BYU To Go Independent In Football And Join The West Coast Conference In Non-Football Sports
Three sources are reporting that BYU is leaving the Mountain West and will join the West Coast Conference with a possible announcement later today. Andy Katz of ESPN, Jay Drew of the Salt Lake Tribune, and Jon Wilmer of the San Jose Mercury News are reporting this:
The move, which takes effect for the 2011-12 season, changes the face of major college sports in the western third of the country -- weakening the Mountain West (BYU's current home) and strengthening the WCC, whose members include three Bay Area schools: Santa Clara, St. Mary's and USF.
The WCC does not carry all of BYU sports:
BYU has 12 sports that are offered by the WCC. It is unclear what will happen to its softball, swimming and diving and track and field teams because the WCC does not sponsor those sports.
I still feel this is a knee jerk reaction to what happened this summer, specifically regarding Utah leaving the Mountain West to join the Pac-10. They should have waited until December of 2011 to see if a BCS bid would be coming the leagues way, but now that is out the window with BYU leaving the Mountain West.
Again, I will not believe any of this until I see it, since the Denver Post looks to be wrong with a throng of other people, but this looks to be the real deal. Check back for a more detailed look of what this means for BYU and the Mountain West.
Follow Mountain West Connection via Twitter and Facebook for News Quick Hits and Random Nonsense.
154 comments
|
Add comment
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
If true...
BYU will be punished for its impatience. The MWC could’ve easily earned an automatic bid which could then be used, along with new markets, to get a much better TV deal…..revenue and exposure would then increase significantly.
Now? BYU may have a football program with history, but they’re not Notre Dame. I’m sure WAC and MWC schools are going to give them suuuuuch an easy time in scheduling too. This seems like a big step backwards.
If I’m the MWC, I consider trying to nab UTEP and Houston at the midnight hour. Very unlikely, but it should get some thought in those offices.
"Lord, beer me strength."
Why to people keep saying that about the auto bid
The MWC becoming an AQ-conference was anything but a sure thing. As far as scheduling, if you read the ESPN story it says that ESPN will actually help BYU schedule games since they’ll be playing so many of their games on their network. You realy think ESPN will pay BYU 4-6 million anually to show BYU playing 4 games against no name schools? I think BYU’s long term goal is to get into the Big-12(10) and playing on Versus was doing nothing for their exposure.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
It's not guaranteed
But getting the exposure of playing 4 games a year on ESPN will help more than staying with Versus.
As an aside, I think Thompson is one of the worst commissioners. I’m sure BYU would have stayed if he had been willing to make some concessions. Instead he called their hand and found out they weren’t bluffing.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
Agreed
The Big 12 looks comfortable with 10 plus I don’t see a lot of their bigwigs there looking to go out of their way to add travel costs to Utah any time soon.
"Lord, beer me strength."
Travel cost?
I’m not sure if you’ve looked at a map lately but Utah’s not that far from any of the Big 12(10) schools. They would add BYU and someone else to bring in the Utah TV market and to play a championship game again which would bring in a lot of revenue.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
Seeing as UT and OU hate conference championship games, I’m sure the Big 12 will rush to get a conference title game.
It’s not that far? Colorado and Nebraska are gone, so it’s not that close either.
Former SWC members SMU, Houston, Arkansas, and TCU have a better shot of a potential 12 move, but it won’t happen for years cause the 12 are happy at 10.
"Lord, beer me strength."
That's the thing.
Texas and Oklahoma own that conference. BYU and the other addition (???) will have to bring a lot more money for the Big 12 to overcome Texas and Oklahoma’s objections. Since they make $17mm per team with the new deal and BYU is slated to make about $4mm-$6mm as an independent, it doesn’t appear BYU is worth adding to the Big 12 if Mack and Bob don’t like playing the championship game. That may change in a few years, but right now BYU adds not enough to overcome the objections of Texas and Oklahoma.
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
The Big 12 has said repeatedly that if they expand it would be to enlarge their footprint
Adding Arkansas makes sense, but SMU, Houston, and TCU are all in Texas, and they already have 4 Texas schools. However, adding BYU and Arkansas would bring in two new TV marketts and thus more revenue.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
Yep
The Big XII will never add BYU. Nor do they want to expand beyond 10.
by VA Libertarian on Aug 31, 2010 10:12 PM PDT up reply actions
Thank you Nostradamus
I didint realize you had an in with the Big 12.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
Notre Dame will schedule BYU every year. The all new "Holy War"
As long as BYU gets a touchdown Joseph. Otherwise it is off.
by daedalus17 on Aug 31, 2010 4:12 PM PDT reply actions 3 recs
Jay Drew
From the SLC Trib called it a low blow when the Fort Worth Star mentioned it, but it is clever.
