CougarCorner
Sign in
Archived Topic

BYU to the Big House? BYU and Mich in negotiations

by CougarPeasant · 9/30/2010

Sponsored Advertisementad content
C
CougarPeasant
http://twitter.com/DJPKKFAN/status/25927883615" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



PK tweeting BYU and MIchigan are in talks to play a 1 and 1.



Thank you ESPN.



Thanks for nothing Comcast.



Also, apparently BYU playing :utard: next year is a done deal. :sick:
B
BYULV
CougarPeasant wrote:
http://twitter.com/DJPKKFAN/status/25927883615



PK tweeting BYU and MIchigan are in talks to play a 1 and 1.



Thank you ESPN.



Thanks for nothing Comcast.



Also, apparently BYU playing :utard: next year is a done deal. :sick:


No surprise, we always play a lower tier PAC 10 team in the preseason ;)



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">
Y
Y 4 Ever
Home and home doesn't necessarily mean 1 and 1. Could still be a 2 for 1. In fact, that's what I'd put my money on.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">
I
Italics
wonder when the games would be. Michigan had a few ugly down years, but they appear to be on the upswing... they could be a national powerhouse again by the time BYU plays them. Can you imagine Texas, Boise State, Notre Dame, and Michigan all in one year? Talk about potential to make a splash...
Sponsored Advertisementad content
C
Cougarbib
Yes - I can imagine that - saw Detmer lose 5 in a row in a stretch like that from his Heisman Trophy date at UH, Bowl game A&M, then into his senior returning Heisman winner season kick off classic Florida State, at UCLA, and maybe Penn State, Notre Dame or some other power.



Spread them out a bit.



Imagine that schedule this year. ND plays a schedule like that every year. The big splash you hear has become a belly flop.



UW plays a schedule much like that and only recently started to slightly adjust by cutting BYU from the schedule. When they went 0-12, our 10-3 Cougars were the closest they came to beating anyone - Locker toss the TD Ball straight up in the air unsportsmanlike conduct penalty followed by blocked extra point.



Spread them out. Two a year - maybe 3 tops and always 1 for 1 or do not do it.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">
R
runbyu1
Wholeheartedly agree with Cougarbib---the schedule could easily get out of hand and be too tough to handle. I'll take 10-2 against decent competition over 8-4 against great competition anyday. Of course, 10-2 against a killer schedule...
M
Mingjai
runbyu1 wrote:
Wholeheartedly agree with Cougarbib---the schedule could easily get out of hand and be too tough to handle. I'll take 10-2 against decent competition over 8-4 against great competition anyday. Of course, 10-2 against a killer schedule...


If you ever want to go 10-2 against a killer schedule, you have to start with a few 6-6, 7-5, or 8-4 seasons to get to that level. I have all the confidence that once BYU gets used to playing a tough Notre Dame-like schedule, they wins will start piling up again.
L
Lawboy
Schedule might get tough, but if the recruits come to pay those games at those places, the BYU program with get tougher as well. Seriously, adding Texas, ND, Michigan, a big game in DC v. WVU, etc--those are destination games v teams all kids want to play for or against. The onus is now on Bronco to lock up the top tier LDS talent and other talent that can make it in Provo. Gotta win some of htose games.



I bet it is a 1 and 1 deal, if it goes down.
C
Cougarfan87
I agree to a certain extent. I think your schedule can have a lot to do with the kind of recruits you get. If you can promise kids you will be playing five top 25 teams a year, they are going to want to sign up because they know they will be getting plenty of exposure and playing the best competition. I wouldn't want to do more than five, and of those five, only one or two should be top 10 type teams. Ofcourse, you can't predict exactly where teams will be ranked in the coming years, but we can get a pretty good idea. I am really starting to love the idea of going independent. However, no more two for ones. Not for anyone. There are plenty of Top 25 teams that will schedule us straight up to be taking two for ones. If you want to be an elite program, you have to act like it, and taking two for ones seems so...desperate.
Sponsored Advertisementad content
N
nc-puma
If we stack several marquee games a year. 8-4 would be optimistic. Could be much much worse. Honestly I'm not confident that BYU, given recruiting reasons 1-50, has the ability to rise up to the level of the competition. In terms of football potential, BYU obviously has a lower ceiling than big state schools. Not to mention that those games really only pay off recruit-wise if we win. Pretty sure the FSU game did nothing to help us recruit Florida. I'm all for a couple huge games a year, but >4... no.
C
Cougarfan87
nc-puma wrote:
If we stack several marquee games a year. 8-4 would be optimistic. Could be much much worse. Honestly I'm not confident that BYU, given recruiting reasons 1-50, has the ability to rise up to the level of the competition. In terms of football potential, BYU obviously has a lower ceiling than big state schools. Not to mention that those games really only pay off recruit-wise if we win. Pretty sure the FSU game did nothing to help us recruit Florida. I'm all for a couple huge games a year, but >4... no.


