Non-Conference Scheduling rumors

[LA Ute]

Good for you.

Since 2001 it is trending Utah, 6-4.

Currently, Utah has scoreboard.

In other words, since 2010 it is trending Utah, 1-0.

[Portland Ute]

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.

wow, one whole game.

[Portland Ute]

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.

This would explain my feelings about the Utah State Legislature.

[Maximus]

It's already been stated the difficulties Nebraska will have in scheduling BYU. In order to be "worth it" from Nebraska's viewpoint, more revenue will have to be garnered via a guaranteed payout to Nebraska from the pockets of ABC/ESPN that will exceed the value of a home game in Memorial Stadium - an amount that is substantial because Memorial Stadium sells out even when Chattanooga comes to town. Maybe the pockets of ABC/ESPN are that deep but I have my doubts. Nebraska does have an opening in 2016 though.
http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showpo...&postcount=690
I'll also add that when Nebraska does schedule an OOC game, they do so with an eye towards national exposure and recruiting. So a game against Fresno St. or Southern Miss. is considered since Nebraska recruits those areas plus those schools are 2-1 deals. More prestigious programs like Washington, UCLA, and Miami are scheduled home/home to garner national interest and help with Nebraska recruiting in those areas. That's why Nebraska scheduled California when Holmoe was coach, because Nebraska recuits California heavily and wanted the exposure.

So what does BYU offer in regard to Nebraska's recruiting footprint? Not much. Making in-roads to LDS prep players??? Almost all LDS/Utah players that Nebraska signs are players who have a profile more suited to U. of Utah than BYU. Consequently, Nebraska would be better served to schedule Utah than BYU if it wanted to make stronger in-roads in Utah.

Tom Osborne also has had a strong friendship with Bobby Bowden. Back in the late 1970s Bowden sought Osborne's help with Florida St. scheduling back when FSU was an indpendent. Nebraska and Tom Osborne were glad to help in the form of scheduling 4 Nebraska-FSU games in the early/mid 1980s...but all 4 were played in Lincoln. That's what friendship can get you in the high revenue world of college football.

As much as I would like to see BYU-Nebraska, there's no reason for Nebraska to schedule it considering their own self interest in terms of revenue and recruiting. Unless it happens in 2016 or BYU accepts a 2-for-1 offer and I've heard that BYU has turned that offer down.

prestigious and UCLA do not belong in the same sentance. Washington hasnt been relevant to the Pac 10 for a while now.

[LiveCoug]

Just an FYI, Lincoln is 7-8 hours from Denver, not 3-4. Denver is actually almost exactly halfway between Lincoln and Denver

[falafel]

Just an FYI, Lincoln is 7-8 hours from Denver, not 3-4. Denver is actually almost exactly halfway between Lincoln and Denver

[TripletDaddy]

It's already been stated the difficulties Nebraska will have in scheduling BYU. In order to be "worth it" from Nebraska's viewpoint, more revenue will have to be garnered via a guaranteed payout to Nebraska from the pockets of ABC/ESPN that will exceed the value of a home game in Memorial Stadium - an amount that is substantial because Memorial Stadium sells out even when Chattanooga comes to town. Maybe the pockets of ABC/ESPN are that deep but I have my doubts. Nebraska does have an opening in 2016 though.
http://www.cougaruteforum.com/showpo...&postcount=690
I'll also add that when Nebraska does schedule an OOC game, they do so with an eye towards national exposure and recruiting. So a game against Fresno St. or Southern Miss. is considered since Nebraska recruits those areas plus those schools are 2-1 deals. More prestigious programs like Washington, UCLA, and Miami are scheduled home/home to garner national interest and help with Nebraska recruiting in those areas. That's why Nebraska scheduled California when Holmoe was coach, because Nebraska recuits California heavily and wanted the exposure.

So what does BYU offer in regard to Nebraska's recruiting footprint? Not much. Making in-roads to LDS prep players??? Almost all LDS/Utah players that Nebraska signs are players who have a profile more suited to U. of Utah than BYU. Consequently, Nebraska would be better served to schedule Utah than BYU if it wanted to make stronger in-roads in Utah.

Tom Osborne also has had a strong friendship with Bobby Bowden. Back in the late 1970s Bowden sought Osborne's help with Florida St. scheduling back when FSU was an indpendent. Nebraska and Tom Osborne were glad to help in the form of scheduling 4 Nebraska-FSU games in the early/mid 1980s...but all 4 were played in Lincoln. That's what friendship can get you in the high revenue world of college football.

