# Conference Expansion!



## Comrade Duck (Oct 24, 2007)

A lot of buzz going on right now with the Big Ten wanting to expand. Reports out of KC have been saying that 4 teams, Nebraska, Mizzou, ND and Rutgers have all received informal invites to the conference. From there the dominoes would fall as all the other conferences start filling holes.

I know a few of you scoffed when I mentioned BYU to the Big 12, but it's not sounding so unrealistic if these reports are true. Mizzou and Nebraska to the Big 10 and then follow that with an invite from the Pac 10 to Colorado. That would create 3 open spots in the Big 12. TCU would be a likely fit to fill one of those slots as well as BYU (the Big 12 wanted BYU back in the mid 90's, there's no reason why they still wouldn't) which would leave one more opening.

That last remaining spot could be an interesting one. It sounds like Utah receiving an invite from the Pac 10 is nearly a done deal. What if the Big 12 steps in as well and give the Utes an invite to try and entice them to come to the conference along with the Cougs and Frogs? Which would they choose? Both would be great conferences, they could keep the natural rivalry with the Cougs in place as well as open the recruiting doors even more for Whitt down in Texas. If the Utes did go to the Big 12 who would the Pac 10 court to try and get to join there conference along with Colorado?

I know it's all speculation, and in the end my Cougs might be on the outside looking in, but it still is interesting. If nothing else it has us talking about college football in May.

With all the talk going on you would think something big is about to happen. I guess we'll see.

Shane


----------



## xxxxxxBirdDogger (Mar 7, 2008)

I don't know that anything is going to happen, but the Big 12 already has teams that don't play on Sunday. The Bible Belt is OK with that stance. BYU was once on the table and that's been confirmed by the Big 12 commissioners. I don't know if that would still be the case. 
BYU vs. Boise State sounds fun to me!


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

Utah to the Pac10 would be a dream for me.... I think you're probably right about the teams going to the Big12 and if Utah goes with em, I'd like to see BSU in the Pac10 instead. I have no idea how it'll shake out but the Big 10 is trying to make some huge moves apparently which opens holes all over the place.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Riverrat77 said:


> I'd like to see BSU in the Pac10 instead.


If you think the Pac 10 has been uppity about BYU and Utah because of their "academic standards," then Boise has no prayer of a Pac 10 invite.


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

GaryFish said:


> Riverrat77 said:
> 
> 
> > I'd like to see BSU in the Pac10 instead.
> ...


Nah, I just dont think they want BYU, regardless of the reason. I do think they want Utah but there are a few other variables that play into it. I'd like to see them pick up BSU so they can really show how they hang with the big dogs.. playing that schedule all year. They already have a rival in Oregon apparently. :lol: It will probably be their only chance to get a national championship and I can't say that I'd hate to watch them play on FSNW every weekend.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

I got to thinking about this on the way in to work this morning. 

The Big-12 is the ONLY major conference that has a member school that are private, religion-sponsored schools. None of the SEC, Big 10, or Pac 10 have a private religious school.


----------



## The Janitor (Jan 23, 2009)

Isn't Boston College a Catholic school?

I personally don't want to see the current Mtn. West conference get split up. I was hoping they would add Boise State. Oh well, maybe somehow the stars will align right and BYU could somehow get into the Big 12. That would be much more exciting, and better quality football than they pac 10 that's for sure.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

You are correct. Boston College is a Catholic school. Same with Miami (FL). 

When you think about it though - that is only 3 schools out of the six BCS conferences. Not much when you think about it. There is just a bunch of baggage in taking a private religious school. Especially when the church, whichever it is, takes pretty serious the religious teachings and places them over athletics and really everything else. 

