Texas Tech Football Coach Blasts Big XII

Florwood wrote:

Before we all get too excited, the following needs to be determined:



1. Is Holmoe really invited to meet with the Big-12 presidents (and who else is he bringing?)

Anne Richards. In a straitjacket.

No straitjacket needed, since she's dead. But it would definately get their attention.

Mars wrote:


http://sports.espn.go.com/dallas/ncf/news/story?id=5341756&campaign=rss&source=NCFHeadlines



" First-year Texas Tech football coach Tommy Tuberville broke ranks with those inside the Big 12 who laud the efforts that kept the conference together and speak of a bright future for the 10-team league. In an interview Tuesday on Rivals Radio, Tuberville said that he didn't think the new Big 12 would have staying power.



"I don't think this conference will last long because there is too much disparity between all the teams," Tuberville told host Bill King. "In the SEC, for instance, Vanderbilt makes as much money in the television contract as Florida. Everybody is good with it. Everybody is on the same page. Everyone gets the same votes. That doesn't happen here in the Big 12. We have some teams that get a little bit more money and have a little bit more stroke than some of the other teams. And when that happens, you're gonna have teams looking for better avenues to leave and reasons to leave."



Tuberville coached in the SEC at Ole Miss (1995-1998) and Auburn (1999-2008) before being hired earlier this year to replace Mike Leach at Texas Tech.



"We have a 10-team league right now, but I just don't know how long that's gonna last, to be honest with you," he said in the Rivals Radio interview. "



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



" Many of the Big 12's basketball coaches embraced -- at least publicly on Monday's summer coaches teleconference -- the idea of playing an 18-game conference schedule in which the 10 teams will play everybody twice. With 12 teams, the conference played a 16-game schedule in which teams played division teams twice and inter-division foes once... One coach, however, isn't exactly thrilled about the extended conference season. Texas A&M coach Mark Turgeon said. Turgeon called it a grind and said it could force him to dial down his non-conference scheduling.



"As a coach, I think it's really, really tough. I was in the Missouri Valley [Conference] with 18 [games], I was in the Pac-10 with 18. I'd much rather play 16," Turgeon said. "Scheduling, you can get out and find you a couple more [non-conference] games, get a couple more wins and now you got a couple more tough games. Of course, our league is going to be really tough. I saw coaches, I know the Big East went to 18, it's a grind, 16's a grind. It's hard and then you add two more. It makes it really tough on a basketball team. I think our non-conference scheduling may change a little bit. I've always been real aggressive scheduling non-conference, we play a lot of quality opponents. That might change in the future. We might not play quite as many because I know I have two extra games in the league. It will be interesting, but I know it's tougher on coaches." "



http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/colleges/post/_/id/4669054/turgeon-not-crazy-about-18-league-games



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



The Big XII meets again in August, and BYU AD Tom Holmoe has reportedly been invited to those meetings. BYU would have to be invited by Sept. 1 of this year to play in the Big XII starting in 2011.

What sources have been saying Holmie has been invited?

MTM wrote:

MTM wrote:

Texas never really was going to the PAC10, .

Thank you!



Texas to the PAC-10 was never really going to happen.



Utah was not an afterthought or the last option as some of you think. CU and Utah to the PAC-10 was the plan all long.

http://www.cougarcorner.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3592



Larry Scott tried to hit a home run and good for him. Who wouldn't want those 6 Big 12 schools to join their conference?



Frankly, I would've preferred staying in the same conference as BYU. When they were talking about the PAC10 staying at 11 and the Big 12 at 10 I was hoping Utah and BYU to the Big 12 together. Or I would've liked to see them stay in the MWC together and get AQ status on their own.



And I do believe BYU will end up in the Big 12 in time.

Utah is another hungry mouth that USC and UW will have to feed. The U of U wasn't the Pac-none's first, or even 6th plan...

Really? Then why not stay at 10 schools?

According to the Cougar Sportsline Colorado and Utah were already being mentioned in 1994.

I'm sure the PAC 10 would've loved Texas and the bunch but that was a pipedream and never had a chance. As Lawboy said all it did was give Texas leverage with the Big 12 schools.

