Did you say “youte”?
as a cougar fan i chuckle that you categorized this in mtn west :)
Hey Maverick & Jinzo check out this quality Pac 12 scheduling. I’m sure you can find an excuse since it is not an SEC school
They play 10 Power 5 games (9 conference games plus BYU) and 6 true road games. No excuse needed. It’s a really solid schedule.
If and SEC team scheduled like that, I would say “Good job.” Teams that have similar schedules this year, 2016, in the SEC include any team with 10 Power 5 games and at least 5 true road games. In the SEC, Georgia is the closest to this tough of a schedule as they play 10 power 5 games (8 conference games plus GT and UNC), but they also only play 4 true road games and 1 neutral site game. Still, I would give the edge to Utah.
Gater Hater SEC fan boy. Next time try adding some substance to the scheduling discussion. Otherwise you are just trolling here.
Always nice to see power teams keep guarantee money in-state
another good intra-state match up, keeping the Utes money in-state….(cough-cough….Saban)
Not playing in-state schools in an Alabama thing. Policy was in place long before Saban got there. Will still be standard operating procedure long after he’s gone. Saban’s Michigan State and LSU teams played several in-state schools.
“What they’ve lacked is an undefeated season. Perfection, and a real case for inclusion in the national championship discussion, is the difference.”
It’s not about the wins, it’s about the money.
Probably making too much of this. The fact that both these programs have winning records in their respective conferences is good enough for me. Neither TCU nor Utah had played P5 teams on a regular basis but are doing so now. It’s amazing both programs can stand toe-to-toe with their new conference mates given the sudden uptick in competition week in, week out now.
It’s unfair to ask teams with MWC rosters to duplicate what they did in the MWC in the Big XII or Pac-12. However, the fact they even come close to doing so is quite impressive. Now that they can attract P5-level recruits and will now have seniors who have played their whole careers in a P5 conference you’re going to have to look out for TCU and Utah in the future.
This article is totally off. It is not about the winning, it is about money, market expansion and selling tickets. 68,000 seat stadium, 22,000 seat arena and one of the largest international alumni/fan bases, Brigham Young is worth a lot of money. It would be stupid to leave 100 million of annual tickets sales on the sideline because softball, soccer and whatever would not play on Sunday. The Big 12 is located in the Christian conservative bread basket so the current Big 12 members only play on Sunday if they have too as it is. The Big 12 has flirted the Brigham Young the most.
Houston, is located in one of the 10 largest cities in the World. So, that is worth something significant.
Cincinnati is located in a strong geographical fit and strong media market. Game on
Then add Memphis for 14 members and become the best basketball conference in the country, along with getting a foot print into SEC territory.
The economics clearly state Brigham Young, Houston, Cincinnati and Memphis are the ones for the Big 12 to add.
I think Houston would fit quite well in the Big-12, not really sure how they ended up in the AAC. They might get more powerful with recruits if they become a P5 team in the Big-12.
It’s real simple how Houston ended up in the AAC it’s because of the market they are in. Honestly Houston would probably get their footing in the Big 12 but it would take longer than TCU did.
Reason I believe that to be the case is by the time Houston would get into the Big 12, most of the players that propelled them to last years strong season would have graduated so you potentially could be looking at a new QB, a revamped offense (I doubt Herman will be there much past the next 2 years), and their coordinators would probably leave also.
Ultimately, TCU was the benefactor of the Big 12 needing a “close” school to their geographical standpoint.
In reality there’s only 1 or 2 programs that have had sustained success that currently belong in Power 5 conferences, and that’s Boise State and possibly BYU (obviously Notre Dame is considered a Power 5 program). If Houston has a decade where they win 8-9-10 games every year then maybe they belong but as it stands right now, their best record in school history isn’t enough to get them in to a power 5 conference. Plus I doubt the Oklahomas of the conference would be jumping for another Texas school in the conference.
The fact that this article list Houston first (and most) as a Big 12 expansion candidate suggests that the writer hasn’t quite followed all the background of what expansion is about. While Houston has had some impressive seasons, and last year was rather good, expansion isn’t solely about who is the best team. Unless the Big 12 plans to expand to 14 or more, Houston would be better served grabbing a travel partner and making a pitch to the Pac 12, whose geography makes it tough to see them expanding without a Texas team.
