The 2014 season football thread

[U-Ute]

A place to discuss pre-spring ball player movements, coaching changes, player tweets/instagrams, spring ball predictions, etc.

I thought I'd start it off with some points I took away from the Dave Christensen press conference:



Dave said that the new offense will look much like last year's. Just a few added wrinkles.
Up tempo when things are clicking, but can't have quick 3-and-outs putting the D in bad positions.
Kyle and Dave stayed close after Idaho State and talked often. Their wives are good friends.
Kyle felt like turnover margin was the story last season on both sides of the ball.
Kyle said that DE took the change with class. My feeling is that DE knows he is on the tail end of his career, but wants to stay connected with football as long as he can still contribute.
Someone else can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Kyle also said that he will be the special teams coordinator unless something else changes and someone becomes available.

[concerned]

A place to discuss pre-spring ball player movements, coaching changes, player tweets/instagrams, spring ball predictions, etc.

I thought I'd start it off with some points I took away from the Dave Christensen press conference:



Dave said that the new offense will look much like last year's. Just a few added wrinkles.
Up tempo when things are clicking, but can't have quick 3-and-outs putting the D in bad positions.
Kyle and Dave stayed close after Idaho State and talked often. Their wives are good friends.
Kyle felt like turnover margin was the story last season on both sides of the ball.
Kyle said that DE took the change with class. My feeling is that DE knows he is on the tail end of his career, but wants to stay connected with football as long as he can still contribute.
Someone else can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Kyle also said that he will be the special teams coordinator unless something else changes and someone becomes available.



Also said Travis out for spring, will be in the mix to start if he is cleared this summer. Continues to sound like they dont expect him back.

[Scratch]

When Kyle was talking about QB options and QB competition, he mentioned "two redshirt freshmen" and then mentioned Manning and Cox by name. No mention of Thomas. In case there was any doubt, that probably confirms what most have suspected about Thomas's future as a QB.

[sancho]

When Kyle was talking about QB options and QB competition, he mentioned "two redshirt freshmen" and then mentioned Manning and Cox by name. No mention of Thomas. In case there was any doubt, that probably confirms what most have suspected about Thomas's future as a QB.

Let's just hope he sticks around.

[UBlender]

Also said Travis out for spring, will be in the mix to start if he is cleared this summer. Continues to sound like they dont expect him back.

But the tone also made it sound like Travis has decided that if he is cleared he will definitely come back. Many have speculated that he could/should retire even if he is medically cleared, but Kyle's tone suggested that this will not happen. If the doctors say he can play, he will play.

[U-Ute]

When Kyle was talking about QB options and QB competition, he mentioned "two redshirt freshmen" and then mentioned Manning and Cox by name. No mention of Thomas. In case there was any doubt, that probably confirms what most have suspected about Thomas's future as a QB.

He did mention Micah a bit after that. But it did seem like an after thought.

[FountainOfUte]

If their public rhetoric is going to lean one way or the other in regard to Wilson, it's going to be more toward the "he's done" side of things, right? Besides preparing for the worst if he retires -- which they'd better be doing anyway -- what do they have to gain by leading the fans, boosters, media, etc. to believe he might come back? Nothing good comes from that. Whatever I'm hearing about it in the media, I'm actually assuming the outlook is a little better.

I have no inside sources, but I think it's sincerely 50/50 that he returns, but if I have to hedge, I'd increase the odds a bit that he comes back. I don't think it's as bleak as people think, but naturally everyone is being super careful. I hope I'm right. ;)

[SoCalPat]

If their public rhetoric is going to lean one way or the other in regard to Wilson, it's going to be more toward the "he's done" side of things, right? Besides preparing for the worst if he retires -- which they'd better be doing anyway -- what do they have to gain by leading the fans, boosters, media, etc. to believe he might come back? Nothing good comes from that. Whatever I'm hearing about it in the media, I'm actually assuming the outlook is a little better.

I have no inside sources, but I think it's sincerely 50/50 that he returns, but if I have to hedge, I'd increase the odds a bit that he comes back. I don't think it's as bleak as people think, but naturally everyone is being super careful. I hope I'm right. ;)

As far as expectations of playing are concerned, we learned something from Jordan Wynn, methinks.

[Hadrian]

Well we picked up another QB. Jason Thompson is transferring from Wyoming (and they're pissed). No one is sure if he can play this year but with all of the QBs we have I wouldn't be surprised to see him end up at another position.

[ute4eva]

I was reading elsewhere that he was recruited to University of Washington as a safety but wanted to play quarterback so he went to Wyoming. Rivals only showed him having two offers in 2012. Washington and Wyoming. It looks like he's a good athlete and would make a good safety.

[USS Utah]

If their public rhetoric is going to lean one way or the other in regard to Wilson, it's going to be more toward the "he's done" side of things, right? Besides preparing for the worst if he retires -- which they'd better be doing anyway -- what do they have to gain by leading the fans, boosters, media, etc. to believe he might come back? Nothing good comes from that. Whatever I'm hearing about it in the media, I'm actually assuming the outlook is a little better.

I have no inside sources, but I think it's sincerely 50/50 that he returns, but if I have to hedge, I'd increase the odds a bit that he comes back. I don't think it's as bleak as people think, but naturally everyone is being super careful. I hope I'm right. ;)

Wisdom would suggest that they at least prepare for him not being cleared medically.

[concerned]

As far as expectations of playing are concerned, we learned something from Jordan Wynn, methinks.

boy, that is the truth.

[sancho]

This article claims that a record number of underclassmen declared for the draft this year. Is football changing? Will early departures soon be the norm for power programs?

http://college-football.si.com/2014/01/16/nfl-draft-early-entry-winners-losers/?eref=sihp

[Utah]

This article claims that a record number of underclassmen declared for the draft this year. Is football changing? Will early departures soon be the norm for power programs?

http://college-football.si.com/2014/01/16/nfl-draft-early-entry-winners-losers/?eref=sihp

I'm ok with early departures from NCAA. In football, you have the kid for three years. That is forever. RS the kid, a year to get his feet wet, then a year to explode. I'm okay with that.

[Utah]

I wonder if RS will become an easier sell to a kid if they see a lot of RS Sophomores being drafted. Gives them a year to work on their bodies and minds and avoid injuries early that can derail a career. This might end up making football a lot safer at the college level as well.

[concerned]

If you are only going to have them 3 years, why have them redshirt at all? better to get three years play out of them than two.

[jrj84105]

[ Quote lost]

RE: Wilson's health
I'm glad the coaches are preparing for the worst this time. That said, I have higher hopes of Wilson returning to a productive state than I did for Wynn going into both 2011 and 2012. Wilson's vascular issue will either be fixed or not fixed. If he comes back, it will be without any residual impairment or any increased risk for sequelae from his condition. For Wynn's shoulder injuries, impairment was a certainty as was increased risk for reinjury. For Wynn, there was no way to return his shoulder back to "factory", but for Wilson, there is a good chance that he will be healthier than before the condition was discovered. That's a big difference to me.

[sancho]

Wilner doesn't like our chances next season:

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2014/01/16/pac-12-football-projections-for-the-2014-division-races/

[LA Ute]

Wilner doesn't like our chances next season:

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2014/01/16/pac-12-football-projections-for-the-2014-division-races/

It's kind of hard to find anyone who does.

[UTEopia]

Wilner doesn't like our chances next season:

http://blogs.mercurynews.com/collegesports/2014/01/16/pac-12-football-projections-for-the-2014-division-races/

And it is hard to argue with his rationale.

[Utah]

If you are only going to have them 3 years, why have them redshirt at all? better to get three years play out of them than two.

Why redshirt them? Brian John, Jordan Wynn, Travis Wilson. There are three reasons to redshirt true freshmen. Their bodies aren't ready for college football. Some kids are ready for college football and they are getting paid by the SEC to play. Good for them. Most aren't. Redshirting allows a kid to grow physically and mentally and get them ready for college football.

Like I said, if you can show a kid that by redshirting they can be better prepared and protect their bodies, this might be a good thing for college football.

[Utah]

Wilner is just being a douche. Let's put it this way:

Last year we won 5 games. We won 4 before Wilson was hurt, then one after than. During our hurt Wilson streak, we could have won the USC, ASU, WSU and Arizona games with half a QB. If Wilson doesn't get healthy, we win at least one of those three games (WSU for sure. Schulz handed WSU 14 points...and we lost by 11).

Fast forward to this year. We lose Reilly, which is HUGE. BUT, we should be better everywhere else on defense. Orchard should be better, our tackles should improve, our LB's WILL be better and same goes for our secondary. We will have depth at every defensive position.

Defensively, we will be better.

Now onto the offense. Christensen is a fantastic OC. If anyone argues differently, they are dumb. He immediately upgrades the WR, TE, and OL positions with his schemes, coaching and track record. WR will be deeper, RB will be deeper, OL will be deeper. BUT, our biggest weakness is still our QB.

Now, I have been a Wilson homer, but reality is, even with Utah at 4-2, he was a little better than average. Would it be a stretch to think that Manning or Cox couldn't replicate what Wilson did? I bet they could. So, if they can replicate what Wilson did in his second year, in their second year, then we will be bowling.

I don't get why everyone is so down on Utah. Everyone talked about how crappy Wilson was playing last year, but now everyone is talking about how Manning and Cox have no chance to play at Wilson's level...I don't get it.

If Wilson doesn't get hurt, we go bowling. We are in the same spot we were this year: a second year QB, a tough schedule, a tough defense...but there are two major differences:

1 - Our Offensive coaches are better.

2 - We won't have a walk-on QB backing up our QB.

I would be shocked if we don't go bowling last year and I don't get why everyone is so down on Utah.

[Utah]

"In the 2007 season, Christensen's offense used this scheme to good effect by scoring a school record 558 points. Additionally, Missouri ranked fifth in total offensive yards (490.29 per game), eighth in scoring offense (39.86 points per game), and ninth in passing yards (314.07 per game). The same season propelled Chase Daniel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chase_Daniel) to Heisman (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heisman) finalist status. Martin Rucker (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Rucker_(American_football)) and Jeremy Maclin (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Maclin) were named consensus All-Americans, making it the first time two Tigers were named as such in the same season. Christensen himself was a finalist for the Broyles Award (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Broyles_Award) and Rivals.com (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rivals.com) named him as the Offensive Coordinator of the Year.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Christensen#cite_note-tigers-2)"

His QB's at Wyoming: Austyn Carter Samuels - a true freshman. He had a great season for a true freshman
Then he had Brett Smith as a true freshman as well.