The plan for Colorado and Utah has long been in place.

ummm... a little thing called a conference championship, perhaps? Also, this crazy notion that with 12, you have two even divisions of six that all play each other, instead of one huge division where all the teams don't get to play every other team every year. The Utes were a means to an end for the Pac so that they could have 12. What do they bring to the Pac? Basketball... They are going nowhere fast, and playing UA twice a year isn't going to help that. Any player with talent is avoiding them like the plague. Football: The only win they can hang their hat on in the last 5 years is a severely overrated Alabama team, which beat a severely overrated Texas in the following years "title game" (right after they almost lost to Nebraska... Nebraska. Not 1980-1990 Nebraska, 2009 Nebraska). I love hearing your AD talk about expanding the stadium with all the new money... after 2 years of 4 loss seasons in a row, he is going to need that cash to hand to everyone walking into the stadium. And the other sports (minus gymnastics) are going to be so far out of their league it isn't funny. Actually it IS pretty funny. Hopefully you stand by them then, like you stand by them now. I just like the idea of us being a better team than you in any given sport for the next ten years. Those wheels are already in motion, and a mid tier leap to the pac isn't going to save you there.



I mean, who do you think that you can beat on a weekly basis in football? You have no less than 3 guaranteed losses a year, and really only 2 guaranteed wins. Well, 3 with Colorado coming in.

Look, I don't have any delusions that Utah is going to run the table every year in the PAC 10. Going undefeated in any conference is a Herculeon task which is why Utah fans look back at 2004 and 2008 so fondly. Very few, if any, teams do it each year.



But Utah is not going to lose 4 conference games every year in the PAC10 either especially in the south with CU, AU, ASU, UCLA, and USC. They're already as good as those teams now with the exception of USC and we'll see how their NCAA sanctions effect them. If Utah's cross divisional games in a given year are UW, Oregon, and Cal then, yes, Utah will probably lose more conference games than they have in the MWC.



And to quote Karl Malone "I don't mean to beat a dead horse to death" but being in the PAC10 will only make Utah better via recruiting (see Harvey Langi's comments). Utah will start landing kids that they wouldn't have before. They're not going to win every recruitng battle but it is certainly not going to hurt them. They will improve.



As for basketball Utah is not in a good place right now and I think the PAC10 will be brutal for them initially although I'm still in the Boylen camp for a few more years. Utah has basketball tradition and history (two things BYU football fans are proud of) and they'll turn it around.



And the Alabama comment is just sour grapes plain and simple. If you're labeling Alabama as "severly overrated" I hope you're putting 2009 Oklahoma in the same catagory.

MTM wrote:
Going undefeated in any conference is a Herculeon task which is why Utah fans look back at 2004 and 2008 so fondly.

I wouldn't say this is Herculean in the MWC. Utah in '04, TCU in '05, BYU in '06, BYU in '07, Utah in '08, TCU in '09... That's six years straight. If it were that hard, it wouldn't happen every year. Right now, if one of the big 3 beats the other two, they pretty much have it. (Except for Utah, which has to watch out for those 27-0 blowouts to UNLV... ;) )



It's even less Herculean in the WAC. Their conference champ has been undefeated every year starting in 2002, except for 2005. (And except for 2007, it was Boise State doing it.)

redneckjedi wrote:

Going undefeated in any conference is a Herculeon task which is why Utah fans look back at 2004 and 2008 so fondly.

I wouldn't say this is Herculean in the MWC. Utah in '04, TCU in '05, BYU in '06, BYU in '07, Utah in '08, TCU in '09... That's six years straight. If it were that hard, it wouldn't happen every year. Right now, if one of the big 3 beats the other two, they pretty much have it. (Except for Utah, which has to watch out for those 27-0 blowouts to UNLV... ;) )



It's even less Herculean in the WAC. Their conference champ has been undefeated every year starting in 2002, except for 2005. (And except for 2007, it was Boise State doing it.)

Yep.

BlueIsBetter wrote:

MTM wrote:
Going undefeated in any conference is a Herculeon task which is why Utah fans look back at 2004 and 2008 so fondly.