How 'bout this. With the major conferences shuffling the decks around, why not BYU go independent in football? Drop any conference affiliation. Every year, they could play Utah, Utah State, Hawaii, Air Force, Army, Navy, and Notre Dame. I mention Army, Navy and Notre Dame because they are the other independents and finding a game in late October through November is pretty hard when teams are wrapped up in their conference schedules. That would leave BYU needing 5 more games. They typically have pulled 2 games from Pac-10 schools, and can get a WAC team any time they want. And in recent years have done well getting ACC and Big East Schools (Florida State, Georgia Tech, Virginia, Syracuse to name a few. Get one Big 12 school - maybe a Colorado or Kansas team. If they drop to D-2 for one game each year, then no problem - they do that now anyway. I'm sure Weber would be willing to go to Provo any chance they could get. And with that in mind, BYU could probably get at least 7 home games a year. Sometimes even 8 if they really pushed it. 

Then as an independent, sign a contract with the Vegas Bowl that says unless BYU gets a BCS game, they get the Vegas Bowl - pretty much the same thing they have right now with the MWC! 

I don't see a downside. Thoughts?


----------



## hyperduc (Sep 18, 2009)

Utah has a strong chance of going to the Pac-10, BYU going somewhere is not a possibility so yes they more than likely will end up on the outside looking in. The one bright side is that with Utah and possibly TCU gone, BYU would be the only good team left in the conference.

When it comes to the discussion of conference leapfrogging, no one is talking about BYU except BYU fans.


----------



## The Janitor (Jan 23, 2009)

That's an interesting though Gary. I actually like the scenario you drew up and if it could be sustained, I think BYU going independent would be better than having any conference affiliation. If Utah and TCU did leave, I see no reason for BYU to want to stay in the MWC anymore.

On a side note, I have heard absolutely nothing reputable about the PAC10 actually expanding. If anybody could share links to the allegedly solid sources this info is coming from, that would really help.


----------



## hyperduc (Sep 18, 2009)

Pac ten officials have been spotted at the U campus and

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/ ... to-big-ten

http://www.mwcconnection.com/2010/4/20/ ... -pac-10-is

http://content.usatoday.com/communities ... -schools/1

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/3422 ... the-pac-12


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

C'mon... ESPN reputable? No way.... :wink: :lol: I just want Utah to go Pac 10 for solely personal reasons.... away games at Pac10 stadiums. WOOOOO HOOOOO!! I'd become an every year season ticket holder if this goes down the way I hope.  

Speaking of which, my hearing aid doctor is a Utah alum... forgot to mention this to him but I'll have to bring it up. He was quick to find out whether I was a BYU fan or not and seemed really pleased when I rather emphatically answered to the effect of, "no, I'm not". 

I also found the comment on ESPN quite humorous that said that the only people talking about BYU going anywhere are BYU fans. :lol:


----------



## Comrade Duck (Oct 24, 2007)

First this:



hyperduc said:


> When it comes to the discussion of conference leapfrogging, no one is talking about BYU except BYU fans.


Then in the very next post:



hyperduc said:


> http://content.usatoday.com/communities ... -schools/1
> 
> http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top%20 ... mff7Q.cspx


Anybody else notice the contradiction?

Murphy phrased it best when he said, "Never argue with a Ute because people might not know the difference."

Shane


----------



## hyperduc (Sep 18, 2009)

Comrade Duck said:


> First this:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


No one noticed the contradiction because they were able read past the letters BYU far enough to understand it wasn't invited.

from: http://content.usatoday.com/communities ... -schools/1

"Utes will be offered an invitation, *however state rival Brigham Young is not invovled*. One reason for not selecting BYU would be the school's insistence on not play on Sundays.?

from: http://www.abc4.com/content/news/top%20 ... mff7Q.cspx
"*BYU would not be invited*, primarily because they don't play on Sunday...and the PAC 10 has a lot of Sunday games."

Saying that they are not being invited does not mean that anyone is talking about them, in fact it went so far as to point out they aren't talking about them. So again no one reputable is taking seriously about BYU going anywhere.


----------



## Comrade Duck (Oct 24, 2007)

Same USA Today article!



