What's new
By:

Big News Out of BYU??

Status
Not open for further replies.
Bronco70 said:
So it has to be either a completely professional, fully objective journalist, or a full blown BYU hater? That logic is convenient for your argument, but I'm guessing the truth somewhere in the grey area that you can't seem to see.

Have you considered the possibility that all the schools in the MWC (that aren't Utah or BYU) are worried about where their conference may be headed? I can fully understand why a CSU guy might be irked at BYU. Especially as arrogant as the cougars can be.

Look, I'm not saying you or CSU boy are completely wrong, or that BYU is necessarily everything they think they are. I'm just saying it's silly to validate yourself using someone else with motives to diminish BYU's stature.
Click to expand...

This guy has no more reason to be biased against BYU than any other writer that would ever do a story on BYU. He writes for a big time paper, in a pretty major market, where the local teams don't have any rivalries with BYU. So yes, if you are dismissing him as being biased, then I can't imagine anyone ever saying anything about BYU without you just dismissing them as being biased.

This guy is a professional journalist, in a neutral market. It's his job to tell it like it is.

I highly doubt CSU fans are "worried about their future" at this point. Once the MWC invited Nevada and Fresno, their future was secure. If the MWC breaks up, you can bet CSU will be one of the teams going to the new conference.
 
SaltyDawg said:
This guy has no more reason to be biased against BYU than any other writer that would ever do a story on BYU. He writes for a big time paper, in a pretty major market, where the local teams don't have any rivalries with BYU. So yes, if you are dismissing him as being biased, then I can't imagine anyone ever saying anything about BYU without you just dismissing them as being biased.

This guy is a professional journalist, in a neutral market. It's his job to tell it like it is.

I highly doubt CSU fans are "worried about their future" at this point. Once the MWC invited Nevada and Fresno, their future was secure. If the MWC breaks up, you can bet CSU will be one of the teams going to the new conference.
Click to expand...

Well, if you are so insistent on sticking to your ALL-OR-NOTHING guns, I guess I am wasting time with you.

But for the record, if you think CSU (or any other team in the MWC) has no vested interest in what BYU does, you are fooling yourself. I understand that in your heart of hearts you want to believe that BYU is insignificant, but in reality they aren't. As it stands, the MWC is a much better conference if they don't go. And that benefits every member of it.

If Utah were sticking around, this might not be such a big deal - don't let the door hit you on the *** on the way out - but, like it or not, BYU is important to the MWC, to their reputation, and to their bottom line. If BYU walks, it severely hampers the MWC's ability to upgrade their TV deal. This affects every school.

Nuetral... not so much.

Perhaps you'd care to explain to me why a Denver Post writer (who's indifferent to BYU, and couldn't care less whether they stay or go) would bother writing this story anyway. Not relevant in his market, right? If nobody cares, seems like a waste.
 
Bronco70 said:
......If Utah were sticking around, this might not be such a big deal - don't let the door hit you on the *** on the way out - but, like it or not, BYU is important to the MWC, to their reputation, and to their bottom line. If BYU walks, it severely hampers the MWC's ability to upgrade their TV deal. This affects every school.
Click to expand...

This is the perfect rebuttal to Conan's theory that when Utah leaves, it's business as usual, but when Big, Bad, BYU decides to leave, people go hay wire.

The difference is, Utah was the first to draw blood. The MWC saw it coming as a possibility for quite some time. With Utah leaving, I'm sure Craig Thompson figured he still had 3 schools in Boise St, TCU, and BYU that could draw in good revenue from a new TV deal down the road and build a 12 team conference around them in an effort to secure AQ status.

If BYU had gone independant first, and Utah reacted to that and tried to leave right after them, it would be the same amount of chaos from the MWC point of view and they'd be trying to do everything possible to retain Utah. As much as BYU lovers would like to turn this into a BYU is better than Utah issue, it isn't. It's simply the fact that the MWC feels like it needs 3 "Anchor" teams to take this conference to the next level and they are doing everything possible to keep that intact.