The Big 12 members who are clamoring for sxpansion are also the ones who are pushing for a Big 12 Network (and probably the dissolution if the Lonhorn Network in that pursuit). While I think the classic cable network model will start to lose some sway as people start leaning more and more towards a la carte options and such (where a whole state’s cable-subscribing population can no longer be depended upon to cover a conference network, whether they’re watching it or not), that’s still the model that college athletics is focusing on and the one the Big 12 seems most likely to pursue if they are able to.
And that’s why Houston would basically be as bad a choice as they could make for any of their (first 3, at least) candidates. Basically, if the Big 12 does expand right now, and Houston is in the group, it will be the Big 12 saying “ok, we give up. There’s no way we can compete money-wise so we’re going to just have the current pie (plus a tiny more since there will be a few more televised games) divided more ways than before. This would likely be the straw that broke the camel’s back, setting the dominoes falling towards an exodus, once the GoR is up in a few years, of any of the teams who have the ability to make a move. So around 2025, the end result would be a Big 12 with Houston but without Texas, Oklahoma, and likely a few others.
If the Big 12 does expand it will be in states they don’t currently have members in, in the hope that they can convince the TV people that Cincy, when playing the right opponents, can deliver a serious chunk of the Ohio market, or that Memphis can deliver a considerable amount of Tennessee… or UCF can Florida, or UConn can Connecticut and a bit if New York. Or BYU can bring Mormon fans to their TV sets nationally.
Not trying to insult Houston here. If the last round of expansion happened now rather than when it did, UofH would probably be neck-and-neck with TCU as far as who would get in. Both are in metro areas of the state, and wile TCU’s longevity of their success would be appealing, Houston’s student body and alumni numbers would be a definite counterargument. But it happened then, not now. The Big 12 has 4 teams from Texas already (and is doubled up in 2 other less-populous states). I honestly don’t believe there are currently any candidates out there who benefit the conference more than they’d hurt it for now, but if you were to be optimistic and say that the TV people would be happy to dole out a significant amount of money for Memphis drawing in the Tennessee market, or Cincy drawing the Ohio market, and that the upgrade in conference membership would propel the invitees to new levels of success… those footprint-expanding gambles would be the gambles to make. Not Houston.
I live north of Houston, adding UH doesn’t do anything at all for the Big 12. This is predominately TAMU country due to the proximity, but if you launch a Big 12 Network you’ve already got the TV market covered with UT and to a lesser extent Baylor, TCU, and TTU. The Big 12 is pretty much left with the slim pickings at this point, they should’ve grabbed Louisville while they were available and they could’ve added Cincinnati to give WVU more logical travel partners.
The problem with this is because he knows none of these schools will bring in huge amounts of revenue with them, and because of the fact that he is to much of a dam liberal craving for money. Bowlsby is having a hard time excepting the fact that no matter which way he goes about this, he knows he is not going to be able to compete money wise with all the other conferences right now, and that the only thing he really can do is just try to build a stable foundation for the future so he maybe could grab some potential big revenue schools such as Florida St. or Clemson. Because of this problem, the Big 12 is having a hard time trying to move forward to expand. Though because they know that the only way this conference is ever going to survive is by expanding. Bowlsby, whether he likes it or not, knows he is going to have to accept the reality of what’s gone on. Which gets us to this point right here is. Out of all the schools, which ones do they think will give this conference stability until realignment happens in the 20’s.
In my opinion I think they need to go to 14 teams and the first two teams are obvious choices and that’s Memphis and Houston and the reason for them are simple. Houston is the first choice because of the stability they bring and the future potential they have. Even though Houston won’t bring in any potential future revenue the stability they the Big12 is enormous for a couple of reasons. 1. Adding Houston would help the Big12 dig in to the recruiting pipeline of A&M and LSU and help steal recruits away from them, which if you haven’t noticed is a huge recruiting ground for both of them. 2. It would help stabilize the market for the Big12 and possible even help steal a couple of thousand tvs away from the SEC, when you consider that the only reason that some of the people down there root for A&M is because all of them hate Texas and the reason they chose A&M was because it was the next closest school to them that was in a p5 conference. With that said Houston would be like a barrier for the Big12 in keeping the SEC out of Texas.
