Thoughts about Utah?

[Freak]

Originally posted by JohnsonCityVol@Nov 22, 2004 9:44 PM
If every undefeated team should be in the BCS, then why not Harvard?

Harvard is undefeated? :blink:

 

[Vols4life]

Originally posted by _volfan_@Nov 22, 2004 9:11 PM
3 years ago, it was MARSHALL.

Last year, and the year before, it was Fresno St.

This year, it's Utah.

When are some of these folks gonna realize that Mid Majors are "MID" for a reason!

The new guy speaks great knowledge!!!! :rocks: :rocks:

 

[Vols4life]

Originally posted by UTVOLFAN@Nov 22, 2004 9:35 PM
they deserve nothing....its UTAH!!!!!


vs Texas A&M
at Arizona
at Utah State
vs Air Force
at New Mexico
vs North Carolina
vs UNLV
at San Diego State
vs Colorado State
at Wyoming
vs BYU

If we had that schedule we would be undefeated every year

I totally agree!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Vols4life]

Originally posted by vol_freak+Nov 22, 2004 9:53 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vol_freak @ Nov 22, 2004 9:53 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-JohnsonCityVol@Nov 22, 2004 9:44 PM
If every undefeated team should be in the BCS, then why not Harvard?

Harvard is undefeated? :blink: [/quote]
Yep they really are undefeated&#33;

 

[_volfan_]

Originally posted by Vols4life+Nov 22, 2004 9:56 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Vols4life @ Nov 22, 2004 9:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-_volfan_@Nov 22, 2004 9:11 PM
3 years ago, it was MARSHALL.

Last year, and the year before, it was Fresno St.

This year, it&#39;s Utah.

When are some of these folks gonna realize that Mid Majors are "MID" for a reason&#33;

The new guy speaks great knowledge&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33; :rocks: :rocks: [/quote]
Yes. I do use my mind some. but I have to tell you that you misspelled Nowledge with a "K"

 

[_volfan_]

Well, Harvard is Div 1-AA. They have a playoff to settle things. These mid majors like Utah are over glorified div 1-AA teams.

 

[allvol]

Considering Utah strength of schedule, which is 117th toughest out of 117 teams................NO WAY&#33; It is no wonder that they are undefeated. I guess if you run up the score on Texas A&M, Utah St, Air Force, UNC, UNLV, San Diego St, Colorado St, Wyoming and BYU, then you should get a BCS bid huh? In all fairness, they are a pretty good team I guess. I will just have to wait and see if they ever play somebody&#33;

According to the Strength of Schedule (SOS) formula previously used by the BCS, Utah&#39;s SOS is 71. A few more facts. Tennessee scheduled UNLV too. BYU beat Notre Dame. Wyoming beat Ole Miss. Alabama played Utah State. You left off North Carolina (which beat Miami). Michigan played San Diego State.


I don&#39;t think Boise State has played a tough schedule at all... therefore should not be considered for a BCS bid. However, Utah has schedule non-conference opponents Texas A&M, North Carolina and Arizona from the BigXII, ACC, and Pac10 respectively. I think they have done what would be required for a mid-major conference team to get into the BCS. And you know, I would really like to see them compete in the BCS just to see if they are really that good.

 

[Vols4life]

Originally posted by allvol@Nov 22, 2004 10:41 PM
I think they have done what would be required for a mid-major conference team to get into the BCS. And you know, I would really like to see them compete in the BCS just to see if they are really that good.

Well crap if they get in they are going to play the Big East Champion either Boston College or West Virginia&#33;&#33; I hope its West Virginia becuase if its BC I dont think anybody would watch that game :blink:

 

[milohimself]

Utah has been getting a lot of attention, so I think the Utes could draw ratings just so people could see if they are the real deal. Out with the Big Least, in with the Mountain West&#33;

 

[_volfan_]

What if people find out the utah&#39;s of College football arent all their cracked up to be. I mean, what if they faced a Oklohoma in the fiesta, or a Tennessee in the Sugar? Is that a matchup we&#39;d want to see?