Props to Chris Hill and the U of U for their forward thinking. While BYU has spent the last few years "entertaining" the idea of going independant, Chris Hill was laying the ground work for Utah to eventually be accepted into the Pac 10. Yes, they needed a good break, such as Texas backing out of the "mega conference" plan, but Utah put themselves in excellent position once that plan fell apart.

BYU on the other hand, decides to hurry up and attempt indendence by 2011 in reaction to what Utah has done simply because they don't feel like they can afford to let Utah leave them in the dust like that. If you don't believe that BYU's master plan for independance was ill-concieved, just look at how it's falling down all around them as we speak.

It's nice to see Utah be proactive while BYU is reactive. However, my heart does go out to Cougar fans. I'm sure getting bitch-slapped back into place by the MWC doesn't taste very good.
 
Bronco70 said:
Nuetral... not so much.

Perhaps you'd care to explain to me why a Denver Post writer (who's indifferent to BYU, and couldn't care less whether they stay or go) would bother writing this story anyway. Not relevant in his market, right? If nobody cares, seems like a waste.
Click to expand...
And that is my point. Anyone who bothers to write a story about BYU would be considered biased in your book because they "cared" enough to write the story. The fact is, it's a story everyone is interested in, whether they care about BYU or not. It's major college football news.

Real quick...

1: I don't think BYU is insignificant.

2: BYU staying doesn't mean anything as far as tv contracts go. The tv contract is already signed. If they negotiate a new contract, it will be better than the current contract- with or without BYU.

3: BYU staying would probably help the BCS bid for the conference, but even that is not a big deal because even if BYU leaves, with the additions of BSU, FSU, and UNR, the MWC has a better BCS rating than last year- with or without BYU.

4: That reporter may or may not be biased, but his points were all spot on, and pretty much all of his points have been brought up in other articles too (though I don't think I've seen all of them in the same article yet).
 
Sorry, but I'm gonna have to go a little OneBrow here:

SaltyDawg said:
Anyone who bothers to write a story about BYU would be considered biased in your book because they "cared" enough to write the story.
Click to expand...

No. If the story was just about BYU considering independence - the Major College Football Story you're talking about - it would read like a news story. This reads like teenagers on Facebook - "You're not as cool as you think you are. You're lame. Whatever." You need to understand that BIAS is not necessarily a negative thing. To assert that the reporter has no interest beyond reporting the story is ridiculous, considering the fashion in which it was written.


2: BYU staying doesn't mean anything as far as tv contracts go. The tv contract is already signed. If they negotiate a new contract, it will be better than the current contract- with or without BYU.
Click to expand...

This may be correct, but it wouldn't take much to top the current deal. Bottom line is, BYU being in or out WILL impact that negotiation. BYU in = better contract.

3: BYU staying would probably help the BCS bid for the conference, but even that is not a big deal because even if BYU leaves, with the additions of BSU, FSU, and UNR, the MWC has a better BCS rating than last year- with or without BYU.
Click to expand...

Are you really trying to argue that FSU and Nevada would compensate for the loss of BYU? BCS-wise... maybe. Maybe. But I think that whole argument is going to be irrelevant in the next few years. Profile-wise, BSU was a nice addition, but it is little consolation for the loss of Utah, IMO. FSU and Nev are not flagship programs. I think the MWC was ***-kicking their way into an AQ, until the PAC 10 stepped in. Without Utah, the argument for a bid is considerably weaker. They are not teetering on the edge of being "in" anymore. They need all the help they can get. And BYU is one of the top programs in the conference.

4: That reporter may or may not be biased, but his points were all spot on...
Click to expand...

Meaning, he agreed with you. I already knew that.
 
SaltyDawg said:
Yeah, I guess it's possible that anyone who ever says anything negative about BYU is just a biased hater. It's far more likely that this professional journalist at a Denver paper is telling it like it is.
Click to expand...