Memphis is the next best choice because of the potential value it has. 1. If Memphis can stay competitive in both football and basketball. Their potential tv market could expand greatly, especially by the time basketball season rolls around considering Tennessee’s basketball program is trash. The Big12 would basically be able to control the basketball market in this that state considering Memphis is the only competitive p5 team in that state. On top of that with Memphis updating all their facilities with the new money they have, the potential for even more money coming from higher ticket prices would be there to. 2. Adding Memphis would allow the Big12 to dig into the SEC territory both in recruiting somewhat and in the market, considering if the is nothing big is going in the SEC people could switch off and watch Memphis play a ranked team such as TCU, OU, or Okst, which would help steal viewers off the SEC Network here and there.
In my opinion I think the other two teams should be Cincy and Boise st for different reasons. I chose Cincy because it allows them to get into a new market. Though the problem with Cincy is the only place they are going to get views from is Cincy. On top of that with Cincy still sitting right in the middle of the conference they are in terms of rankings, nobody knows if they are going to be able to compete in the Big12. Because of that their viewer market is going to go up and down depending on how good they do, considering a lot of them will just flip over to watch Ohio st.
I chose Boise st for a couple of reason. 1. Even though the market in Idaho is very small. If Boise st can stay competitive in football their potential market outside of the state could be a lot larger. Especially states such as Colorado, when you consider they have no good teams. The potential for them to get into larger markets such as Denver is really great.
I know you maybe wondering why I didn’t included the two Florida schools. The reason I never chose them was, considering how small of the market they have and considering how much they struggle as is in their current conferences. Bringing them up into the Big12 will make it practically impossible for them to win, which basically cuts that already small market in half to basically nothing considering nobody is going to watch a team consistently lose. With that being said all adding a Florida team will do is cut into the revenue the team we currently have are making and that will surely piss teams like TCU, Tech, OU, and Okst the hell off. Which brings me to this point. The only way the Big12 is going to get into the Florida market is by taking Florida st away from the ACC come conference realignment time.
Not sure how long West Virginia is going to last in The Big-12.
Would West Virginia possibly end up in the Atlantic Coast Conference or the American Athletic Conference if they are no longer in the Big 12 at some point?
In my opinion West Virginia will fit perfect in the ACC, there you will have in conferences rivalries with Va.Tech, Virginia & don’t forget the backyard brawl with Pitt. I never liked the mountaineers in the Big-12, makes no sense to me. I think West Virginia is too big of a team to head back to the AAC. If they can bring something to the table like recruiting or TV market then I could see the SEC going after them as well.
I miss the old backyard brawl rivalry between West Virginia and Pittsburgh. It would be great to see that annually again!
Basically the ACC inviting WVU would be like the Pac12 inviting New Mexico.
Can’t compare TCU and Utah to Houston, Memphis, UCF, Colorado State. TCU and Utah were top national programs when they switched, then just had an adjustment period to begin competing again at high levels. These other schools do not show to have that same track record or ability to make that adjustment, IMO.
Agreed. Utah had two undefeated seasons with BCS bowl wins before joining the Pac-12. TCU had an undefeated season and a Rose Bowl win, and another BCS bowl appearance before joining the Big 12. Both teams had several excellent seasons, not just one or two, before “moving up”. And both still have the same excellent head coach now that they’ve had for more than 10 years. Those are the reasons that Utah and TCU have only had slight drop-offs in total number of wins since “moving up” to stronger football conferences.
Teams with less history of success, or more coaching turnover, or both, would get crushed their first several years after moving up. Instead of matching TCU’s first several years in the Big 12, they’d be more like Baylor’s first several years in the Big 12 when Baylor averaged only 1 conference win per year.
12 team expansion: BYU and Memphis. 14 team expansion: BYU, Boise state, Cincinnati, and Memphis. Best bet for the Big 12.
Agree with @David May and @MJB – Colorado moved to PAC-12 same time Utah did, and has only won maybe a half-dozen conference games total in 5 years – they can’t hang. Even the first season, Utah was in a three-way tie for PAC-12 South title until their last game – which ironically was the only Colorado conference win that year besides Arizona, which is the only PAC-12 team the Utes haven’t beaten in-conference.