I think its a waste to give a Mid Major a slot in the BCS bowl picture. There is a verified good team somewhere being left out.

But then, we can combine this post with a few others on here. The ones that bash UT for not scoring 50 points a game, yet hold Utah on a pedestal for beating BYU by 30.

 

[allvol]

With Tennessee&#39;s pass defense.... I think Utah would give the Vols all they want.

The point that I think most are missing is what if Utah is really good enough to contend for a national title? There should be a system in-place that allows them to have a chance. Otherwise, a playoff is not needed... just use the same old polls and BCS BS to decide the national champion.... and only the "big" schools can be invited.

If Utah and Boise State finish in the top 6.... both are guaranteed a spot in the BCS. The Rose Bowl would be Utah vs Michigan.

 

[Vols4life]

Originally posted by _volfan_@Nov 22, 2004 10:55 PM
What if people find out the utah&#39;s of College football arent all their cracked up to be. I mean, what if they faced a Oklohoma in the fiesta, or a Tennessee in the Sugar? Is that a matchup we&#39;d want to see?

I think its a waste to give a Mid Major a slot in the BCS bowl picture. There is a verified good team somewhere being left out.

But then, we can combine this post with a few others on here. The ones that bash UT for not scoring 50 points a game, yet hold Utah on a pedestal for beating BYU by 30.

Yep you are right Texas will be left out again and will head to the Holiday bowl for the 2nd year in a row&#33;&#33; Now tell me that aint right freakin Texas sitting at #5 wont get to play in a BCS bowl unreal&#33;&#33; But yet the Utes of Utah will get in come on now&#33; :banghead: :banghead:

 

[milohimself]

That&#39;s just the thing -- As well as some bigger, better teams (most notable of which is no. 22 Texas A&M), Utah has scheduled in some very tough opponnents, and still managed to dominate like any of the top 5 teams should.

I&#39;ll focus on the Texas A&M victory for a moment. The final score was 41-21, Utah. That margin of victory is 13 points larger than that of Oklahoma&#39;s victory over A&M. The Utes looked more impressive than Oklahoma against a common opponent. That&#39;s pretty convincing to me, not to mention a 46-16 spanking of a 6-5 North Carolina who managed to upset Miami.

If you don&#39;t give teams like Utah a chance to play in BCS games, then you might as well watch USC vs. Oklahoma for the national title year in and year out.

 

[volinbham]

It&#39;s an interesting argument - Utah has played a relatively weak (but 71st is by no means the weakest) schedule. Yet, they&#39;ve won big consistently. As AllVol pointed out, their non-conference schedule is all BCS conferences. Had they had an opportunity to play a stronger opponent, they may have won those big as well.

I say, give them a shot. After the first 4 teams, there&#39;s a drop-off - Would you argue that Georgia or Miami or Boise St. are more deserving? If Utah was in the SEC and played a weak non-conf (all mid-majors) and went 9-2 would that be enough? That&#39;s where UGA and Miami sit.

The worst part of the bowl system for me is the &#036;&#036; aspect. The bowls don&#39;t reward the best teams, they reward the best fans. NIU went 10-2 last year with wins over Alabama (SEC), Maryland (ACC) and Iowa St. (Big12) all on the road. They might have won more against the BCS conferences but those are the three they got to play. The MAC was strong last year. NIU received NO BOWL BID because they did not have a history of fan support. On the otherhand, numerous 6-5 teams from BCS conferences received bowl bids. I guarantee NIU was a top 25 team.

Give Utah the shot, it&#39;s not like they are keeping out a more deserving team (with the possible exception of Louisville but they are another mid-major so there you go)

 

[milohimself]

We&#39;ll see how Louisville does next year.

 

[volinbham]

Originally posted by afanalso@Nov 22, 2004 12:26 PM
I think they should NOT get A BCS Bowl game. Maybe it will force some of these schools to beef up there schedule.