He will start off with QB's better than two kids as true freshman. Manning and Cox are both PAC-12 QB's and better QB's than Samuels and Smith at the same point in their careers. Why can't he do the same with them? And if he does, we will win more than 6 games.

Buck up Ute fans, things are looking up.

[Hot Lunch]

Wilner is probably the most dialed Pac-12 blogger there is. He gives great insight and when I want to read something well written non-homer info about the Pac-12, he is who I go to. I wouldn't start saying he is being douchey. He is calling a spade a spade right now.

[Utah]

So, do you think our defense will be worse than it was last year?

Do you think it is highly unlikely that Manning or Cox can't replicate what Wilson did last year?

Do you think we make a bowl game if Wilson doesn't get hurt?

So, if our defense should be better, if Manning/Cox can do what Wilson did, and if both can replicate what Wilson did, and the odds of both getting hurt are extremely low, why would that make us worse than Colorado?

I like Wilner, but this article is a joke. We will be better at every position, we get a Michigan team that isn't that great right now, and USC and Oregon at home in the cold.

We should beat Idaho St, Fresno St, Washington State (and don't give me that "they beat us crap." We won't have a walk-on QB that spots them 14 next year), and Colorado. That is 4 wins.

We should be in these games: Michigan, UCLA, Oregon St, USC, ASU, Stanford, Arizona.

We have a 99% chance of losing to Oregon.

As tough as our schedule is next year, we only have one "guaranteed" loss. We can beat every other team. We are better than 4 of those teams. That means out of 7 games that are winnable, we only need two wins to beat our record this year.

We will be better at every position next year. Why couldn't the one point loss to ASU be a win? Or the game where we threw 6 picks? Or 3 picks? Or a pick six to start the game?

Lazy by Wilner. Or doing it on purpose to drive up clicks.

[LA Ute]

Buck up Ute fans, things are looking up.

I like to be optimistic, but the hard-to-explain underperformance of so many aspects of the program, including a series of decisions from the top that make us go :blink:, have made a lot of fans very cautious. Still, I hope you are right and that next year at this time we are all reflecting on a bowl win.

[Applejack]

So, do you think our defense will be worse than it was last year?

Do you think it is highly unlikely that Manning or Cox can't replicate what Wilson did last year?

Do you think we make a bowl game if Wilson doesn't get hurt?

So, if our defense should be better, if Manning/Cox can do what Wilson did, and if both can replicate what Wilson did, and the odds of both getting hurt are extremely low, why would that make us worse than Colorado?

I like Wilner, but this article is a joke. We will be better at every position, we get a Michigan team that isn't that great right now, and USC and Oregon at home in the cold.

We should beat Idaho St, Fresno St, Washington State (and don't give me that "they beat us crap." We won't have a walk-on QB that spots them 14 next year), and Colorado. That is 4 wins.

We should be in these games: Michigan, UCLA, Oregon St, USC, ASU, Stanford, Arizona.

We have a 99% chance of losing to Oregon.

As tough as our schedule is next year, we only have one "guaranteed" loss. We can beat every other team. We are better than 4 of those teams. That means out of 7 games that are winnable, we only need two wins to beat our record this year.

We will be better at every position next year. Why couldn't the one point loss to ASU be a win? Or the game where we threw 6 picks? Or 3 picks? Or a pick six to start the game?

Lazy by Wilner. Or doing it on purpose to drive up clicks.

I'm not convinced the D will be improved. We lose our best DB (by far), out best interior lineman (by far), and our best DE/LB (by far). Two of those guys will get drafted and all three might. Yes everyone should improve, but I don't see the talent to replace Reilly or McGill (I now trust Kyle to patch the interior of the D-line.

Also, I would be shocked if one of our freshmen QBs can replicate Wilson's production. Freshmen QBs are extremely unreliable (Wilson was bad as a freshman). I think our only hope for improving next year is if Wilson comes back.

[sancho]

I like to be optimistic, but the hard-to-explain underperformance of so many aspects of the program, including a series of decisions from the top that make us go :blink:, have made a lot of fans very cautious. Still, I hope you are right and that next year at this time we are all reflecting on a bowl win.

I don't think it's so hard to explain. We haven't had a QB stay healthy in years, and we lost our three best offensive players to injury this year.

Again, we were one play away in any number of games from never having this type of conversation.

[sancho]

Wilner is probably the most dialed Pac-12 blogger there is. He gives great insight and when I want to read something well written non-homer info about the Pac-12, he is who I go to. I wouldn't start saying he is being douchey. He is calling a spade a spade right now.

All reporters have biases, and all local reporters have some homerism. Wilner is no exception. But, yes, this prediction is justifiable.

[jrj84105]

The variety pack of Cox, Manning, and Thomas puts DC in a really, really hard position trying to install his offense when he has three QB's who are each suited to running a different type of offense. Additionally, DC goes in without being particularly familiar with their individual skillsets. This can't be minimized; this is an extremely huge challenge that DC is presented with and it is the result of a pattern of completely directionless QB recruiting. Oh, and add to that, TW might return and cause DC to make large adjustments to his partially installed offense when fall camp comes around. We were already facing some very difficult challenges to our offensive system when TW went down, and adding a new OC at this time only makes things more complicated.

This isn't DC's fault, but it's his burden and it's a very large one.

[sancho]

This isn't DC's fault, but it's his burden and it's a very large one.

Agree, and the burden is made larger by the masses seemingly accepting the idea that it's "bowl game or you're fired" for this staff.

You have commented on recruiting QBs with different styles before. I can see your point, but I'm still in the "get the best you can" camp. It seems like most of the top teams are doing the same thing (with the exception of USC and Alabama). And I still have hope for Thomas as a DB. I think our approach to give that style of QB an honest shot at the job will land us some top athletes that we would not get otherwise.

[LA Ute]

Agree, and the burden is made larger by the masses seemingly accepting the idea that it's "bowl game or you're fired" for this staff.

You have commented on recruiting QBs with different styles before. I can see your point, but I'm still in the "get the best you can" camp. It seems like most of the top teams are doing the same thing (with the exception of USC and Alabama). And I still have hope for Thomas as a DB. I think our approach to give that style of QB an honest shot at the job will land us some top athletes that we would not get otherwise.

FWIW, DC said in his interview with Riley that he is in the "get the best you can" camp" and that the offense he likes is flexibly designed so he can use various types of QBs. Maybe just coachspeak, but interesting.

[jrj84105]

It's not wrong to go after the "best you can get" but I really strongly feel there is an appropriate sequence for getting to that point.

1) Establish an offensive identity.
2) Recruit the "best you can get".
a) If you have an identity, most of "the best you can get" will be the kids who see themselves as good fits for the central tendencies of your offense. You establish a selection bias where the "best you can get" will disproportionately be kids that fit your system. It's mutually beneficial co-selection.
b) You may get a great local kid or a kid with some sort of program or personnel connection who requires a departure from the central tendencies to perform at his peak, but with an established identity, that temporary departure won't change the trajectory of your recruiting and take you away from your core identity.

A program should always recruit the "best it can get" with the exception being a program that has failed to develop a sufficient identity. We are such a train wreck in that regards, that I think we needed to step backward and actually really rebuild a recognizable identity, even if that meant passing on a talented but mismatched HS prospect to bring in a less talented but more system congruent player. I think we had the opportunity and good will of the fanbase and donors to do a more complete rebuild earlier in the PAC voyage, but now KW is running out of time and I think skipping the critical step 1 is going to bite him in the ass this year.

PS: I think our defense exemplifies this point. We take "the best we can get" on D and it turns out, that because we have a recognizeable system, we have appeal to interior D-linemen and lock down corners. We consistently replenish those position with a high success rate for the guys we recruit because the "best guys we can get" include a lot of guys that select us specifically for our defensive identity. (It's also a reason why the "best we can get" didn't really help our LB group and why we had to take a more targeted recruiting approach to that position to intentionally rebuild our identity- hence the transfer fallout of at this spot).

In summary, your best player shouldn't force you to change your system, he should allow you to transcend your system. I think that captures my philosophical issue with how we recruit QB's.

[Utah]

I posted a longer version of this on Utefans, but this is the situation we are in:

Our depth is better.
A lot of our positions will be better next year (the exceptions being....whoever plays in Riley's spot).

QB at worst is a wash
RB will be better
WR will be better
OL will be better
TE will be better
DT will be better
DE - Orchard will be better, depth will be better
LB will be better
CB will be better (yes, we lose McGill, but he only played one year, we will have two guys starting with starting experience, whereas last year NONE of our CB had any starting experience)
S will be better

Schedule wise, I know everyone loves to lament how hard next year will be and blah, blah, blah, but reality is we were #3 or #5 in SOS this year. Odds are, that won't happen again. We trade Weber for ISU (wash, both suck), USU for Fresno (USU is better), and BYU for Michigan (BYU was 8-5 with their marquee win over Texas, Mich was 7-6 with their Marquee win over ND with no QB, wash).

We won't have to face Cook, Barr, the Arizona RB, Stanford loses a lot of players, USC loses a lot of players, we get Oregon and USC at home in the cold, WSU loses most of their OL and secondary, etc, etc, etc. Our schedule will be easier next year. Maybe not a lot, but we don't need it to be a lot easier to make a bowl game.

So, we have better players, better coaches, and an easier schedule. But, we will suck worse. Ummm...I don't follow the logic. Sorry.

I just think it has become trendy and cool to bitch and moan.

[Utah]

It's not wrong to go after the "best you can get" but I really strongly feel there is an appropriate sequence for getting to that point.

1) Establish an offensive identity.
2) Recruit the "best you can get".
a) If you have an identity, most of "the best you can get" will be the kids who see themselves as good fits for the central tendencies of your offense. You establish a selection bias where the "best you can get" will disproportionately be kids that fit your system. It's mutually beneficial co-selection.
b) You may get a great local kid or a kid with some sort of program or personnel connection who requires a departure from the central tendencies to perform at his peak, but with an established identity, that temporary departure won't change the trajectory of your recruiting and take you away from your core identity.