Utah beat Arizona first year in the conference 2011.
SDSU has some solid home-and-homes lined up – granted the majority of them are from Cali schools but still impressive.
So appears after this season Utah won’t be playing an OOC game versus a P5 opponent until 2023. BYU as Utah’s ‘major’ OOC opponent every season will not be viewed kindly with CFP committee. The Utes must improve their OOC scheduling unless they want to become irrelevant, once again.
“BYU as Utah’s ‘major’ OOC opponent every season will not be viewed kindly with CFP committee.”
Uh, yes it will be. BYU has a better football program than half of the Power Five schools.
How is Utah’s schedule strength with CFP committee already doomed? I thought that the days of 2018 polls based on 2015 recruiting rankings was done and the CFP committee would be objective.
I am optimistic there can be objectivity. I also think BYU, Northern Illinois and several TBD opponents have a chance to be solid in any given season.
NIU could be tricky, the MAC is very cyclical. If Fleck stays WMU will be near the top, CMU is playing very strong right now but their QB only has 1 more season, Toledo is seemingly always solid, and BGSU appears to be making their cyclical push.
Most upper division P5 programs play at least one OOC game against another upper division P5 program.
For example, in the Pac-12 Stanford, UCLA, USC, Oregon, Arizona State consistently try to play at least one top P5 program.
BYU might be better than some of the lower division P5 programs but they certainly are not upper division.
If Utah wants to be considered an upper division team, they must schedule better. Otherwise they can join with Arizona and WSU with the worst scheduling. WSU has an excuse, whereas Utah does not.
Pac12 plays a 9 game conference schedule so that is 9 P5 programs right there. BYU is recognized as a P5 equivalent by the conferences. So Utah’s schedule will be better than TCU, Baylor and most SEC schedules. This is several years out and who knows what the playoff will look like by then.
Great news. Glad to see these two schools are not letting the changing landscape of college football impact their historic rivalry.
Hello, Longhorns and Aggies!!
Not going to happen anytime soon. Texas wants no part of a&M. Also, texas has built an OOC many years in the future with quality p5 OOC, thus they have no need to get A&M, UT has 4 years playing 2 p5’s OOC with a 9 game conf schedule and no FCS games. A&M meanwhile has many openings and never schedules 2 p5’s OOC even though they have 8 game conf schedule.
You are way wrong, friend. It’s the Ags that want no part of the Horns. They are yesterdays news in the State of Texas. Aggies OWN recruiting in Texas.
Glad to see it coming back. This game is why I became a college football fan and it has been missed. It is an emotional drain and is hard on both teams to have at the beginning of the year. If Stanford and USC can schedule Notre Dame toward the end of the year, not sure why Utah can’t get the Pac 12 to allow them to schedule their in state rival in November. Why force the Colorado rivalry?? I completely see where Dr Hill is coming from though. A 9 game Pac 12 schedule is crazy enough. It is obvious that BYU, as an independent, needs this game more than Utah does.
While it helps Pac-12 scheduling to have a team playing BYU during Thanksgiving week, it doesn’t have to be Utah vs. BYU.
What would be most helpful,to the Pac-12 schedulemaker, actually, is if BYU played a Pac-12 North team in years when ND is playing at Stanford that weekend, and a Pac-12 South team in years when ND is playing at USC that weekend. But of course scheduling never works out quite that cleanly.
BYU needs it more in October or November. For civility reasons, I wish the game would just go away.
Good to see this get worked out.
On a different note, I see the 2019 BYU at Wash St game now has a date of 10/12. Where did this info come from?
Educated guess from a reader after communicating with Tom Holmoe.
Here are the two sources I used, folks:
1.BYU has chronological road and home opponent listings by year – being after USU and before UMass, this meant 10/12, 10/19 (if BSU not already known for this date), 10/26, 11/2, 11/9 or 11/16:
2. Tom Holmoe’s e-mails to Chris Hill list the first date above booked with an opponent and the latter four open dates:
3. The only date previously thought to be open now not mentioned as open by TH was 10/12
4. 10/12 is a convenient date for the Pac-12 with a ND-P12 game taking place.