I wouldn't say this is Herculean in the MWC. Utah in '04, TCU in '05, BYU in '06, BYU in '07, Utah in '08, TCU in '09... That's six years straight. If it were that hard, it wouldn't happen every year. Right now, if one of the big 3 beats the other two, they pretty much have it. (Except for Utah, which has to watch out for those 27-0 blowouts to UNLV... ;) )



It's even less Herculean in the WAC. Their conference champ has been undefeated every year starting in 2002, except for 2005. (And except for 2007, it was Boise State doing it.)

Yep.

You're right. I stand corrected. I guess meant undefeated season. Conference play is another matter.



Still, everyone talks about how the PAC 10 sucks and the MWC is better and I don't understand the reasoning that Utah is somehow all of the sudden going to be a middle of the pack PAC10 team.



And I'm not a homer. I think Utah, BYU, TCU, or Boise St. could immediately compete in the PAC10 and I think Utah will.

MTM wrote:
Look, I don't have any delusions that Utah is going to run the table every year in the PAC 10. Going undefeated in any conference is a Herculeon task which is why Utah fans look back at 2004 and 2008 so fondly. Very few, if any, teams do it each year.



But Utah is not going to lose 4 conference games every year in the PAC10 either especially in the south with CU, AU, ASU, UCLA, and USC. They're already as good as those teams now with the exception of USC and we'll see how their NCAA sanctions effect them. If Utah's cross divisional games in a given year are UW, Oregon, and Cal then, yes, Utah will probably lose more conference games than they have in the MWC.



And to quote Karl Malone "I don't mean to beat a dead horse to death" but being in the PAC10 will only make Utah better via recruiting (see Harvey Langi's comments). Utah will start landing kids that they wouldn't have before. They're not going to win every recruitng battle but it is certainly not going to hurt them. They will improve.



As for basketball Utah is not in a good place right now and I think the PAC10 will be brutal for them initially although I'm still in the Boylen camp for a few more years. Utah has basketball tradition and history (two things BYU football fans are proud of) and they'll turn it around.



And the Alabama comment is just sour grapes plain and simple. If you're labeling Alabama as "severly overrated" I hope you're putting 2009 Oklahoma in the same catagory.

Utah has great coaches, and that has really been the only thing that has kept them in the mix. Utah is constantly getting out-recruited by BYU and the likes, and yes, I will stand out here and say that their coaching is what sets them apart. I would trade the gameday aspect of coaching with the U any day of the week and twice on sundays (have fun playing them, by the way ;) ). That is the only thing that has kept you guys apart from the rest of the mix, but what are you going to do when your worst team, is Air Force quality, every week. You guys don't have the depth, and as far as recruiting battles go, you guys have one years' advantage over us, which pretty much puts it on par. Let's face it, in an AQ conference, you are going to be able to sway 3 star guys with that all day long, but not 4 stars. That sn't going to be a deciding factor... you not only have to be in an AQ conference, you need to WIN in an AQ conference. And I see nothing more than an 8-4 future for you. All those close ones you should have dropped to SDSU, UNM, and everyone else the last 5 years, you won't be able to do that week after week after week. So you get a boost in recruiting for one year until people see that you are the new ASU in the conference. And that is assuming that you clean up THIS YEAR in the MWC. If you don't do that this year, you don't have a prayer. So yes, it is a good get as far as recruiting goes, but it isn't going to be the deciding factor. It is the icing on the cake, and if you put sugar frosting on a pile of crap, it still tastes like crap (I haven't tested that out, that's just a theory ;) ).



Sure my grapes are sour, The U was handed something that it doesn't deserve, and it is a huge get for you guys. We won't play each other anymore, because the U isn't going to schedule any one worth two jelly beans (because they get an over-inflated SOS rating.) So the "rivalry" is going to be dead, at least in a head to head fashion. U still have all day to tell us how much better you are than us, even though evidence shows otherwise - so, I guess it doesn't change that much, does it.