A program should always recruit the "best it can get" with the exception being a program that has failed to develop a sufficient identity. We are such a train wreck in that regards, that I think we needed to step backward and actually really rebuild a recognizable identity, even if that meant passing on a talented but mismatched HS prospect to bring in a less talented but more system congruent player. I think we had the opportunity and good will of the fanbase and donors to do a more complete rebuild earlier in the PAC voyage, but now KW is running out of time and I think skipping the critical step 1 is going to bite him in the ass this year.

PS: I think our defense exemplifies this point. We take "the best we can get" on D and it turns out, that because we have a recognizeable system, we have appeal to interior D-linemen and lock down corners. We consistently replenish those position with a high success rate for the guys we recruit because the "best guys we can get" include a lot of guys that select us specifically for our defensive identity. (It's also a reason why the "best we can get" didn't really help our LB group and why we had to take a more targeted recruiting approach to that position to intentionally rebuild our identity- hence the transfer fallout of at this spot).

In summary, your best player shouldn't force you to change your system, he should allow you to transcend your system. I think that captures my philosophical issue with how we recruit QB's.

I don't get this "we have 15 QB's that play 15 different styles of QB" argument. Look at who we have right now:

Wilson - probably 50/50 runner/passer
Manning - more passer than runner
Cox - more runner than passer
Thomas - more runner than passer
Isom - more runner than passer
Hansen - more runner than passer
Schulz - more shitty QB than anything

Manning is the only odd duck there. Ask Foles how successful a QB can be in a "running" offense. Or ask Kelly how hard it is to make tweaks to an offense to play to your strengths.

I think this is another argument that has become trendy to say, but when you look at it, it isn't that big of a deal.

It would be nice to have all running QB's or pocket passers. Reality is, our depth sucked after 2011. We need bodies. We now have Wilson (maybe), Hansen, Manning, Thomas, Cox, Isom as our QB's. That is 6 QB's that have the talent to play at this level. One of them may or may not be a great runner (Manning, but no one has seen him play, so we don't know), one of them is a solid runner (Wilson) and four are running QB's.

There is no schizophrenia here.

[jrj84105]

I'll argue one last point and maybe try to convince you that Adam Schulz is not a very good quarterback, but he's not shitty.

In 2012 WSU gave up 163 ypg and 4.0 ypc while in 2013 they gave up 187 ypg and 4.5 ypc. Going into the game we were struggling to score points and were on the road with an inexperienced starting QB. Strategically, it was critical that against this piss poor run defense we establish the run early and let our struggling QB settle in. But we have a problem. We're trying to establish a run game out of the shotgun and a single back personnel group with a QB who cannot sell the read option to save his life. Failure to run the ball puts our struggling QB in obvious passing situations deep in our own territory early in the game. Schulz blows it big time. The issue is that we're in the situation because we couldn't run the ball (not until the end of the game when WSU went to a more prevent defense was York successful). We couldn't run the ball because our QB couldn't sell the read option. Schulz's lack of mobility- a system fit issue- put him on the ropes even before the knockout punches were delivered. Schulz isn't shitty. He played shitty because we as a team could not execute the primary component of the gameplan due to his inability to run the ball. If we have a mobile QB, even if he's the mobile QB equivalent of Hays, we execute that gameplan and win that game.

[Utah]

I'll argue one last point and maybe try to convince you that Adam Schulz is not a very good quarterback, but he's not shitty.

In 2012 WSU gave up 163 ypg and 4.0 ypc while in 2013 they gave up 187 ypg and 4.5 ypc. Going into the game we were struggling to score points and were on the road with an inexperienced starting QB. Strategically, it was critical that against this piss poor run defense we establish the run early and let our struggling QB settle in. But we have a problem. We're trying to establish a run game out of the shotgun and a single back personnel group with a QB who cannot sell the read option to save his life. Failure to run the ball puts our struggling QB in obvious passing situations deep in our own territory early in the game. Schulz blows it big time. The issue is that we're in the situation because we couldn't run the ball (not until the end of the game when WSU went to a more prevent defense was York successful). We couldn't run the ball because our QB couldn't sell the read option. Schulz's lack of mobility- a system fit issue- put him on the ropes even before the knockout punches were delivered. Schulz isn't shitty. He played shitty because we as a team could not execute the primary component of the gameplan due to his inability to run the ball. If we have a mobile QB, even if he's the mobile QB equivalent of Hays, we execute that gameplan and win that game.

Awesome. That was the best breakdown of Schulz I've ever read. Thanks. Great post. I learned a lot from it.

Thanks. A lot of good points and I was a bit harsh with Schulz.

[Applejack]

I posted a longer version of this on Utefans, but this is the situation we are in:

Our depth is better.
A lot of our positions will be better next year (the exceptions being....whoever plays in Riley's spot).

QB at worst is a wash
RB will be better
WR will be better
OL will be better
TE will be better
DT will be better
DE - Orchard will be better, depth will be better
LB will be better
CB will be better (yes, we lose McGill, but he only played one year, we will have two guys starting with starting experience, whereas last year NONE of our CB had any starting experience)
S will be better

Schedule wise, I know everyone loves to lament how hard next year will be and blah, blah, blah, but reality is we were #3 or #5 in SOS this year. Odds are, that won't happen again. We trade Weber for ISU (wash, both suck), USU for Fresno (USU is better), and BYU for Michigan (BYU was 8-5 with their marquee win over Texas, Mich was 7-6 with their Marquee win over ND with no QB, wash).

We won't have to face Cook, Barr, the Arizona RB, Stanford loses a lot of players, USC loses a lot of players, we get Oregon and USC at home in the cold, WSU loses most of their OL and secondary, etc, etc, etc. Our schedule will be easier next year. Maybe not a lot, but we don't need it to be a lot easier to make a bowl game.

So, we have better players, better coaches, and an easier schedule. But, we will suck worse. Ummm...I don't follow the logic. Sorry.

I just think it has become trendy and cool to bitch and moan.

I don't want to get into a shouting match about who has more faith in the one and true living team, but I'll just point out that it is really, really easy to disagree with your positional comparisons. For example, without Wilson next year, the QB position is worse, no doubt about it. Look back at the archives on this board and you will see a number of posters suggesting that Wilson would leave early for the NFL (cough, cough, SU [airball]). We won't be making far-fetched predictions about Conner Manning leaving early. Also, why is the O-line definitely getting better? We lose two starters. Are the backups significantly better? Also, I can't imagine a scenario where the TEs are better without Jake Murphy. I could go on.

The point is, I think there are a lot of question marks this upcoming season. The biggest, and in my opinion most ominous, is quarterback. You don't win in this league without stellar QB play.

[Jarid in Cedar]

I would question DT as well. We lose 3 of our top 4 rotational guys (Tenny, LT, and Hemuli).
Now I have confidence that we will have solid interior line play based on our traditional strength at that position, but to say we will be better without seeing who will fill those holes is beyond a stretch.

[jrj84105]

Awesome. That was the best breakdown of Schulz I've ever read. Thanks. Great post. I learned a lot from it.


Thanks. A lot of good points and I was a bit harsh with Schulz.
PS: I've been too dismissive of the the people who say that a spread can be modified to suit a mobile or passing QB. You gave some examples where it's worked. One caveat, it seems like the teams that successfully implement one of these sort of flexible spread offenses are run by offensive minded head coaches. My pessimism on us pulling it off is that there are additional constraints placed on our offense by KW which make things a lot harder.


KW wants the D to set the tone. If the D is struggling, he wants an explosive offense that can keep the team in a shoot out. When KW thinks his D has the edge, he wants an offense that can run clock and limit turnovers. Those demands basically eliminate a wishbone option offense (great for running clock, zero explosiveness) and spread to pass (explosive, can't run clock-ask Mike Leach). If KW would understand that a spread led by a mobile>passing QB is going to have limited explosivity and that a spread led by a passing>mobile QB can't start running clock with a 10 point lead midway through the third quarter, we'd be fine. I get frustrated seeing OC after OC canned and have trouble get excited about new hires when the root of the problem is still there. Without a very talented balanced pass:run QB (an improved TW) or a unusually functional 2QB system (utilizing Cox or Manning as KW's gameplan dictates), I don't see how a spread offense can satisfy Kyle.

[Utah]

I don't want to get into a shouting match about who has more faith in the one and true living team, but I'll just point out that it is really, really easy to disagree with your positional comparisons. For example, without Wilson next year, the QB position is worse, no doubt about it. Look back at the archives on this board and you will see a number of posters suggesting that Wilson would leave early for the NFL (cough, cough, SU [airball]). We won't be making far-fetched predictions about Conner Manning leaving early. Also, why is the O-line definitely getting better? We lose two starters. Are the backups significantly better? Also, I can't imagine a scenario where the TEs are better without Jake Murphy. I could go on.

The point is, I think there are a lot of question marks this upcoming season. The biggest, and in my opinion most ominous, is quarterback. You don't win in this league without stellar QB play.

I was kind of a dick, I'm sorry.

I disagree about the QB situation. Going into fall, we will have Manning, Cox, Thomas, and Isom in the QB position. They all had offers from other BCS schools (except maybe Manning, but Utah offered and got him committed very early). Last year we had Wilson and Schulz. I'm not sure that any of our QB's will be as good as a healthy Wilson. BUT, look at the games we won with a healthy Wilson:

USU: Wilson was very good in this game. BUT, we trade USU out for Fresno with no Carr. Utah should win this game with Cox or Manning.
Weber St: Doesn't matter who our QB is, we will pound ISU
Michigan: Tough game. BYU was our comp from last year. I don't think Wilson won that game for us. It was all defense. I think we will need the same this year to beat QB. So, I think our QB's could be just as good as Wilson in that game.
Oregon State: Wilson kept us in and lost us that game. He threw a ton of picks that gave OSU a lot of points. I think Manning or Cox could equal or better Wilson's performance in that game.
UCLA: Again, Wilson lost us that game. I think one of our QB's could do at least as good, if not better.
Stanford: This is a funny game. On paper, it makes Wilson look amazing. BUT, he only did screen throws the whole game. I think that performance could be replicated by one of our guys. This is the game where Wilson got hurt.

