stuckinbig10country wrote:

I think Holmoe is wise in not dealing with ND if they are intent on scheduling 8 to 10 years out. That is a bad deal for BYU. Too much can change during that time. Here are two things that could happen in the next 8-10 years. I am not saying that they are going to happen, or are even likely to happen, but they are things that Holmoe has to think about.

1. Notre Dame does what it should have done a long time ago and join the Big 10 (their schedule will be easier, and makes it more possible for undefeated seasons). The Big 10 will even let them keep their TV deal. Now they are playing 8-9 conference games, and do you think they will cancel their rivalry games against USC, Navy, or BC and give up their games against a bigger name opponent to play BYU. No, the BYU game gets cancelled, then we have to play a FCS team, and the AD gets criticized for scheduling that game. Combine joining the Big 10 with the new scheduling practice that ND is using (7 home games, 1 neutral site game considered a home game, and 4 road games) all their road games would be in conference, or at the very least they would have one road game at USC.

2. The church decides that BYU and BYU-Hawaii stop competing in inter-collegiate sports. Granted, I don't think this is 8-10 years away (more likely 15-20). You all are saying that won't happen, but I had friends taking recruiting trips to Ricks College the year before they decided they were removing the very successful sports programs there. They didn't think it was happening either.

Again, these are some things that would preclude us from scheduling that far in advance. Others include us changing conferences.

1. Unless Notre Dame starts stinking it up for the next several years, NBC will never cancel their contract with ND and therefore, ND will never have a need to attach itself to the Big 10 or any other conference for the purposes of TV deals or bowl tie-ins. Despite their record this year, I think they will be back. There is too much tradition and pride at that school for them to be down for long.

2. I think the reasoning for canceling intercollegiate sports at Ricks (BYU-I) was because the school wanted to focus more on teaching and learning as opposed to worrying about an intercollegiate athletics program. That way, all the money devoted to sports could go to other more important activities, or better yet, get sent to BYU-Provo for our program Honestly, unless the First Presidency and the Twelve thinks there is harm or bad press coming to the church because of intercollegiate sports at BYU, they will not cancel the program. There are too many good missionary efforts that have come because of the athletic program. Those in charge of the athletic program are too cognisant of bringing in the right types of kids so that they will be a good example for the university and the church. When you think about it, Crowton wasn't forced out JUST because of his poor record '02-'04...it was because of all the off the field problems with players. I don't foresee the administration ever letting that happen again. If it does and gets completely out of hand, then I might see them canceling all intercollegiate sports.

penncougar wrote:

Maybe I feel alone in this, but I see no benefit in playing Utah State every year. I'm an out of state fan now, but we would be better off playing a really good D1AA school, then a bottom dweller who should be in that league. I would love to see us cancel some of those games and schedule any other school even if we were traveling across the country to play somewhere tough.

Playing Army is a million times better for us than those games against Utah State

I agree. Back when we were playing Utah State every year, I always said we should dump them and schedule a top 20 team (if possible--as high quality as possible anyways). We were always clamoring for respect (nothing has changed there) and Utah State does absolutely nothing to help garner that respect.

On the other hand, it seems that going undefeated is what matters to the pollsters if you're not one of the cartel (I was very please to see Dan Wetzel use this term. That guy is great in my eyes--he's advocating strongly for a playoff) shcools. We need look no further than the example of Hawaii this year.

So, it's hard for me to say now. I think however if I had to take a stand, that in the long term, scheduling tougher opponents (and winning our fair share of them) is the best way to go if we want to earn national respect and recognition. That goes for the rest of the teams in the conference as well. I think the conference has done really well in terms of scheduling in this regard, and we've (the MWC) have had many close ones, ones we coulda, shouda won, but we didn't. We simply have to convert those close losses into wins.

That's my two cents.

Go Coogs!

Army may not be a top 25 team every year but I do think that most sports analysts would respect scheduling them as an opponent. They have a good football tradition (a few national championships in the late 1800s maybe?). I like the idea of playing a service academy besides AF as well. What I don't like is traveling to the east coast. We haven't played well there in the past.

byuphil wrote:

penncougar wrote:

Maybe I feel alone in this, but I see no benefit in playing Utah State every year. I'm an out of state fan now, but we would be better off playing a really good D1AA school, then a bottom dweller who should be in that league. I would love to see us cancel some of those games and schedule any other school even if we were traveling across the country to play somewhere tough.

Playing Army is a million times better for us than those games against Utah State

I agree. Back when we were playing Utah State every year, I always said we should dump them and schedule a top 20 team (if possible--as high quality as possible anyways). We were always clamoring for respect (nothing has changed there) and Utah State does absolutely nothing to help garner that respect.

On the other hand, it seems that going undefeated is what matters to the pollsters if you're not one of the cartel (I was very please to see Dan Wetzel use this term. That guy is great in my eyes--he's advocating strongly for a playoff) shcools. We need look no further than the example of Hawaii this year.