Two words for you Salty: "Persecution Complex"

If you ain't got one, you ain't a zoob!
 
The details of the BYU to the WAC possibility have been released. Although virtually moot now, still an interesting read:

Exactly how close was BYU to declaring its football independence and rejoining the Western Athletic Conference?

Close enough that what can essentially be called a prenuptial agreement was drawn up and ready to go — until Fresno State and Nevada got proposals they liked a little better.

In a document obtained by the Deseret News on Monday, details are spelled out that shed a lot of light on how BYU and the WAC were negotiating and, perhaps, some of the reasons BYU was considering such a move.
Click to expand...

https://www.deseretnews.com/article/700059598/BYU-football-Cougar-WAC-prenup-gives-insight.html?pg=1

Interesting that the potential buyout for BYU was only 2 mil, whereas it was 5 mil for every other school in the WAC. And it was waived entirely if the school (including BYU) went to an AQ conference. Just shows how desperate the WAC was to get BYU in...they were willing to be used as a stepping stone by BYU into the Pac-12 or Big 12.
 
Jeditiger said:
I would never willfully insult someone in that manner unless I knew they were, in fact, a zoob. If you are not, in fact, a zoob, then you have my apologies good sir!
Click to expand...

Thank you. I'm certainly not a BYU fan.

Thing is, I don't even really disagree with Salty at the core of the BYU issue. But that isn't what we're conversing about. I just don't believe for one second that a Colorado-based MWC beat writer is writing a story about BYU's skewed perception of themselves - solely for journalistic pursuit and objective reporting. There are likely ulterior motives - shame BYU into staying put...? I don't know. Also, the fact that Salty cites this article as validation of his position is particularly amusing. But I disagree with him, he disagrees with me. Not a big deal in the grand scheme of things.
 
jazzman12 said:
This is the perfect rebuttal to Conan's theory that when Utah leaves, it's business as usual, but when Big, Bad, BYU decides to leave, people go hay wire.
Click to expand...
Hey genius go back to school. It's not a theory it's a fact. It's what happened. But delusional Ute fans live in a different reality anyway so whatever.
 
CONAN - I have a few questions for you. I'm not trolling, I am truly interested in your answer.

1. Do you really believe that panic ensued solely because BYU looked like they may be packing up shop?

2. Do you think the reaction would have been the same if Utah were never going to the PAC 10, and BYU had, under those circumstances, announced it's intention to go independent?

3. Do you give any credence to the theory that the MWC panicked because they had already lost one of their flagship programs, and was unwilling to part with another in such rapid succession?

4. And lastly, do you think the MWC has always considered BYU the crown jewel of their collection?
 
CONAN said:
Hey genius go back to school. It's not a theory it's a fact. It's what happened. But delusional Ute fans live in a different reality anyway so whatever.
Click to expand...

LOL, you wanna talk facts? Fact is, Utah is heading to the Pac 10 and BYU is left holding their tiny dick in their hands. Sometimes facts are a bitch huh?
 
CONAN said:
Hey genius go back to school. It's not a theory it's a fact. It's what happened. But delusional Ute fans live in a different reality anyway so whatever.
Click to expand...

lol, it was not business as usual when Utah left.

First, the MWC invited Boise State, after turning them down just a few weeks prior.

Then, BYU went into full fledged panic mode and tried to join the WAC- only to get totally owned and humiliated by the MWC.

Is that business as usual in your book? And you're saying Ute fans are delusional and live in a different reality? lol, whatever.
 
Bronco70 said:
CONAN - I have a few questions for you. I'm not trolling, I am truly interested in your answer.

1. Do you really believe that panic ensued solely because BYU looked like they may be packing up shop?

2. Do you think the reaction would have been the same if Utah were never going to the PAC 10, and BYU had, under those circumstances, announced it's intention to go independent?