Cox or Manning had better be better than a hurt Wilson or Schulz.

That's why I think our QB position will be better than last year. They might only be 90% of a healthy Wilson, but we can beat Fresno, ISU and Michigan with a 90% of Wilson, especially with how many players return from our secondary. I think our QB's are better than a hurt Wilson or Schulz, so that means 6 of our games, our QB will be definitely better, and six it may be almost as good. We go bowling with that.

Again, with Murphy, he was out a lot of games. If our TE is 70% of Murphy, that is better than 0% of Murphy.

I think we forget how much we lost last year due to injuries. We have depth now. We didn't have depth last year.

As far as the OL, some were saying that our backup C was better, but didn't know the offense as well. So, a year later, our new starting C should be better. That means we are only downgrading maybe one OL position. Every team has to deal with this as well though. SO, it washes out even. And you can hide the OL, especially with some of the skill guys we should have next year (Dres, Poole, Young, etc).

Stanford loses their DC and a lot off their defense. UCLA loses a lot off their defense. USC lost a ton of players. Colorado rivals us in QB bad luck. WSU loses their whole OL and secondary (remember a new secondary in the OSU game? terrible).

We bring back 5 guys in our secondary who have starting experience. We will have 5 LB'ers with starting experience. Our DL can get back to what it was before Star, where we rotate 9 guys in. TE is deeper (remember, when Tonga and Murphy went down we had Williams, yikes), WR is deeper, RB is deeper.

We will be better than we were last year, and we were this close to having 9 wins. We love to "wo is me, we didn't make a bowl" but we were really close to 9 wins. We played a lot of teams better than defensively than anyone else.

So, I think we go bowling next year. I think 6 wins is doable. I think we start out 4-2 again, like this year with our losses being either Michigan, UCLA or OSU (we win one of those games) and then I think we have another WTF win over Stanford/USC/ASU. That's five. Then I think we have a great chance to beat Arizona, WSU and Colorado. Then I think we do the same thing to Oregon as this year. Keep it close until midway through the third, then lose.

Six wins isn't that hard. We can beat these teams:

ISU, Fresno, UCLA, WSU, OSU, Michigan, Arizona, ASU, USC, Stanford, Colorado.

The only team I don't think we can beat is Oregon.

Out of 11 winnable games, we only need six. And yes, 11 are winnable, because this last season, as terrible as it was, we were never out of any game. Every game was winnable. We didn't win, but it was winnable.

[crazyute]

I don't get this "we have 15 QB's that play 15 different styles of QB" argument. Look at who we have right now:

Wilson - probably 50/50 runner/passer
Manning - more passer than runner
Cox - more runner than passer
Thomas - more runner than passer
Isom - more runner than passer
Hansen - more runner than passer
Schulz - more shitty QB than anything

Manning is the only odd duck there. Ask Foles how successful a QB can be in a "running" offense. Or ask Kelly how hard it is to make tweaks to an offense to play to your strengths.

I think this is another argument that has become trendy to say, but when you look at it, it isn't that big of a deal.

It would be nice to have all running QB's or pocket passers. Reality is, our depth sucked after 2011. We need bodies. We now have Wilson (maybe), Hansen, Manning, Thomas, Cox, Isom as our QB's. That is 6 QB's that have the talent to play at this level. One of them may or may not be a great runner (Manning, but no one has seen him play, so we don't know), one of them is a solid runner (Wilson) and four are running QB's.

There is no schizophrenia here.
I would definitely say that Isom is more of a passer than runner. Much in the same mold as travis wilson. He has running ability. but is better at throwing the rock around.

[crazyute]

I would question DT as well. We lose 3 of our top 4 rotational guys (Tenny, LT, and Hemuli).
Now I have confidence that we will have solid interior line play based on our traditional strength at that position, but to say we will be better without seeing who will fill those holes is beyond a stretch.
stevie tuikoluvatu is going to be better than any of those three. and that is not knocking those 3 at all. that says more about stevie. My hope also is to see dimick move inside and get his weight in the 285-290 range. I believe his athleticism does us more good inside. then we still have sesi ianu that would and will match anything LT or hemuli did last year.

[Utah]

I would definitely say that Isom is more of a passer than runner. Much in the same mold as travis wilson. He has running ability. but is better at throwing the rock around.

That is awesome to hear. I think we will be pleasantly surprised with our QB's this year. Remember, Wilson was compared to Drew Bledsoe coming out of high school...BUT he was considered a LONG TERM project. He wasn't supposed to be very polished for a couple of years.

[Utah]

Also, I don't think Isom will be the starter, but I wouldn't rule him out as DC has had success with two True freshman QB's. We have completely underestimated how HUGE of a hire DC is.

[Utah]

stevie tuikoluvatu is going to be better than any of those three. and that is not knocking those 3 at all. that says more about stevie. My hope also is to see dimick move inside and get his weight in the 285-290 range. I believe his athleticism does us more good inside. then we still have sesi ianu that would and will match anything LT or hemuli did last year.

This is how a lot of our new guys will be. This is the first year most of our guys who play will be PAC-12 players and not MWC players.

We underestimate how good of a job our coaches have done with limited talent.

[Jarid in Cedar]

stevie tuikoluvatu is going to be better than any of those three. and that is not knocking those 3 at all. that says more about stevie. My hope also is to see dimick move inside and get his weight in the 285-290 range. I believe his athleticism does us more good inside. then we still have sesi ianu that would and will match anything LT or hemuli did last year.

I have heard Stevie's named thrown around plenty. He may end up better than that crew, but will he be there next year? That is the question.


Also, Dimick will likely always be a swing guy between de and dt. Depending on the strengths of the team we play.

[Hot Lunch]

I have heard Stevie's named thrown around plenty. He may end up better than that crew, but will he be there next year? That is the question.


Also, Dimick will likely always be a swing guy between de and dt. Depending on the strengths of the team we play.

It is Saturdays like today that make me already miss college football. Can't wait until August.

[crazyute]

I have heard Stevie's named thrown around plenty. He may end up better than that crew, but will he be there next year? That is the question.


Also, Dimick will likely always be a swing guy between de and dt. Depending on the strengths of the team we play.

Why wouldn't Stevie be here next year?

[Jarid in Cedar]

Why wouldn't Stevie be here next year?

Meaning, will he be ahead of(better than) the 3 departures in 2014. Without actually playing a game in his career, that its hard to predict out the gate.
He's may end up better over the next 3 years, but i want to see three goods before proclaiming him to be better at the start of this coming season.

[Utah]

I'm so excited to see Pita, Blechen, Paul, Scott and young play. Pita, Paul, Scott and Young are all very highly talked about and Blechen just makes plays. I think we forget how he was in the right spot at the right time. He just makes plays.

Also, we have some highly recruited TE's as well.

[sancho]

far-fetched predictions about Conner Manning leaving early.

I predict Manning will leave early. First round pick in 3 years. He will also be drafted in the 2nd round by the Jazz, despite his never having played organized basketball. He will be so loved in the state that the Jazz will draft him just to sell tickets. Also, the Manning family will adopt him and he will host Saturday Night Live.

[Hot Lunch]

I'm so excited to see Pita, Blechen, Paul, Scott and young play. Pita, Paul, Scott and Young are all very highly talked about and Blechen just makes plays. I think we forget how he was in the right spot at the right time. He just makes plays.

Also, we have some highly recruited TE's as well.

I am excited about all those guys minus Blechan. I have given up on him. He was not good in 2012.

[LA Ute]

I am excited about all those guys minus Blechan. I have given up on him. He was not good in 2012.

We never know when he's going to make a great play or when he's going to blow one. Plus, it seems like he's never figured out that tackling is about more than simply hitting the ballcarrier hard.

[Applejack]

I am excited about all those guys minus Blechan. I have given up on him. He was not good in 2012.

Although I follow recruiting WAY closer than I should, once the players sign, I don't get excited about them until they prove something on the field. Therefore, I am excited for Paul and Scott. I agree with HotLunch on Blechen - I hope he is a backup. As for Pita and Young, I don't believe in practice squad all-stars. My general rule is "don't count on unproven players." Sometimes unproven players are instant contributors (JWIII). But almost always, they aren't. That's why the QB position is terrifying.

[jrj84105]

Although I follow recruiting WAY closer than I should, once the players sign, I don't get excited about them until they prove something on the field. Therefore, I am excited for Paul and Scott. I agree with HotLunch on Blechen - I hope he is a backup. As for Pita and Young, I don't believe in practice squad all-stars. My general rule is "don't count on unproven players." Sometimes unproven players are instant contributors (JWIII). But almost always, they aren't. That's why the QB position is terrifying.
Exactly this.

also echo that Isom is very Wilsonesque with the exception that I think Isom looks better keeping his eyes down field and throwing on the move than Wilson did even through his freshman year at Utah. If Isom were an early enrollee, I think he'd have a very strong chance at being the starter. that would also make life a lot easier for DC because he could implement an offense around Isom and if Wilson comes back in fall there would be little adjustment needed. Maybe they can convince him this weekend to come early.

[UTEopia]

I posted a longer version of this on Utefans, but this is the situation we are in:

Our depth is better.

Just to be a contrarian, I am going to take the opposite view. I really hope you are right, but other than hope and expectation, I don't think there are any known facts to support the assumptions you are making.



A lot of our positions will be better next year (the exceptions being....whoever plays in Riley's spot).