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 10:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Seems short sited
Missing how this helps BYU as an entire school. The WCC gives no advantage to their other sports and none to the sports that are not in the WCC. I don’t think going independent will go as easy as they think TV contract wise, I understand its huge religous following but missing where they capture the 20-30 male market. Unless they remake Rudy in Provo UT I don’t see them getting high ratings.
Wonder what Boise thinks off all these schools leaving? TCU,BYU,Utah, and Boise could go up against any other conferences top 4 schools, oh well.
Bring back Fum's Song!
They already have a TV deal in place with ESPN for 4 games a year
It’s rumored to be worth 4-6 million a year which is way more than the 1.3 million they made last year.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
Not exactly.
They’ve already discussed a TV deal with ESPN. I don’t know how far they’ve gone, but ESPN certainly hasn’t given them a final number. The $4-6 million is significantly more than was previously reported by various sources (several sources had ESPN at $2-$3 million, still more, but not much more). Obviously, that is still in negotiation. BYU’s 2010 football record just became a lot more important, as it may be the basis for increased or decreased amounts in the ESPN deal.
Personally, I wonder who plays BYU in October and November now that they don’t have the WAC willing to restructure the schedule to give BYU 4-6 guaranteed games.
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
by displacedute on Aug 31, 2010 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions
I would think if ESPN wants them
than the 2010 record wouldn’t factor too much in it. Obviously if they totally fell apart it would, but I think most people expect it to be a bit of a rebuilding year already. If BYU went 8-4 but showed a lot of room for improvement with more experience going into 2011, I don’t think that would hurt any tv negotiations.
Hawaii, Army, and Navy, Notre Dame
Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com) and one of the top Rockies writers at the Bleacher Report.
Seeing as most teams have schedules through 2016...
I really wonder who will play BYU in the near future.
"Lord, beer me strength."
Hawaii…Idaho….La. Tech
Actually I think that will be a huge issue. Schedule is a big part of why people buy tickets, and that’s still the number one source of any programs income.
Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com) and one of the top Rockies writers at the Bleacher Report.
the remaining WAC teams almost HAVE to play BYU
It’s the only way they’ll ever have the revenue to stay afloat. It means that BYU is going to be settling for some incredibly boring games, but that’s their problem.
by David Hooper on Aug 31, 2010 5:41 PM PDT up reply actions
Agreed
The WAC members will be desperate for games. The remaining WAC teams might be forced into independence until they have a league again.
There was a previous post on this blog that said Fresno and Nevada would still like to join the MWC in 2011. That would mean BYU would have the WAC minus schedule where needed.
Utah State will always be willing to schedule BYU. I bet that Utah and Utah State will be permanent games on the BYU schedule. I bet my Utes will have the Cougars back here. Except for 2011 that is.
is that still the case?
Why would the WAC want to play BYU.
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 5:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Short travel and reasonable money.
The WAC teams now have to play games to pay for their athletic departments. They don’t want to play BYU, I’m sure, but they may have to.
by David Hooper on Aug 31, 2010 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
Goodbye potential AQ status...
I am the BSU Guru. I know everything and anything about BSU, just ask me. Although I may need a minute…and an internet connection.
Maybe not
There is always this:
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/aug/31/mwc-c-usa-take-talks-next-level/
The Mountain West Conference plans to "take the conversation to the next level" with Conference USA on various issues affecting to the leagues, including access to the Bowl Championship Series in college football.
Houston and...
Houston and Idaho? Gives Boise a close team and they are looking better of late.
Bring back Fum's Song!
never, EVER, dUI
please no…NO NO NO
Why would the MWC stoop to that level.
Idaho may be looking better but to quote and admirable admiral: IT’S A TRAP!
"Speak softly and wear a loud shirt" - Kimo's Rules
So we can tap that lucrative Moscow television market? Because MWC schools need more help in recruiting Idaho talent? Idaho is historically awful, Boise State clearly isn’t planning on pushing for their inclusion (their athletic director doesn’t even want to play Idaho anymore) and they close up our chances of keeping our foot in the Utah market or West Texas.
by HawkeyedFrog on Aug 31, 2010 4:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Blame Utah
Had THEY stayed, then it was still reasonable for BYU to remain. Because the Utes bolted, BYU is essentially forced out of the MWC as a lame-duck mid-major conference.
You can't blame Utah for jumping to the Pac-10 where they would make 10+ more million bucks a year...
Mountain West Connection - The best site for MWC Sports.
UNLV is going all the way this year!
Then why blame BYU
for jumping ship to 2 or quadruple their earnings. It’s about money, but more than anything it’s about exposure. My point is that Utah left a much stronger MWC than BYU did. Because Utah left, BYU is essentially FORCED to move out just to give them room to improve their lot in the BCS bids even if they have to take 1 step back(going independent) to move two steps going forward(joing the Big 12 in a year or two).
