CougarCorner
Sign in
Archived Topic

This Utah Fan's Avatar Says it All...

by Italics · 8/2/2010

Sponsored Advertisementad content
S
SpiffCoug
The series currently stands 53-34-4 for Utah. It's 5-5 the past 10 years, and 10-10 the past 20. Utah has 19 more wins overall, and they they have played 21 more "HOME" games than BYU 56 games in SLC vs. 35 in Provo. Since the series became fair and started rotating home and home every year in 1975, the series stands Utah 12 - BYU 23.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_War_%28Utah_vs._BYU%29#Utah.27s_early_dominance
M
MTM
kitic77 wrote:
The series currently stands 53-34-4 for Utah. It's 5-5 the past 10 years, and 10-10 the past 20. Utah has 19 more wins overall, and they they have played 21 more "HOME" games than BYU 56 games in SLC vs. 35 in Provo. Since the series became fair and started rotating home and home every year in 1975, the series stands Utah 12 - BYU 23.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holy_War_%28Utah_vs._BYU%29#Utah.27s_early_dominance


I think that is less about home field and more about LaVell.
S
SpiffCoug
Well, since it's less about home field and now that Lavell is gone, how about we play 35 of the next 56 in Provo? I wonder what the all-time series would look like then?
M
MTM
kitic77 wrote:
Well, since it's less about home field and now that Lavell is gone, how about we play 35 of the next 56 in Provo? I wonder what the all-time series would look like then?


No, thanks.



Incidentally, do you know why the 2 for 2 in '72-'75?
S
SpiffCoug
I don't. I thought that was pretty weird too.
Sponsored Advertisementad content
C
Cougs_Rule
Eastern? Hello? I was hoping for another rebuttal. But since you have been blown away by stats and not just "the mormon" rancor ( I'm happy to add that) it seems rather obvious that your "roots" run quite a bit deeper in the red. Have fun this year continuing to ignore and do nothing about the horrible behavior of your BYU hating buddies in RES. I bet you dont reveal your duality to your Ute buddies.
E
Eastern
- If you guys actually knew me you'd laugh at the thought of me being a closet Ute fan. My allegiances are much higher than BYU or Utah.

- I never said BYU doesn't have a lot to be proud of. I've spent many Saturdays screaming at the TV pulling for them. But I grew up outside Utah so I have different perspective.

- That Cotton Bowl victory was a good one against Kansas State. Sarkisian was brilliant. But the Cotton Bowl isn't really on par as far as prestige with the Sugar, Fiesta, Orange and Rose.

- But like I said, it's what you do on the national stage that turns heads. The Cotton Bowl 15 years ago doesn't carry a fraction of the weight as two undefeated seasons and a Fiesta Bowl win and Sugar Bowl win over two BCS conference champions.

- BYU fans have a problem giving credit where credit is due. If something doesn't go their way they cry religious bigotry and circle the wagons. The only way I can see religion coming in to the PAC-10's decision is that they weren't going to give special privileges like not playing on Sunday to the newbie. That makes sense. Why should the rest of a conference have to make special exceptions for the new guy? But that's not religions persecution.

- I suppose by seeing this from a a different angle I'm an anti-Mormon bigot.
F
frdbtr
Eastern wrote:
- If you guys actually knew me you'd laugh at the thought of me being a closet Ute fan. My allegiances are much higher than BYU or Utah.

- I never said BYU doesn't have a lot to be proud of. I've spent many Saturdays screaming at the TV pulling for them. But I grew up outside Utah so I have different perspective.

- That Cotton Bowl victory was a good one against Kansas State. Sarkisian was brilliant. But the Cotton Bowl isn't really on par as far as prestige with the Sugar, Fiesta, Orange and Rose.

- But like I said, it's what you do on the national stage that turns heads. The Cotton Bowl 15 years ago doesn't carry a fraction of the weight as two undefeated seasons and a Fiesta Bowl win and Sugar Bowl win over two BCS conference champions.

- BYU fans have a problem giving credit where credit is due. If something doesn't go their way they cry religious bigotry and circle the wagons. The only way I can see religion coming in to the PAC-10's decision is that they weren't going to give special privileges like not playing on Sunday to the newbie. That makes sense. Why should the rest of a conference have to make special exceptions for the new guy? But that's not religions persecution.

- I suppose by seeing this from a a different angle I'm an anti-Mormon bigot.


Airwolf is that you? This really sounds familiar. "I am a BYU fan but my alliegences are much higher....."
C
Cougs_Rule
Eastern, you have a few good points about national attention and mormons and wagons; but I have to push back on your PAC 10 analysis. Its almost nauseating to have to go back through all the reasons and speculations--but do you seriously think your positive psychology/anti-victim mentality can explain away why BYU with its fan base in the west and larger fan base in the SLC market (all economic imperatives that drove other conference expansions) shouldn't have been enough to trump other variables like sunday play? NO way. Do you know anything about Cal or Stanford academia? Do you know anything about BYU academia? Call it academic freedom vs. academic conservatism if you like. But It smacks of the type of bigotry consistent with godless academic sophistries merely hiding behind explanations such as sunday play. And I dare say that if you are not careful "your allegiances" might be confused with the same sort of "objective thinking" (insert valueless; insert allegiance to the "higher order" of the scientific method and "sound reasoning") that kept BYU out (thankfully) of the PAC-ex nihilo.
I
Italics
frdbtr wrote:
- If you guys actually knew me you'd laugh at the thought of me being a closet Ute fan. My allegiances are much higher than BYU or Utah.

- I never said BYU doesn't have a lot to be proud of. I've spent many Saturdays screaming at the TV pulling for them. But I grew up outside Utah so I have different perspective.

- That Cotton Bowl victory was a good one against Kansas State. Sarkisian was brilliant. But the Cotton Bowl isn't really on par as far as prestige with the Sugar, Fiesta, Orange and Rose.

- But like I said, it's what you do on the national stage that turns heads. The Cotton Bowl 15 years ago doesn't carry a fraction of the weight as two undefeated seasons and a Fiesta Bowl win and Sugar Bowl win over two BCS conference champions.

- BYU fans have a problem giving credit where credit is due. If something doesn't go their way they cry religious bigotry and circle the wagons. The only way I can see religion coming in to the PAC-10's decision is that they weren't going to give special privileges like not playing on Sunday to the newbie. That makes sense. Why should the rest of a conference have to make special exceptions for the new guy? But that's not religions persecution.

- I suppose by seeing this from a a different angle I'm an anti-Mormon bigot.


Airwolf is that you? This really sounds familiar. "I am a BYU fan but my alliegences are much higher....."


DING DING DING DING DING DING DING
Sponsored Advertisementad content
E
Eastern
dmcougar, I'm pretty conservative in my politics and liberal politics being shoved down students' throats on college campuses is a sore spot for me. Both BYU and Utah have accolades to be very proud of. But with athletic conferences money seems to drive all decisions or it's at least the top priority. I don't know what kind of formulas the PAC10 used to arrive at their estimates but they're not stupid. I'm sure they created models for all potential financial outcomes with each school. I'm sure they considered fan bases and market share and all the variables. If they could make more money with BYU in the conference they would have invited them. I just find it hard to believe that, with money being the driving force, the PAC 10 would let religion get in the way. I'm not saying it wasn't a factor. I just don't see it trumping money in their decision making process.
S
Schmoe
Unfortunately, the school presidents still play lots of political games and it was ultimately their decision, not some PAC-10 money committee or the ADs. Don't be so naive as to believe that religion and politics aren't huge for schools like Stanford and Berkley.
M
Mars
Eastern wrote:
If you guys actually knew me you'd laugh at the thought of me being a closet Ute fan. My allegiances are much higher than BYU or Utah.

You smoke pot? Ah, you must be an Oregon fan!



Or maybe you meant geographically... University of Alaska?
B
Brayden Green
Mars wrote:
If you guys actually knew me you'd laugh at the thought of me being a closet Ute fan. My allegiances are much higher than BYU or Utah.

You smoke pot? Ah, you must be an Oregon fan!



Or maybe you meant geographically... University of Alaska?


I didn't know they let monks surf the webs now.
M
Mars
BlueIsBetter wrote:
Eastern wrote:
If you guys actually knew me you'd laugh at the thought of me being a closet Ute fan. My allegiances are much higher than BYU or Utah.

You smoke pot? Ah, you must be an Oregon fan!



Or maybe you meant geographically... University of Alaska?


I didn't know they let monks surf the webs now.

http://todayilaughed.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/high-five.jpg" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">
Sponsored Advertisementad content
E
Eastern
Schmoe wrote:
Unfortunately, the school presidents still play lots of political games and it was ultimately their decision, not some PAC-10 money committee or the ADs. Don't be so naive as to believe that religion and politics aren't huge for schools like Stanford and Berkley.


Politics and religion could have come into their decision but typically money is the bottom line. The per school payout is always a huge factor in who conferences invite and whether schools will accept it.
S
Schmoe
It is a reason, that's why they didn't invite New Mexico and UNLV, but even you're not stupid enough to think that money is the only factor involved (which is obvious if you look at ratings numbers, game attendance both home and away, etc. for BYU vs Utah).
D
Ddawg
kitic77 wrote:
Actually I have deep connections to both BYU and Utah over several generations. But that aside, nobody cares about MWC or WAC championships. You have to ask yourselves what gets a program noticed enough so other conferences want them? What matters is what you do on the national stage. How many Orange Bowls has BYU won or even been in? How about Sugar Bowls? Fiesta Bowls? Nobody cares about Holiday bowl wins or Las Vegas Bowl wins. BYU won the NC in 1984. This is not an insult but that NC isn't widely respected outside Provo. Utah has simply turned heads on the national stage more than BYU.



You guys can play the religion card and make excuses for why Utah got the invite but it would be nice to see a BYU fan take the high road for once. Most people don't give a crap if a school is affiliated with a specific religion. I'm Mormon. But it's embarrassing when BYU zealots act like snotty whining teenagers who don't get their way.

This simply not true. If it was about football accomplishments or "turning heads on the national stage more than BYU" then Colorado would not be going to the PAC-10. This was about capturing television markets. Colorado "delivers" the Denver market. The PAC-10 had to choose between BYU and Utah to capture the SLC market.



BYU is still the dominant ratings force in the SLC market, but their religious affiliation it what turned off the PAC-10 high brows.


Bingo!!! We are locked on & it's a "go!"

8)
Y
YNot
Eastern wrote:
dmcougar, I'm pretty conservative in my politics and liberal politics being shoved down students' throats on college campuses is a sore spot for me. Both BYU and Utah have accolades to be very proud of. But with athletic conferences money seems to drive all decisions or it's at least the top priority. I don't know what kind of formulas the PAC10 used to arrive at their estimates but they're not stupid. I'm sure they created models for all potential financial outcomes with each school. I'm sure they considered fan bases and market share and all the variables. If they could make more money with BYU in the conference they would have invited them. I just find it hard to believe that, with money being the driving force, the PAC 10 would let religion get in the way. I'm not saying it wasn't a factor. I just don't see it trumping money in their decision making process.


Yeah, Larry Scott and his peons ran those numbers, presented them to the PAC 10 presidents and chancellors, and then....Stanford, Cal, UCLA, and USC's representatives collectively said "NO WAY!" (Sunday play, proposition 8, etc. etc.)



The numbers clearly show that BYU would deliver the Salt Lake market better than Utah and that BYU would bolster ratings and attendance at every PAC 10 home game. However, the California schools would never let that happen.



Then, Commissioner Scott showed the spreadsheet with Utah and Colorado and the number of TV sets in Utah and Colorado didn't change, so Utah was a great alternative. Utah and Colorado fit the PAC 10 well and I do not blame anyone for that decision.



Frankly, I am said that religion and politics get in the way of athletic competition, but that's reality. I really do wish the BYU had been invited to the PAC 10. The main thing that we will miss out on is playing road games in California, Arizona, Oregon, Washington, and Colorado in front of thousands of BYU alumni in these states! Not to mention the better bowl affiliations, money, and opportunities.



With that said, is all lost? No way. BYU has a bright future. The MWC is in California, Utah, Colorado, etc. In fact, the MWC is also in Texas, which more than makes up for Oregon, Washington, and Arizona! The MWC should be more aggressive on the fact that it has a foot in southern California and Dallas. I think the MWC needs to be much more proactive in extending its footprint and Mtn. distribution in California and Texas. BYU can be the leader in doing this. Why aren't we talking about how BYU can work with the Mtn. to enable the Mtn. to provide better quality and HD broadcasts? The MWC covers more top 50 markets than the ACC or the Big East....Dallas, Denver, San Diego, Salt Lake, Las Vegas, Albuquerque, etc. We should be looking for more ways to get into LA and San Francisco and Dallas...and beyond.
E
EM_Puma
I personally don't think Utah's success is connected to BYU whatsoever. The facts are in the books that they have not had the fan support of BYU ever, but I'd not be using common sense to see that they probably will do fine in the PAC12. I feel the sentiment shared by Bronco that the rivalry will never be the same now and I thought it had gotten too far over the edge as well. I lived all my life with the Ohio St/Michigan rivalry, but when we lost to the Wolverines, I didn't have their stupid fans in my face like I do here working in Salt Lake. Winning years are great, but I developed such a dislike for the Ute fan base in the area that I'm not that sad to see that disappear.



I think Utah deserves to be a PAC12 team. I believe BYU deserved the consideration because of success in every area that matters, but that doesn't diminsh the fact that I feel the Utah deserves what they achieved. It just sucks that we were denied because of our religious afiliation, but we can't control that. I still think that by far BYU is the classier organization, but hat's off to Utah on their opportunity.
Page 2 of 3
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.