> "The story also says that the Cougars could go to the Big 12 if Colorado is the second team to move to the Pac-10."


Taken from the ABC 4 Sports article:



> "This is all speculation...but sources are telling ABC 4 Sports that Utah will be invited to join the PAC 10 conference, but not BYU. *The Cougars could wind up in the Big 12...or staying put in the MWC*"


That was my point, but I didn't really expect you to understand that.

Shane


----------



## Comrade Duck (Oct 24, 2007)

Let me help you with the highlights from the articles hyperduc since you have a hard time understanding anything past the opening title:

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/spo ... 96754.html



> CHANGE IN OUR TIME
> Since the Big Ten said it wanted to add a team or teams to its powerhouse conference, speculation over who's going where and who will be left looking for a home has run rampant. Will the Big Ten - there are actually 11 schools - grow by one or get crazy and add five? What will be the Southeastern Conference's response, if any? Is the Pac-10 serious about adding two schools so it can add a money-making conference championship football game? *How does all of this affect the Big 12?* We take a look at some of the scenarios, from least to most outlandish:
> 
> *Big change*
> ...


http://cfn.scout.com/2/968955.html



> The Big 12 could quickly take over TCU without a problem, and it might try to swallow up Utah and BYU before the Pac 10 does, but that's not like getting the bigger-name schools from the BCS leagues. Forget about getting anyone from the Big Ten.





> Big 12 - Baylor, BYU, Colorado State, Houston, Iowa State, Kansas, Kansas State, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Oklahoma State, SMU, Texas, Texas A&M, Texas Tech, TCU, Utah


http://bleacherreport.com/articles/3085 ... tidal-wave



> The First Wave: Big 12 Scenario
> 
> If the Big Ten decides to go south instead, Missouri would be the most likely new addition.
> 
> ...


http://www.mwcconnection.com/2010/1/23/ ... byu-if-the

This one should be easy for you. It says it all right in the title of the article.


----------



## Comrade Duck (Oct 24, 2007)

hyperduc said:


> Utah has a strong chance of going to the Pac-10, BYU going somewhere is not a possibility so yes they more than likely will end up on the outside looking in. The one bright side is that with Utah and possibly TCU gone, BYU would be the only good team left in the conference.
> 
> When it comes to the discussion of conference leapfrogging, no one is talking about BYU except BYU fans.


At this point it is all speculation. Is BYU, or Utah for that matter, going anywhere? Who knows! I'll believe it when it happens. I wouldn't be surprised if the Cougs do get left out, but you won't catch me pretending, by speaking in absolutes, to know something that is obvious to everyone else that I don't.

People are talking about BYU in possible scenarios of a conference realignment. Hell, you proved that with your own links even though you weren't smart enough to realize it. Is it possible? Sure. Likely? Probably not, but we'll see.

Like I said though, if nothing else it gets us talking about football in May.

Shane


----------



## hyperduc (Sep 18, 2009)

If you think that an article about Utah and Colorado being invited the Pac-10 is somehow about you because it happens to mention you were not invited, well all I have to say is no wonder they call it life in the bubble.


----------



## Comrade Duck (Oct 24, 2007)

hyperduc said:


> If you think that an article about Utah and Colorado being invited the Pac-10 is somehow about you because it happens to mention you were not invited, well all I have to say is no wonder they call it life in the bubble.


I'm not sure I can make it any simpler for you to understand but I'll try. My original post talked about rumors of BYU possibly joining the Big 12 if there is a shake up in some of the major conferences. Within this thread there are linked 5 or 6 different articles/blogs (including the one you posted) that specifically mention BYU and the Big 12. You say only BYU fans are talking about the possibility of them leaving the MWC. Well, none of those articles were written down in "the bubble."

It's not that complicated. Try to keep up!

