BYU-Texas 2011

YES, I love more BIg XII games, and we get Texas when we got lots of SR's

As for UTEP being in the equation. It was Texas who agreed to play them. Texas made the announcement to play BYU and UTEP. Not BYU. Unless there was something that I missed.

For those of us in Texas this is a real highlight. I can't wait, beating them would be AMAZING!!!!

gmj81 wrote:

Confirmed by BYU press release and SL trib:



http://blogs.sltrib.com/byu/index.php?p=10129&more=1&c=1&tb=1&pb=1





Sounds like one and done.

That blows but it will give us huge SOS points in 2011 and will set us up for a NC run if we can win them all.



I honestly don't understand it. You'll give Wyoming a home-and-home but don't feel like the Cougars are worthy? WTF? Pansies.



We better be getting payout of over a million for this.

Texas cares about Ws first, quality Ws second. A road win at Wyoming is supposed to be a sure thing for them. A road game in Provo is a much bigger risk.

If you get a chance to play texas, take it. lets not think we are more awesome than we are.



This equals money and exposure and a chance to catapult the program even further on the national stage. we would be stupid to pass it up.

BigCougsFan wrote:
As for UTEP being in the equation. It was Texas who agreed to play them. Texas made the announcement to play BYU and UTEP. Not BYU. Unless there was something that I missed.

Okay, that makes sense. I remember now that there was a link to some Texas media source, but I had gone to our own and then I didn't see anything about UTEP and I misunderstood, think they were talking about a BYU/UTEP matchup. Thanks.

jonnylingo wrote:
If you get a chance to play texas, take it. lets not think we are more awesome than we are.



This equals money and exposure and a chance to catapult the program even further on the national stage. we would be stupid to pass it up.

I am with you on this one. You don't pass the chance to play a perceived top 5 program because your ego gets hurt that they don't respect you enough for a 1 and 1.

in my mind the question is,would a program with the same perceived strength,say a middle of the road PAC-10 team like Cal or Arizona or perhaps even OSU do a deal like this one?now before i get broadsided,let me point out the operative word here is perceived,the national perception not necessarily the reality.I can't see any of those programs being willing to do a one and done for the privilege of perhaps getting worked in Austin.in fact,i'd have tosay that if we don't get "future consideration" for a game in Provo as a stand alone entity,then Wyoming did a much better job negotiating with Texas than we did.

I'm sure the argument could be made that this is a great way to kick off a Nat'l. Championship push that year,but really that's just wishful thinking at this point,and doesn't have anything to do with this contract.

The problem with the one and done is we don't have anyone coming to Provo and Holmoe can't get any quality team to come here. Do a 2 for 1 if that is what it takes but spread it out. Have them play in Provo first and then we go play there the next year. Then spread it out and have us go play there in year 4 or 5.



Holmoe needs to make the snubbs public when a team wants to play us but refuses to come to Provo. Where are the Big 10 teams that Bronco was saying he wanted to schedule?

Everyone needs to realize that Holmoe is up against it now. He had 3 games to schedule for a season that starts in 18 months and for which most teams have already contracted games. This Texas game was a must and we'll be lucky to get one more BCS or decent non-AQ team. I'm positive we'll have to go FCS for the 3rd game.

This is probably the most compelling argument for this game that i've read.do you have any idea why 'we're so up against it',as far as our scheduling for 2011?was that a game that UW backed out of leaving this hole in the schedule?obviously I get the fact that teams from the BCS perceive little to gain and much to lose by scheduling us in Provo,but is there something else inplay causing the problem?i'm beginning to really have a new appreciation for FSU for giving us the credit to schedule a home and away.

:roll: :roll:

byutx wrote:
Everyone needs to realize that Holmoe is up against it now. He had 3 games to schedule for a season that starts in 18 months and for which most teams have already contracted games. This Texas game was a must and we'll be lucky to get one more BCS or decent non-AQ team. I'm positive we'll have to go FCS for the 3rd game.

You're an awful kind individual and someone who we'd all like as our boss. Holmoe has had this situation for a lot longer than 18 months and there is no one else responsible than himself. No one put him into this situation and he has owned it.