QB at worst is a wash
RB will be better
WR will be better
OL will be better
TE will be better
DT will be better
DE - Orchard will be better, depth will be better
LB will be better
CB will be better (yes, we lose McGill, but he only played one year, we will have two guys starting with starting experience, whereas last year NONE of our CB had any starting experience)
S will be better


QB: I will agree that it will not be worse. No evidence to suggest that it will be better.
RB: No evidence RB's will be better. Poole and Lucky are the leading candidates for most of the PT. We have no idea whether any of the other players can play.
WR: I will agree they will be better solely because KScott will be back and we know he is an upgrade over both Fitz and Denham. There is no evidence that any of the backups are better.
OL: Vyncent Jones was our best and most consistent offensive lineman. JT had a solid senior season. I believe that Aiono will move to center and either Asiata or Albers will be the other tackle. If it is Albers, he will play LT. If Asiata, he will play RT. There is no basis for the assumption that this group will be better than last year's group.
TE: The only real production we had from the TE position came from Murphy and although he missed a number of games, nobody stepped up in his absence to do anything so overall, I would have to say that this position will not be as good.
DT: We lose our top 3 DT's and the only returning guys did not do a lot last year. Counting on Stevie to recover from his injury or Lowell to come in and shine as a true freshman are pie in the sky thinking IMO.
DE: Orchard will be better, but there will be nobody close to Trevor Reilly on the other side. Definitely a downgrade.
LB: We probably will be better with Paul joining the group.
S: We will have two new starters. One will likely be a guy (Blechen) who most of us agree is not the answer and the other guy is totally unknown. Total crapshoot to say that this position group will be better.
CB: Relying on the returning guys who did not get it done (Thomas, Orvey, Freeman, Corporan) is a baseless assumption.

So the argument can be made that we will be a little worse at most position groups. This argument has more basis in history than the assumptions you have made.


Schedule wise, I know everyone loves to lament how hard next year will be and blah, blah, blah, but reality is we were #3 or #5 in SOS this year. Odds are, that won't happen again. We trade Weber for ISU (wash, both suck), USU for Fresno (USU is better), and BYU for Michigan (BYU was 8-5 with their marquee win over Texas, Mich was 7-6 with their Marquee win over ND with no QB, wash).

We won't have to face Cook, Barr, the Arizona RB, Stanford loses a lot of players, USC loses a lot of players, we get Oregon and USC at home in the cold, WSU loses most of their OL and secondary, etc, etc, etc. Our schedule will be easier next year. Maybe not a lot, but we don't need it to be a lot easier to make a bowl game.

So, we have better players, better coaches, and an easier schedule. But, we will suck worse. Ummm...I don't follow the logic. Sorry.

I just think it has become trendy and cool to bitch and moan.

I agree that USU this past year was a better team than a Fresno St. team that will be replacing a bunch of departing seniors. Michigan and BYU are interchangeable, but traveling to Ann Arbor is probably going to be a little more difficult than to Provo.

We have won two road games in the PAC 12, WSU in 2011 and CU in 2012. No PAC 12 road wins in 2013. Our PAC 12 road schedule is OSU, Stanford, UCLA, ASU and CU. Other than CU, there is no reason to believe that the Utes are going to beat these other teams on the road. Home games are UA, WSU, Oregon and USC. It is logical to think we have a better than even chance of beating WSU at home, UA is probably 50/50 but the other two are unlikely.

So, Without clear evidence that our players or coaches are better than 2013 and a schedule more difficult because there is 1 fewer home game, I think it will be very difficult for the Utes to get to 6 wins.

[crazyute]

Just to be a contrarian, I am going to take the opposite view. I really hope you are right, but other than hope and expectation, I don't think there are any known facts to support the assumptions you are making.




QB: I will agree that it will not be worse. No evidence to suggest that it will be better.
RB: No evidence RB's will be better. Poole and Lucky are the leading candidates for most of the PT. We have no idea whether any of the other players can play.
WR: I will agree they will be better solely because KScott will be back and we know he is an upgrade over both Fitz and Denham. There is no evidence that any of the backups are better.
OL: Vyncent Jones was our best and most consistent offensive lineman. JT had a solid senior season. I believe that Aiono will move to center and either Asiata or Albers will be the other tackle. If it is Albers, he will play LT. If Asiata, he will play RT. There is no basis for the assumption that this group will be better than last year's group.
TE: The only real production we had from the TE position came from Murphy and although he missed a number of games, nobody stepped up in his absence to do anything so overall, I would have to say that this position will not be as good.
DT: We lose our top 3 DT's and the only returning guys did not do a lot last year. Counting on Stevie to recover from his injury or Lowell to come in and shine as a true freshman are pie in the sky thinking IMO.
DE: Orchard will be better, but there will be nobody close to Trevor Reilly on the other side. Definitely a downgrade.
LB: We probably will be better with Paul joining the group.
S: We will have two new starters. One will likely be a guy (Blechen) who most of us agree is not the answer and the other guy is totally unknown. Total crapshoot to say that this position group will be better.
CB: Relying on the returning guys who did not get it done (Thomas, Orvey, Freeman, Corporan) is a baseless assumption.

So the argument can be made that we will be a little worse at most position groups. This argument has more basis in history than the assumptions you have made.



I agree that USU this past year was a better team than a Fresno St. team that will be replacing a bunch of departing seniors. Michigan and BYU are interchangeable, but traveling to Ann Arbor is probably going to be a little more difficult than to Provo.

We have won two road games in the PAC 12, WSU in 2011 and CU in 2012. No PAC 12 road wins in 2013. Our PAC 12 road schedule is OSU, Stanford, UCLA, ASU and CU. Other than CU, there is no reason to believe that the Utes are going to beat these other teams on the road. Home games are UA, WSU, Oregon and USC. It is logical to think we have a better than even chance of beating WSU at home, UA is probably 50/50 but the other two are unlikely.

So, Without clear evidence that our players or coaches are better than 2013 and a schedule more difficult because there is 1 fewer home game, I think it will be very difficult for the Utes to get to 6 wins.
I think that whittingham will move to the reilly role. playing DE/LB. if this is the case I would say we are a lot closer to replacing reilly than you think.

also don't forget about sesi ianu at DT and dimick who probably moves down inside.

[UTEopia]

I think that whittingham will move to the reilly role. playing DE/LB. if this is the case I would say we are a lot closer to replacing reilly than you think.

also don't forget about sesi ianu at DT and dimick who probably moves down inside.

I like Whittingham as an LB. I don't think he has the height, the weight, the strength, speed or quickness of Reilly.

Ianu really showed nothing this year and Dimick is a tough, hard working kid who is kind of a tweener. Not big enough to play inside and not quick enough to get a lot of pressure from the outside. i don't think we have a DT as good as Tenny. Ianu is probably equal to Heimuli and Seni is a step below LT.

[Utah]

I'll be honest. All this debate about the DL is kind of moot. All Whitt does is put DL in the NFL. Our DLine will be fine. Someone else will step up, and Orchard or someone else will be playing on Sunday like every year for the past forever.

QB will be better because we have depth. Same with WR and TE. I'll listen to RB arguments, but seeing how Poole and Radley will be back and we add Young, I don't think you'll win. No one would argue that LB or S will be worse off. TE will be better because we will actually have TE's. After Tonga and Murphy went down, we had Williams sort of playing TE ie we didn't have one. We will next year, so TE is better. Same with OL. Our OL sucked last year. DC is a proven OL coach, and the OC and able to tailor the offense to our strengths.

So, you can't debate that QB, WR, TE, LB and S won't be better. I'd add CB to that, seeing how we did lose McGill, but he was a one year player anyways, and Thomas and Orphey are returning starters and Rowe is moving to CB. Safety maybe a toss up, but, we can't be worse off than last year and our dead last INT rate.

The only maybe positions are OL, DL, and RB. Due to Whitt's history, DL will be fine. Equal at worst. I don't think losing York is as big of a deal as we think, so RB is a wash. OL still has three returning starters, which is pretty good. Worst case, wash.

Is there one position we will be worse off than last year? The only position you could argue is DL...and again, all Whitt does is create NFL DLinemen.

So, better coaches, every position is better, except for MAYBE OL, and easier schedule...

We will be better.

Home games next year: ISU, Fresno, WSU, USC, Oregon, Arizona. We should win four of those games. We can win five of those games. We might win six of those games due to Oregon coming in November (pray for snow).

Road games next year: Michigan, OSU, UCLA, ASU, Stanford, Colorado. Yikes. We should win one of those games. We can win all six of those games.

There is only one game that you could argue that we have lost before we play the game and that is Oregon...and if there is six inches of snow on the ground, that isn't true at all.

We will be bowling next year, and everyone will be wanting to give Whitt a lifetime deal and worried about when DC is going to leave us high and dry with BJ again. Relax and get ready to enjoy it.

7-5 next year. We start out 5-1. BIG losing streak. Beat Arizona. Beat Colorado. 7-5. Win the Las Vegas Bowl over BYU, oddly enough, 54-10. 8-5, and Utah is back. Ute fans are happy once again.

Enjoy the offseason. We are finally a PAC-12 team and will start regaining our spot as a consistent winner.

[crazyute]

I like Whittingham as an LB. I don't think he has the height, the weight, the strength, speed or quickness of Reilly.

Ianu really showed nothing this year and Dimick is a tough, hard working kid who is kind of a tweener. Not big enough to play inside and not quick enough to get a lot of pressure from the outside. i don't think we have a DT as good as Tenny. Ianu is probably equal to Heimuli and Seni is a step below LT.
well whittingham is a 6'2" 240 lbs. he has a great quick first step. with the talent we have coming in next year at LB getting the best 11 on the field might warrant this move. and was something that was looked at last spring and summer. unfortunately the injury that blechen went through forced him back. adding 10 lbs would make him plenty big enough. but with blechen, paul, norris, hale, and masina we have plenty of talent there to where whittingham can play the reilly role, LB/DE.

as for ianu it was a learning year. and he showed as much as LT did. and dimick while a tweener last year will add the 15-20 lbs to play DT and be very good inside. he played last year at 275.

[UTEopia]

We will be bowling next year, and everyone will be wanting to give Whitt a lifetime deal and worried about when DC is going to leave us high and dry with BJ again. Relax and get ready to enjoy it.

7-5 next year. We start out 5-1. BIG losing streak. Beat Arizona. Beat Colorado. 7-5. Win the Las Vegas Bowl over BYU, oddly enough, 54-10. 8-5, and Utah is back. Ute fans are happy once again.

Enjoy the offseason. We are finally a PAC-12 team and will start regaining our spot as a consistent winner.