Shane


----------



## hyperduc (Sep 18, 2009)

Comrade Duck said:


> I'm not sure I can make it any simpler for you to understand but I'll try.
> 
> Shane


Here let me help you,

The first link I posted: no mention of BYU except byu fans in the comment section

The second link I posted: no mention of BYU except byu fans in the comment section

The third link refers back to ABC4's (local) reporting of the interest the PAC-10 had in Utah, in both of those links Utah was the subject and BYU was mentioned as a possible replacement for a team that was invited to go elsewhere.

My point was valid, BYU isn't a serious candidate for going anywhere.


----------



## HighLakesDrifter (Sep 13, 2007)

Jon Wilner of the San Jose Mercury News does a pretty good job of explaining the BYU/Pac-10 issue. BYU fans won't like it much.

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/colleg...expansion-revisiting-the-brigham-young-issue/

If Utah joins the Pac-10, I will become a season-=ticket holder. I grew up in Eugene, Oregon, and love Pac-10 ball. The chance to see it locally is too much to pass up!


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

May 3, 2010 issue of Sports Illustrated has an article that starts on page 50, The Colossal Conference Grind-up written by Austin Murphy. It lays out three _possible_ scenarios:

*Scenario 1*
The Big Ten adds only Missouri, while Colorado and Utah jump to the Pac-10. The Big 12 fills its two openings with BYU and TCU.

*Scenario 2*
The Pac-10 still takes Colorado and Utah, but the Big Ten steals three-Missouri, Nebraska, and Rutgers. All of the moves leave the Big 12 and Mountain West on life support.

*Scenario 3*
Welcome to conference Armageddon.............

My point is; Sports Illustrated is NOT 'nobody', and they have discussed scenarios with BYU joining the Big 12, so to say "only BYU is talking about it" is false. It may be very unlikely they will make such a move, but that is not the issue pertaining to hyperduc's claims.


----------



## Comrade Duck (Oct 24, 2007)

proutdoors said:


> May 3, 2010 issue of Sports Illustrated has an article that starts on page 50, The Colossal Conference Grind-up written by Austin Murphy. It lays out three _possible_ scenarios:
> 
> *Scenario 1*
> The Big Ten adds only Missouri, while Colorado and Utah jump to the Pac-10. The Big 12 fills its two openings with BYU and TCU.
> ...


No way this article exists! Nobody outside of the bubble is talking about BYU shuffling conferences because they are not a serious candidate. No way SI, the most popular sports magazine ever, would run such nonsense.

How do I know this? Because hyperduc has been gracious enough to share with us his inside knowledge of the situation, information that the media is obviously not privy too, especially not some dude from SI named Austin Murphy who gets paid to write about sports.

Most people are mistaken to think that all this talk, up to this point, is just speculation, hearsay and a lot of rumors. Not hyperduc though. He's got absolute knowledge. Just ask him. He'll tell you.



proutdoors said:


> *My point is*; Sports Illustrated is NOT 'nobody', and they have discussed scenarios with BYU joining the Big 12, so to say "only BYU is talking about it" is false. It may be very unlikely they will make such a move, but that is not the issue pertaining to hyperduc's claims.


I got your point Pro, and it's a valid one. I don't know if the intended recipient will get it though. That might be asking way too much. Thanks for sharing the article.

Shane


----------



## Comrade Duck (Oct 24, 2007)

hyperduc said:


> My point was valid, BYU isn't a serious candidate for going anywhere.


Who says? And who really knows? You? A lot of people say they aren't, but a lot of people think they are. Maybe you can show me where it says BYU has been ruled out of all the possible scenarios. Show me where it says that BYU "isn't a serious candidate." I'm still seeing plenty of written talk that has BYU included.

Shane


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

Comrade Duck said:


> I'm still seeing plenty of written talk that has BYU included.
> 
> Shane


There was plenty of talk too about the Jazz having the team to make a serious run at a championship too.... and then reality kicked in. 8)


----------



## Comrade Duck (Oct 24, 2007)

Riverrat77 said:


> There was plenty of talk too about the Jazz having the team to make a serious run at a championship too.... and then reality kicked in. 8)


Why do you got to go there? That one still hurts.