As much as I would like to see BYU-Nebraska, there's no reason for Nebraska to schedule it considering their own self interest in terms of revenue and recruiting. Unless it happens in 2016 or BYU accepts a 2-for-1 offer and I've heard that BYU has turned that offer down.

So what you could have said was that Nebraska's schedule is full until 2016, at which time they could schedule a home and home.

[Paperback Writer]

So what you could have said was that Nebraska's schedule is full until 2016, at which time they could schedule a home and home.

Not quite. Nebraska won't schedule a home/home with BYU because it doesn't help them with recruiting. And Nebraska can make more money by scheduling Chattanooga (again) in 2016 then a home/home with BYU. If it happens, it will be a 2-for-1 (and I don't think that's really fair to BYU).

[Portland Ute]

Exactly. Which is why BYU has dominated for the past 40 years.

That's what you console yourself with knowing that Utah has dominated the rivalry.

Okay, let's stick to the "modern era" of two platoon football. Utah has a one game advantage and 1 tie mixed in.

Since the rebirth of Utah football under Ron McBride, the "modern era" of Utah football, Utah leads 11-8.

I fail to see why 40 years is any more important than gauging the entire history of the game, the modern era or the McBride era.

BTW, what was the title of this thread?

[Flattop]

Great you won 19 out of 20 games. You dominated a 20 year period. That bought you a lot of room over the next 20.

In the last 18, things have been tilted in favor of the Utes.

So, I say 18....you go to 40...I got 100....I WIN!

BFD.

5 years, 10 years, 40 years, 60 years, etc. At some point it gets a little silly.

Between 1972 and 1992, BYU won 19 games. Since 1992, they have won 7. So 40 years of domination is resting mostly on that 21 year period after LEdwards took the job down in Provo.

[jay santos]

One game in 41 is a wow. One game last year is everything.

Scoreboard.

You were ranked in the top 5 at one point and tanked the rest of the season. We were in the dregs and caught fire. Your young QB proved he sucks. Our young QB proved he's ready to dominate.

We went into the game with no chance to win, outplayed you the entire game, and lost on a fluke. It hurt badly for a few days, I admit. But three days later, you guys were back down in the dumps looking at your situation, and we were pumped up looking forward to the UTEP bowl game blowout. In this case, scoreboard doesn't really do much for you, does it? Do you feel great saying SCOREBOARD about that win?

[Flattop]

You were ranked in the top 5 at one point and tanked the rest of the season. We were in the dregs and caught fire. Your young QB proved he sucks. Our young QB proved he's ready to dominate.

We went into the game with no chance to win, outplayed you the entire game, and lost on a fluke. It hurt badly for a few days, I admit. But three days later, you guys were back down in the dumps looking at your situation, and we were pumped up looking forward to the UTEP bowl game blowout. In this case, scoreboard doesn't really do much for you, does it? Do you feel great saying SCOREBOARD about that win?

I recall our young QB being injured*, and your young QB looking good against many of the same teams our young QB looked good against. What your young QB appears to have that our young QB does not is moxy.

Granted, I wanted no part of Boise St. in the bowl game without a healthy Wynn, but it was easy to look beyond that to Utah's inaugural season in the Pac-12.

As for scoreboard, a win is a win is a win. Did you claim scoreboard and feel good about it when your senior QB only beat our young QB in overtime the previous year?

*I am told that when the docs opened up that shoulder, they were shocked that our young QB had played so long with it.

[kccougar]

I recall our young QB being injured*, and your young QB looking good against many of the same teams our young QB looked good against. What your young QB appears to have that our young QB does not is moxy.

Granted, I wanted no part of Boise St. in the bowl game without a healthy Wynn, but it was easy to look beyond that to Utah's inaugural season in the Pac-12.

As for scoreboard, a win is a win is a win.

*I am told that when the docs opened up that shoulder, they were shocked that our young QB had played so long with it.

Wynn's shoulder was not his biggest problem last year.

[Flattop]

Wynn's shoulder was not his biggest problem last year.

Perhaps. He was playing in an offense which really didn't suit him, his receivers too often ran bad routes, the play calling of his OC wasn't very imaginative or flexible and, of course, after the injury he was even more afraid of getting hit than usual.

[creekster]

*I am told that when the docs opened up that shoulder, they were shocked that our young QB had played so long with it.

The docs must not have watched him play.