Overestimating or underestimating the Utes...hmmmm. To say that Utah could run the table (until Nov. 22, of course) is generous at the very least. I don't see how they can get past Michigan. I don't think they will lose to UNLV or USU, but after Colorado Springs they could easily be 2-2, which would boot them out of the top 25 for at least five weeks. Even then, they'd have to beat Weber, Oregon St. (tough anywhere) and CSU at Rice Chex, and Wyoming and UNM (both hostile places to play) on the road to even be 7-2 and get back into the polls.

Don't get me wrong either way. I don't underestimate Kyle's boys; Utah will be plenty good enough to cream USU and Weber. But I don't overestimate them either; they're certainly not #14 good.

Wow, I'm surprised to read some of the thoughts on this thread. I hate utah as much as the next guy, but the utes are going to have a tough team this year if they stay healthy.

First, I do agree that ranking utah #14 is a stretch. They haven't done anything to merit being ranked that high and they have too many question marks on defense. utah will not be ranked in the top 25 in the pre-season polls that really matter (AP & USA Today/Coaches).

utah's offense should be solid if Johnson can stay healthy (and that is a big if); however, Louks is a solid back-up. Mack proved to be a reliable RB. The OL is solid, but not deep. The receivers are good (Godfrey, Casteel, Brown, Brooks) and could be great if Key, Reed, and LaPorte live up to the hype (that is if they even end up qualifying).

utah's defense is a different story, but willingham always fields a good defense. The DL has the most question marks. The DE's are very good, but again there is no depth. The biggest concern is at DT (and it is a huge concern). They were already hanging their hopes on two incoming freshmen (one of which already had his scholarship revoked). The LB's aren't incredible, but will be servicable. The secondary should be just as good as last year, even with the loss of Tate.

Their schedule isn't too difficult. It seems like nobody is giving the utes a chance against Michigan, but Michigan has their own problems to deal with. I'm sure the Michigan offense will sputter in it's first game using the spread. Not to mention all the key losses in personel on offense.....new QB, new RB, only one returning starter on the OL, and inexperienced receivers. That bodes well for the utes weaker defense.

On the other hand, Michigan's defense should be very good and challenge the utes offense. It's going to be a good game.

10 or 11 regular season wins is realistic for the utes. I want BYU to go undefeated so the team won't necessarily need utah to be good this year, but beating a strong utah team would not be a bad thing either.

x_rugger wrote:

i saw that ranking, and made a mental note to ignore that site forever. this guy is either ill-informed, or a homer.

He may be wrong, but you tell me if he is ill-informed: http://www.philsteele.com/Misc%20Pages/2007qa.html

Mars wrote:

x_rugger wrote:

i saw that ranking, and made a mental note to ignore that site forever. this guy is either ill-informed, or a homer.

He may be wrong, but you tell me if he is ill-informed: http://www.philsteele.com/Misc%20Pages/2007qa.html

Great link, Mars. The factor Steele has neglected to include in his informed analysis is Bronco's emphasis on and success with execution. This has improved the consistency with which BYU manages score in games. For many years, even (forgive my blasphemy) during LaVell's tenure, experience and talent didn't always transfer into consistent ablility to score/defend as needed. The only spike on the consistency meter during the last two seasons has been the Tulsa game. Other than that, BYU has scouted well, prepared tediously, and executed to their potential.

Steele says the reason he has Utah and TCU beating BYU is because of venue. Rice Chex is definitely a great place to play, but by no means has home field been the deciding factor in the BYU/UTAH series in any of the last 7-10 years. Utah plays well against BYU anywhere and has done an admirable job at disrupting the Cougars regardless of where the game has been played. The same could be said for TCU. They don't have a particular advantage at home either; they've played us tough everywhere since they came into the MWC. Sure, we'd like to think nobody can handle the Cougar crowd at LES, but Mr. Hall, Unga, Pitta, Feinga, Jorgensen, etc., etc. are dang intimidating when they play on any field.

Basically, I still don't see how Utah could get through the MWC without at least two conference losses even if they were to miraculously beat a great Michigan defense; because of that, the Utes have no business in the top 20 in any poll.

Utah does not deserve a top 25 pre-season ranking.

However, I do feel that Utah could easily surprise Michigan and beat Oregon State at home. If Utah can survive road games at Wyoming and New Mexico, I would not be surprised if Utah is 8-1 or even 9-0 going into its home game vs. TCU. If Utah withstands TCU, they could roll into the showdown with BYU at RiceChex as one of the PERCEIVED hottest teams in the nation.

The point is, I could see Utah going 11-1 or 10-2 in '08. Still, that doesn't mean that I think they are one of the top 15 teams in the nation.

But, wouldn't it be great if the Holy War game determined which non-BCS team breaks the BCS this year?!!!

PlayoffDude wrote:

Utah does not deserve a top 25 pre-season ranking.

But, wouldn't it be great if the Holy War game determined which non-BCS team breaks the BCS this year?!!!

It would be great I just wish it was in Provo instead of that toxic waste of a stadium.