# For Riverratt...



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

http://msn.foxsports.com/collegefootbal ... tt-090210-

They of course have no idea what they are talking about..


----------



## fixed blade XC-3 (Sep 11, 2007)

Yeah, but the rat knows a lot more about college football than this yayhoo.


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

They won a game... plagued with stupid penalties and inexcuseable turnovers... and that proves them worthy of anything? Seriously.... get real. They were lucky to get out of that game with a win and thats the real deal. I cheered my guts out for the U last night, to the point that I'm hoarse this morning, so its not that I'm hating on the Utes. Like Garyfish with his Cougars, I'm just keepin it real. It was NOT an impressive win, it was anything but... however, a win is a win and hopefully the Utes will keep building on the emotional wave they must be riding right now. 8)


----------



## orvis1 (Sep 7, 2007)

fixed blade said:


> Yeah, but the rat knows a lot more about college football than this yayhoo.


I just will never see eye to eye with him on college football no matter how many experts give credit to the Utes Riverratt will always downplay the win. They played sloppy as hell gave up 4 turnovers, called a timeout on a missed FG, had tons of penalties, and still managed to make the play in overtime to win the game. If the Utes win the pac 12 I still think Riverratt will not admit they are for real. In the article I quote "It also marked the Utes' 20th victory against a BCS team, the most by a non-BCS team." So if the Utes are not for real then unless you play in a BCS league you cannot be a real team right?


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

In all fairness, that is 20 wins in how many games. That stat to me means nothing unless I know like it is 20-10 or 20-50 something like that. It has been since 1998 since the BCS was created (according to the article) so that is 12 full seasons, with an average of 12 games per season that is 144 games. They play like 2-4 BCS schools a year, so lets say 3 on average so that is 36 BCS schools. So they are roughly 20-16 by my very rough calculations, nothing to write home about. I am just trying to be realistic. 

Now, to the main point, this win was a big win. The Utes won when they played like crap and beat a team that is favored to win a BCS conference championship. I don't know how anyone can dismiss this win as big. Not as big as BYU beating Oklahoma last year, but it is big none the less.


----------



## hockey (Nov 7, 2007)

I think I saw a stat last night that Kyle is 11-4 against BCS.
One of the hallmarks of a good team or program is that they win "ugly" and that is exactly what they did


----------



## coyoteslayer (Sep 10, 2007)

The Utes did play a very sloppy game last night, and they also made some very good drives. The Utes can play sloppy and still get the job done because of the talent they have on their team. Most first games are sloppy on both sides, but Kyle will address those issues so they don't happen like that again.


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

jahan said:


> In all fairness, that is 20 wins in how many games. That stat to me means nothing unless I know like it is 20-10 or 20-50 something like that. It has been since 1998 since the BCS was created (according to the article) so that is 12 full seasons, with an average of 12 games per season that is 144 games. They play like 2-4 BCS schools a year, so lets say 3 on average so that is 36 BCS schools. So they are roughly 20-16 by my very rough calculations, nothing to write home about. I am just trying to be realistic.
> 
> Now, to the main point, this win was a big win. The Utes won when they played like crap and beat a team that is favored to win a BCS conference championship. I don't know how anyone can dismiss this win as big. Not as big as BYU beating Oklahoma last year, but it is big none the less.


Great post Jahan. They've had two fantastic years in a mediocre conference and anyone that thinks they can go from preparing for Wyoming, UNLV, SDSU, and teams like that for half the year to planning for any major conference teams every week, all year long and just go make a huge impact immediately is kidding themselves. Its a totally different ballgame and nobody is going to just lay down and let the new kid on the block just walk all over them.

That win last night?... Awesome. For the most part, it was really enjoyable although Shakey did about everything he could to cost them the game in the first couple quarters. :roll: I'm sure he'll get straightened out by their next game, at least I hope so because it would be great to see the Utes do well in their last season here. Emotionally, thats an awesome way to get the crowd behind you and roll into your season but my opinion that they barely won and were lucky to do so in light of their on the field errors, has nothing to do with whether I think they're a "real" team or not. Its simply the way it is.... they BARELY won... thats basically what overtime means. You couldn't close the deal in regulation, end of story. I suppose its out of line to bring up that except for an untimely "illegal shift" penalty, Pitt would have scored on a pass to the flat on the Pitt side and taken the game. Yeah, it happened right in front of me, literally. Anyone that thinks the Utes are a fantastic team based on last night's performance is flat out delusional and couldn't be rational about the teams performance anyway. :roll:

I'm slowly coming around to where I'm getting excited for Ute games (hell, the wife even took me to the bookstore and bought me a new Ute sweatshirt yesterday, not to mention all the Ute crap she bought the day before to "get ready" for the game) and I'm liking the Utes and the way they play but they've got some work ahead of them... hopefully they don't just overlook UNLV and get caught slacking off. They'll still have to play hard and eliminate most of their mistakes to win.


----------



## Catherder (Aug 2, 2008)

jahan said:


> In all fairness, that is 20 wins in how many games. That stat to me means nothing unless I know like it is 20-10 or 20-50 something like that. It has been since 1998 since the BCS was created (according to the article) so that is 12 full seasons, with an average of 12 games per season that is 144 games. They play like 2-4 BCS schools a year, so lets say 3 on average so that is 36 BCS schools. So they are roughly 20-16 by my very rough calculations, nothing to write home about. I am just trying to be realistic.


Utah is 20-11 against BCS schools in the BCS era. Which is very good. Here is a table showing BCS schools records against other nonconference BCS schools in the 1998-2008 period. (2nd column)
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/st ... ats/080905

As you can see, only a select few schools can boast a better BCS vs BCS record than the U's 20-11. The schools that had a better record in that period include. USC, Mich St., Miami, Nebraska, Georgia, Virginia Tech, and Wisconsin.