I'm not saying BYU to the Big 12 is definitely going to happen. In fact, I said I wouldn't be surprised that if when the dust settles there still right where they are at now, in the MWC. I do think it's a possibility though. Regardless of what I think, the main argument here is whether or not there are people outside the bubble who think it's a possibility, and are talking about it. Obviously there are.

Thanks for the Jazz dig anyways!

Shane


----------



## hyperduc (Sep 18, 2009)

Comrade Duck said:


> Regardless of what I think, the main argument here is whether or not there are people outside the bubble who think it's a possibility, and are talking about it. Obviously there are.
> 
> Thanks for the Jazz dig anyways!
> 
> Shane


At least your being mentioned at the bottom of articles about the Utes, fun being little brother isn't it?


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

As disappointed as I'll be Shane, I do think that you're probably right and that a bunch of hypothetical nonsense will wind up being just that when its all said and done. I really would like to get to watch a bunch of Pac-10 or 12 or whatever games here in Utah. I am just wondering if there are too many pieces to the puzzle and if one is missing, the whole thing falls apart.


----------



## Comrade Duck (Oct 24, 2007)

hyperduc said:


> At least your being mentioned at the bottom of articles about the Utes, fun being *little brother* isn't it?


Your creativity is about as strong as your reading comprehension. Did you think of that all by yourself?

I laugh when I see Ute fans trying to use the "little brother" title. You've worn that scarlet letter for too long over the last couple decades to be able to pass it on just yet. The tide has not turned. Aside from the Jazz, BYU is the story in this state and in the national perspective they are still recognized more so than the Utes. The gap has been closed somewhat, but as long as the Cougs continue beating the Utes you still own that label brother. Conference allegiance won't change that.



Riverrat77 said:


> As disappointed as I'll be Shane, I do think that you're probably right and that a bunch of hypothetical nonsense will wind up being just that when its all said and done. I really would like to get to watch a bunch of Pac-10 or 12 or whatever games here in Utah. I am just wondering if there are too many pieces to the puzzle and if one is missing, the whole thing falls apart.


I wouldn't even know what to guess any more because the rumors keep changing. I do know though that Washington is coming to town this fall. A good opportunity to see your favorite PAC 10 team in person. If we can, we ought to get a group of us together pre-game to do some tailgating.

Shane


----------



## jahan (Sep 7, 2007)

Comrade Duck said:


> hyperduc said:
> 
> 
> > At least your being mentioned at the bottom of articles about the Utes, fun being *little brother* isn't it?
> ...


I disagree with the bolded statement, but I am not trying to take anything away from BYU, but Utah is definitely on the national radar more than BYU. Really we are lucky to have two great football programs in this state that have such a good rivalry, I personally would hate to see that go away.


----------



## hyperduc (Sep 18, 2009)

Comrade Duck said:


> I laugh when I see Ute fans trying to use the "little brother" title. You've worn that scarlet letter for too long over the last couple decades to be able to pass it on just yet. The tide has not turned. Aside from the Jazz, BYU is the story in this state and in the national perspective they are still recognized more so than the Utes.


Awww...that's cute, you don't realize the 80's are over and you still think your team is relevant. :roll:

Remind me if you will:
Who owns the overall win/loss record = Utah (Utah leads, 53-34-4)
Who has the most undefeated seasons = Utah (Utah actually has 7 undefeated seasons and 5 perfect seasons) 
Who has been to two BCS bowls = Utah (by the way BYU has 0 BCS appearances)
Who owns the post season bowl win percentage = Utah (Utah 80% vs. BYU .375) 
Consensus national titles = BYU (perfect seasons only get you BCS bowl games these days)
Last five meetings = (Tied, 5-5)

Recently it has been competitive, but face it: On the national scene you are little brother.