I really do hope you are right. I am not a pessimist when it comes to the football program. I think we are slowly getting players in the program that we need to move in the right direction. However, I don't move guys from the unproven (limited game action without showing much) and unknown (no game action) into the they will be better than what we had last year category until they show it. We lose our best RB, our best OL and probably No. 3 as well, our top 3 defensive lineman, our best defensive player and our best defensive back. The guys behind these guys, with the exception of RB, are unknown or untested.

[Devildog]

I'll be honest...

We will be bowling next year, and everyone will be wanting to give Whitt a lifetime deal and worried about when DC is going to leave us high and dry with BJ again. Relax and get ready to enjoy it.

7-5 next year. We start out 5-1. BIG losing streak. Beat Arizona. Beat Colorado. 7-5. Win the Las Vegas Bowl over BYU, oddly enough, 54-10. 8-5, and Utah is back. Ute fans are happy once again.

Enjoy the offseason. We are finally a PAC-12 team and will start regaining our spot as a consistent winner.

The scenario you describe wouldn't be too bad. I just hope it's not delusional.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fq9jTAF7zRY&feature=youtu.be

[Senioritis]

There's an amazing amount of pissiness in the Ute fanbase these days.

I would like to talk about Sagarin ratings, the virtue of winning, and figure out some kind of realistic expectation.

According to Sagarin, 2013 was Whittingham's fourth best team.



2013
34


2012
61


2011
39


2010
26


2009
24


2008
5


2007
34


2006
46


2005
51



Utah's average Sagarin during Whittingham's tenure is 35. Based on Sagarin, if Utah were still in the MWC (with TCU) they would have won 12 games in 2013, 9 games in 2012, and 9 games in 2011. Do you believe the fans who feel they deserve so much would be so full of pissiness, had Utah still been in the clutches of Craig Thompson's Aquanet?

When the Mighty Utes hearkened to Larry Scott's pleadings and reluctantly accepted the PAC 12's advances, the expectation among the clueless, yours truly included, was that Utah would continue the winning ways they had established in the MWC. Sure, there may be a little adjustment period, but, boy howdy, we are the Utes and we put on our pants one leg at a time like everybody else, but then we go out and win 10 games a year. That's just what we do, conference affiliation be damned.

Now, after three years of reality collectively cold cocking us in the specials, perhaps we are better prepared to answer the following multiple choice question:

Given the choice, do you prefer:

A. Winning, regardless of opponent
B. Opponent, regardless of winning

For a lot of noisy but very deserving and full of expectation Utah fans, it's more fun to win 10 games a year in the MWC than not win very much but play a bunch of freaking good teams in the PAC 12. It seems the majority think that winning is the thing, and we should be winning now like we were in the MWC, or at least not losing like Chuck Freaking Stobart is at the helm. I read the raging homerism at usufans.com, and I see the echoes of Utefans.net circa 2009. Fans like winning, and almost always don't really care about who their boys are beating as long as the beating is happening.

So, what can we realistically expect, with these three years haunting our collective psyche?

The fact is that the good Utah teams can compete near the top of the PAC 12, and that the conference can't possibly remain this freaking good all of the time. It will also be very uncommon for the Utes to challenge for the conference championship, over time we can expect about a .500 record overall, and expecting an average Sagarin rating better than 35 is, in my mind, not realistic. The years (like 2013 and 2012) where the PAC has 6 or 8 teams in the top 35, Utah's not going to fare all that well. There have been four of those years over the last nine. In another four, Utah would have done just fine (and did, in 2011), and in one, Utah would have challenged.

I'm a Whittingham guy, and will be until he's run out of town by fans who expect better and know that they deserve more than what they are getting. My trousers are Gorilla Glued to the Whittingham bandwagon.

Whittingham is who he is, and will continue to deliver what he always has. Is it enough?

[Applejack]

There's an amazing amount of pissiness in the Ute fanbase these days.

I would like to talk about Sagarin ratings, the virtue of winning, and figure out some kind of realistic expectation.

According to Sagarin, 2013 was Whittingham's fourth best team.



2013
34


2012
61


2011
39


2010
26


2009
24


2008
5


2007
34


2006
46


2005
51



Utah's average Sagarin during Whittingham's tenure is 35. Based on Sagarin, if Utah were still in the MWC (with TCU) they would have won 12 games in 2013, 9 games in 2012, and 9 games in 2011. Do you believe the fans who feel they deserve so much would be so full of pissiness, had Utah still been in the clutches of Craig Thompson's Aquanet?

When the Mighty Utes hearkened to Larry Scott's pleadings and reluctantly accepted the PAC 12's advances, the expectation among the clueless, yours truly included, was that Utah would continue the winning ways they had established in the MWC. Sure, there may be a little adjustment period, but, boy howdy, we are the Utes and we put on our pants one leg at a time like everybody else, but then we go out and win 10 games a year. That's just what we do, conference affiliation be damned.

Now, after three years of reality collectively cold cocking us in the specials, perhaps we are better prepared to answer the following multiple choice question:

Given the choice, do you prefer:

A. Winning, regardless of opponent
B. Opponent, regardless of winning

For a lot of noisy but very deserving and full of expectation Utah fans, it's more fun to win 10 games a year in the MWC than not win very much but play a bunch of freaking good teams in the PAC 12. It seems the majority think that winning is the thing, and we should be winning now like we were in the MWC, or at least not losing like Chuck Freaking Stobart is at the helm. I read the raging homerism at usufans.com, and I see the echoes of Utefans.net circa 2009. Fans like winning, and almost always don't really care about who their boys are beating as long as the beating is happening.

So, what can we realistically expect, with these three years haunting our collective psyche?

The fact is that the good Utah teams can compete near the top of the PAC 12, and that the conference can't possibly remain this freaking good all of the time. It will also be very uncommon for the Utes to challenge for the conference championship, over time we can expect about a .500 record overall, and expecting an average Sagarin rating better than 35 is, in my mind, not realistic. The years (like 2013 and 2012) where the PAC has 6 or 8 teams in the top 35, Utah's not going to fare all that well. There have been four of those years over the last nine. In another four, Utah would have done just fine (and did, in 2011), and in one, Utah would have challenged.

I'm a Whittingham guy, and will be until he's run out of town by fans who expect better and know that they deserve more than what they are getting. My trousers are Gorilla Glued to the Whittingham bandwagon.

Whittingham is who he is, and will continue to deliver what he always has. Is it enough?

A-freaking-men.

[SoCalPat]

If we can get our QB situation steadied, we will be a 7-win team at worst in 2014. And I believe we will.

[LA Ute]

There's an amazing amount of pissiness in the Ute fanbase these days.

I would like to talk about Sagarin ratings, the virtue of winning, and figure out some kind of realistic expectation.

According to Sagarin, 2013 was Whittingham's fourth best team.



2013
34


2012
61


2011
39


2010
26


2009
24


2008
5


2007
34


2006
46


2005
51



Utah's average Sagarin during Whittingham's tenure is 35. Based on Sagarin, if Utah were still in the MWC (with TCU) they would have won 12 games in 2013, 9 games in 2012, and 9 games in 2011. Do you believe the fans who feel they deserve so much would be so full of pissiness, had Utah still been in the clutches of Craig Thompson's Aquanet?

When the Mighty Utes hearkened to Larry Scott's pleadings and reluctantly accepted the PAC 12's advances, the expectation among the clueless, yours truly included, was that Utah would continue the winning ways they had established in the MWC. Sure, there may be a little adjustment period, but, boy howdy, we are the Utes and we put on our pants one leg at a time like everybody else, but then we go out and win 10 games a year. That's just what we do, conference affiliation be damned.

Now, after three years of reality collectively cold cocking us in the specials, perhaps we are better prepared to answer the following multiple choice question:

Given the choice, do you prefer:

A. Winning, regardless of opponent
B. Opponent, regardless of winning

For a lot of noisy but very deserving and full of expectation Utah fans, it's more fun to win 10 games a year in the MWC than not win very much but play a bunch of freaking good teams in the PAC 12. It seems the majority think that winning is the thing, and we should be winning now like we were in the MWC, or at least not losing like Chuck Freaking Stobart is at the helm. I read the raging homerism at usufans.com, and I see the echoes of Utefans.net circa 2009. Fans like winning, and almost always don't really care about who their boys are beating as long as the beating is happening.

So, what can we realistically expect, with these three years haunting our collective psyche?

The fact is that the good Utah teams can compete near the top of the PAC 12, and that the conference can't possibly remain this freaking good all of the time. It will also be very uncommon for the Utes to challenge for the conference championship, over time we can expect about a .500 record overall, and expecting an average Sagarin rating better than 35 is, in my mind, not realistic. The years (like 2013 and 2012) where the PAC has 6 or 8 teams in the top 35, Utah's not going to fare all that well. There have been four of those years over the last nine. In another four, Utah would have done just fine (and did, in 2011), and in one, Utah would have challenged.

I'm a Whittingham guy, and will be until he's run out of town by fans who expect better and know that they deserve more than what they are getting. My trousers are Gorilla Glued to the Whittingham bandwagon.

Whittingham is who he is, and will continue to deliver what he always has. Is it enough?

Post of the year so far. I do think our program can consistently be a top-quarter-of-the-PAC-12 program, but it will take a while to get there, if we ever do. I'm more optimistic about basketball becoming a perennial challenger relatively soon.

I think what Utah fans have to get used to is that being in the top half of the PAC-12 is a great ride, year after year. In the MWC we got too used to the idea that the only successful season was a conference championship season.

[DrumNFeather]

When the P12 network was showing highlights of the early season games leading into the interview with Whitt, it reminded me of how good Wilson was early. He played pretty well prior to the injuries. Sure, he had a few bonehead plays, but it feels like most of those were post injury-ies. Here's hoping we solve the QB problem for 2014 and beyond.

[Applejack]

When the P12 network was showing highlights of the early season games leading into the interview with Whitt, it reminded me of how good Wilson was early. He played pretty well prior to the injuries. Sure, he had a few bonehead plays, but it feels like most of those were post injury-ies. Here's hoping we solve the QB problem for 2014 and beyond.

I would love this to be the case, but I am really doubtful that we can fix our QB sitch (thanks instagram!) by next year.