So, it's hard for me to say now. I think however if I had to take a stand, that in the long term, scheduling tougher opponents (and winning our fair share of them) is the best way to go if we want to earn national respect and recognition. That goes for the rest of the teams in the conference as well. I think the conference has done really well in terms of scheduling in this regard, and we've (the MWC) have had many close ones, ones we coulda, shouda won, but we didn't. We simply have to convert those close losses into wins.

That's my two cents.

Go Coogs!

There are plenty of bottom dweller BCS schools that we could schedule that would be better than DIAA schools or the Logan High Schools of the world. I'll bet we could get a deal with a Baylor or Iowa State done.

We all sit here on our high horse and complain about the BCS and say that we should schedule pussy teams like Hawaii did this year so we can get to a BCS bowl game. I say that is a bunch of crap and I'll bet that if you ask Bronco, he'll tell you its a bunch of crap, but he'll say it nicer. Bronco is building a team that can run the table every year and thats the great thing about BYU football right now.

If we were undefeated right now we could be in the NC game talk because we played tougher teams than Hawaii did this year, especially if UCLA wouldn't have fallen apart. We have the same opportunity next year by playing Pac-10 teams. Washington and their qb will be tough. Every team every year has a chance at a National Championship, no matter what.

Ask yourselves this question:

If Hawaii would have run the table but replaced the two DIAA teams they played with Arizona and UCLA, would they still be struggling to get a BCS bid. HELL NO. They would be in the top ten and, with the way this season has gone, in the National Championship talk

penncougar wrote:

byuphil wrote:

penncougar wrote:

Maybe I feel alone in this, but I see no benefit in playing Utah State every year. I'm an out of state fan now, but we would be better off playing a really good D1AA school, then a bottom dweller who should be in that league. I would love to see us cancel some of those games and schedule any other school even if we were traveling across the country to play somewhere tough.

Playing Army is a million times better for us than those games against Utah State

I agree. Back when we were playing Utah State every year, I always said we should dump them and schedule a top 20 team (if possible--as high quality as possible anyways). We were always clamoring for respect (nothing has changed there) and Utah State does absolutely nothing to help garner that respect.

On the other hand, it seems that going undefeated is what matters to the pollsters if you're not one of the cartel (I was very please to see Dan Wetzel use this term. That guy is great in my eyes--he's advocating strongly for a playoff) shcools. We need look no further than the example of Hawaii this year.

So, it's hard for me to say now. I think however if I had to take a stand, that in the long term, scheduling tougher opponents (and winning our fair share of them) is the best way to go if we want to earn national respect and recognition. That goes for the rest of the teams in the conference as well. I think the conference has done really well in terms of scheduling in this regard, and we've (the MWC) have had many close ones, ones we coulda, shouda won, but we didn't. We simply have to convert those close losses into wins.

That's my two cents.

Go Coogs!

There are plenty of bottom dweller BCS schools that we could schedule that would be better than DIAA schools or the Logan High Schools of the world. I'll bet we could get a deal with a Baylor or Iowa State done.

We all sit here on our high horse and complain about the BCS and say that we should schedule pussy teams like Hawaii did this year so we can get to a BCS bowl game. I say that is a bunch of crap and I'll bet that if you ask Bronco, he'll tell you its a bunch of crap, but he'll say it nicer. Bronco is building a team that can run the table every year and thats the great thing about BYU football right now.

If we were undefeated right now we could be in the NC game talk because we played tougher teams than Hawaii did this year, especially if UCLA wouldn't have fallen apart. We have the same opportunity next year by playing Pac-10 teams. Washington and their qb will be tough. Every team every year has a chance at a National Championship, no matter what.

Ask yourselves this question:

If Hawaii would have run the table but replaced the two DIAA teams they played with Arizona and UCLA, would they still be struggling to get a BCS bid. HELL NO. They would be in the top ten and, with the way this season has gone, in the National Championship talk

Right on.

Here's a question for you guys that think we should go with the soft scheduling route. Is that the kind of football that you like to watch? Do you really want to watch mediocre competition the whole season just to get a crack at one good game. Wow I can bet the satellite and cable companies will be scrambling to add the MTN to their lineup with that type of schedule. I'm guessing that the people in this forum who want a cupcake schedule are also complaining about the MTN. The MTN will NEVER go anywhere if the flagship team of the conferences makes a practice of playing nobodys.

SanAntonioBlue wrote:


Right on.

Here's a question for you guys that think we should go with the soft scheduling route. Is that the kind of football that you like to watch? Do you really want to watch mediocre competition the whole season just to get a crack at one good game. Wow I can bet the satellite and cable companies will be scrambling to add the MTN to their lineup with that type of schedule. I'm guessing that the people in this forum who want a cupcake schedule are also complaining about the MTN. The MTN will NEVER go anywhere if the flagship team of the conferences makes a practice of playing nobodys.[/quote]


If we play cupcakes, no one well ever see it anyway. At least when we have bigger games now they get picked up by VS and CSTV, which are 1000 times better than the MTN. If we start playing no name schools, not only will the rest of our conference suffer because of lack of exposure, our recruiting will suffer. Kids know whats up and they'll see right through a cup cake schedule