And for your other sports, I can laugh myself to sleep imaging HOW BAD you are going to be in everything else. I mean, Baseball... you can't even win a MWC tourney, and we are NOBODY in the baseball world. The Pac is the VERY BEST conference in the nation! Football, you are a ,mid-tier performer at best. Basketball, again you are going against, UA, ASU, USC, UW, Stanford, CAL, UCLA, I mean you will be LUCKY to have a .500 program in the next 10 years. All the other sports nobody cares about, but still, Volleyball, Soccer, Track and Field, do you really think that the Utes are going to beat the California All Star team in ANY of that? Hahahahaha. Now, BYU on the other hand, can compete better in all of these sports, including basketball and football. So enjoy the money, it is all you are going to get. You are only joking yourself if you think that a 4 star recruit WANTS to go to a perennial 8-4 team because they are in an AQ. Just ask ASU, and WSU. I'm not saying you won't get 4 stars, you will, just not any that you would have gotten in the first place. It just solidifies people that would already go there (While ironically taking some of that away. Do you think that LDS athletes are going to choose the U over BYU knowing that they have to play on sundays now? That will be a deciding factor for more people in Utah than you think).



The U crawled and begged for this opportunity, and I am pleased as punch to see that they are getting it - right in the teeth.

Still, everyone talks about how the PAC 10 sucks and the MWC is better and I don't understand the reasoning that Utah is somehow all of the sudden going to be a middle of the pack PAC10 team.

MTM, you have to understand what we are talking about. The pac none IS overrated. USC doesn't play anyone out of conference, so you never really know how good they are. So head to head, I think that we are on par with the Pac. Their top team USC, is better than any of ours, and their top 3 or 4 besides that, we can match up and it is pretty even. The problem in the MWC, is that our bottom dwellers are so bad. UNLV, UNM, SDSU, and Wyoming wouldn't make it past 3 or 4 wins in any other conference that matters, so it allows for a lot of easy weeks. So instead of one bye week, it is essentially 3-4 in the MWC. Our top 3 teams are as good as almost any top 3 teams out there (though I would side with the SEC and Big 12 top 3). But we at least have a punchers chance. When you are playing Air Force quality, then TCU quality, then BYU quality, then Air Force quality, then Air Force quality again, it is hard for a team with no depth (ie the Utes, and BYU 2-3 years ago - MAN OUR RECRUITING HAS BEEN SOLID) to take the blows week after week. I mean, USC is legit they are so deep, and though they will be affected, they still don't drop down that much. Sure, you can beat Oregon, OSU, Arizona, Washington, Arizona State and UCLA when that is the marquee game on your schedule and you are saving up for it. Can you do it week after week? I am not saying that in football they are going to get trounced, (though I hope they do) I am saying that all the close games you have pulled out at the end the last 5 years - even in your glory seasons - well some of those are going to be losses, because you are going to be playing teams deeper than you. Some of them better coached, too. Which is something in this league that you have never had to never worry about, except in the case of Gary Patterson (TCU coach). Maybe Bronco's coaching staff gives you a run for the money, but I don't think so. We have won you recently because we have better depth and better quality players. You have kept it close with us, because you have far superior coaching, especially when it comes to gameday preparation and game day adjustments. (If Anae continues to steamroll Unga over you a few years ago up the middle, you don't have one of those perfect seasons... That will change soon, in either one of two ways.)



So it isn't two different worlds, where they (Pac) suck and all the sudden they are awesome. It is that, on any given day we can beat them, handily sometimes. They just have a harder week to week schedule (though not as hard as they are given credit for). Every coach gets twice your coaches salary, and they are all looking to pick you apart. You won't compete, but you won't complete get throttled either. You will be 3rd or 4th best at best, which means that we should see you in the Vegas bowl in a couple years.



EDITED FOR UNDERSTANDING, I NEED SOME "WAKE UP JUICE"

BlueIsBetter wrote:
[ Now, BYU on the other hand, can compete better in all of these sports, including basketball and football..

I have not made this about Utah vs. BYU but since you did please tell me what in God's green earth makes you think this? And try to stay objective if you can.



Utah and BYU have won EXACTLY the same number of MWC titles in football and basketball. Exactly the same number in both sports.



In football Utah is 19-11 against BCS teams and BYU is 14-19.



Incidentally, Utah won the MWC baseball tourney last year. BYU hasn't won it since 2001-2002.



I grew up in the LaVell era and BYU was clearly better on the football field in those days. When Utah hired Ron McBride the playing field started to level and on the field of play I don't see how anyone can logically argue that Utah hasn't had just as much success as BYU in the past 20 years. The numbers don't lie.

