FanNation - The Republic of Sport

Don't forget to vote at
http://www.fannation.com/throwdowns/show/274440-utah-is-the-1-team-in-the- nation?category_id=4

one thing about any utah homers i've seen, they're a helluva lot more polite than many other knuckleheads here!

I may be a Utah homer. I do live in the state. But I am not a Ute fan. I'm not a cougar fan. I cheer for the Aggies.

However, Utah deserves a shot at the title. You just can't take that away from them. They did everything they were asked to do. It's plain wrong that half the division 1 football teams in the nation are excluded from the national championship before the season even starts. What should Utah have done differently to deserve a shot at the title?

They scheduled as good as they could. There noncoference schedule had Michigan (shouldn't have been as bad as they were), Oregon State (strong BCS program), Utah State (Instate Battle of the Brothers game), and Weber State (where Ron McBride now coaches - kind of a favor to him for all he did for the Ute program in the 90's).

Just moving to the pac-10 or another stronger conference is not as easy as you act like it is either. The idea has been tried for both Utah and BYU and it never works out. I'm sure both teams would jump on the opportunity if it were given.

Auburn not being given the chance to play in the national championship was a travesty as well. So I really don't see how pointing to history and saying that because Auburn was denied the opportunity Utah should be as well, makes any sense. If anything, it proves that the system has been messed up for a while now and something needs to be done.

Nice blog, but you've missed the point.

"Did Utah fluke win over Alabama? Maybe, maybe not."

Are you serious? Did you even WATCH the game? And if you want to talk about Homers...look no further than yourself. Prior to the Sugar Bowl the 'popular' opinion was that Utah couldn't 'hang with the Big Boys.' That a MWC team going up against an 'SEC Powerhouse like Alabama' couldn't possibly match the speed and athleticism of a BCS school. It was all about the SEC, and how GREAT Alabama is. And dollars to doughnuts, you were right there in the mix.

Now, after it's been said and done, 'homers' like you are trying to discredit the win. Because a lowly MWC team coudln't possibly have beaten a football tradition like 'Bama. SOMETHING must have happened to allow this to happen. So instead, you find fault NOW with 'Bama's schedule - playing lowly teams of the SEC. Excuse me, but according to popular opinion, the SEC is the strongest conference. Now, after a loss to a MWC team, they're the cellar dwellers of the BCS. Give me a break.

As for scheduling OOC games - why is that MOST of the elite BCS schools refuse to play the likes of Utah, TCU and BYU? You talk as if it's easy to just go out and schedule a game with USC or Texas. Those teams don't want to take a chance of potentially LOSING to a mid-major upstart.

This post started out as a slap against fair-weather fans but quickly turned into an attempt to downplay Utah's DOMINANT win over a storied Alabama program (remember all the pre-game hype about the mighty Tide?). Your motives are as transparent (and just as thin) as your knowledge of football.

Perhaps your next post could be on the multitude of self-proclaimed football experts that dot the landscape - who are all more versed in the nuances of the game, have all the answers yet still work at Wal-Mart.

Put your NASCAR shirt back on boy, and shut your pie hole.

Really? You are calling me a homer? I live in Massachusetts. My "homer" teams would be Boston College, Notre Dame, UConn, UMass, etc. Do you recognize my avatar? Probably not because it is the logo of Southern New Hampshire University, a DII school part of the Northeast X.

Secondly, I never said Bama is playing lowly teams of the SEC. Unless you truely believe that Auburn is the 13th best team in the nation, LSU is top 10 in the nation, otherwise, these two have underachieved.

Thirdly, it was not as dominant as you think. Yes, they scored 21 points off the back, but then what? The offense didn't score again until the 4th quarter.

Wal-Mart I work at not. NASCAR, I could take it or leave it; it has gone down since The Rock was removed from the circut.

As for it being easy to schedule USC or Texas, it is relativly easy. Those big college program value the oppertunity to get Utah at home because that is a nationally televised game, exposing the team to all parts of the country, not to mention the amount of money sponsors would poor in.

Once again, words are twisted. Learn to read before you post a comment. And you talk of me being a homer? Look at you first comment you have ever made.

"Really? You are calling me a homer?"