How can they beef up their schedule? The BCS conferences pick one decent non-conference team and some sure wins. Utah did play all its non-conference from BCS conferences and given their record this year, how likely is it that they will be offered a game next year? It&#39;s a no-win for the BCS schools since a loss comes against a lower conference and a win doesn&#39;t do much more for you than beating a crap team from the same conference. If I&#39;m an SEC coach, I&#39;m not putting Utah on the schedule unless I don&#39;t have a choice - give me LaTech, UNLV any day. With the exception of maybe one premier non-conference game for recruiting purposes, non-conference games are not supposed to be a major challenge.

The mid-majors are basically screwed in SOS. So what if one per year gets a shot at the big-time -- they have to be undefeated to get that shot when 2 - loss teams from BCS conferences get the same shot.

 

[_volfan_]

This whole arguement is strong evidence that this needs to be settled on the field.

You got about 55 AP writers and 60 HBC&#39;s voting on how teams should be ranked. Each of those 115 people have 115 ideas on what a "good" team is.

Add to that, the 7 people who wrote the computer programs that decide the other part of the BCS rankings. They have 7 other opinions on how to award or punish teams, based on a plethoria of standards.

So the BCS is comprosed of 122 "opinions".

What would shut everybody up is a playoff. if Utah runs the table in an 8 team playoff, then I will be the first to hail them TRUE NATIONAL CHAMPIONS.

I just dont think they are that good. But without a playoff, we will never know.

 

[volinbham]

The playoff would settle it but running the table would be tough for any team.

Not that you are saying it but I&#39;m not arguing that Utah have a shot at the National Championship game - rather, one of the 8 spots in a BCS bowl. Again, if you look at the top 10 in the BCS - you have Boise St, Georgia, Miami and Louisville all behind Utah - would you argue any of those is more deserving than an undefeated team that has won impressively consistently? That&#39;s all I&#39;m saying.

Not to keep bringing this up but look at UGA in a position for an at large bid (unlikely). We are even with them in the computer polls but the huge gap in human polls has them at 8 in the BCS while we are at 15. As VolFreak and I briefly discussed, it&#39;s conceivable that we could win the SEC and still be ranked LOWER than UGA (of course we would get the auto bid) - In short, I agree with your comments regarding the flawed nature of the polls.

 

[Vols4life]

Originally posted by milohimself@Nov 22, 2004 11:05 PM
That&#39;s just the thing -- As well as some bigger, better teams (most notable of which is no. 22 Texas A&M), Utah has scheduled in some very tough opponnents, and still managed to dominate like any of the top 5 teams should.

I&#39;ll focus on the Texas A&M victory for a moment. The final score was 41-21, Utah. That margin of victory is 13 points larger than that of Oklahoma&#39;s victory over A&M. The Utes looked more impressive than Oklahoma against a common opponent. That&#39;s pretty convincing to me, not to mention a 46-16 spanking of a 6-5 North Carolina who managed to upset Miami.

If you don&#39;t give teams like Utah a chance to play in BCS games, then you might as well watch USC vs. Oklahoma for the national title year in and year out.

I really dont count that win against Texas A&M cause that was the first game of the year and A&M had a lot of new starters on D so I am not counting that win&#33;

 

[volinbham]

Originally posted by Vols4life@Nov 22, 2004 11:33 PM

I really dont count that win against Texas A&M cause that was the first game of the year and A&M had a lot of new starters on D so I am not counting that win&#33;

:blink: :blink: :blink:

Winning the first game of the season doesn&#39;t count? Wouldn&#39;t the same logic apply to early season problems for Utah?

So USC didn&#39;t really beat Virginia Tech in the first game of the NCAA season this year?

 

[Vols4life]

Originally posted by _volfan_@Nov 22, 2004 11:17 PM
This whole arguement is strong evidence that this needs to be settled on the field.

You got about 55 AP writers and 60 HBC&#39;s voting on how teams should be ranked. Each of those 115 people have 115 ideas on what a "good" team is.

Add to that, the 7 people who wrote the computer programs that decide the other part of the BCS rankings. They have 7 other opinions on how to award or punish teams, based on a plethoria of standards.