BlueIsBetter wrote:
Football: The only win they can hang their hat on in the last 5 years is a severely overrated Alabama team

This just plain wrong. That Alabama team was outstanding. They were also disappointed to be playing Utah in the BCS bowl, which explains to me why they were shellshocked in the first half. Overrated that 'Bama team was not. Unmotivated, but not overrated.

MTM wrote:
I grew up in the LaVell era and BYU was clearly better on the football field in those days. When Utah hired Ron McBride the playing field started to level and on the field of play I don't see how anyone can logically argue that Utah hasn't had just as much success as BYU in the past 20 years. The numbers don't lie.

Most sports writers date the renaissance of Utah football from 2004, the year one Urban "Oscar" Meyer stepped on campus. Nobody doubts that Utah has been a national player ever since, despite having a couple "off" years.

The numbers don't lie

ah, war of the lies, damned lies, and statistics.



For the record. Utah's since 1990 is 157-82 including 2 very magical undefeated seasons which I think drastically inflate these numbers and bely the overarching trend of mediocrity that is Utah football over the last two decades, but I'll still count them.



BYU's record over the same time period is 167-83-2. and no undefeated seasons.



BYU double digit win seasons: 8

Utah double digit win seasons: 5



Interesting point MTN about lying numbers, except MY numbers say BYU is better than Utah. You'll counter that you have a better BCS win-percentage which I won't argue except to say BYU has played played 3 more of them despite Utah's BCS heroics.and does nothing to counter earlier points that Utah gets up for big games, and loses easy ones.



But you're point of view is that Utah will have MORE wins against equal or BETTER opponents in the Pac-0 than they did when they played an EASIER schedule in the WAC and MWC?



shall we count conference championships over that same time period as well or are the number "lying" too much for your POV?



Don't get me wrong, I have nothing but respect for Utah's success in recent years, but numbers are not as rock solid proof as you'd like.

MTM wrote:

[ Now, BYU on the other hand, can compete better in all of these sports, including basketball and football..

I have not made this about Utah vs. BYU but since you did please tell me what in God's green earth makes you think this? And try to stay objective if you can.



Utah and BYU have won EXACTLY the same number of MWC titles in football and basketball. Exactly the same number in both sports.



In football Utah is 19-11 against BCS teams and BYU is 14-19.



Incidentally, Utah won the MWC baseball tourney last year. BYU hasn't won it since 2001-2002.



I grew up in the LaVell era and BYU was clearly better on the football field in those days. When Utah hired Ron McBride the playing field started to level and on the field of play I don't see how anyone can logically argue that Utah hasn't had just as much success as BYU in the past 20 years. The numbers don't lie.

I will check on the BCS stats in a minute...



You asked for this.



Mountain West Conference Tournament Champions. (In sports where we don't have a championship, I have taken the regular season winner, ie football.) This is off the MWC site, so it is as objectionable as it gets. I just took the winner if it was BYU or Utah. Read through it, (the Ute portion should only take a few seconds) and let me know if you think we would be more competitive than you across the board.



1999-2000



BYU - Football, Women's Cross Country, Women's Cross Country, Womens Soccer, Mens Swimming and Diving, Womens Swimming and Diving, Mens Indoor track and Field, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Mens Outdoor Track and Field, Womens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - Football, Women's Basketball, Softball



2000-2001



BYU - Baseball, Mens Cross Country, Womens Cross Country, Womens Soccer, Womens Volleyball, Mens Swimming and Diving, Womens Swimming and Diving, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Mens Basketball, Mens Tennis, Womens Tennis, Mens Golf, Softball, Mens Outdoor Track and Field, Womens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - NOTHING, A BID NADA.



