# Too Quiet??



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

I wish Utah was winning or BYU was losing so people would come on and talk football.

Will Utah's win over Stanford be the one game the Utes hang their hat on?


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

No, their season is always won or lost on the BYU game.

:mrgreen:


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

What is there to talk about? Utah State's season went down with Chuck E.'s knee. Utah can't find an offense, and BYU lost the rivalry, which is all that matters to utefan, so there isn't much else to talk about. Hence the downside of the rivalry game early in the year. Because lets face it, Utah is no closer to a Rose Bowl than BYU at this point. BYU is locked into the Fight Boredom Bowl, and Utah will be extremely lucky to get a bowl - heck - they would be thrilled with a trip to the Fight Boredom Bowl against BYU at this point. Yea, welcome to the 12-Pack. And Independence. Either of which get you the Fight Boredom Bowl. 

Go team go!


----------



## HighNDry (Dec 26, 2007)

What about the Las Vegas bowl? Would Utah be happy to go there or is it just too demeaning for a PAC12 team?


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Not good enough for the Vegas Bowl. I think the Vegas Bowl is too high in the pecking order to take a Utah team that will finish 6-6 at best.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

As a Cougar Fan, I'd rather the Vegas bowl than the macaroni and cheese bowl. Not that it really matters at that point. Its really trying to decide if you'd rather have dog crap on your right shoe vs. your left.


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

That's exactly what I don't understand about people hating independence. They say "well you can't play for a conference championship."

My question is: "who cares?" How many conference championships has BYU won? Bunches. Does anyone care? No because they didn't get BYU to the BCS bowls.

Winning a conference championship was tangential to winning football games. Having a conference and beating New Mexico, UNLV, SDSU, and the other dregs of the WAC/Mountain west every year was meaningless. The accomplishment has always been winning a bunch of football games. It just so happens that it used to get you a worthless and meaningless conference championship too.

As for the bowls, there's only one that matters for football. The rest are about money. In my mind it doesn't matter whether you go to the Fight Boredom Bowl, the Sin Bowl, the Flushing Toilet Bowl, or the Who Gives a Ratsass bowl. For all but 2 teams every year, it's just an excuse for winning teams to play another game and make some money.

If you're looking for more than that out of a bowl game, you'll always be sorely disappointed.

From the PAC perspective, the job of the PAC in bowl games is to not lose. Odds say you get an MWC team or BYU. Since you are in the Great and Powerful Oz, you should destroy the independent or MWC teams. Your league credibility is based on beating those kinds of teams, convincingly. So most of the PAC finds itself spending the bowl season trying to maintain credibility. There's nothing to gain for them in the End Nigerian Scams bowl. There is only something to lose: credibility and national respect. Of course, you'd have more of that in the first place if you didn't pick up teams with histories like Colorado, Washington schools, and Arizona schools. And only recent history is on the side of the Utes. 

That's half your conference. Stay relevant PAC. Beat the cellar dwellers in the Breast Cancer Awareness bowl.


----------



## Mr Muleskinner (Feb 14, 2012)

Dodger said:


> As for the bowls, there's only one that matters for football. The rest are about money. In my mind it doesn't matter whether you go to the Fight Boredom Bowl, the Sin Bowl, the Flushing Toilet Bowl, or the Who Gives a Ratsass bowl. For all but 2 teams every year, it's just an excuse for winning teams to play another game and make some money.


Sorry Dodger but bowl games mean more than that to a lot of people. Those that have played in them and have gone to them will attest to it. Are they about the money? Sure for the Universities and NCAA (which is a business) but if they were just about the money to those that play and attend they would not even exist.


----------



## Dodger (Oct 20, 2009)

Mr Muleskinner said:


> Sorry Dodger but bowl games mean more than that to a lot of people. Those that have played in them and have gone to them will attest to it. Are they about the money? Sure for the Universities and NCAA (which is a business) but if they were just about the money to those that play and attend they would not even exist.


To some extent, I agree that a bowl means more to the players than to the fan base or the University in general. But, I think it also means something to players because they work for it all year long. Their reward for doing well is earning an extra game. They're football players. They want to play football. For most of them it is the last game they'll ever play in. Of course that is going to mean something more to them than the Bangalore Tech Support Bowl will mean to the average fan.

I disagree that bowls aren't just about money though. Football players play football because they like it. They will play football whether there is money or not (evidence: they play for 4 or 5 years without getting paid). The bowls would not exist without money. Universities wouldn't participate and the Bowl Pimp (otherwise known as the NCAA) wouldn't have any reason to have the games without getting their University working girls to cough up their yearly bowl protection money.

Fans only care about one more game and they pay for it. That's the reason it happens.

Money, not happy thoughts, player warm fuzzies, bowl rings, or sunny destinations, makes football go round.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

I'm all about one more football game. I totally agree with Dodger on that. Well said. As a follow up, if you don't think the Trash.com Toilet Bowl is important to the schools, then see what happens when they don't go to Albacracky, or El Paso, or Fort Worth for it. If Utah doesn't go to one of these fine cities this year, Whit will get one more year to right the ship or he'll be coach of some other team. (Which sucks because he's a very good coach). But bowls do mean things. If nothing else, they are an indicator of the health of a football team. It only takes a 6-6 record to get one these days. And if a team can't do that for multiple years in a row, then change will happen.


----------



## wyoming2utah (Sep 12, 2007)

I said it another thread early on...what's there to talk about when both BYU and Utah suck? Neither team is worth watching right now because neither of them are headed anywhere of significance. So, I will stick to the NFL...go Chiefs! Yes, I am a bandwagon Chiefs fan now with Alex Smith!


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

I enjoy the college game. And I've enjoyed watching BYU continue to improve through the year, from the mercy flush game against a horrible Virginia team, through a solid, quality team performance last week against BSU. Through the wins and the losses, its been enjoyable to see the team come together and improve. (yet another reason the rivalry is better at the end of the year -when both teams have had the season to find their stride). 

The Chiefs are a fun team. I don't know if the NFL was ready for the KC to be the only undefeated team at the mid point. Especially with a coach and QB that were thrown away by their previous teams. I really like seeing both Alex Smith and Andy Reid have success in their new venue. Awesome for both of them. Go Chiefs!


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

Yeah, I had high hopes for the Aggies before Chuckie went down. That and both teams' loss to Utes kind of took the air out of the season. BYU can still show something special if they handle ND and Wisconsin. Taysom Hill's accuracy improvement has totally changed that team. San Francisco after Christmas sounds really nice but I can't talk my wife into going.


----------