So the BCS is comprosed of 122 "opinions".

What would shut everybody up is a playoff. if Utah runs the table in an 8 team playoff, then I will be the first to hail them TRUE NATIONAL CHAMPIONS.

I just dont think they are that good. But without a playoff, we will never know.

There will not be a playoff not anytime for many many many years&#33;&#33; The presidents at the BCS schools love the money they get I know the presidents of the SEC and Big 12 like there football programs bringing in over 100 million a year to share with the schools&#33;&#33; Plus I go to a D2 school and the NCAA would get all of the money from the playoffs and that would make a lot of people mad


Then you have to go through well who would get homefield advantage and all this other stuff I say keep the BCS&#33;

Crap remember before the BCS you would not even have USC,Auburn,and Oklahoma not even play each other&#33; They would all be in separate bowls&#33;&#33; So the BCS is better then what we had and will be better then what we will ever have&#33;&#33;&#33;

 

[Vols4life]

Originally posted by volinbham+Nov 22, 2004 11:37 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (volinbham @ Nov 22, 2004 11:37 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Vols4life@Nov 22, 2004 11:33 PM

I really dont count that win against Texas A&M cause that was the first game of the year and A&M had a lot of new starters on D so I am not counting that win&#33;

:blink: :blink: :blink:

Winning the first game of the season doesn&#39;t count? Wouldn&#39;t the same logic apply to early season problems for Utah?

So USC didn&#39;t really beat Virginia Tech in the first game of the NCAA season this year? [/quote]
Ok I should have said it doesnt carry much weight being the first game for Texas A&M....It should count just does not carry much weight&#33;&#33;

 

[volinbham]

just messing with you

Utah didn&#39;t have a chance to play them later in the season so all we have to go on is that they soundly beat them.

 

[allvol]

Originally posted by Vols4life+Nov 22, 2004 11:40 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Vols4life @ Nov 22, 2004 11:40 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by volinbham@Nov 22, 2004 11:37 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-Vols4life

@Nov 22, 2004 11:33 PM

I really dont count that win against Texas A&M cause that was the first game of the year and A&M had a lot of new starters on D so I am not counting that win&#33;

:blink: :blink: :blink:

Winning the first game of the season doesn&#39;t count? Wouldn&#39;t the same logic apply to early season problems for Utah?

So USC didn&#39;t really beat Virginia Tech in the first game of the NCAA season this year?

Ok I should have said it doesnt carry much weight being the first game for Texas A&M....It should count just does not carry much weight&#33;&#33; [/quote]
Some of the computer rankings used in the BCS give more weight to recent games. Therefore, Utah is not getting as much credit or not getting "full" credit (for lack of a better word) for beating Texas A&M at the beginning of the season.... yet they are still ranked no lower than 6 in any of the computer rankings.

 

[milohimself]

With offensive stats like they&#39;ve racked up, I don&#39;t know why they wouldn&#39;t be.

Passing
Alex Smith 185/280 (66.1%), 28 TD&#39;s, 4 INT&#39;s, rating of 174.9
Brian Johnson 14/21 (66.7%), 1 TD, 1 INT, rating of 129.7

Rushing
Marty Johnson 156/782, 5.0 YPC, 59 long, 14 TD&#39;s
Quinton Ganther 103/620, 6.0 YPC, 56 long, 1 TD
Alex Smith 120/563, 4.7 YPC, 70 long (TD), 10 TD&#39;s
Steve Savoy 22/307, 14.0 YPC, 92 long (TD), 6 TD&#39;s
Paris Warren 27/140, 5.2 YPC, 11 long, 2 TD&#39;s

Recieving
Steve Savoy 60/891, 14.9 YPR, 78 long (TD), 11 TD&#39;s
Paris Warren 65/878, 13.5 YPR, 65 long (TD), 10 TD&#39;s
Travis LaTendresse 26/402, 15.5 YPR, 45 long, 2 TD&#39;s
John Madsen 23/350, 15.2 YPR, 58 long, 4 TD&#39;s