2001-2002

BYU - Football, Mens Cross Country, Womens Cross Country, Womens Soccer, Mens Swimming and Diving, Womens Swimming and Diving, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Basketball, Mens Outdoor Track and Field, Womens Outdoor Track and Field, Baseball



Utah - Womens Volleyball, Softball



2002-2003

BYU - Mens Cross Country, Womens Cross Country, Womens Soccer, Mens Swimming and Diving, Womens Swimming and Diving, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Mens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - Womens Volleyball



2003-2004

BYU - Womens Cross Country, Mens Swimming and Diving, Womens Swimming and Diving, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Tennis, Mens Outdoor Track and Field, Womens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - Football, Womens Soccer, Mens Basketball, Softball



2004-2005

BYU - Mens Cross Country, Womens Cross Country, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Women Tennis, Softball, Mens Outboor Track and Field, Womens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - Football, Womens Soccer



2005-2006

BYU - Mens Cross Country, Womens Cross Country, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Mens Outdoor Track and Field , Womens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - Womens Volleyball, Womens Swimming and Diving, Women Basketball, Softball



2006-2007

BYU - Football, Mens Cross Country, Womens Cross Country, Womens Swimming and Diving, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Tennis, Mens Golf, Softball, Mens Outdoor Track and Field, Womens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - NADA, NOTHING, ZERO



2007-2008

BYU - Football, Mens Cross Country, Womens Soccer, Womens swimming and Diving, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Mens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - NOTHING, AGAIN...



2008-2009

BYU - Mens Cross Country, Womens Soccer, Womens Swimming and Diving, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Softball, Mens Outdoor Track and Field, Womens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - Football, Womens Volleyball, Womens Basketball, Mens Basketball, Baseball





So, to sum it up, BYU has 90 Tourney titles, versus the U's 16. 13 of the 16 are in Womens sports.



And true, this list doesn't include Gymnastics, your claim to fame, but it also doesn't include Mens Volleyball, where we are a national contender every year. And football is tied up 4 on 4, except we have a national championship. So I guess that isn't even. You have more BBall cred, for now, but not in the last 5 years.



So...



EDITED: REFORMATTED so columns would line up

CAFB_04-12 wrote:

Football: The only win they can hang their hat on in the last 5 years is a severely overrated Alabama team

This just plain wrong. That Alabama team was outstanding. They were also disappointed to be playing Utah in the BCS bowl, which explains to me why they were shellshocked in the first half. Overrated that 'Bama team was not. Unmotivated, but not overrated.

call it what you want, they got killed by a Ute team that wasn't very good. The Ute defense was good, but the offense? You can call it unmotivated, I'll buy that. Call it a brown puppy, if you want. The Utes came out with a game plan and attacked.

BlueIsBetter wrote:

BlueIsBetter wrote:
[ Now, BYU on the other hand, can compete better in all of these sports, including basketball and football..

I have not made this about Utah vs. BYU but since you did please tell me what in God's green earth makes you think this? And try to stay objective if you can.



Utah and BYU have won EXACTLY the same number of MWC titles in football and basketball. Exactly the same number in both sports.



In football Utah is 19-11 against BCS teams and BYU is 14-19.



Incidentally, Utah won the MWC baseball tourney last year. BYU hasn't won it since 2001-2002.



I grew up in the LaVell era and BYU was clearly better on the football field in those days. When Utah hired Ron McBride the playing field started to level and on the field of play I don't see how anyone can logically argue that Utah hasn't had just as much success as BYU in the past 20 years. The numbers don't lie.

I will check on the BCS stats in a minute...



You asked for this.



Mountain West Conference Tournament Champions. (In sports where we don't have a championship, I have taken the regular season winner, ie football.) This is off the MWC site, so it is as objectionable as it gets. I just took the winner if it was BYU or Utah. Read through it, (the Ute portion should only take a few seconds) and let me know if you think we would be more competitive than you across the board.



1999-2000



BYU - Football, Women's Cross Country, Women's Cross Country, Womens Soccer, Mens Swimming and Diving, Womens Swimming and Diving, Mens Indoor track and Field, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Mens Outdoor Track and Field, Womens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - Football, Women's Basketball, Softball



2000-2001



BYU - Baseball, Mens Cross Country, Womens Cross Country, Womens Soccer, Womens Volleyball, Mens Swimming and Diving, Womens Swimming and Diving, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Mens Basketball, Mens Tennis, Womens Tennis, Mens Golf, Softball, Mens Outdoor Track and Field, Womens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - NOTHING, A BID NADA.