----------



## Comrade Duck (Oct 24, 2007)

Look at the 2008 season. Utah had a great year, went undefeated and won the Sugar Bowl. It wasn't until the bowl game was over that the national media even realized they were pretty dang good. The Utes weren't even in consideration when it came to discussion of the National Champion until after the bowl game was over.

That same season, BYU opens up the first half of the season undefeated. They are the medias BCS darlings. After they drilled UCLA there was even talk by the guys at ESPN and other sports media outlets of them possibly being worthy of a NC berth should they run the table. They weren't as good as everyone thought, but they still got the recognition.

The Cougs finish the 2008 season on a down note with key losses to TCU, Utah and UofA. All it took though was a 1 point win over OU and they jumped from the 20's in the rankings to the top 10. It's still September, and once again the national media is throwing around BYU's name of possibly making it to a title game should they run the table.

I know the joke is that BYU is always the NC in September, but the national media is the ones that fuel that fire. BYU jumped 11 spots in the rankings after beating the Sooners because of their national perception. Utah runs the table in 2008 and the national perspective going into the bowl game was that they were still the 2nd best team in the MWC and that TCU gave them that win. It took the bowl victory over Alabama before they finally got any true respect.

Does BYU deserve that respect. No, they haven't earned it but they still get it anyways. On a national level, it's still BYU 1st and Utah a close 2nd. In this state it's not even close. All you have to do is open a newspaper, listen to sports talk radio or watch the news and see who gets the most coverage to figure that one out.

Bronco has taken 3 out of 5 over Kyle. He's won nearly as many outright conference championships as the University of Utah has won since the 1950's. He's had four 10+ winning seasons in a row all of which they finished in the top 25.

I'm not living in the 80's. I'll stay within the last 4 years if you want and BYU has 3 out of 4 over the Utes with 2 conference championships to their names. 

We're only talking football also. If you want we can talk about how the 2 different basketball programs compare to each other. 

The Utes football program is a strong one, the perceptional gap has definitely gotten closer, but when it comes right down to it, you're still the little brother, brotha!


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

I'm as big of a BYU honk as there is. And I've gotta say, that in football, the utahutes are more on the national scene lately than BYU. Its hard to argue that our 3-2 record in the Vegas bowl is better than two BCS victories and the longest bowl winning streak in the country. Plus a #1 pick in the draft. All great accomplishments. I really take my hat off the utahutes for what they have accomplished. While BYU has won the rivalry three of the last four years, utahutes are more on the national radar right now than BYU. Its pretty amazing what can happen when a BYU guy is your coach! ;-)

Now that said, I think both schools have very different things to offer to other conferences. BYU travels exceptionally well. They fill stadiums across the nation on a consistent basis because of the fan base. BYU outsells Utah in home game attendence, season ticket holders, and fan support in every sport except women's gymnastics - all in favor of BYU. But they also don't play on sunday, which is a detriment to joining ANY conference where BYU is not the top dog. 

As good as utahutes are right now, and TCU, BYU is still THE top dog in the MWC. They are the top TV draw. They are tops in attendence for both home and road games. And they dictate how the conference runs. If utah or TCU jump ship, the MWC will stick around. If BYU jumps, the MWC is the WAC or Conference USA. I think the utahutes could/would do well in the PAC 10. I don't think its a good fit for my Cougars. IF, and it is a BIG IF, BYU leaves the MWC (something I think is VERY unlikely), the Big 12 would be the best fit. It is a conference that will put up with the sunday play thing. But then again, deep bible belt states like Texas and Oklahoma don't like Mormons all that much. So I doubt it would happen because of the religious divide. 

Besides, BYU can continue as top dog in the little pond of the MWC, or be one of many pups in the litter in any major conference. And I think they like calling the shots in their own little corner of the world.