Independence
Is always an option. BYU or any school would have jumped to go to a BCS league. The league was still on track to be a BCS league with BYU, and the Comcast-NBC U merger could have been huge.
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 10:18 PM PDT up reply actions
You're not getting it
The Big 12 will not add BYU in the next 10 years
Mountain West Connection - The best site for MWC Sports.
UNLV is going all the way this year!
There's a big difference between the two.
All 9 other MWC teams would have taken the PAC 10 invite. No other MWC team would have done what BYU did, and BYU certainly deserves some blame for the manner in which they went about it (basically trying to destroy the MWC by making replacing them impossible and trying to steal SDSU and UNLV to go with them, instead of just walking away and wishing everyone good luck)
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
I'm not sure you can say that no other team would have done what BYU did.
I think most teams would do anything they felt would better their situation (whether or not people agree that a move betters their situation is beside the point).
Also, while the move harms the MWC, I don’t think that was their motivation. The motivation was securing their own situation, not destroying another conference. One may have led to the other, but I think the motivation there is not the same thing.
And how do we know that offering SDSU and UNLV was BYU’s idea?
It may have not been their motivation
But they knew what they were doing, they knew it would harm the MWC and that’s the point.
Mountain West Connection - The best site for MWC Sports.
UNLV is going all the way this year!
Holly, I don't know if it was their idea, but they signed off on it.
They knew exactly what they were doing and what it would do to the MWC, and they did it anyway. Did they WANT to destroy the MWC? I don’t think so. Did they give any concern whatsoever to destroying the MWC? It doesn’t appear they did, and they knew exactly what their plan would potentially do to the MWC. Craig outsmarted them by snagging Fresno and Nevada, but if BYU had gotten what they wanted the MWC would be unlikely to exist, as SDSU, UNLV and BSU would all likely be in the WAC right now (leaving the MWC with 5 teams at the end of 2010).
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
More of this "blame Utah" shit?!
You’re a broken record. I already explained to you why Utah isn’t at fault in a previous thread. Anyway, once again, here’s the difference: Utah didn’t willfully and knowingly destroy one conference and damage another on its way out the door. But you’re all about blame, so why stop at Utah? Why not blame the Pac for inviting them? Or the TV networks for making gobs of cash off of amateur athletes and enticing the conferences into ludicrous deals? Or the BCS for the unfair, money-fueled system? Or how about blaming BYU whose “national championship” helped create the BCS? Where does it end? How far back do you want this blame to go?
by FeloniousMonk on Aug 31, 2010 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
EXCELLENT!!!
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions
BYU really does want to prove
that they are the Notre Dame of the West.
misplaced ego is not a good thing
Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com) and one of the top Rockies writers at the Bleacher Report.
Not true
They want to quadruple their TV revenue and play 4 times a year on ESPN which will only help their recruiting.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
if it was really about that
they could have come to a deal with the MWC to have uneven revenue sharing for TV revenue, just like the Big 12 has.
Utah left…and BYU got jealous, and had to make a statement too.
Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com) and one of the top Rockies writers at the Bleacher Report.
They tried
But commissioner Thompson said he woudn’t make any special deals to keep teams in the conference. Plus, the addition of Fresno ST and Nevada means their already meager TV revenue of 1.3 million anually would have to be split with 2 more schools.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
How do we know they didn't investigate that avenue and decided the MWC would never do that?
Also, I’m pretty hesitant to assign motivation before hearing from them. Certainly the Utah move hurt, but I think people are sort of missing the exposure factor for the religious reasons. Vai Sikahema (former BYU player) wrote a column about this a couple weeks ago, and I found this interesting:
Not long after the sports programs at Ricks College were banned a decade ago, a couple members of the Board of Trustees met with the Athletic Dept staff at BYU to discuss BYU’s mission and answer questions and concerns. Naturally, someone asked if BYU Sports was also in danger of going the way of the Dodo bird. I’m told the answer was, and I’m paraphrasing, “BYU sports is second only to the efforts of our young men and women’s efforts as missionaries in attracting interest to the Church. If that changes, then we’ll reconsider if it’s worth having.”
All of us who ever pulled on the silks for BYU knows that. It was communicated to us at every turn.
BYU’s discontent with its meager portion of a TV contract that it clearly is the sole breadwinner for is not about money.
It’s about exposure.
I think the issues that he refers to here are a bigger part of it than some are giving credit for. Whether this is the right move to accomplish that remains to be seen, granted, but I do think this is a big factor.
Exposure to the religious/faith part of the equation is what I’m talking about when they think they are the Notre Dame of the West, though put much nicer and tactfully than saying “Notre Dame of the West”
Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com) and one of the top Rockies writers at the Bleacher Report.
Okay, but to say that implies you think they think they're already there.
I’m saying that’s what they’re aiming for, not that think they’re anywhere close to that now.