1. Travis Wilson - I doubt he plays - no insiders have told me this, but this seems like a long time to go without knowing whether you will be starting for a Pac-12 team or hanging up the cleats.
2. Adam Schultz - I'm not a fan, even though he once threw for 3,000 yards in a scrimmage in 2009.
3. Conner Manning - I know nothing about him. From all indications he is next in line based on his practice and development last year. I just know how freshmen quarterbacks tend to do in BCS or whatever we now call "difficult" conferences.
4. Brandon Cox - He struggled learning the offense last year, as you would expect for a freshman. I doubt we ever see him take snaps in a game.
5. Donovan Isom - Many on here think he is a cross between Brian Johnson and Goliath, but true a true freshman taking snaps makes me have a Darnell Arecenaux flashback.
6. Micah Thomas - Is he a safety yet?

That's a lot of bodies, but they don't instill much confidence.

[Diehard Ute]

I would love this to be the case, but I am really doubtful that we can fix our QB sitch (thanks instagram!) by next year.

1. Travis Wilson - I doubt he plays - no insiders have told me this, but this seems like a long time to go without knowing whether you will be starting for a Pac-12 team or hanging up the cleats.
2. Adam Schultz - I'm not a fan, even though he once threw for 3,000 yards in a scrimmage in 2009.
3. Conner Manning - I know nothing about him. From all indications he is next in line based on his practice and development last year. I just know how freshmen quarterbacks tend to do in BCS or whatever we now call "difficult" conferences.
4. Brandon Cox - He struggled learning the offense last year, as you would expect for a freshman. I doubt we ever see him take snaps in a game.
5. Donovan Isom - Many on here think he is a cross between Brian Johnson and Goliath, but true a true freshman taking snaps makes me have a Darnell Arecenaux flashback.
6. Micah Thomas - Is he a safety yet?

That's a lot of bodies, but they don't instill much confidence.

Wilson is 50/50 as he's always been. There's just a formula for evaluation of his condition and it requires time between exams.

[Utah]

In response to Senioritis, I posted this on UFN:

I think Utah's goals should be this:

1 - Bowl game every year. This is very likely and possible considering the talent that is found in the state of Utah. Utah is the third best state in the West in putting kids into DI programs. If we win Utah, we should be eligible to go bowling. This last year was tough, as 4 of the top 5 left. If we get to bowl's I think more kids stay home.

2 - Out of every five years, end the season ranked 2 times. If we are going bowling every year, that means at least six wins every year. Oregon, Stanford, Washington, USC, ASU, and UCLA all finished ranked. The worst team was Washington and they had four losses and nine wins. I think that with the talent we have access to, we should get 9 wins twice every five years.

3 - Out of every five years, compete for the south once. This means with two weeks left, we have a chance to win the south division.

What this means, is that every 5 years (a full recruiting cycle) we should have records that look similar to this (including bowl games):

7-6 (6-6 regular season)
7-6 (7-5 regular season)
8-5
9-4
10-3

Once every 10 years play in the PAC-12 title game, and once every 20 years finish in the top 5 and play in the Rose Bowl.

[U-Ute]

1. Travis Wilson - I doubt he plays - no insiders have told me this, but this seems like a long time to go without knowing whether you will be starting for a Pac-12 team or hanging up the cleats.

My concern for Wilson is upstairs.

Even if he is cleared to play, when it's 4th down and two at the 35 and Wilson starts to scramble, don't you think it will be in the back of his head as he thinks about taking that strong safety head on?

As a parent, I would have a hard time encouraging my kid to continue unless I was absolutely certain that there would be no long term ramifications. I don't know if they can give that kind of assurance.

[Diehard Ute]

My concern for Wilson is upstairs.

Even if he is cleared to play, when it's 4th down and two at the 35 and Wilson starts to scramble, don't you think it will be in the back of his head as he thinks about taking that strong safety head on?

As a parent, I would have a hard time encouraging my kid to continue unless I was absolutely certain that there would be no long term ramifications. I don't know if they can give that kind of assurance.

In the end the decision is going to be his, however the doctors he has will tell him if there's any risk, or if he can play without worry.

University Healthcare has some of the best neurosurgeons in the world.

[Utah]

So, some guy on sportsnation came up with a power ranking of all the college football teams using the last five years. While it has huge limitations (namely Boise St being ranked so high, UCLA being ranked so low, etc) it's football and something to have a yawn about.

According to him, Utah is ranked #45.

Utah's opponents are ranked:

Fresno St - 46
Michigan - 23
Wash St - 73
UCLA - 15
OSU - 39
USC - 11
ASU - 28
OU - 3
Stanford - 6
Arizona - 34
Colorado - 96

I'd make three groups: The top 25 (losses), the next 25 (50/50 games) and the rest (should win). Here is how we stack out:

Top 25:

Michigan
UCLA
USC
OU
Stanford

The next 25 (50/50):

Fresno St
OSU
ASU
Arizona

The rest:

WSU
Colorado

Tough schedule. The only thing I would change is I think Michigan is a little high. They are 23 under this formula, and I don't think they are that good. I'd put them in the next 25 category for next year.

That means we should lose to:

USC, UCLA, Stanford, Oregon

I don't think anyone would argue with that. ALTHOUGH, we always seem to have a WTF win every year. So, I put us at 1-3 in those games.

The next 25 are:

Michigan, Fresno St, Oregon St, ASU, Arizona.

I think Utah wins Fresno St, Oregon St, and Arizona next year. I think ASU and Michigan are 50/50 games. It wouldn't shock me if they beat or lost to either team. So, worst case scenario, that puts us at 3-2 in that group. 4-5 overall.

The last group is WSU and Colorado. I think they win both games this next year. That puts our record at 6-5. Toss in an Idaho State University, and we are at 7-5. I think we win our bowl game and end the year at 8-5, which is a great year.

All of this hinges on Utah finding TWO QB's. If not, then we are headed to the cellar as a new coaching staff comes in, blows up the south pipeline and tries to unsuccessfully regain California. Then in three years, he is fired and hopefully after that we find a keeper (another reason that Whitt should get two more seasons).

http://www.footballstudyhall.com/2014/2/7/5387456/2014-college-football-rankings-football-outsiders-projections

[mpfunk]

So is Utah trying to land Kendal Thompson for the QB spot next year?

Announces he is graduating early and leaving on January 21, 2014.
http://m.newsok.com/oklahoma-football-quarterback-kendal-thompson-announces-that-hes-transferring/article/3926003

Today he tweets that he is in Salt Lake City.
https://twitter.com/thurm405/status/434432644386803712

This could be the perfect bridge for the Utes to next season.

[Applejack]

So is Utah trying to land Kendal Thompson for the QB spot next year?

Announces he is graduating early and leaving on January 21, 2014.
http://m.newsok.com/oklahoma-football-quarterback-kendal-thompson-announces-that-hes-transferring/article/3926003

Today he tweets that he is in Salt Lake City.
https://twitter.com/thurm405/status/434432644386803712

This could be the perfect bridge for the Utes to next season.

What is his story? After your post, I got excited and googled him. Looks like he didn't do much at OU and wasn't highly recruited out of high school (only offered by OU and Tulsa). I want a transfer QB in the worst way, but is this the right guy?

[SeattleUte]

So is Utah trying to land Kendal Thompson for the QB spot next year?

Announces he is graduating early and leaving on January 21, 2014.
http://m.newsok.com/oklahoma-football-quarterback-kendal-thompson-announces-that-hes-transferring/article/3926003

Today he tweets that he is in Salt Lake City.
https://twitter.com/thurm405/status/434432644386803712

This could be the perfect bridge for the Utes to next season.

How do you know he's not visiting SLC for another reason?

[mpfunk]

What is his story? After your post, I got excited and googled him. Looks like he didn't do much at OU and wasn't highly recruited out of high school (only offered by OU and Tulsa). I want a transfer QB in the worst way, but is this the right guy?

Here is what Oklahoma reported as his recruiting out of high school.

Under Armour All-American ... four-star recruit by Tom Lemming's MaxPreps ... three-star recruit by ESPN.com, Rivals.com and Scout.com ... played in just three games as a senior due to an injury in the season's second game ... completed 25-of-34 passes for 295 yards with five touchdowns and no interceptions in those three games while logging 42 rushing attempts for 237 yards and one TD ... completed 166 of 259 passes in 2009 for 2,793 yards and 29 touchdowns while rushing for 466 yards and 10 TDs ... as a sophomore in 2008, threw for 1,025 yards and 13 TDs with 76 completions on 148 attempts while rushing for 136 yards and one TD.

http://graphics.fansonly.com/schools/okla/graphics/auto/tiny_arrow3.gifNo. 14 quarterback (Rivals.com)
http://graphics.fansonly.com/schools/okla/graphics/auto/tiny_arrow3.gifNo. 17 quarterback (ESPN.com)
http://graphics.fansonly.com/schools/okla/graphics/auto/tiny_arrow3.gifNo. 21 combo quarterback (Tom Lemming's MaxPreps)
http://graphics.fansonly.com/schools/okla/graphics/auto/tiny_arrow3.gifNo. 2 player in Oklahoma (Rivals.com)
http://graphics.fansonly.com/schools/okla/graphics/auto/tiny_arrow3.gifNo. 2 player in Oklahoma (Scout.com)

[mpfunk]

How do you know he's not visiting SLC for another reason?

You are right, he might be visiting SLC for another reason. That is why I asked if Utah is trying to recruit him.

[jrj84105]

You are right, he might be visiting SLC for another reason. That is why I asked if Utah is trying to recruit him.

Dennis Erickson started following him on twitter after the transfer announcement, so I'd say, yes we're recruiting him.

[SoCalPat]

How do you know he's not visiting SLC for another reason?

Take it to the bank: we are recruiting him.

[concerned]

did we also try to recruit max Wittek, or was he prohibited from playing in conference free and clear even though he had graduated.

[Diehard Ute]

Of note Utah signed 3 of the recruits who are headed on missions because we had available signing spots for this year.

In that same release Kyle stated we have one more signing spot that they're holding for the "best available player"

[Applejack]

Hold on, SU is on to something here. What other reasons could bring him to Salt Lake? Does he ski? Does he love choral music? Is he a salt water taffy connoisseur?

