spots below ours last season and why it'll finish nearly 100 spots below ours this season. Furthermore, even w/all of these scheduling breaks, byu still loses to the vast majority of p5 schools they schedule. They had all off season to prepare for uva and lost; Bye weeks preceding The U/Wisc and lost both; Idaho St prior to ND and lost; Weeks to prepare for a UW team minus all of its primary coaches and got destroyed.

    byu has played against 7 Pac-12 schools at random, spanning years, and has beaten merely 2 bottom feeders, gotten destroyed twice at home and once on a neutral field and is 0-3 against The U.

  • WACPaddingOurSchedule pocatello, ID
    Aug. 12, 2014 10:30 p.m.

    worf
    Mcallen, TX
    Utes have made a living, from decades of BYU TV revenue, and now ride the coat tails of conference teams which are much stronger then they are.

    Yikes! This is nothing to find pride in.

    _______

    No, pride is BYU and fans like your self riding the pride train to independence thinking you are better than everyone else. BYU made a living off its WAC legacy. And now you are riding the coattails of New Mexico St. Idaho St, Idaho..... just to fill up your schedule.

  • poyman Lincoln City, OR
    Aug. 13, 2014 10:24 p.m.

    Ummmm WAC Padding.... I guess you haven't checked your own schedule lately have you?