And I think when most people go to the “NotreDame of the West” thing they’re mostly referring to the religiously affiliated independent who has a huge fan base and tons of football history. To me that usually is more about football with religion (and particularly any religious goals) only being tangential.
agreed
This will last a max of 5 years.
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Will Air Force follow?
cause a 10 game conference, gives them 9 games. with annual games with Army and Navy, that only leaves them one open Non-Conference game a year.
If the MWC doesn’t add 2 teams to get to 12 AF maybe forced to leave…
Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com) and one of the top Rockies writers at the Bleacher Report.
2 non-conference games
sorry been a long day dealing with problems other people are causing.
Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com) and one of the top Rockies writers at the Bleacher Report.
damn I was right the first time
really…long day with no delete button
Colorado Rockies correspondent at My Team Rivals (www.mtrmedia.com/rockies) and my own site Rockies Reporter (www.rockiesreporter.wordpress.com) and one of the top Rockies writers at the Bleacher Report.
The conference has plenty of time to figure that out.
Since Fresno and Nevada won’t be in until 2012, the MWC has until Sep. 1 of next year to get two more teams if they want to reach 12 in 2012. But 2011 is already set.
And even if the MWC has to spend a year or two with an 8-game schedule for a 10-team conference, it’s alright. It’s certainly not optimal, as the Big 10 has shown, but it’s doable for the short term. There’s no real reason the conference or any of its members to get in a panic over this.
And I doubt that USAFA leaves unless they have to; it’s so much easier to have your schedule spelled out for you – especially in other sports.
by David Hooper on Aug 31, 2010 5:40 PM PDT up reply actions
10 teams and an 8 game schedule wasn't all that bad
For the Big Ten or the Pac 10 (remember that they only went to a 9 game schedule after 12 regular season games were always allowed). It was 11 teams and an 8 game schedule that was problematic, because it made it much more likely you’d have a tie for the conference title between teams that didn’t play.
Link to Andy Katz’s story since it’s not in the article. Obviously he’s more focused on the basketball aspect.
Still not official yet...
BYU has to make it official before the deadline.
Mountain West Connection - The best site for MWC Sports.
UNLV is going all the way this year!
They will.
They’re stretching the drama out on this one.
by David Hooper on Aug 31, 2010 5:44 PM PDT up reply actions
its done
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Good then.
Onward and upward. The MWC still has TCU and BSU, which was basically TCU and Utah in BCS value. Fresno and Nevada don’t really hurt things, and since BYU wasn’t as much of a contributor as Utah, TCU, or Utah, their loss isn’t as bad as it could have been.
USAFA is looking good for the long term, and both CSU and Wyoming are quite optimistic about their futures. SDSU has the potential to move upward in a hurry as well. It may be a bit late for AQ considerations, but the MWC looks to be a league that will fill that ‘middle of the conference’ gap they’ve had for a while.
by David Hooper on Aug 31, 2010 5:57 PM PDT up reply actions
Here's what's funny
On the one hand people say “Good riddance” and on the other they act all pissed. If this was Wyoming or New Mexico leaving, no one would care.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
Exactly...
BYU did something worse then New Mexico or Wyoming could do because they were the key to AQ Status… If they could have stayed in the MWC for just a couple more days I would have been totally fine.
Mountain West Connection - The best site for MWC Sports.
UNLV is going all the way this year!
Why are you holding BYU to this standard
yet dismiss that same line of logic towards Utah? There seems to be a double standard here for BYU. What’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.
Because Utah didn't completely destroy the MWC
The MWC still had a better than 50% chance of gaining the AQ after losing Utah. But by BYU leaving, they destroyed the conference.
Mountain West Connection - The best site for MWC Sports.
UNLV is going all the way this year!
How do you figure.
Had utah held tight. the MWC would be stronger than all but 3 other conferences. Having Utah, BYU, BSU, and TCU is the conference. Thats FOUR perenniel top 25 teams year in and year out.
And your logic is wrong. Utah DID destroy the MWC because their departure took BOTH Utah teams OUT of the MWC both directly and indirectly. BYU manuever has a lot to do with finances and exposure, things they could have endured a couple more years had Utah maintained the course and allowed the addition of BSU bring the MWC to AQ status. With the Utah departure, that just isn’t a reality anymore.
Why you’re faulting BYU to moving onto greener pastures(more $$$ and more exposures) but defending Utah move to the pac-10 (more $$$) is a very solid double standard on your part.
I really don't see the giant leap in cash for BYU
And exposure… maybe, but my issue is it wasn’t Utah’s fault BYU left. Utah still made sure the door was open after they left so that they wouldn’t destroy the MWC while furthering their school. BYU won’t get nearly the jump in cash that Utah will and exposure will jump a bit – no one is going to watch BYU vs. Army… They could have stayed for a couple more days and not destroyed a conference… Instead they just had to leave right now and screw the MWC.