In a year when we were more experienced, I think we would have beat Florida State. And the point isn't necessarily that we get Florida recruits, but that kids see us playing Michigan, Florida State, Notre Dame, Texas etc. on TV and say, man I want to be able to play those teams. I agree that no more than 4 huge games. I think two huge games a year (top ten) and three top 25 should do the trick. No one could laugh at a schedule like that, it would be great for recruiting, and it still leaves seven other winnable games to become bowl eligible. Even if we only beat two out of the five top 25 teams, that would put as at 9-3 with an awesome schedule and a 10 win season for our bowl game. Winning all five puts you at a chance for a national title in one year, instead of the Boise program where you have to go two years undefeated in a row--though I think they will still get left out.
F
frdbtr
Cougarfan87 wrote:
If we stack several marquee games a year. 8-4 would be optimistic. Could be much much worse. Honestly I'm not confident that BYU, given recruiting reasons 1-50, has the ability to rise up to the level of the competition. In terms of football potential, BYU obviously has a lower ceiling than big state schools. Not to mention that those games really only pay off recruit-wise if we win. Pretty sure the FSU game did nothing to help us recruit Florida. I'm all for a couple huge games a year, but >4... no.


In a year when we were more experienced, I think we would have beat Florida State. And the point isn't necessarily that we get Florida recruits, but that kids see us playing Michigan, Florida State, Notre Dame, Texas etc. on TV and say, man I want to be able to play those teams. I agree that no more than 4 huge games. I think two huge games a year (top ten) and three top 25 should do the trick. No one could laugh at a schedule like that, it would be great for recruiting, and it still leaves seven other winnable games to become bowl eligible. Even if we only beat two out of the five top 25 teams, that would put as at 9-3 with an awesome schedule and a 10 win season for our bowl game. Winning all five puts you at a chance for a national title in one year, instead of the Boise program where you have to go two years undefeated in a row--though I think they will still get left out.


You should go look up statistics on how othen visiting teams beat top 25 team in the NCAA. Not often. The schedule you outline above would be a recipe for a 6-6 team every year.
C
Cougarfan87
frdbtr wrote:
nc-puma wrote:
If we stack several marquee games a year. 8-4 would be optimistic. Could be much much worse. Honestly I'm not confident that BYU, given recruiting reasons 1-50, has the ability to rise up to the level of the competition. In terms of football potential, BYU obviously has a lower ceiling than big state schools. Not to mention that those games really only pay off recruit-wise if we win. Pretty sure the FSU game did nothing to help us recruit Florida. I'm all for a couple huge games a year, but >4... no.


In a year when we were more experienced, I think we would have beat Florida State. And the point isn't necessarily that we get Florida recruits, but that kids see us playing Michigan, Florida State, Notre Dame, Texas etc. on TV and say, man I want to be able to play those teams. I agree that no more than 4 huge games. I think two huge games a year (top ten) and three top 25 should do the trick. No one could laugh at a schedule like that, it would be great for recruiting, and it still leaves seven other winnable games to become bowl eligible. Even if we only beat two out of the five top 25 teams, that would put as at 9-3 with an awesome schedule and a 10 win season for our bowl game. Winning all five puts you at a chance for a national title in one year, instead of the Boise program where you have to go two years undefeated in a row--though I think they will still get left out.


You should go look up statistics on how othen visiting teams beat top 25 team in the NCAA. Not often. The schedule you outline above would be a recipe for a 6-6 team every year.