With that said, I believe highly that he is dealing with forces beyond his control and the nature of scheduling took a huge change with the induction of the BCS. It took it a few years, but teams started to understand that you could get away with dumming down your non-conference schedule as long as you were a BCS member and especially if you were from a strong BCS conference. BCS losses don't hurt you, but you have little to gain in playing non-BCS teams that can beat you. I can't think of anything incentive wise for an AD to schedule BYU and give them a home game.



This result from the BCS system has been very caustic to teams like BYU, BSU, Utah and TCU, because a win over us just doesn't give these teams a lot of mileage--especially more than it would have been to schedule a lesser opponent and pummel them at home. Our situation is a byproduct of this situation and I don't see a remedy as long as the BCS exists.



That has been my point and why I keep beating the dead horse and proclaiming that I want Holmoe to bring this issue to the surface. I think he is motivated mostly from not wanting to alienate any of the BCS teams in specifically identifying them as not wanting to play BYU, and I understand that to a degree and that might be the best response. I'm just not certain because I don't think that gets you any further along in your progression of scheduling quality home opponents. I don't have an honest idea what else to do because I believe the environment for a BYU has even gotten to the point where the 2 for 1s are not attractive any more for the usual top BCS teams.



I might be wrong, but under the BCS I think we are and will be scheduling impaired.

Ahh crap, I misread it first time, and thought it was a Home, and Home, not a 1 and done =(

I have to think that there are people in Norman OKlahoma wondering why Texas would risk it ;)



It's a win win for us, it keeps us on our toes the entire preseason, helps recruiting, and in the 1st game of a season, anything can happen.



Sure, I'd love to have someone return to Provo, but this was a no brainer. I don't think any of us think that 2011 will be our best team, but nothing will be better motivation for those young guys to improve and work hard the next season + than thinking about Texas to start it off, especially considering the success we had vs Oklahoma. (to be honest, we would have given this years Texas team a good game)



BTW, if any of you thought that Jake Heaps or Ross Apo were going on missions, scheduling Texas just threw that out the window; those boys want the Longhorns badly, especially Apo.

craigoscarson wrote:

BTW, if any of you thought that Jake Heaps or Ross Apo were going on missions, scheduling Texas just threw that out the window; those boys want the Longhorns badly, especially Apo.

Is Apo mormon?







It sounds like it is hard to get anyone to travel to play basketball out of conference now also. I wonder if the AD's put together package deals. Tell North Carolina, Duke, Minnesota, Indiana, Baylor etc we'll come play you in basketball if you come to Provo to play us in football. Then they can come play at Energy Solutions Arena for a neutral site basketball game.

Wickchad84087 wrote:

BTW, if any of you thought that Jake Heaps or Ross Apo were going on missions, scheduling Texas just threw that out the window; those boys want the Longhorns badly, especially Apo.

Is Apo mormon?

Yes

I love having another game in Texas --- 4 straight years with a regular season game in Texas. Taking on another Big 12 bad boy does not suck either.



This game will be a national broadcast game in a good time slot.



And pulling out a win would be awesome!

EM_Puma wrote:

Everyone needs to realize that Holmoe is up against it now. He had 3 games to schedule for a season that starts in 18 months and for which most teams have already contracted games. This Texas game was a must and we'll be lucky to get one more BCS or decent non-AQ team. I'm positive we'll have to go FCS for the 3rd game.

You're an awful kind individual and someone who we'd all like as our boss. Holmoe has had this situation for a lot longer than 18 months and there is no one else responsible than himself.

I think you misunderstood me. I didn't intend to remove (or to place) any blame on Holmoe. Regardless of whether it's "all his fault", the truth is that it's time to focus on getting any game at this point. Don't forget we had several games scheduled with teams that have pulled out, including well known games vs./@ UW, Army and ASU. From what I understand from Holmoe's quote about a slow process with a couple teams is that he expected to have a deal done soon. He's got a couple other options, but now it's time to start getting desperate.



The better our program gets, the harder it's going to be to get AND KEEP those contracted games with BCS conferences foes.

This is a game you take no matter what. Just as Utah took the Michigan game, and took the Notre Dame game they play in 2010, and as we took the OU game, one and done away is not so bad. Good pay day and opens up relations for future games in many sports. This is a respect game, plain and simple. Shows we will play anyone, anywhere and not bail out. Also puts pressure on other BCS school to step up and play us. And as we all know, the BCS era is killing our scheduling. The big schools are all dumbing down their non-conference schedules.