Who will you root for in the Sugar Bowl?

[Fiyero]

poll

[il Padrino Ute]

You should have made this a public poll so we could see who the Ute haters/not BYU fans are.

[Donuthole]

G: Alabama, because BYU goes head to head with Utah for recruits every year and a BCS win only hurts BYU in that respect, and because a Utah win will do nothing to change the system as presently constituted.

[MarkGrace]

First option.

[LiveCoug]

You should have made this a public poll so we could see who the Ute haters/not BYU fans are.

I will publicly say I voted for the first option. I am a Ute hater AND a BYU fan. You can be both.

[TripletDaddy]

I thought it was called the SUGAR BOWL?

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

I voted for Utah due to respect for MWC. But in thinking about it I realize that Utah winning will give Utah a nice boost in respect, and a minimal if any boost for the MWC, and no boost for BYU.

So I would revote for I don't care, or maybe a slight push to Utah just because I like Afa Garrigan.

[ERCougar]

Third option--a Utah win does help the conference credibility. And yes, DDD, I realize that's small-time football conference member talking. Oh well, that's exactly what we are.

I don't think a Utah BCS run is going to hurt our recruiting chances. Our suckitude is.

[SeattleUte]

For a BYU fan to root for Utah would be truly irrational.

[venkman]

I will publicly say I voted for the first option. I am a Ute hater AND a BYU fan. You can be both.

Bingo.

[Donuthole]

Third option--a Utah win does help the conference credibility. And yes, DDD, I realize that's small-time football conference member talking. Oh well, that's exactly what we are.

I don't think a Utah BCS run is going to hurt our recruiting chances. Our suckitude is.

While it may or may not help the conference's credibility, conference credibility means jack shit with the current system in place. It helps BYU much more if its rival doesn't have the opportunity to claim 2 BCS victories in 5 years when it visits with recruits.

[ERCougar]

While it may or may not help the conference's credibility, conference credibility means jack shit with the current system in place. It helps BYU much more if its rival doesn't have the opportunity to claim 2 BCS victories in 5 years when it visits with recruits.

I guess that depends on how the current BCS rules work. How do they reevaluate conferences after the four-year period? Is it an average of final rankings? Before or after the bowl games?

Regarding BYU-Utah--I think most recruits make their decisions based on relationships with coaches, quality of facilities, previous BYU/Utah ties, and quality of team. While # of BCS trips factors slightly into the last one, there are at least three other factors involved, and even with the last one, I think overall quality of the program is more important. If we have a 1 or 2-loss season next year, four ten-win seasons in a row will be every bit as impressive as Utah's BCS run this year. In fact, if Utah bombs next year (they might), the overall consistency would be more impressive.

If we build a program that consistently competes for the MWC title and the MWC does well on the national stage, we'll be fine competing against Utah.

EDIT: As a B-Ball recruit, would you rather play for Utah or BYU?

[Donuthole]

I guess that depends on how the current BCS rules work. How do they reevaluate conferences after the four-year period? Is it an average of final rankings? Before or after the bowl games?

Regarding BYU-Utah--I think most recruits make their decisions based on relationships with coaches, quality of facilities, previous BYU/Utah ties, and quality of team. While # of BCS trips factors slightly into the last one, there are at least three other factors involved, and even with the last one, I think overall quality of the program is more important. If we have a 1 or 2-loss season next year, four ten-win seasons in a row will be every bit as impressive as Utah's BCS run this year. In fact, if Utah bombs next year (they might), the overall consistency would be more impressive.

If we build a program that consistently competes for the MWC title and the MWC does well on the national stage, we'll be fine competing against Utah.

I don't disagree with most of what you said, but I'd still rather Utah not have the opportunity to go into a fence-sitting recruit's home and say "We beat Alabama in the SUGAR BOWL, and BYU has never even been to the BCS." I feel like if Utah gets pasted in the SUGAR BOWL, that will preempt them from bringing it up, if only a bit. Nobody wants to draw attention to a game they lost, unless they believe in "Poppinga Victories."

[Fiyero]

How do they reevaluate conferences after the four-year period? Is it an average of final rankings? Before or after the bowl games?

There is a formula, though I don't know what the exact breakdown is. It must be based on the regular season alone because the final 2008 rankings were released two weeks ago:

Big 12: 0.9819
SEC: 0.7892
ACC: 0.7455
Big 10: 0.6689
MWC 0.5347
Big East: 0.5259
PAC 10: 0.4069
WAC: 0.2993
MAC: 0.1144
C-USA: 0.0020

Note that if the 2009 auto-bids were based on 2008 alone, rather than on a 4-year window, the MWC would be in and the Pac-3 would be out.

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

There is a formula, though I don't know what the exact breakdown is. It must be based on the regular season alone because the final 2008 rankings were released two weeks ago:

Big 12: 0.9819
SEC: 0.7892
ACC: 0.7455
Big 10: 0.6689
MWC 0.5347
Big East: 0.5259
PAC 10: 0.4069
WAC: 0.2993
MAC: 0.1144
C-USA: 0.0020

Note that if the 2009 auto-bids were based on 2008 alone, rather than on a 4-year window, the MWC would be in and the Pac-3 would be out.

So does anyone know the 4 year averages? When is the alleged review date to become one of the chosen few?