Mountain West Connection - The best site for MWC Sports.
UNLV is going all the way this year!
Maybe you should worry about making your own program better
Instead of relying on BYU to bring you up. If UNLV was up there with BYU, TCU, and Boise St, maybe they would have stayed.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
What?
I know UNLV is a bottom feeder, but that has nothing to do with becoming a BCS league… And UNLV has nothing to do with the discussion. Sure let’s take shots at the bottom feeders, and blame them for BYU leaving…
/shoots a funny look at urnext
Mountain West Connection - The best site for MWC Sports.
UNLV is going all the way this year!
by rebelfan1 on Aug 31, 2010 8:48 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I wasn't trying to put you down
And I’m not blaming UNLV. But I don’t think BYU is under any obligation to the MWC. They have to do what they think is in their own best interests. Plus, a lot of people here are upset BYU’s leaving, but then welcome Fresno and Nevada with open arms. The difference is that BYU is hurting the MWC while Fresno and Nevada are hurting the WAC and helping the MWC.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
BYU was under the obligation of good faith and fair dealing, just like any contract participant.
Looking out for their own best interests is fine, but there comes a point where they’re not just doing that, but have gone beyond that point and are actively destroying other relationships. It’s bad faith, and in my (albeit Ute-centric) opinion, BYU crossed that line when they pushed for the buyout and tried to recruit SDSU and UNLV to come with them.
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
What?
I’ve never read anywhere that they tried to bring SDSU and UNLV. But again, they were looking out for their non-football teams. They weren’t trying to screw over the MWC and it’s all irrelevant anyways since the only way BYU hurt the MWC was by leaving.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
the money
utah is going from 1.5 mil to 15 million. A much bigger jump from 1 to 6 million. I dont care that BYU left to make their situation better, but the way they did it is disturbing.
I dont see the harm in them waiting, but Utah did not have the choice to tell the Pac-10 ‘nope we are good we will call you in 2011 if things change’
AGain the option to go Indy is always there, it is not always an option to go to a BCS league.
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 10:22 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
What?
Since when is BYU under obligation to look out for the best interests of the MWC? It’s disturbing because they’re only quadrupeling their money instead of multiplying it by 10 like Utah?
And I’m not sure BYU could have waited. Boise St has become the darling of ESPN with so many of their games being aired there, but now they’re leaving and are stuck in obscurity on Versus. ESPN needs to replace those games for the 2011 season. BYU fit the bill of what they were looking for. Usually TV deals are for more than just 1 year. If they stayed one more year and the MWC didn’t become an AQ-conference, meanwhile ESPN makes a deal with someone else like Navy, what options do they have then? The chance was there and they took it, just like Utah. I really don’t get these mental gymnastics so many U fans are engaging in.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
BYU has an obligation not to screw over the MWC.
As I mentioned above, there’s a difference between doing what’s best for you and actively screwing over your business partners. BYU crossed that line.
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
But they weren't actively trying to screw them over
They were just trying to make sure their non-football teams had a home. But that all doesn’t matter since in the end the only way BYU hurt the MWC was by not playing in it anymore. Which is the exact same way Utah hurt the MWC.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
That's true, but I can't believe you don't see the difference between Utah announcing they're leaving . . .
. . . and BYU trying to leave while simultaneously trying to make it impossible for the MWC to replace them and trying to cause the MWC to fall apart.
You’re right, in the end they FAILED to destroy the MWC, but that was one of the consequences they knew was coming if they succeeded in sealing the WAC.
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
Can someone tell me what BYU is even playing football for anymore?
They can’t win a conference championship. They don’t have the super-sweet deal Notre Dame has with the BCS. So what is BYU playing for?
"Lord, beer me strength."
Televangelism.
That’s the only way I can put it in one single word. They want to broadcast their church adverts to a broader audience, and they can do that via their TV network, and possibly via an ESPN deal if they do indeed have one.
This was not a move made for the football players at all. I don’t know what their motivation is either, outside of the ‘church ambassador’ role.
by David Hooper on Aug 31, 2010 6:37 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
You've Got It Hooper
Auto-bids were not a motivating factor for the LDS church. They’re looking for a way to advertise their church to a wider audience than Versus and The Mtn. could produce. An auto-bid only has an effect on one game of the year. Getting ESPN and their own network lasts all season long.
Fear the Frog!
as Randy Moss says
’Straight Cash homey!
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 7:52 PM PDT up reply actions
What are Army and Navy playing for?