They would not all be on the road. That's why we set up home and homes not away and aways. Furthermore, we should never lose more than five games since what I am advocating is other teams we would routinely beat up on (you know, Utah State, NMSU, etc.).
E
EM_Puma
The question that needs answered is how do we grow this program as an independent. It's the proverbial situation where do you wait until you have the athletes to compete with a similar Notre Dame schedule or do you play a ND schedule and therefore get more 4-5 star players that will enable you to successfully play a ND schedule year in and year out? I don't know the answer. I don't think you're going to get more of the 4-5 star players that would be a "good" fit at BYU if you are playing the type of schedule we have had in the MWC and the bowl games we've been to, but if your are not a winning program, then that will turn the head of those players as well.



If I had to decide, I think I would fall on scheduling the tough opponents over just playing a softer schedule, as I think overall, the attraction of playing Michigan, Notre Dame, Texas, etc. is a higher draw than our record unless we end up with a losing record every single year--but that's just my guess.
Sponsored Advertisementad content
C
Cougarfan87
EM_Puma wrote:
The question that needs answered is how do we grow this program as an independent. It's the proverbial situation where do you wait until you have the athletes to compete with a similar Notre Dame schedule or do you play a ND schedule and therefore get more 4-5 star players that will enable you to successfully play a ND schedule year in and year out? I don't know the answer. I don't think you're going to get more of the 4-5 star plas that would come to BYU if you are playing the type of schedule we have had in the MWC and the bowl games we've been to, but if your are not a winning program, then that will turn the head of those players as well.



if I had to decide, I think I would fall on scheduling the tough opponents over just playing a softer schedule, as I think overall, the attraction of playing Michigan, Notre Dame, Texas, etc. is a higher draw than our record unless we end up with a losing record every year--but that's just my guess.


Concur. As long as we are going to bowl games and playing tough teams on a national stage, I think we will get better recruits. Going independent does nothing for our exposure if we keep a dummied down schedule. No one's tuning in to watch us play Wyoming.
L
Lawboy
This is why Florida has never gone undefeated, and why most PAC-10 teams go 4-4 in conference. It is tough to win on the road vs even a decent team. And let's be clear--the bottom of the MWC has traditionally not even been decent. And when we pick up the WAC teams, they will not be either. Certain wins are required. But having 4-5 certain wins a years is a good thing. Every SEC does it, so no shame in it. The goal is 6 certain wins, 2-3 probable, then 3-4 tough games. The top teams in the nation typically have that type of balance.
D
Dcr36
Lawboy wrote:
This is why Florida has never gone undefeated, and why most PAC-10 teams go 4-4 in conference. It is tough to win on the road vs even a decent team. And let's be clear--the bottom of the MWC has traditionally not even been decent. And when we pick up the WAC teams, they will not be either. Certain wins are required. But having 4-5 certain wins a years is a good thing. Every SEC does it, so no shame in it. The goal is 6 certain wins, 2-3 probable, then 3-4 tough games. The top teams in the nation typically have that type of balance.


This should be framed and reposted every time this topic comes up.
C
Cougarfan87
Lawboy wrote:
This is why Florida has never gone undefeated, and why most PAC-10 teams go 4-4 in conference. It is tough to win on the road vs even a decent team. And let's be clear--the bottom of the MWC has traditionally not even been decent. And when we pick up the WAC teams, they will not be either. Certain wins are required. But having 4-5 certain wins a years is a good thing. Every SEC does it, so no shame in it. The goal is 6 certain wins, 2-3 probable, then 3-4 tough games. The top teams in the nation typically have that type of balance.


That's my point exactly. Every SEC champ will end up playing around five top 25 teams during their schedule. Hence, if undefeated they are always a shoe in for the BCS title game. If we want to have that kind of respect, we need to do likewise. Our other seven games (eight if we bring in Hawaii) should be certain wins, or pretty certain. Well, we've got Utah State, so we're down to six or seven gimmes in most years. ;)
C
Cougarfan87
I'll add to that thought by looking at the two favorites in the SEC:



Bama (west) will/has played Arkansas (currently #15), LSU (currently #12), Auburn (currently #10) and Florida (currently #7), and likely Florida again in the title game.



Florida (East) will play Bama (currently #1), LSU (currently #12), South Carolina (currently #20), Florida State (not currently ranked but is one or two in the "others receiving votes--will likely be top 25 soon), and likely Bama again in the title game.



That's five top 25 teams with a couple of top 10 teams. A schedule like that, despite who else you might play, breeds respect amongst recruits--especially when they get to watch it on national TV.
Page 1 of 2
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.