Why, yes, I am. According to your 'blog' anyone who 'jumps on the bandwagon" is a homer. And you, my friend, are on the 'discredit the Utah win' bandwagon - and NOT about fair-weather fans as your title would lead one to believe.

"Secondly, I never said Bama is playing lowly teams of the SEC"

Hmmm.....

"...but beat several overrated teams, such as LSU, Clemson, Georgia, and Auburn"

Translation: Alabama hasn't beaten anyone. While I agree that the majority of these teams underachieved this season (especially Clemson), we're still talking about the fabled SEC (minus Clemson). They recruit Blue Chip prospects, receive more money and get a lot more exposure than any other conference. On any given day, the SEC is the strongest of the conferences, and not by luck. And no, I don't say that because I'm an SEC fan. To build a team in the MWC with dominating speed and a smothering defense without all of the above-mentioned perks, is commendable. To go down into SEC territory and play against 'Bama in their backyard....and to win, is even more impressive.

"Thirdly, it was not as dominant as you think. Yes, they scored 21 points off the back, but then what? The offense didn't score again until the 4th quarter."

Again, I ask you - DID YOU WATCH THE GAME? Obviously not. Even 'Slick' Nick Saban admitted that they get owned. It's obvious that in your mind, dominate translates into points - so to you, a dominating performance would be if the Utes came out on top with 60+ points.

Look at the stats: 61 yards rushing for 'Bama who's bread and butter this season was the run. Smash-mouth, old school football and they got SHUT DOWN. Completely. On their own, the Tide settled for 3 points when they did manage to make it into Utah territory. The other two touchdowns were scored on a return and after a fumble by Brian Johnson to start the second half. Other than that, Alabama could not move the ball. Florida was behind the 8-ball much of the game against the Tide and had to rally to pull off the win. Utah's defense (which was smothering) racked up 8 sacks and completely stifled Alabama's offensive game.

I think that would classify as dominant. And Nick Saban, as untrustworthy as he is, agrees.

"As for it being easy to schedule USC or Texas, it is relativly easy"

Dude - what planet are you from? Do you even watch Division 1 football at all? There are a few big name programs that are not afraid to schedule tough OOC games - USC and Oklahoma come to mind immediately - with the Sooners taking it on the chin at home from TCU a few years back. But those schools are few and far between. Take some time and look at the 'big boys' and peruse their schedules - lots of fluff and no meat and there is a reason - which you, no doubt, are unaware of.

"Learn to read before you post a comment."

LOVED this comment - absolutely brilliant. I think I read into your blog well - it wasn't about fair-weather fans, it was about demeaning a solid, DOMINATE performance by a MWC team. I can read just fine. Maybe YOU should learn to do a little research before you post such inflammatory comments on a public board to avoid 'misinterpreted' responses such as mine.

Couple of things. I am a Utes fan, and have been for several years.So you don't need to worry that I have only recently come out declaring Utah's dominance. Just a small note, it's Southern California, not South California.
In your TD you say that, Utah beat Oklahoma in their previous BCS bowl. Check the facts. They beat Pittsburgh in the Fiesta Bowl. And there were plenty of people calling for the Utes to get a shot at #1 that year too. The problem with that year was that not only did the Utes go undefeated, but so did Auburn (who got hosed), Oklahoma, and USC. So when the bowls were done, you had Utah, Auburn, and SC undefeated. So Utah's cries were drowned out by Auburn's. This year's different because Utah's the only unbeaten team.
Secondly, you can't discredit Utah's schedule because of their conference and who they play. No one knew Michigan was going to be THAT BAD when the season started (evidenced by several of ESPN's "experts" picking them to play in a bowl game). Weber State is a DII team (which most DI teams play now), but they were good enough to host a playoff game in the DII playoffs, I believe they got to as high as #8 in the DII rankings for what it's worth). So the Utes did what they were supposed to with their schedule. And about that schedule, Oregon State beat USC the week before playing Utah, not after.
Lastly, I love how quickly fans outside of the MWC area dismiss the conference by saying if they think they're that good, schedule games with the Florida's, USC's, and Oklahoma's. If you were familiar with the Utah program, which I am after having gone to school there and being involved in the athletic department, I can tell you that teams like Utah, BYU, and TCU try. But the "big time" schools want no part of those games for 2 reasons. #1 There's a risk they will lose (like OU did to TCU 3-4 years ago, and USC did a couple years before that vs BYU), and #2 These "smaller" schools want it to be a home and home which the big guys laugh at. We can only get these type of games if we agree like TCU did this year, to go to Norman or Gainsville. Or if, like it's rumored with OU and BYU next year, we play at a neutral site (because the New Cowboys stadium is not going to be 95% OU fans). Before you criticize the Utah's for not scheduling these games, say the same thing to the BCS teams.