BYU has a better deal than Navy but Navy still seems to put a good team out there every year. This idea that the only motivation for playing is for the conference championship is over blown. I played Rugby for BYU and we didn’t have a conference championship to play for and I still wanted to beat the snot out of whoever we played against. Anyone who’s played sports knows the desire to win burns strong no matter the situation.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
They play for
The Commander in Chiefs trophy
"Football is a violent game played by violent people, so put a smile on your face, murder in your heart and lets go kick these f***kers in the mouth" -Dick Bumpas, TCU Defensive Coordinator
So 2 of their games have meaning
What about the other 10? They could go 2-10 and still win the trophy.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
Pride, guy. Pride.
That and fun. We’re talking about the military here. Service academies do everything for honor, duty and pride. They may not have the best athletes, but that doesn’t stop them from competing and doing the most with what they have. Remember that most of the players at a service academy aren’t playing for a shot at the NFL, they’ve already decided on a career path. Also, I’ll thank you to not compare BYU to any service academy.
by FeloniousMonk on Aug 31, 2010 10:09 PM PDT up reply actions
At the service academies
A lot of them are playing for fitness also. It’s required of cadets to play a sport.
by VA Libertarian on Aug 31, 2010 10:19 PM PDT up reply actions
You guys are making all my points for me
I was responding to someone that said BYU will have nothing to play for without a conference championship, but as we can see, there’s plenty to play for. That was my point and I apreciate everyone who made it for me even if you didn’t realize it at the time. And I’ll compair BYU’s football players with any sevice acadamy’s players all day long. An athlete is an athlete no weather they’re in the military or not.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
Except
That Navy and Army aren’t exactly national powerhouses.
Yes, Navy does well, but I’m assuming that BYU wants to do better and be more relevant than the Midshipmen.
by VA Libertarian on Sep 1, 2010 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions
bowl game
top 25 rankings stuff like that. BYU has no conference titles to tell recruits about and they will slowly lose recruits to Utah since they have the option to go to the Rose Bowl every year, conference titles, and can have a similar lifestyle at BYU.
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 10:23 PM PDT up reply actions
If you really played rugby at BYU
Then you’d have the sense to say “we played to make the National Round of 16 and win a national championship.” You had all sorts of shit to play for.
In rugby there are LAU championships, TU championships, Nationals, etc.
You had plenty to play for.
The football team does not.
by VA Libertarian on Aug 31, 2010 10:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Not when I was there
We never whent to the playoffs since they had games on Sunday. Finaly our coach, his last name was Smyth, decided to enter the playoffs and just forfeit when they finaly had to play on Sunday. But all that was after I left. And since you seem to doubt I’m telling the truth, I’ll tell you Kimbal Kjar and Henry Bloomfield were probably two of the best players I played with, both of whom went on to play with the Eagles.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
Really?
You didn’t even have an LAU championship to play for? I would assume the Utah Rugby Union didn’t schedule Sunday matches, but I could be wrong.
Fair point on the national playoffs – I suppose I didn’t think about the Sunday issue, since all the playoffs are Friday/Saturday nowadays. I do recall the BYU women getting screwed over 2 years ago or so, however, so I suppose you’re certainly correct.
Nevertheless, I know a lot of teams that have their LAU tournament as the biggest or second-biggest date on the calendar (it was actually a troublesome thing for my school, because it was a huge deal for all the other teams in our union, but not us since we were D1).
by VA Libertarian on Sep 1, 2010 10:48 AM PDT up reply actions
They'll still have bowl games to shoot for.
Despite the BCS, that should still be a worthwhile goal. A bowl game is a fantastic trip and a fun time for them if they allow it to be.
by David Hooper on Aug 31, 2010 10:16 PM PDT up reply actions
I think there'll be a few at-large spots opening up now that the WAC has been torn to shreds.
by David Hooper on Aug 31, 2010 10:23 PM PDT up reply actions
True. There are 35 bowl games now, if I counted correctly.
Which means 70 of 120 teams will be needed to fill all the bowls. There will be a year coming soon where there aren’t enough 6-6 or better teams to fill all those bowls. As long as BYU goes 7-5 they’ll get a bowl bid.
Now, the odds are pretty good that the bid will be to Vegas-level or lower, but regardless, BYU is going bowling when they hit 7 wins.
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
by displacedute on Sep 1, 2010 10:00 AM PDT up reply actions
It could be a Holiday Bowl.
BYU has been to 11 of those.
BCS Evolution -- Punctuating the Equilibrium - twitter
Yes, but none in the past decade.
You think the Holiday bowl is giving up its Big 12 or PAC 12 ties to get BYU? I don’t.
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
The last 5 years, here are the big 12 #5 teams
These are post bowl game, so I’m not sure how they were prior to the bowl games)
2005: Colorado (7-5)
2006: TTech (8-5), Missouri (8-5), KSU (7-6)
2007: TTech (9-4, ranked #22), OSU (7-6), aTm (7-6)
2008: OSU (9-4, ranked #16), Nebraska (9-4)
2009: Oklahoma (8-5)
I’d say that most years that’s been better than BYU.