Stats can sometimes be deceiving, but they do support that the Utes body of work against good competition over the past 12 years has been most impressive, and shows that they belong at the "big boy table". It would be delusional to think that we will steamroll the Pac-10 over the next few years, but yes, we will be competitive, and we do belong.


----------



## Chaser (Sep 28, 2007)

A lack-luster performance against a #15 team, and they still come up with the win? Sounds pretty big if you ask me. 

With that in mind, they have plenty of work cut out for them. If they can minimize the turnovers and eliminate the mental mistakes on offense and in the secondary, I think they've got it licked. They may just get enough practice to work out all the issues before the really important games roll around in November. They'll need to beat the lesser opponents handily to gain the confidence necessary to beat TCU and BYU. And they CANNOT overlook ANYONE. 

As for saying they won't be able to jump right into the PAC-12 and immediately make a difference- I guess we'll just have to see, but it seems to me that the Utes have a habit of rising to the occasion. I think they'll be just fine!


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

The thing is this. The utahutes will be favored in every single game, and should win every single game, until November. The ONLY game that will be any kind of challenge to them will be the Oct. 30 game at Air Force. And that only because for some reason, Air Force seems to play them especially tough every year. Four of their last five games are Air Force, Notre Dame, TCU and BYU. They'll hit that stretch 7-0, and could who knows what happens in those last five games. It is plenty of time to iron out the uncharacteristic mistakes they made last night. 

I guess above all else, I was most surprised by some of the mistakes they made. Coach Whitt teams usually don't make those kinds of mistakes. Ever. So that was the most surprising to me.


----------



## Huge29 (Sep 17, 2007)

I am amazed at all of the objective criticism especially from the likes of CS; I guess the sauce can't flow on a weeknight! For a first game, you kind of have to expect some sloppiness, but it was pretty isolated to about 5 plays (4 TO's and one long pass for a TD). They will clean up those problems in no time. They won the war in the trenches decidedly holding the 4th best Freshmen (last year) to his career low of only 72 yards. Out paced yards by about 50%, 405 vs 266. You simply take out two of those bad plays and we have a blow out on our hands against the #15 team in the nation! Clearly add one sloppy play and they lose, but I thought that was a great game! Props to the ewts.


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

Chaser said:


> A lack-luster performance against a #15 team, and they still come up with the win? Sounds pretty big if you ask me.
> 
> With that in mind, they have plenty of work cut out for them. If they can minimize the turnovers and eliminate the mental mistakes on offense and in the secondary, I think they've got it licked. They may just get enough practice to work out all the issues before the really important games roll around in November. They'll need to beat the lesser opponents handily to gain the confidence necessary to beat TCU and BYU. And they CANNOT overlook ANYONE.
> 
> As for saying they won't be able to jump right into the PAC-12 and immediately make a difference- I guess we'll just have to see, but it seems to me that the Utes have a habit of rising to the occasion. I think they'll be just fine!


I disagree. This game was a lack-luster performance against a team ranked #15 in the pre-season. Pitt didn't do a think to justify that ranking. I think both teams looked pretty lousy for most of the game with a few sparks of something exciting for the future. But, Pitt certainly didn't justify the #15 ranking. It will be interesting to see how the rest of their season goes. My guess is that it won't go very well based on their performance against the Utes the other night.

Sloppy play in the first game seems to me to be the result of sloppy summer coaching.

My never-so-humble opinion is that the Utes will be a middle of the road team in the Pac-10/12. The Utes have, many times, risen to the occasion but they are not consistent. Each year they struggle in Eugene and/or Corvallis. As I recall the Sugar Bowl season was only made possible because the Beavs quarterback ran out of bounds on 4th and goal without throwing the ball. I don't see the Utes being ready for what has been a bowl game for them, every week.

Maybe that will change in the future. But, for the forseeable future, I see the Utes with 3-4 in conference losses per season. Tack on a BYU loss and they'll be shooting a far from impressive .500.


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

Catherder's post wins this thread, IMO. Utah has been and will continue to be superb against BCS opponents. Kyle Whittingham is a first rate coach. I think he's just about as good as any coach in the country at maximizing the talent he's given. I'll still vote for the Cougars and cheer venemously against the Utes. I mean I can't stand those dang Utes! They're a good football team, though. It kind of hurts to say it out loud.


----------



## Comrade Duck (Oct 24, 2007)

BirdDogger said:


> They're a good football team, though. It kind of hurts to say it out loud.


Some things are better left unsaid!

Shane


----------



## Chaser (Sep 28, 2007)

Well, that de-validates everything Birddogger just said! 

Catherder- you make a good point. I think rankings shouldn't even start until after the first conference games are played. Just too many what-ifs floating around to justify a valid pre-season ranking. But since they do rank teams before play begins, I guess we've got to go with it, right? Lots of shake-ups in the first few weeks of the season. It would be nice to see everyone start out with a clean slate, and earn their rank through wins.


----------



## fixed blade XC-3 (Sep 11, 2007)

Speaking of rankings when will they come out with the updated ones?


----------



## Chaser (Sep 28, 2007)

Fixed- should be out by this afternoon.


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

Dodger, although I've somewhat converted to wearing all red Utes stuff on Saturdays now (not much to be had in purple, unless you want it to say Weber on it), I agree with all of your post, especially the last line of your next to last paragraph. Its a lot different when you have to prepare for folks that were once an out of conference, once a season game and now you're playing them every week. I think there will definitely be some rough years before things start to even up.


----------