2001-2002

BYU - Football, Mens Cross Country, Womens Cross Country, Womens Soccer, Mens Swimming and Diving, Womens Swimming and Diving, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Basketball, Mens Outdoor Track and Field, Womens Outdoor Track and Field, Baseball



Utah - Womens Volleyball, Softball



2002-2003

BYU - Mens Cross Country, Womens Cross Country, Womens Soccer, Mens Swimming and Diving, Womens Swimming and Diving, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Mens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - Womens Volleyball



2003-2004

BYU - Womens Cross Country, Mens Swimming and Diving, Womens Swimming and Diving, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Tennis, Mens Outdoor Track and Field, Womens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - Football, Womens Soccer, Mens Basketball, Softball



2004-2005

BYU - Mens Cross Country, Womens Cross Country, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Women Tennis, Softball, Mens Outboor Track and Field, Womens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - Football, Womens Soccer



2005-2006

BYU - Mens Cross Country, Womens Cross Country, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Mens Outdoor Track and Field , Womens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - Womens Volleyball, Womens Swimming and Diving, Women Basketball, Softball



2006-2007

BYU - Football, Mens Cross Country, Womens Cross Country, Womens Swimming and Diving, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Tennis, Mens Golf, Softball, Mens Outdoor Track and Field, Womens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - NADA, NOTHING, ZERO



2007-2008

BYU - Football, Mens Cross Country, Womens Soccer, Womens swimming and Diving, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Mens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - NOTHING, AGAIN...



2008-2009

BYU - Mens Cross Country, Womens Soccer, Womens Swimming and Diving, Mens Indoor Track and Field, Womens Indoor Track and Field, Softball, Mens Outdoor Track and Field, Womens Outdoor Track and Field



Utah - Football, Womens Volleyball, Womens Basketball, Mens Basketball, Baseball





So, to sum it up, BYU has 90 Tourney titles, versus the U's 16. 13 of the 16 are in Womens sports.



And true, this list doesn't include Gymnastics, your claim to fame, but it also doesn't include Mens Volleyball, where we are a national contender every year. And football is tied up 4 on 4, except we have a national championship. So I guess that isn't even. You have more BBall cred, for now, but not in the last 5 years.



So...



EDITED: REFORMATTED so columns would line up

You forgot Tiddlywinks.

Does anyone care about Cross country for hell sakes?

You're the one who said the PAC 10 invite all about a football championship game. It wasn't about non-rev sports.

In the sports that count (football and basketball) Utah is as good as BYU and I think that's what pisses you off so much.

MTM wrote:



You forgot Tiddlywinks.

Does anyone care about Cross country for hell sakes?

You're the one who said the PAC 10 invite all about a football championship game. It wasn't about non-rev sports.

In the sports that count (football and basketball) Utah is as good as BYU and I think that's what pisses you off so much.

Typical. "The sports we aren't good at don't matter." You are pathetic at anything that isn't Bball or Football, and right now you are okay at football, and terrible at basketball.



Again, 1 national championship to 0. 1-0. I wouldn't call that "just as good." And that isn't even talking about the quality pro players that have come out of the Y versus the U. We have you up against the ropes twice over on that one, in football AND basketball.



And your first post on the boards made it about BYU...



Bottom line, your luck is running out. You dug your own grave in the pac, and I am going to be glad to see you lay down in it.

By the way, I'm sure if we played Tiddlywinks we'd beat you at that too...

The PAC-10 expansion had:

ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH COMPETITIVENESS IN FOOTBALL OR MEN'S BASKETBALL.



Ute fans who think it did are flat out wrong. If football and/or bballs success was a factor (i.e. conference champsionships, tourney championsships, etc.) then Colorado would not have been invited as they've been awful in both sports for nearly a decade or longer.



The PAC-10 expansion was driven by trying to get into never before held television markets. Denver is a large market and SLC isn't bad - especially when you take the valleys north and south of Salt Lake valley into consideration. SLC is growing rapidly.



The PAC-10 wanted to get into the Utah market once the Texas plot dissolved, and had to choose between BYU and Utah. Utah and not BYU being added came down to one simple factor: Utah is not run by the LDS Church.



If BYU is a state-run, or other privately-run school they get the invite. BYU captures more of the Utah market than the Utes. That will likely begin a slow change. But in my opinion, the LDS Church was the determining factor in the Ute's invite.



Again, if the Utes' invite was about competitiveness in football then can a Ute fan answer this question:



Why is Colorado now a PAC-10 school?