----------



## Comrade Duck (Oct 24, 2007)

Gary, you're too rational. It takes the fun out of it. :wink: 

Shane


----------



## Riverrat77 (Sep 7, 2007)

Comrade Duck said:


> If we can, we ought to get a group of us together pre-game to do some tailgating.
> 
> Shane


I'd be down, that would be a good time I think. BBQ, watch some other games beforehand, play some cornhole (yeah, I think its weird as hell too and I still watch people play in the Ute tailgate lot when I'm there).


----------



## hyperduc (Sep 18, 2009)

GaryFish said:


> BYU outsells Utah in home game attendence, season ticket holders, and fan support in every sport except women's gymnastics - all in favor of BYU.


I am the ONLY person who has spotted the flaw in this argument ? BYU is an LDS school in the middle of an 90% LDS state, they are the ONLY D1 LDS school in the world. So it stands to reason that their success in attendance is closely related to it's church affiliation, not its success on the respective fields of play.


GaryFish said:


> If utah or TCU jump ship, the MWC will stick around. If BYU jumps, the MWC is the WAC or Conference USA.
> 
> Besides, BYU can continue as top dog in the little pond of the MWC, or be one of many pups in the litter in any major conference. And I think they like calling the shots in their own little corner of the world.


BYU already has a bad rap for not wining games out of conference and that reputation is exacerbated by the fact that most of the wins come against teams that finish .500 or worse. The UCLA win looked good until, the OU win looked good until ( I was there for that one), but that is the M.O. BYU is always provo's Natn'l champ in the second week f the season. FWIW that OU games wasn't one that BYU would have won with Bradford in for all four quarters.

If Utah jumps ship and for some reason TCU ends up in the big 12, the MWC might as well be dead. BYU will be the only dog in the fight and their reputation of only beating bad teams will just get worse.


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

hyperduc said:


> I am the ONLY person who has spotted the flaw in this argument ? BYU is an LDS school in the middle of an 90% LDS state, they are the ONLY D1 LDS school in the world. So it stands to reason that their success in attendance is closely related to it's church affiliation, not its success on the respective fields of play.


You are absolutly correct. However, there is no flaw in the argument. I never said it was attributible to being better. The BYU fan base is bigger than Utah's. There are millions of LDS that have gone to other universities, but still are BYU fans because of the religious affiliation. It is why BYU teams draw big crowds any where in the country. In all sports, BYU is the top draw in the MWC. But remember - conference invites are based on revenue/TV markets - not competitiveness.

I think that BYUs dispersed, religious fan base is what makes them attractive to another conference. I think it is what makes them more attractive than any other MWC team. BYU will draw more TV viewers than any other team. Doesn't mean they are better or worse on the field - they just have a larger and more dispersed fan base. Every other MWC team (except for Air Force) are regional at best.

I think the other thing BYU has going for them are the facilities. They have the largest football and basketball arenas in the MWC. Again - another selling point. The only other MWC team that plays in facilities comparable to most BCS schools is San Diego State for football. But most SDSU games are friends/family affairs anyway, so they are not much a player in that.



hyperduc said:


> BYU already has a bad rap for not wining games out of conference and that reputation is exacerbated by the fact that most of the wins come against teams that finish .500 or worse. The UCLA win looked good until, the OU win looked good until ( I was there for that one), but that is the M.O. BYU is always provo's Natn'l champ in the second week f the season. FWIW that OU games wasn't one that BYU would have won with Bradford in for all four quarters.


BYU actually has a very good reputation for winning good non-conference games. OU would have had a much better year had they been able to deal with BYU's blitz package. BYU has beat every super power they have played (except USC). They are 4-0 vs. the best of the Big 12. They've also lost games they should have won. But that is how it goes. But if you want to talk about beating great teams that are not so great, just reflect on the "key" wins the utahutes had in their two undefeated seasons. That Michigan team didn't make a bowl, and Texas A&M finished at 500. Just sayin' - If you want to make that argument, it applies to many teams.



hyperduc said:


> BYU will be the only dog in the fight and their reputation of *only beating bad teams* will just get worse.


Does that include the utahutes 3 of the last 4 years?


