(10-21-2016 04:57 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  ...
And this isn't theoretical. Utah's biggest issues this year are LB depth and thanks to injuries RB depth. One of BYU's LB (Langi) as you know played for Utah but was recruited to BYU while on his mission. Another BYU starter (Pauu) was ultimately asked by Utah to gray shirt and opted for BYU. Boise State's 200 yard rusher McNichols was a Utah commit who went to Boise after being asked to gray shirt. Watching a BYU-Boise game is a stark reminder of how close we are to stepping up. If BYU and Boise decline as programs, a few of those kids are probably taking the gray shirt and contributing big for us this year.

Sounds like recruiting priorities and scholarship management is more responsible for Utah's issues with depth rather than that BYU and Boise State cherry picking your guys.
Pau'u was not offered a scholarship from Utah per rivals--but was offered by BYU, Colorado, Washington, Iowa State, Nebraska, and Oregon State. If he hadn't chosen BYU, who is to say he would have grey shirted at Utah instead of one of taking someone else's scholarship?
McNichols only had offers from Utah, Boise State, and Colorado State--he committed to Utah and then changed his commit to Boise State after his visit there--if Utah asked their commit to grey shirt then he was prioritized down and lost that way. You don't get do-overs when you miss on a recruit.
Langi has been at BYU 3 years--Utah can't blame his absence for their lack of depth at LB. And Utah has benefited from players changing commits while on a mission (remember Jake Murphy?). Langi was able to transfer without sitting out because Utah never signed him to a LOI before his mission since he enrolled early.
Rather than focusing on what a school can do to knock down neighboring programs to get stronger, they would be better served to keep investing in their program, make good hires, recruit well, and repeat it year after year.

Yes, they probably should. Future Big XII: West Virginia, Baylor, TCU, Houston, Iowa State, BYU (fball only), Air Force (fball only), Connecticut, Cincinnati, Memphis, Central Florida, South Florida

(10-22-2016 11:49 AM)f1do Wrote:  

(10-21-2016 04:57 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  ...
And this isn't theoretical. Utah's biggest issues this year are LB depth and thanks to injuries RB depth. One of BYU's LB (Langi) as you know played for Utah but was recruited to BYU while on his mission. Another BYU starter (Pauu) was ultimately asked by Utah to gray shirt and opted for BYU. Boise State's 200 yard rusher McNichols was a Utah commit who went to Boise after being asked to gray shirt. Watching a BYU-Boise game is a stark reminder of how close we are to stepping up. If BYU and Boise decline as programs, a few of those kids are probably taking the gray shirt and contributing big for us this year.

Sounds like recruiting priorities and scholarship management is more responsible for Utah's issues with depth rather than that BYU and Boise State cherry picking your guys.
Pau'u was not offered a scholarship from Utah per rivals--but was offered by BYU, Colorado, Washington, Iowa State, Nebraska, and Oregon State. If he hadn't chosen BYU, who is to say he would have grey shirted at Utah instead of one of taking someone else's scholarship?
McNichols only had offers from Utah, Boise State, and Colorado State--he committed to Utah and then changed his commit to Boise State after his visit there--if Utah asked their commit to grey shirt then he was prioritized down and lost that way. You don't get do-overs when you miss on a recruit.
Langi has been at BYU 3 years--Utah can't blame his absence for their lack of depth at LB. And Utah has benefited from players changing commits while on a mission (remember Jake Murphy?). Langi was able to transfer without sitting out because Utah never signed him to a LOI before his mission since he enrolled early.
Rather than focusing on what a school can do to knock down neighboring programs to get stronger, they would be better served to keep investing in their program, make good hires, recruit well, and repeat it year after year.

That's how the big time schools build depth. They augment their standard recruiting classes by getting guys with full commitable offers to other programs to come as preferred walkons or gray shirts when they've reached their LOI/scholarship limit. You have to be able to add guys in non-standard methods and give them a chance to prove themselves without using up those 25 initials per year. That's the recruiting game.

jr #94,

The scheduling conversations for Minnesota are inherently different than for Utah. We don't have two FBS schools in the state with long histories of playing (almost) every year!

Utah does. You can't escape that.


You get nine PAC games per year, and you're a PAC school. That automatically means you get to recruit great football athletes. Not only from Utah, but Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, California, Oregon, Washington, and Pacific Islanders.

You have no argument.


Pretending that you need to recruit Texas and Florida kids is a lie, possibly just an excuse to avoid scheduling BYU and Utah St.

Luckily, it seems Utah state government has the balls to force them to play. Good.


I saw what happened when another storied rivalry ended because the two teams were no longer in the same conference (NDSU and UND). North Dakota state government wouldn't force them to play, as they should have.

(10-23-2016 10:14 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  jr #94,

The scheduling conversations for Minnesota are inherently different than for Utah. We don't have two FBS schools in the state with long histories of playing (almost) every year!

Utah does. You can't escape that.


You get nine PAC games per year, and you're a PAC school. That automatically means you get to recruit great football athletes. Not only from Utah, but Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, California, Oregon, Washington, and Pacific Islanders.

You have no argument.


Pretending that you need to recruit Texas and Florida kids is a lie, possibly just an excuse to avoid scheduling BYU and Utah St.

Luckily, it seems Utah state government has the balls to force them to play. Good.


I saw what happened when another storied rivalry ended because the two teams were no longer in the same conference (NDSU and UND). North Dakota state government wouldn't force them to play, as they should have.

You're hopelessly clueless.

(10-23-2016 10:14 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  jr #94,

The scheduling conversations for Minnesota are inherently different than for Utah. We don't have two FBS schools in the state with long histories of playing (almost) every year!

Utah does. You can't escape that.


You get nine PAC games per year, and you're a PAC school. That automatically means you get to recruit great football athletes. Not only from Utah, but Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, California, Oregon, Washington, and Pacific Islanders.

You have no argument.


Pretending that you need to recruit Texas and Florida kids is a lie, possibly just an excuse to avoid scheduling BYU and Utah St.

Luckily, it seems Utah state government has the balls to force them to play. Good.


I saw what happened when another storied rivalry ended because the two teams were no longer in the same conference (NDSU and UND). North Dakota state government wouldn't force them to play, as they should have.

Actually Utah has 3 FBS schools with long histories of playing each other. Utah and Utah St played every year since the 1880's. BYU Utah rivalry started 50 years later, but it's still an 80 year rivalry. I hope Utah and Utah St continue playing each other as they are the big state schools in the state. BYU is a for profit school and at the end of the day BYU vs Utah should be second priority for the state of Utah.
Cheers!

(10-23-2016 12:40 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(10-23-2016 10:14 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  jr #94,

The scheduling conversations for Minnesota are inherently different than for Utah. We don't have two FBS schools in the state with long histories of playing (almost) every year!

Utah does. You can't escape that.


You get nine PAC games per year, and you're a PAC school. That automatically means you get to recruit great football athletes. Not only from Utah, but Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, California, Oregon, Washington, and Pacific Islanders.

You have no argument.


Pretending that you need to recruit Texas and Florida kids is a lie, possibly just an excuse to avoid scheduling BYU and Utah St.

Luckily, it seems Utah state government has the balls to force them to play. Good.


I saw what happened when another storied rivalry ended because the two teams were no longer in the same conference (NDSU and UND). North Dakota state government wouldn't force them to play, as they should have.

Actually Utah has 3 FBS schools with long histories of playing each other. Utah and Utah St played every year since the 1880's. BYU Utah rivalry started 50 years later, but it's still an 80 year rivalry. I hope Utah and Utah St continue playing each other as they are the big state schools in the state. BYU is a for profit school and at the end of the day BYU vs Utah should be second priority for the state of Utah.
Cheers!

Agreed. There is a natural relationship between the state flagship and the state landgrant. We also have a very long (and historically more competitive) relationship with Wyoming. We also have strong academic ties with some of our graduate and professional programs (like the medical school) having spots reserved for Wyoming residents and paid for by the state of Wyoming.

(10-23-2016 12:40 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(10-23-2016 10:14 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  jr #94,

The scheduling conversations for Minnesota are inherently different than for Utah. We don't have two FBS schools in the state with long histories of playing (almost) every year!

Utah does. You can't escape that.


You get nine PAC games per year, and you're a PAC school. That automatically means you get to recruit great football athletes. Not only from Utah, but Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, California, Oregon, Washington, and Pacific Islanders.

You have no argument.


Pretending that you need to recruit Texas and Florida kids is a lie, possibly just an excuse to avoid scheduling BYU and Utah St.

Luckily, it seems Utah state government has the balls to force them to play. Good.


I saw what happened when another storied rivalry ended because the two teams were no longer in the same conference (NDSU and UND). North Dakota state government wouldn't force them to play, as they should have.

Actually Utah has 3 FBS schools with long histories of playing each other. Utah and Utah St played every year since the 1880's. BYU Utah rivalry started 50 years later, but it's still an 80 year rivalry. I hope Utah and Utah St continue playing each other as they are the big state schools in the state. BYU is a for profit school and at the end of the day BYU vs Utah should be second priority for the state of Utah.
Cheers!

What? Like a University of Phoenix or DeVry University? Under what definition can you classify BYU as "for profit". I've read some doozies on message boards but this is one of the biggest.

jr,

I conclude that you have conceded the discussion to me, then.

Utah shall schedule BYU and Utah St every year, going forward, since no one can propose a reasonable, logically argument for why they should not. Just pretend stuff.

(10-23-2016 10:16 PM)f1do Wrote:  

(10-23-2016 12:40 PM)billybobby777 Wrote:  

(10-23-2016 10:14 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  jr #94,

The scheduling conversations for Minnesota are inherently different than for Utah. We don't have two FBS schools in the state with long histories of playing (almost) every year!

Utah does. You can't escape that.


You get nine PAC games per year, and you're a PAC school. That automatically means you get to recruit great football athletes. Not only from Utah, but Colorado, Arizona, Nevada, California, Oregon, Washington, and Pacific Islanders.

You have no argument.


Pretending that you need to recruit Texas and Florida kids is a lie, possibly just an excuse to avoid scheduling BYU and Utah St.

Luckily, it seems Utah state government has the balls to force them to play. Good.


I saw what happened when another storied rivalry ended because the two teams were no longer in the same conference (NDSU and UND). North Dakota state government wouldn't force them to play, as they should have.

Actually Utah has 3 FBS schools with long histories of playing each other. Utah and Utah St played every year since the 1880's. BYU Utah rivalry started 50 years later, but it's still an 80 year rivalry. I hope Utah and Utah St continue playing each other as they are the big state schools in the state. BYU is a for profit school and at the end of the day BYU vs Utah should be second priority for the state of Utah.
Cheers!

What? Like a University of Phoenix or DeVry University? Under what definition can you classify BYU as "for profit". I've read some doozies on message boards but this is one of the biggest.

My bad for using the term "for profit" BYU is a Private LDS Church owned school. I was trying to differentiate between Utah, Utah St and BYU in this discussion of priorities of who should be playing who in the state of Utah. As One BYU poster said earlier, "BYU scheduling Utah is a hinderance for BYU."--In that case BYU should move on and let Utah play Utah St in football and BYU can schedule the national schedule they want with teams from coast to coast on it.
Cheers!

(10-24-2016 11:06 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  jr,

I conclude that you have conceded the discussion to me, then.

Utah shall schedule BYU and Utah St every year, going forward, since no one can propose a reasonable, logically argument for why they should not. Just pretend stuff.

how it feels

Didn't click on it.

I'll assume you have nothing to add, since you'd rather post links with false titles. That's much easier than having to think of something.

(10-21-2016 04:57 PM)jrj84105 Wrote:  And this isn't theoretical. Utah's biggest issues this year are LB depth and thanks to injuries RB depth. One of BYU's LB (Langi) as you know played for Utah but was recruited to BYU while on his mission. Another BYU starter (Pauu) was ultimately asked by Utah to gray shirt and opted for BYU. Boise State's 200 yard rusher McNichols was a Utah commit who went to Boise after being asked to gray shirt. Watching a BYU-Boise game is a stark reminder of how close we are to stepping up. If BYU and Boise decline as programs, a few of those kids are probably taking the gray shirt and contributing big for us this year.

Pretty funny. We've had an entire run of Governor's School graduates and other high performing students at my local high schools go to BYU when they received scholarships to local Virginia universities. Same way with Basis when I lived in Tucson. These are really good, highly sought students. I never recall any Governor's School or Basis students going to the UU.

BYU has a pull that the UU simply can't match with a large number of prospective students. Langi and Pau'u are both part of that culture, and will be inclined to go in a direction that lets them keep a culture they like.

Your real concern should be if BYU-Idaho restarts their football program and moves to Div I. It would attract the LDS athletes that aren't able to make the educational requirements at BYU, and draw more of your recruiting core away.

(10-18-2016 01:54 PM)Dr. Isaly von Yinzer Wrote:  I think the conference should have some combination of the following teams:

WEST
Houston
Brigham Young
Boise State
Colorado State
San Diego State
*Air Force

EAST
Cincinnati
Central Florida
South Florida
Connecticut
*Navy
*Army

I think the Commander-in-Chief Trophy would be a cool thing to have in your league - it would always get you attention.

I'm sure I am missing some good ones too but I think that the conference is demonstrably better than either the AAC or the MWC.

I like this, but I'd tweak it as follows:

WEST
BSU
BYU
UH
SDSU
CSU
AF

EAST
USF
UCF
ECU
Cincy
Army
Navy

Or you could have a nice 10 team confernce:

WEST
BSU
BYU
UH
SDSU
AF


EAST
USF
UCF
Cincy
Army
Navy