People who didn't attend Highland find many ways to deal with their feelings of inferiority and disenfrancisement. NWUF is just coping the best way he can.Originally Posted by Dwight Schr-Ute
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
People who didn't attend Highland find many ways to deal with their feelings of inferiority and disenfrancisement. NWUF is just coping the best way he can.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
Truer words were never spoken.
I'd bet the Utah sports news media are almost unanimous in wanting the rivalry game to continue.
"It is only with the heart that one can see rightly; what is essential is invisible to the eye."
--Antoine de Saint-Exupery
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold."
--Yeats
“True, we [lawyers] build no bridges. We raise no towers. We construct no engines. We paint no pictures - unless as amateurs for our own principal amusement. There is little of all that we do which the eye of man can see. But we smooth out difficulties; we relieve stress; we correct mistakes; we take up other men's burdens and by our efforts we make possible the peaceful life of men in a peaceful state.”
--John W. Davis, founder of Davis Polk & Wardwell
not "almost." They even admit it drives ratings.
As a former media member I completely concur with these thoughts and it's disappointing. The SLC media are generally a lazy bunch - the television and radio media. I think the print guys work really hard and I appreciate their efforts. The broadcast media do not. Gone are the days when broadcast media tell really good stories consistently. What stories they do tell are fed to them by the SIDs at the respective schools.
There is no art anymore to the story-telling. Nothing is though-provoking. Nothing is beautiful. Nothing stands alone. I remember two pieces I watched Dave Fox and David James edit, respectively, back in '96 or '97. The James piece was an interview with Keith Van Horn following the Kentucky loss his senior year. It was raw, dripping with emotion, very little reporter involvement and a lot of just Keith talking and video of Keith and the Utes playing. I haven't seen David James do a piece like it in at least fifteen years. Dave Fox did a completely different story during the NBA playoffs one of those years. He took a photographer to Venice Beach and just picked up the sites and sounds of the place on a May/June afternoon. No reporter involvement - just pictures and sound. It ... was ... Awesome! It may have been the last good piece Fox ever edited. Fox was a master at video-editing. I learned an immense amount from him.
The SLC market wouldn't know that now. It's all just talk - and almost all talk turns to BYU-Utah comparisons. But my knowledge of the talent wasting away in the local stations makes it an even greater state of deprivation. Think of all the stories that could be told about our Pac-12 opponents, coaches and schools - the issues that could be tackled, the sites that could be seen and heard. Sorry - just needed a late-night lament.
Apparently, Utah and BYU are in talks for extending the series for 2019 and 2020. BYU really wants the 2019 game to be played in November, coming on the heels of the 2018 game (SLC) that is also played in November. My feelings on playing BYU have been made clear on this board, but I am not a fan of playing them anywhere in November. Our motivation here is clear -- it's the end of the conference season and we're trying to establish a rivalry/tradition with Colorado. Those motivations trump BYU's motivation, which is to avoid a November home slate of Idahos and Savannah States.
Ideally, we play in September, but I would take October provided we had a bye week or a home game immediately following BYU.
Also, can we rip up the Northern Illinois contract and offer Utah State a 2-for-1, with the Aggies coming to SLC in 2018-19, with a trip to Logan in 2020? I am totally lost as to why we signed on for this series.
In the emails obtained by the Tribune Dr. Hill told Holmoe he had no interest in playing BYU in November and reiterated that the one November game was done solely as a favor to the Pac12.
Are we really trying to negotiate a 2019 game? BYU's schedule for the first three weeks of the season is filled up, as is the last weekend when Stanford or USC plays Notre Dame (Washington State). Hill must have known that when he sent the email, and must have known what the response would be. I interpreted his email as creating a paper trail to say "see, I tried" when the BYU - Utah State extension was announced and the media asked the inevitable question abut Utah-BYU. Hard to read that exchange as serious or even good faith negotiating.
I agree. There's no reason for us to be making arrangements with Utah State or Northern Illinois.
The BYU game is tricky. It always gets worked up into a huge, make-or-break the season type thing, and I don't like that happening in Sept or Oct. It's a tough loss to recover from, and it's a win that leads to a letdown the following week. I feel like it's a lot safer to have it at the end of the season. On the other hand, I hate helping BYU in any way, and they desperately need something in November. Plus, I'm starting to like the CU game at Thanksgiving time.
In any other bargaining situation, Utah would have a clear upper hand and would use it to an advantage. It seems like we want to play nice on this one due to our long history.