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Now all that said, I don't see BYU leaving the MWC. The Sunday play deal is a deal killer for sure with the PAC-10. And as I said before, the religous bigotry towards the Mormons among most other Christian faiths will keep them out of any other of the BCS conferences. 

Besides. In the MWC - BYU is the top dog and calls the shots. They would not have that in any BCS conference. I don't see them giving that up.


----------



## hyperduc (Sep 18, 2009)

GaryFish said:


> You are absolutly correct. However, there is no flaw in the argument. I never said it was attributible to being better. The BYU fan base is bigger than Utah's. There are millions of LDS that have gone to other universities, but still are BYU fans because of the religious affiliation. It is why BYU teams draw big crowds any where in the country. In all sports, BYU is the top draw in the MWC. But remember - conference invites are based on revenue/TV markets - not competitiveness.


Sounds like were on the same page here.



GaryFish said:


> BYU actually has a very good reputation for winning good non-conference games. OU would have had a much better year had they been able to deal with BYU's blitz package. BYU has beat every super power they have played (except USC). They are 4-0 vs. the best of the Big 12. They've also lost games they should have won. But that is how it goes. But if you want to talk about beating great teams that are not so great, just reflect on the "key" wins the utahutes had in their two undefeated seasons. That Michigan team didn't make a bowl, and Texas A&M finished at 500. Just sayin' - If you want to make that argument, it applies to many teams.


I think you think they have a good reputation, statistics would prove otherwise.

Case in point, BYU plays all of their bowl games out of conference and their bowl record is an abysmal .375. and to further that point BYU's record against teams who finish the season with a winning record is 20-24 from 2002-2010 (espn.com)

2008 seemed like a good year, after all who could complain about a ten win year. The season isn't really so impressive when you consider that they played three teams who finished +.500 and lost all three of those games.



GaryFish said:


> Does that include the utahutes 3 of the last 4 years?


Well over the past 6 years they are 3-3 against Utah, and over the past 10 years the are 5-5 against Utah. I would assert that neither team has a clear advantage in the recent past.


----------



## proutdoors (Sep 24, 2007)

Last season is the most relevant season when comparing the two programs. :wink: Scoreboard! :mrgreen:


----------



## GaryFish (Sep 7, 2007)

Its all good Hyperduc. The way I see it, we can discuss all day long who has a better football program - BYU or utahutes. And we'd both be right. and wrong. And have plenty of evidence for whatever we wanted to show. 

Relevant to the conference expansion discussion, my bottom line is that in the next 3-4 years, I believe that utahutes will be in a BCS conference and BYU will be in the MWC. And I'm not sure that isn't just the best thing for both schools in reaching their own specific missions. I actaully think BYU will be independent before they'll be in a BCS conference.


----------



## hyperduc (Sep 18, 2009)

GaryFish said:


> Relevant to the conference expansion discussion, my bottom line is that in the next 3-4 years, I believe that utahutes will be in a BCS conference and BYU will be in the MWC. And I'm not sure that isn't just the best thing for both schools in reaching their own specific missions. I actaully think BYU will be independent before they'll be in a BCS conference.


Really not much we disagree on there, but I think the chances of BYU going anywhere (including independent are pretty slim)


----------



## Comrade Duck (Oct 24, 2007)

DJ and PK had a guy on this morning from the Kansas City Star. An interesting interview if you got a minute to listen. I'll include the newspaper article that they discuss.

Newspaper Article:
http://www.kansascity.com/2010/05/18/19 ... ation.html

Click on the link for Blair Kerkhoff:
http://www.kjzz.com/fansports/audio/interviews

Points of interest (at least to me): Texas is the big prize, TCU wouldn't be an option because the Big 12 doesn't want to expand in a state they already have a presence, the Sunday deal for BYU wouldn't necessarily be a deal breaker (his opinion), the tv deal with the PAC 10 could influence a lot of what happens.

Shane


----------

