If it were the Pac-12...

[byu71]

Given that our all-time record against the Pac 10 is 32-57-1, I am going to go ahead and disagree with your assessment that PAC10 teams (current or no) are "likely" wins at home and 50/50 away.

I would throw out all time and just go with the Bronco era. Likely wins at home and 50/50 away seems very reasonable.

[YOhio]

Given that our all-time record against the Pac 10 is 32-57-1, I am going to go ahead and disagree with your assessment that PAC10 teams (current or no) are "likely" wins at home and 50/50 away.

Leave the stats to Indy. You're not equipped to wield that kind of a weapon.

[TripletDaddy]

I would throw out all time and just go with the Bronco era. Likely wins at home and 50/50 away seems very reasonable.

why would you only go with the bronco era? is there something statistically significant about his tenure as coach vs Crowton and Edwards as coaches?

[TripletDaddy]

Leave the stats to Indy. You're not equipped to wield that kind of a weapon.

Is this supposed to be an insult? If so, then the joke's on you because I don't get it!

[byu71]

why would you only go with the bronco era? is there something statistically significant about his tenure as coach vs Crowton and Edwards as coaches?

For the same reason I wouldn't use Army's all time football record against anyone. Times change and teams change and programs change.

Using the Bronco era is as relevant as using the "all time" as you did.

By the way, what is USC's all time record against Utah.

[Pheidippides]

why would you only go with the bronco era? is there something statistically significant about his tenure as coach vs Crowton and Edwards as coaches?

Yeah. He's the coach now, and prospective results are all that matter for the purposes of this discussion. (small n ignored for the purposes of laying the lumber).

Unless you expect LaVell to come back to coach us in 2011 and Crowton in 2012.

[YOhio]

why would you only go with the bronco era? is there something statistically significant about his tenure as coach vs Crowton and Edwards as coaches?

At the MWC media days in July, Mendenhall told CBS Sportsline's Dennis Dodd the anecdote he's repeated many times to local media and fans. Half a dozen years ago, he sat with New Mexico coaches and wondered how they could compete with BYU's older, more mature players who'd been on missions. When he got to BYU, he sat with Cougar coaches who wondered how they could win with missionaries.

I was one of those who said it couldn't be done.

I did so in some commentary in 2003-04 during the Gary Crowton years. The thesis was this: BYU needed a sold core of four-year players to establish chemistry, consistency and skill development.

I also argued that BYU needed junior-college imports, many of them non-LDS, especially in the secondary, a successful recipe employed by LaVell Edwards.

Since that commentary, Mendenhall's roster has increased the number of missionary participants, beginning in the low 60-percent range to almost 70 percent in 2008, when 85 of 123 players on the roster had served missions.

Magic is happening.

[TripletDaddy]

For the same reason I wouldn't use Army's all time football record against anyone. Times change and teams change and programs change.

Using the Bronco era is as relevant as using the "all time" as you did.

By the way, what is USC's all time record against Utah.

SC has played Utah what...once? That isn't going to be a significant sample size. I think after you play a conference about 80-90 times over the course of 30 years, you get a sense of where you stack, taking into consideration fluctuations in quality in BYU's program and the PAC10. You are suggesting that the past 5 years is more indicative but don't really explain why.

USC is a good example of your fallacy. The Pete era has been wildly successful. Taking into account only this recent era ignores that SC was wildly marginal for the prior 20 years. However, over the decades, SC has more success than failure. Army would be another example to support this. Army hasn't enjoyed any sustained success in decades.

[byu71]

SC has played Utah what...once? That isn't going to be a significant sample size. I think after you play a conference about 80-90 times over the course of 30 years, you get a sense of where you stack, taking into consideration fluctuations in quality in BYU's program and the PAC10. You are suggesting that the past 5 years is more indicative but don't really explain why.

USC is a good example of your fallacy. The Pete era has been wildly successful. Taking into account only this recent era ignores that SC was wildly marginal for the prior 20 years. However, over the decades, SC has more success than failure. Army would be another example to support this. Army hasn't enjoyed any sustained success in decades.

So would you agree with me, quoting an all time statistic isn't any more relevant than quoting a statistic over say the last 4 years.

[TripletDaddy]

So would you agree with me, quoting an all time statistic isn't any more relevant than quoting a statistic over say the last 4 years.

No, not at all. Overall, the all-time stat gives you a better handle on the program. Relying solely on the last 4 years to assess how BYU stacks up against the PAC10 makes no sense to me. If it does to you, have at it.

I like relying solely on the Bronco era, because as nik said, he is our coach right now. therefore, I expect to win 10 games every year that Bronco is the head coach. It is reasonable to assume BYU will continue to win 10 games a year because we have done so 3 times in the Bronco era.

Florida will likely keep winning 2 NCs every 3 years and USC will win 6 or 7 BCS bowls for every one that it loses. These are all reasonable assumptions.

PS This also means that Utah will go 13-0 every 4 years, as well. Not bad.

[byu71]

No, not at all. Overall, the all-time stat gives you a better handle on the program. Relying solely on the last 4 years to assess how BYU stacks up against the PAC10 makes no sense to me. If it does to you, have at it.

I like relying solely on the Bronco era, because as nik said, he is our coach right now. therefore, I expect to win 10 games every year that Bronco is the head coach. It is reasonable to assume BYU will continue to win 10 games a year because we have done so 3 times in the Bronco era.

Florida will likely keep winning 2 NCs every 3 years and USC will win 6 or 7 BCS bowls for every one that it loses. These are all reasonable assumptions.

PS This also means that Utah will go 13-0 every 4 years, as well. Not bad.

You are now starting to go off into ex-ute style of arguing. He wore me out with that a long time ago so I don't go that route anymore.

We will just agree to disagree which is fine with both of us I am sure.

[Color Me Badd Fan]

As far as BYU's record against Pac-10 teams go, I think we've got to look at a snapshot from the past 30 years- or the period from which BYU actually became a relevant program.

But I also think with BCS conference affiliation comes more money and better recruiting and BYU and Utah would become more competitive in the Pac-10. In this respect, Utah's ceiling is probably higher than BYU's because BYU would still have the self-imposed restrictions. At the very least, BYU would start landing the Manti Teo type recruits more regularly.

If Washington State or Oregon State can be competitive in the Pac-10 in some years, then so can Utah and/or BYU. Utah and BYU will never be USC, UCLA or Washington(once those latter two programs get back on their feet, it's only a matter of time), but it can certainly attain a level of success similar to Oregon or Arizona State.

[TripletDaddy]

You are now starting to go off into ex-ute style of arguing. He wore me out with that a long time ago so I don't go that route anymore.

We will just agree to disagree which is fine with both of us I am sure.

there is little to argue. I've given you a load of examples showing why your approach makes little sense. If going off Bronco alone makes sense, then all the other expectations I listed must also be reasonable to you. Florida fans are being reasonable to expect NCs 2 out of every 3 years because that is what has happened in the Urban Meyer era.

[byu71]

there is little to argue. I've given you a load of examples showing why your approach makes little sense. If going off Bronco alone makes sense, then all the other expectations I listed must also be reasonable to you. Florida fans are being reasonable to expect NCs 2 out of every 3 years because that is what has happened in the Urban Meyer era.

Actually, you have given yourself a load of examples.

[Indy Coug]

I don't look at 4 years of data to determine global climate change and I wouldn't look at 4 years of football data to determine a 10 to 25 year outlook.