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
true
Will the WAC let them in on their bowl deals or the MWC?
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 10:24 PM PDT up reply actions
This will end in spectacular failure
I will enjoy watching it burn. Misplaced pride never ends well.
--Dave
Addicted to Quack, your friendly, neighborhood Oregon Ducks blog
by David Piper on Aug 31, 2010 6:31 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
BYU will be back in a league in five years
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 7:53 PM PDT up reply actions
Probably
This is more a means to an ends path for BYU. This gives them control over their own destiny. The MWC is no longer the rate-limiting obstacle to what they may become. Sure it could back-fire, but I highly doubt it. BYU’s football history is excellent. They’re be competitive and likely wind up in a better situation in 2-3 years than where the MWC was.
How?
If they can schedule top flight schools in late October and November then Ill buy it.
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 10:24 PM PDT up reply actions
BYU's only future option is back in the MWC.
BYU better pray the MWC gets worse, because otherwise if the independent thing backfires they’ll be going back to the MWC with their tail between their legs and no new concessions from the MWC.
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
by displacedute on Sep 1, 2010 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions
And thinking about Utah,
will BYU insist on keeping the rivalry game going, and will Utah be interested?
As a Ute fan, I'm torn on this rivalry issue.
I used to despise BYU. I mean, downright hate and loathe that team, but something’s changed over the past few years… or, rather, has been changing over the past two decades. It’s like Utah’s success on the field has made that one game less important to me personally.
Used to be a time when it seemed like all Utah played for was to beat BYU. I hated that. I hated the fact that we (Utah fans) elevated the TDS into such an important role. I wanted Utah to be playing for bigger stakes, for something more than just beating a rival. Over the past two decades I’ve watched that happen. Utah now has more important things on its agenda. Bigger goals, shinier rings. I haven’t given a disproportionate shit about BYU in a long while now. I want Utah to beat them, just like I want them to beat every team they face, but I no longer feel bad about it if they don’t beat them. It ain’t the be all, end all any more. I’ve actually looked forward more to when the Utes play TCU than I have the BYU game. And now I’m definitely more excited about games with USC, Oregon, UCLA, Cal and even CU.
Part of me couldn’t care less if Utah never played BYU again. Contrary to popular opinion, the rivalry hasn’t gotten uglier recently. It’s always been ugly and was really terrifyingly witch-ass ugly during the years of BYU dominance. Back then “classy” wasn’t in any zoob’s vocabulary. Another part of me also remembers back when the rivalry meant “everything” and that part wants it to continue, but even that part acknowledges that the rivalry has changed and it ain’t what it once was.
Bottomline, Utah has no real reason to play BYU anymore and, while it would be nice to see it continue, I also wouldn’t mind if it just went away.
by FeloniousMonk on Aug 31, 2010 7:20 PM PDT up reply actions
I think BYU needs the game far more than Utah does.
Utah has plenty to play for within conference, and they won’t have any trouble filling out the nonconference slate. In a sense, not having to play BYU would give them more flexibility. They could still schedule the occasional matchup if they wanted, but it wouldn’t be a requirement by any means.
But BYU will need to schedule a few marquis games if they want a respectable SoS and if they want exposure. Nobody’s going to flip to BYU-TV to see 12 games of Hawaii, Idaho, etc.
We’ll see. It’s an interesting situation for them.
by David Hooper on Aug 31, 2010 7:28 PM PDT up reply actions
The game's not going anywhere
Both Utah and BYU play Utah St every year even though the Aggies haven’t had a good team for some time. No matter who benefits more from the game, it will still be played every year.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
Agreed
It is a big revenue game for both teams with no travel costs.
I do think it will help BYU a lot more than Utah though. BYU needs it now, Utah doesn’t. But it looks like it will continue.
Utah already broke the series with Utah State
Does Utah really need to carry an in state rival anymore?
BCS Evolution -- Punctuating the Equilibrium - twitter
Does anyone need to carry and in state rival?
If you really think BYU and Utah will stop playing each other every year, you’re deluding yourself.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
That is one thing I agree on with you...
Mountain West Connection - The best site for MWC Sports.
UNLV is going all the way this year!
One thing about this series
It has never really been close. One team or the other tends to have dominance. The last decade of close games has been an exception.
Anyone want to lay odds on where the pendulum is headed now?
BCS Evolution -- Punctuating the Equilibrium - twitter
Utah
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 10:25 PM PDT up reply actions
I love that Utah thinks they're going to be so much better now.
Being in the Pac10 will bring in more money so Utah will be able to finaly improve their facilities so they’re on par with BYU, but I don’t think it will give them the huge edge in recruiting that people think. Just look at UL. They had a top 25 team for several years, jumped to the Big East, and now they stink. Only time will tell what all this changing will mean.