In the end, Utah beat everyone on their schedule. They thoroughly outplayed the "Bigger, stronger, all around better" Alabama team in basically a Bama home game. And they proved again they belong with the big boys. I am thoroughly convinced that Utah could beat Oklahoma, Texas, or USC. And I honestly think they would give Florida a game before losing a close game. I just wish that Utah could have a chance to prove themselves, and back up the claims made by them and their fans. But, thanks to the BCS BS, they won't get their chance because they started the season ranked 29 in the AP poll and 28 in the USA today. That's a jump of 23 in the AP and 22 in the USA as compared to 3 for Florida and Oklahoma in both. A rise of 7 in the AP and 6 in the USA for Texas. And a drop of 1 and 2 respectively for USC. If Utah wasn't viewed as inferior because of their conference, this argument wouldn't be occurring. It's a shame.

QUOTE(#5):

Originally posted 04:12 PM ET  01.05 by JAubin: Go Gators! 9-0

Wal-Mart I work at not.

I would have guessed more in the line of Burger King or McDonalds ( would you like fries with that sir ? )

Interesting blog and comments. He shouldn't have used the term 'fluke' win, but I don't think he meant it the way it was taken. The blogger was indicating that the win perhaps was not as significant as many Utah fans might take it. Not that they weren't the better team, especially on that night.

I agree also with his statement that being undefeated does not confer the right to say or be No. 1. I would have argued the same case if Penn St. had squeaked by Iowa while playing in a relatively weak schedule.

I don't agree much with any of the comments about scheduling. The blogger states Utah should schedule the powerhouses. How do you know they are not trying? As for the Utah fans, how do you know they are trying ? I don't think anyone really knows. And scheduling is done so far in advance you don't really know if a team is going to be good or not by the time you play them. But ultimately you will be judged by the results against the schedule you have in that particular year. It may not seem fair to you but that is how it is. Just because you beat who is in front of you, like Hawaii did last year, is not enough. Concerning the reciprocity of scheduling statement. When you are trying to gain respect in the college football world you have to take that one on the chin. I was around when Florida State was building their program back in the 70's. They could not get a big school to play them in Tallahassee so every year they went on the road to play the likes of Nebraska, Ohio St., Notre Dame, etc. They played hard and they played good. They built their program and became respected.

Utah earned a heap of respect both for themselves and for their conference this year. It will make a major difference in the way they and other MWC teams are treated in the polls next year. You should be proud of everything that has been accomplished. Of course you have an argument that you should be in the title game, but so do several other teams. And remember too that the participants were chosen prior to your win over Bama. Thats just the way it is, and I hope you can take satisfaction out of a 2nd, 3rd or 4th place finish.

Fla. 12-1, played 3 teams in the final AP top 25 and lost to Ole Miss.
Okla. 12-1 played 5 teams in the same poll and lost to Texas
Utah played 4 teams from that poll.....13-0.....'nuff said

Fla. 12-1 played 3 AP top 25 teams. 1 loss to Ole Miss
Okl. 12-1 played 5 AP top 25 teams. 1 loss to Texas
UTAH 13-0 played 4 AP top 25 teams. 0 losses.......nuff said.
Congratulations to my unofficial National Champs

Actually Utah has tried to schedule the big boys....Did you notice Michigan was on their schedule this year. Note Michigan wouldn't do a home & home & yes I know they were down this year but when Utah scheduled them they were one of the top teams in the nation. Also Utah had scheduled a home & home with Texas a couple of years ago where I think Texas would have been on the schedule this year but Texas backed out of the deal. So I don't want to hear anymore about who we play or try to play when the so called big boys don't want anything to do with us, and now you know why!