Let's change the first part of your sentence to, "In a non-playoff era ..." Because when your best non-con efforts for the next four years yield only Northern Illinois and San Jose State, you need quality non-con opponents on the schedule. And BYU is a million miles better than either of those schools.
We should've learned something from hoops scheduling last year. Weak non-conference scheduling can only hurt you. It can never help. Unless you don't care about making the postseason, you should always be scheduling to curry favor with the selection committee.
That's more vital at a school like Utah, where making the playoff should be viewed as a once-in-a-generation (every 20-25 years) accomplishment. You can't claim lack of foresight in weak non-con scheduling when that day comes -- no one will listen to you or have any sympathy for you. Now, if we get to a point where making the playoff or strongly contending for it becomes routine (once every 4-5 years), then you can let your reputation speak for itself. But we're not in that position now. We need a P5 school on the docket every year. Absent that, BYU far and away the next best option, and BYU knows that. They see our schedules too. And the committee made it clear in Year One that you cannot rest on the laurels of a nine-game conference slate.
I think that I've mentioned it here before - or somewhere - but I don't understand why Chris Hill can't create a rotating four-year schedule with BYU and USU where we're doing home-and-homes with both programs. Perhaps you play each team every other year either home or away or it's a two-on, two-off sort of thing. I'd really like to see one of them on our schedule each year. I like the in-state game. This satisfies SoCal's point to have a solid non-con opponent on the schedule and it somewhat quiets the in-state criticism that we're not behaving in good faith. Now this is easier said than done given our brothers to the south and to the north but hopefully within a few years something like this could develop.
I still love the idea of beginning the season with an in-state rivalry game. It would have a lot of build-up every year whether it was BYU or USU and, of course, we would be at the center of it.
Maybe in basketball. In football, we have seen time and again over decades that weak non-conference scheduling can help immensely.
BYU has not been a better option in football than NIU or USU over the past few years. Still, I get the point. BYU is less likely to be an SOS anchor than the other two schools.And BYU is a million miles better than either of those schools.
A tough schedule is just as likely to kill our playoff chance in some year as it is to push us over the top. TCU and Baylor were both one tiny break away from a playoff, and they both had weak OOC schedules. OSU won the whole burrito, and they had a weak OOC schedule. The OOC schedule is always a gamble; sometimes the hard schedule pays off, and sometimes the weak schedule hits.That's more vital at a school like Utah, where making the playoff should be viewed as a once-in-a-generation (every 20-25 years) accomplishment. You can't claim lack of foresight in weak non-con scheduling when that day comes -- no one will listen to you or have any sympathy for you.
Are you trying to imply that BYU has some leverage in these negotiations? BYU needs this badly. Your argument is coming down to SOS in case we are ever good enough to make the playoff, which is such a remote possibility that it makes no sense to say we need the BYU game. There is only one set of reasons why we need the BYU game - history, tradition, rivalry, and hate. If we were doing this for OOC schedule, Boise State has always looked for series with Pac-12 teams, and they offer a much larger SOS bump than BYU.Absent that, BYU far and away the next best option, and BYU knows that.
The Pac-12, like the SEC, will send any 0 or 1 loss team to the playoff for the foreseeable future, regardless of OOC schedule.
There's a reason FSU/Miami went away from that. Those games were hyped large every year, and every year the game was terribly ugly. If we're going to play BYU, let's play them once we have our legs under us.
As for USU, I see no reason why we should be making trips to Logan. If they want to come down to SLC every once in a while, fine.
Love the comments section after any Utah-BYUP article in the newspaper. Poo flinging galore. Personally, I don't care if we schedule BYUP or not. I'm just as happy with Michigan, USU and Fresno instead, but SUU and North Dakota...Really?....that's just embarrassing.
“Children and dogs are as necessary to the welfare of the country as Wall Street and the railroads.” -- Harry S. Truman
"You never soar so high as when you stoop down to help a child or an animal." -- Jewish Proverb
"Three-time Pro Bowler Eric Weddle the most versatile, and maybe most intelligent, safety in the game." -- SI, 9/7/15, p. 107.
You keep bringing up OOC scheduling as needing to be tough, when that's not true at all. Utah needs as easy of an OOC schedule as possible.
Look at Ohio State: Navy, VT, Kent State, Cincinati. One P5 team. Horrible OOC.
Alabama: West Virginia, Florida Atl, Southern Miss, Western Carolina. One P5 team. Horrible OOC.
Florida State: Oklahoma St, Citadel, Notre Dame, Florida. Good OOC. 3 P5 teams. Yet Florida State was ripped all year for too "easy" a schedule.