Don't trust this guy. He lies.
How would recruiting NOT improve with a move to the P10? . I don’t believe that 5 star recruits are gonna instantly come knocking come February but playing teams like Oregon, UCLA and USC trumps the prestige of going to Laramie, Fort Collins and Vegas. It will make a difference but just how much is anyone’s guess.
Also, there is a bit of a difference between the Pac-10 and the Big East. We both know the BE and the ACC have been getting heat for being AQ conferences lately when the MWC has been producing good teams as well. No doubt ,Utah will have to adjust to a P-10 schedule but with improvements to recruiting and facility upgrades, it will be a matter of time before we compete on their level.
If all you BYU fans believe that independence will be the best thing that ever happened to you why can’t we get excited about someday playing in the Rose Bowl?
When Louisville jumped to the Big East, they lost their genius head coach in Bobby Petrino
That’s why they now suck, not cause they jumped to the Big East.
Mountain West Connection - The best site for MWC Sports.
UNLV is going all the way this year!
Utah's facilities are already "on par" with BYU.
That’s not a concern. Utah’s recruiting is likely to improve dramatically. By most measures Utah, BYU and TCU have been the #1, #2 and #3 non-AQ teams (in some order) over the past 5 years. But even then, most years they have trouble breaking into the top 40 and are behind schools like Arizona, UW and Oregon State. That won’t be the case for Utah anymore.
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
Remember Max Hall?
http://www.mwcconnection.com/2009/11/28/1177464/audio-byu-qb-max-hall-calls
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 10:27 PM PDT up reply actions
I've never understood the "zoob" insult.
I’m pretty sure I even saw an explanation once, but have since forgotten. So clearly it didn’t strike a nerve.
It mostly only applies to the aggressively arrogant, lost-in-the-fog-of-self-delusion BYU fan,
which is something that you are not, so that explains that. :) BTW, it’s not necessarily an insult, more a descriptive term.
by FeloniousMonk on Aug 31, 2010 10:43 PM PDT up reply actions
And the explanation is based on BYU being like a zoo.
From utefans.net:
ZOOB: Slang term for a BYU student/athlete/fan. (Traditional Saying: “The only REAL institution south of the U is the zoo.”) Legend has it the term came about because BYU is like a Zoo, whose inmates roam the grounds seeking mates, thus people associated with it are Zoobies. Also, if you live in a Zoo, your reality is only perceived by yourself, not to anyone else who sees you. The Lions in the Savannah display might think they are in Africa, but everyone else knows they are in the Zoo.
Everyone hates a pink-shirt-wearing communist.
by displacedute on Sep 1, 2010 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions
But so fitting for so many BYU students/fans.
by FeloniousMonk on Sep 1, 2010 2:35 PM PDT up reply actions
I don't get this belief in BYU's recruiting bump
Why do people believe 4 games on ESPN will help? Isn’t anybody familiar with BYU? No drinking, no dancing, no smoking, no girls. How many (non-Mormon) 18 yr olds want to sign up for that?
But because they’re on ESPN four times a year (BYU vs Army, hooray!) it means prospects are going to sign up for four years in Provo?!! That’s crazy. You know what else is on ESPN all the time? Bass fishing! Are a lot of 18 yr olds signing up for that? No!
Pretty ignorant comments.
BYU has been a competitive top 25 teams for decades now with their same standards holding true during all that time. So using that as an excuse against them is well, illogical.
I didn't say the standards weren't successful
I said that those standards won’t suddenly appear better because they school is on ESPN. People seem to think that BYU’s recruiting will improve if they’re on TV. That’s the entire point behind this move to independence, right?
Kids know what they’re getting in Provo now, just like they knew what they were getting 40 years ago.
National broadcast games with Utah State, Utah, Army and Wake Forest won’t suddenly make it all better.
The standards don't go away
but you’re wrong if you think being on national tv doesn’t help recruiting.
Sure, they’ll still only be able to recruit certain athletes. That’s never going to change. But maybe they’d get a few more of those athletes that might have otherwise chosen to go elsewhere.
I don’t think any of us can say for sure what will happen. But I think the standards are a non-issue, here.
I think they mean
It wont improve their recruiting, but said in a round about way.
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 10:28 PM PDT up reply actions
No dancing? Huh.
Guess I was dreaming all those dances I went to.
Also, BYU only recruits kids that know the rules and are willing to live by them. Contrary to popular belief, not every single 18-year-old cares about that stuff.
Not every 18 year old does
But the 4-5 star recruits normally do unless they are LDS.
Mountain West Connection - The best site for MWC Sports.
UNLV is going all the way this year!
Michael Loyd Jr.
Mountain West Connection The best site for MWC sports!
by Jeremy Mauss on Aug 31, 2010 10:29 PM PDT up reply actions

by 