Actually Utah has tried to schedule the big boys....Did you notice Michigan was on their schedule this year. Note Michigan wouldn't do a home & home & yes I know they were down this year but when Utah scheduled them they were one of the top teams in the nation. Also Utah had scheduled a home & home with Texas a couple of years ago where I think Texas would have been on the schedule this year but Texas backed out of the deal. So I don't want to hear anymore about who we play or try to play when the so called big boys don't want anything to do with us, and now you know why!

Which conference has the best record against BCS conferences?
The answer is likely to surprise many from around the nation!

It's the Mountain West Conference that has a 10-6 record against BCS conferences. That's better than any conference in the country. The MWC went 6-2 against the PAC-10. The MWC went 2-0 against the "mighty" SEC, and 1-0 against the Big-10 and 10-6 overall against all BCS conferences!

What is it that makes USC, or Florida, or Oklahoma, or Texas' schedules so far superior to that of the UTES? How can you discredit the MWC conference and Utah's strength of schedule when the MWC has the best record against BCS conference schools.

It's clear that fans and AP voters are basing their opinions on the past and not on the present. Look at the facts. The UTES deserve consideration for #1 in the AP vote.

Lets get one thing straight. If Penn St. had beat Iowa they would have played in the national title game and no one would have said one thing about their schedule (which is essentially the same as Utah's when you look at Sagarin rankings etc.) Utah dominated Alabama and had a schedule just as strong or stronger than 60-70% of the schools in the BCS conferences. Until someone can tell me how the only undefeated team in the country doesn't deserve to hold the title of Champion I will continue to look at the BCS as nothing more than a good ol' boys club where reputation and perception count for more than actual accomplishments on the field.

This is the part of the whole argument that kills me. If Penn St. beats Iowa they are playing for the title. Has anyone looked at the schedule Penn St. played this year? It is almost identical to the utes schedule when you look at the Sagarin rankings and the did it mostly against a conference that went 1-6 in bowl games. Having said that, if they were undefeated they would have a title shot and on one would have given them any crap about the conference or schedule they played. The BCS proves yet again that reputation adn perception trump actual accomplishment on the field of play. If you don't beleive that just ask Auburn, who lost out on the chance to play for a title to USC and Oklahoma, two of the biggest media darlings ever, even though they both underachieve almost every year by losing ot Oregon St or Stanford (USC) or being beaten in BCS games year after year (Oklahoma.)

It is true Penn St. would likely have been playing for the national title if they had gone undefeated(probably a 99% chance or better. It is not true they would not have received a ton of crap about their schedule or their conference. I was on the message boards before they lost, and they were receiving a ton of it then. If you read my previous post(#9) you know that I was one of the people who did not believe they necessarily deserved a shot even if they finished undefeated.

Only two teams go to the title game under this format. Utah had not played Alabama when the teams were chosen. That seems to always be forgotten. The system is what it is. Personally, I think they got the right two teams based upon what was accomplished during the regular season.

I found this 'gem' of a thought on another board and thought I'd post it back here - being that this was posted
by the owner of this blog:

"Play Utah and Alabama again. If the same thing happens then ok, Utah is for real. However, by playing once, it could have been a fluke."

With this kind of logic, ALL teams, no matter what conference, should have to play the same team twice to make
sure their win was legit - 24 game season anyone?

I'm now convinced that the owner of this blog is actually a kid (or a really stupid adult) and am done wasting time
with such a worthless post. SI needs to pull this link from the Ute team page - this is pure garbage and provides
no RATIONAL points of conversation whatsoever.

You forget to mention the thousands of UF bandwagon fans, I think there are more on the UF bandwagon than in Utah's bandwagon.

QUOTE(#10):

Originally posted 11:11 AM ET  01.06 by macinthestix

Fla. 12-1, played 3 teams in the final AP top 25 and lost to Ole Miss.Okla. 12-1 played 5 teams in the same poll and lost to TexasUtah played 4 teams from that poll.....13-0.....'nuff said

Really you cant count TCU and BYU. They played no one. Admit that they all played a fairly week schedule. Oregon st and Bama were their only notable wins