TCU: Samford, Minnesota, SMU. One P5 team. Horrible OOC.
Baylor: SMU, Northwestern, Buffalo. Horrible OOC.
Only two teams in the top 6 had tough OOC schedules and it didn't help them at all. FSU was ripped for "too easy" of a schedule and Oregon played the toughest OOC yet weren't ranked #1.
There is a reason why Baylor and TCU laugh when they are told to beef up their OOC.
It's because it isn't smart. It isn't condusive to winning.
Winning teams play at home 7+ times a year and schedule down in OOC.
Beefing up Utah's OOC is the last thing they should be doing. Dumbing up Utah's OOC and having 7 home games every year should be the priority.
Agreed. Our goal in the near future is to make a bowl game, not to make the playoff. That can be difficult, especially when we only have four home conference games. We need to make sure we can get to 7 wins (6 not enough).
I'm not so sure this is true, although it very well could be true. Scheduled games get moved all the time, and it's extemely common to suggest a game date when the other team already has a game scheduled on that date.
Very true, but the email didn't say anything like that. Hill could have said: "we really want to try to work this out, but the only weeks we have available are already filled on your schedule. Would you be willing to try to move a game?"
FWIW, I've seen a bunch of these emails between schools, and I've almost never seen that type of discussion. It's always or almost always one school tossing out dates, and then the other school saying they'll try to move games (if the new opportunity is worth trying to move the other dates).
Those are not this situation. Everybody, especially Hill, knows how sensitive the issue is for many many fans. This cant be the first time they have discussed it out of the blue. 2019 and 2020 surely came up when they scheduled 2016-18, or since then. Holmoe has said many times he wants to play every year. He has said that that when the U wont commit, he cant wait for ever and has to fill up those dates with other teams. That is why to me Hill's email seems disingenuous to some extent. I just don't think we are trying to schedule them for 19 and 20, in part because we have said in the past we don't want to play it every year, and would be quite happy if it didn't work out. $0.02
Last edited by concerned; 02-25-2015 at 12:11 PM.
I am on board with the idea of rotating series with BYU and USU. The one part of this that I disagree with is that Utah can't do home and home with Utah State. I don't think it's realistic and would signal Utah struggling to leave behind its old G5 identity. Utah is P5 now and must act the part--if USU wants that game it needs to be in SLC almost every time. Heck, doesn't BYU have a 2-for-1 or 3-for-1 deal with USU? No way, Utah takes anything less.
Utah finished 2014 with the 11th toughest schedule in the country, despite having an OOC schedule against one of the worst Michigan teams in 100 years, a mediocre at best G5 team in Fresno St and Idaho St.
The PAC-12 is proving challenging enough, Utah simply doesn't need to upgrade it's OOC schedule.
you could just as easily conclude that Holmoe is being disingenuous. Holmoe already knows that November and October games are out of the question, and yet he is trying to weasel his way in there.
Whitt has stated on several occasions that he doesn't want the BYU game during conference play.
All of those schools you mentioned save Baylor had exactly what I'm looking for: One P5 opponent. Thanks for making my point for me.
FSU was ripped because the ACC was weak. It's non-conference schedule probably saved them.
We'll never know about Baylor, but we know its primary reason for missing the playoff that it could control for not getting in was its non-con sked.
This past year's non-con sked or next year's has never been debated. It's what we have in following years. Where's the Michigan after 2015 on our schedule?
Disagree. Our goal should be to win the South. Every year. I'll take a South crown (and the chance to play for more), one bowl year and three bowl-less years in every five as opposed to five years in which we go anywhere between 9-3 and 6-6.
Sure, and I'll take one national championship every decade in exchange for 6 years of famine. But it doesn't work like that, does it? We can say the goal is to win the south, but right now, to get to that goal, we need to climb a ladder.
In that case, I think we are all on the same page. Every Ute fan around wants to have one P5 opponent on the schedule each year. Thanks again to USC for shooting down the greatest scheduling agreement in the history of college football. BYU is not a P5 team, though, so P5 on the schedule is not really relevant to the BYU question.
Yes, but maybe Baylor loses to that P5 and is not in the discussion at all. It's a two-edged sword.We'll never know about Baylor, but we know its primary reason for missing the playoff that it could control for not getting in was its non-con sked.
a Michigan type OOC game isn't needed as long as the PAC-12 keeps 5-6 teams in the top 25 every year, and I don't see that changing. If the PAC-12 had an 8 game conference schedule then I could see adding a marque opponent.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote