Non-Conference Scheduling rumors

[LA Ute]

While there is some history between Utah and Colorado, it might as well be ancient history for how relevant it is now.

True. Maybe it will become a decent little rivalry. It will never replace the BYU rivalry.

[Flattop]

True. Maybe it will become a decent little rivalry. It will never replace the BYU rivalry.

Nothing lasts forever but the earth and sky.

Being an out-of-conference rivalry will certainly have an affect on the BYU rivalry.

Over time, an in-conference rivalry is likely to develop, be it with Colorado or some other Pac-12 school.

[Flattop]

The other day, Portland Ute tried to correct me when I noted that BYU had been dominating the rivalry for 40 years. He responded that even 20 years would be a stretch. I guess he forgot that LEdwards showed up 40 years ago and since that time BYU has basically won the majority of those games, including a stretch of 19-2 or something like that.

Utah dominated before LEdwards. BYU dominated the 1970s and 1980s. Nobody has dominated since 1993.

Over the last 41 years (1970-2010), BYU leads 26-15. Utah leads 11-7 since 1993.

[TripletDaddy]

Utah dominated before LEdwards. BYU dominated the 1970s and 1980s. Nobody has dominated since 1993.

Over the last 41 years (1970-2010), BYU leads 26-15. Utah leads 11-7 since 1993.

Yes, so thank you. For the past 40 years, BYU has won almost 2 to 1. Portland seemed to think it had only been 20 years. I noticed that you included the 41st year because it favored your argument.

[LA Ute]

Nothing lasts forever but the earth and sky.

Being an out-of-conference rivalry will certainly have an affect on the BYU rivalry.

Over time, an in-conference rivalry is likely to develop, be it with Colorado or some other Pac-12 school.

"Never" in this case means "not in the lifetime of anyone now posting on this board."

[Flattop]

Yes, so thank you. For the past 40 years, BYU has won almost 2 to 1. Portland seemed to think it had only been 20 years. I noticed that you included the 41st year because it favored your argument.

Wow, one whole game.

I don't see how that 1970 game really makes much of a difference.

40 years = 26-14.

Actually, I just counted the games from 1970 to 2010 and only realized after the fact that it was 41 games.

It is still 11-7 Utah since 1993, which means it is trending Utah.

[Flattop]

"Never" in this case means "not in the lifetime of anyone now posting on this board."

Maybe just for the baby boomers.

[LA Ute]

Wow, one whole game.

I don't see how that 1970 game really makes much of a difference.

40 years = 26-14.

Actually, I just counted the games from 1970 to 2010 and only realized after the fact that it was 41 games.

It is still 11-7 Utah since 1993, which means it is trending Utah.

Let's just focus on undefeated seasons in the last 50 years. [Edit: I thought of saying "the last 10 years" but am trying to be generous.)

[TripletDaddy]

Wow, one whole game.

I don't see how that 1970 game really makes much of a difference.

40 years = 26-14.

Actually, I just counted the games from 1970 to 2010 and only realized after the fact that it was 41 games.

It is still 11-7 Utah since 1993, which means it is trending Utah.

Not really since you just said that nobody has dominated during that time period.

[Flattop]

Not really since you just said that nobody has dominated during that time period.

Trending and dominating are not the same thing.

Utah leads by 4 games since 1993. I am not willing to call that domination. But it is clearly advantage Utah, therefore it is trending Utah.

[TripletDaddy]

Trending and dominating are not the same thing.

Utah leads by 4 games since 1993. I am not willing to call that domination. But it is clearly advantage Utah, therefore it is trending Utah.

Fair.

So for the past 40 years BYU has dominated the rivalry by a factor of almost 2 to 1.

Since 2006, the rivalry is trending BYU, 3-2.

[Flattop]

Fair.

So for the past 40 years BYU has dominated the rivalry by a factor of almost 2 to 1.

Since 2006, the rivalry is trending BYU, 3-2.

Good for you.

Since 2001 it is trending Utah, 6-4.

Currently, Utah has scoreboard.

[TripletDaddy]

Good for you.

Since 2001 it is trending Utah, 6-4.

Currently, Utah has scoreboard.

wow, one whole game.

[KillerDog]

One of the interesting things about the whole Utah to the PAC-12 story is the bits and pieces of information that are out there. The ones you report, KD, have the ring of truth. I'll just add one thought, that it's my understanding that discussions that took place during the "due diligence" phase were not negotiations and key deal points weren't struck then. Rather, the wishes of key representatives of each side were clarified.

I also understand that the PAC-10 was not asking that Utah not schedule BYU (that seems like a bizarre request anyway, when I think about it), and that both the PAC and Utah were very worried that the Utah Legislature would try to stop the move. That is the primary reason Utah wanted to go into the PAC in 2011 despite taking a big hit on TV money, so that there would be less time for legislative mischief. It's also a reason that Utah needed to be free to schedule BYU, in order to avoid opposition from key players in the state.

I can state with a lot of confidence that playing the rivalry game at the end of the season, as much as fans like me would like that, is not something anyone on the Utah side is pushing for. I don't know about the BYU side.

I can confirm that the bolded portion is accurate. Sometimes people forget that the legislature has a lot to say about the U and the legislature is, by and large, BYU fan heavy.

[Surfah]

wow, one whole game.

That was set on a tee for you.