3. Do you give any credence to the theory that the MWC panicked because they had already lost one of their flagship programs, and was unwilling to part with another in such rapid succession?

4. And lastly, do you think the MWC has always considered BYU the crown jewel of their collection?
Click to expand...

I'll take on those questions.

1, 2 and 3. I agree with others who said the panic ensued because BYU was the 2nd big-time program to leave. I'm a Ute hater. I admit it. But I also admit the result would have been the same had BYU left first and then Utah announced a move to the Pac-10. And if Utah were still in the MWC, Thompson would have said, "see ya later, Cougs" and then gotten on the horn to Fresno State or Nevada.

The MWC conference would be just fine with 3 of the 4 big teams in it: Boise State, TCU and Utah or BYU. Take away the two latter teams and you not only eliminate two of the best schools in terms of football (and many other sports), you lose the entire state in terms of TV's. Now granted, the state of Utah ain't huge, but there's more people watching MWC football in Salt Lake and Provo than there are in Laramie, Fort Collins, etc.

4. There's no question BYU is the crown jewel. BYU was the driving force behind the formation of the MWC. BYU has the most viewers across the nation. However, I will admit that due to Utah getting BCS bids, and with Boise State coming aboard and adding BCS money to the pot, the importance of BYU has diminished. But really, this whole ess is Thompson's fault. BYU had brought up legal questions re: the TV contract with Versus and the Mtn, which the MWC failed to address.

BYU still wields considerable power. And right now, they're like a "swing state" in an election year. Keep BYU in the MWC and the conference might still qualify for an automatic berth when the BCS bids are reassessed. Subtract BYU (on top of Utah) and the MWC slides back into also-ran status. Replacing Utah AND BYU with Fresno State and Nevada is not exactly an even swap.
 
I don't buy that BYU was the "Crown Jewel" of the MWC. Now I do believe that when the MWC was initially formed, you could call BYU that but much has changed over time. In the history of the MWC, Utah is above .500 in head-to-head against BYU, won an equal amount of MWC titles and of course gotten the conference 2 BCS births and 2 BCS wins.

And for the record, I don't think you could annoint Utah the crown jewel either. With the addition of TCU a few years ago, the MWC actually had a few nice things going and didn't need to hang their hat on just 1 school's performance. That's the entire reason people are starting to believe the conference was worth AQ status.

With the loss of Utah but the addition of Boise, the conference was still headed in that direction. However, it obviously cannot afford to lose Boise, TCU or BYU from here on out because of Utah's defection and it would work that way regardless of who left first.

Some BYU fans get it, others clearly don't: You're not as big of a deal as you think you are. And that's not saying you're a below average program, it's just stating the facts. You tried to pull a power play, and you lost. Do you really think Nevada and Fresno bolt the WAC if a school like Notre Dame is the one talking about entering into a deal with the conference? Obviously not.
 
Jazzman12 said:
I don't buy that BYU was the "Crown Jewel" of the MWC. Now I do believe that when the MWC was initially formed, you could call BYU that but much has changed over time. In the history of the MWC, Utah is above .500 in head-to-head against BYU, won an equal amount of MWC titles and of course gotten the conference 2 BCS births and 2 BCS wins.
Click to expand...

Having lived in SoCal for several years I still have a number of friends down there that are huge PAC fans. In fact the company I work for is based in SoCal and every year the UCLA vs. USC game makes for an interesting week at work.

NONE of them even knew that Utah had gotten into the PAC until I mentioned it and to a person they all asked, "Utah? Really? Why? Are they any good?" LOL Several even mentioned how they thought the only big time school in the state of Utah was BYU, which they had all heard of. There were even a couple of people that associated Utah as BYU and mentioned BYU beating Cal last year. LOL

I'm sure Utah will turn a few heads once they start PAC play but don't delude yourself into thinking that as of now Utah has any name recognition outside of the MWC.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page
Back
Top