[Utah]

What is his story? After your post, I got excited and googled him. Looks like he didn't do much at OU and wasn't highly recruited out of high school (only offered by OU and Tulsa). I want a transfer QB in the worst way, but is this the right guy?

Until we find the right guy, I want as many guys as possible.

[mpfunk]

Take it to the bank: we are recruiting him.

That certainly seems like the logical explanation for why he is in Salt Lake City for the weekend. Utah has need for a QB. QB is transferring and eligible to play the next year. QB is spending a weekend in Utah. QB has previously stated on his twitter account than he may head west to play. QB has no ties to Utah.

I think we can take it to the bank that Utah is recruiting, especially because they would be stupid to not recruit him.

[LA Ute]

The chatter I am getting is that this is pretty close to a done deal.

[UBlender]

Hold on, SU is on to something here. What other reasons could bring him to Salt Lake? Does he ski? Does he love choral music? Is he a salt water taffy connoisseur?

Possibly to catch a show at Hale Center Theatre, although I've been and there's nothing worthwhile there.

[DrumNFeather]

Is Tommy Grady showing him around town?

[LA Ute]

I love the fact that we are recruiting him. If Wilson does not return, we are very thin and inexperienced at quarterback. I'd much rather see excessive pessimism about the future than the kind of optimism that saw us hoping that Jordan Wynn would return injury free and stay that way. As they say, hope for the best, plan for the worst.

[SoCalPat]

I love the fact that we are recruiting him. If Wilson does not return, we are very thin and inexperienced at quarterback. I'd much rather see excessive pessimism about the future than the kind of optimism that saw us hoping that Jordan Wynn would return injury free and stay that way. As they say, hope for the best, plan for the worst.

I think recruiting Thompson is the clearest indicator that Wilson will never be back.

Also, did anyone know Thompson is the son of a former Sports Illustrated cover feature? Albeit not for the right reasons ... (EDIT: It should be noted Charles Thompson took his medicine and is an exemplary citizen ... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charles_Thompson_(American_football)

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9c/CharlesThompsonSI-01.jpg

[Diehard Ute]

I think the number of people who claim to know what is happening with Wilson is comical.

[jrj84105]

I think the number of people who claim to know what is happening with Wilson is comical.
Yes. No Wilson tea leaves in this move. I'm finally coming around on the DC hire. QB's get hurt, and most teams find at some point in the season, that they are only as good as their backup QB. Even if TW were 100% cleared, nothing I saw last year with Schulz on the field and Manning on the sideline tells me we are two deep at QB.

[crazyute]

very interesting in that he could be a bridge to a guy nobody talks about, brandon cox. both are athletic and left handed? (just thinking out loud)

[sancho]

very interesting in that he could be a bridge to a guy nobody talks about, brandon cox. both are athletic and left handed? (just thinking out loud)

Nobody talks about? I've been repeatedly told by people who want to fire coach that he made a mistake in not playing Cox when Wilson went down.

[Hot Lunch]

I think the number of people who claim to know what is happening with Wilson is comical.

I know what is happening and I will be shocked if Travis plays this fall. Bringing in Thompson is a great move by the program. I hope he comes. He wil be able to bridge the gap for the current freshman if they aren't ready and give us a. Chance to win.

[Diehard Ute]

I know what is happening and I will be shocked if Travis plays this fall. Bringing in Thompson is a great move by the program. I hope he comes. He wil be able to bridge the gap for the current freshman if they aren't ready and give us a. Chance to win.

As I have said before, think what you will, but this idea that anyone knows what's going on is silly. I can say that with 100% certainty.

[Hot Lunch]

As I have said before, think what you will, but this idea that anyone knows what's going on is silly. I can say that with 100% certainty.

I have some pretty good connections.

[Diehard Ute]

I have so e pretty good connections.

And you think I don't apparently.

[DrumNFeather]

Well, even if he's cleared, wouldn't he benefit from a redshirt year?

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

[Hot Lunch]

And you think I don't apparently.

No, that is not what I think. I just know what I have been told and by whom.

[Diehard Ute]

No, that is not what I think. I just know what I have been told and by whom.

As do I.

[sancho]

Well, even if he's cleared, wouldn't he benefit from a redshirt year?


If it's safe, I want him to play. Especially given the other options.

[ute4eva]

If it's safe, I want him to play. Especially given the other options.


Mike Patterson is still playing with the Giants after his treatment in 2012.

[Devildog]

There's an amazing amount of pissiness in the Ute fanbase these days.


Well lets all break out our #34 Sagrin ratings t-shirt.

[USS Utah]

very interesting in that he could be a bridge to a guy nobody talks about, brandon cox. both are athletic and left handed? (just thinking out loud)

That might be a bridge too far. (Sorry, I couldn't resist.)

[Hot Lunch]

Mike Patterson is still playing with the Giants after his treatment in 2012.

Did Mike have what Travis has?

[SoCalPat]

As I have said before, think what you will, but this idea that anyone knows what's going on is silly. I can say that with 100% certainty.

So why has Thompson agreed to make a visit to Utah then?

[Diehard Ute]

So why has Thompson agreed to make a visit to Utah then?

Because it's a 50/50 kinda thing. It could go either way, but there's no way to know which way it's going to go yet.

Of course who knows what another change in the OC guard will bring...even if Travis is cleared there's no guarantee that DC wants him as his QB.

[SoCalPat]

Because it's a 50/50 kinda thing. It could go either way, but there's no way to know which way it's going to go yet.

Of course who knows what another change in the OC guard will bring...even if Travis is cleared there's no guarantee that DC wants him as his QB.

Utah has interest, Thompson has interest. We have a QB whose future is highly uncertain, we're not going with Schulz and the players behind him are completely untested. You've mentioned DC's impact here. Sure, there's no way to know, but we're not under oath here. I would say its 75-25 at this point.

[Diehard Ute]

Utah has interest, Thompson has interest. We have a QB whose future is highly uncertain, we're not going with Schulz and the players behind him are completely untested. You've mentioned DC's impact here. Sure, there's no way to know, but we're not under oath here. I would say its 75-25 at this point.

And you can say that, but that's not where it stands. We'll know more in a couple weeks when Travis gets checked again.

[ute4eva]

Not to enter into the "sources" discussion above but Mike played the entire 2012 season with his AVM then had treatment for it. During his return he was cut by the Eagles and picked up by the giants in the 2013 season.

[UTEopia]

And you can say that, but that's not where it stands. We'll know more in a couple weeks when Travis gets checked again.

I think the interest in the kid from Oklahoma is indicative of three things: 1) they are uncertain whether Travis will be able to play. I have been told that it is simply unkown at this point. The upcoming tests will likely result in another waiting period or a definitive answer that he will not play. It is unlikely that the tests will conclusively indicate that he can play but they could indicate that he will not. 2) They are not convinced that Travis, if he can play, can get them where they want to be. 3) they want as many options as possible at the position where they need better play in order to be successful and they need those options now and not in two years when the freshmen mature. The coaches know they have a one and possibly two year window to get this going and they are going to do their best to win now.

[Utah]

I think the interest in the kid from Oklahoma is indicative of three things: 1) they are uncertain whether Travis will be able to play. I have been told that it is simply unkown at this point. The upcoming tests will likely result in another waiting period or a definitive answer that he will not play. It is unlikely that the tests will conclusively indicate that he can play but they could indicate that he will not. 2) They are not convinced that Travis, if he can play, can get them where they want to be. 3) they want as many options as possible at the position where they need better play in order to be successful and they need those options now and not in two years when the freshmen mature. The coaches know they have a one and possibly two year window to get this going and they are going to do their best to win now.

My sources, common sense, have backed up all you've stated.

[sancho]

2) They are not convinced that Travis, if he can play, can get them where they want to be.

Travis has to be the best bet to win immediately, right?

And suppose Wilson can't play and the OU kid comes. I'm not sure Thompson beats Manning for the job. Manning has an edge in familiarity with the system. Oklahoma has been a wreck at QB the past two seasons, and even in their desperation they stuck with Bell and the other guy over giving Thompson a shot.

That said, I'm fine with having extra QBs on the roster, as long as we make up our minds and stick with our starter instead of bouncing all over the options like a pinball.

[LA Ute]

FWIW, A-Rod said on the Bill and Hans show that if he's cleared to play Wilson is the starting QB until someone beats him out.

http://espn.kall700sports.com/aaron-roderick-utah-qb-coach-2-13-14/

I thought it was a surprisingly strong statement. But it's the "if" that matters.

[jrj84105]

A lot of people seem pretty convinced that without Wilson, Manning is the de facto starter. I don't think that's the case. Because DC's offense under Pinkel was successful, people want to think that's DC's ideal offense rather than what he ran at Wyoming. At Wyoming, where DC was calling his own shots, he used a mobile QB in Brett Smith. His #2 QB (now at Utah) was even further along the mobile/running end of the QB spectrum. Now DC is pushing for a transfer QB who is also a dual threat guy. This gives us the following QB's:
Running: Micah Thomas, Jason Thompson, Chase Hansen, Brandon Cox, +/- OU transfer
Mobile: Travis Wilson, Donovan Isom
Pocket: Adam Schulz, Conner Manning

DC says he will build his offense to highlight the attributes of the best QB. That said, we've had zero movement of mobile QB's to other positions and have in fact actively added to the roster with transfer(s) of that mold. I know a lot of Utah fans are gunshy about running QB's due to our injury issues, but when you see a coach building the requisite depth to operate an offense with a stable of running QB's, and when his only independent offense featured a running QB, you have to start thinking that his preference is a running QB. We'll certainly see a thinning of the herd, but I'm not sure it will be through position switches for our athletic QB's.

[Crimsonute]

A lot of people seem pretty convinced that without Wilson, Manning is the de facto starter. I don't think that's the case. Because DC's offense under Pinkel was successful, people want to think that's DC's ideal offense rather than what he ran at Wyoming. At Wyoming, where DC was calling his own shots, he used a mobile QB in Brett Smith. His #2 QB (now at Utah) was even further along the mobile/running end of the QB spectrum. Now DC is pushing for a transfer QB who is also a dual threat guy. This gives us the following QB's:
Running: Micah Thomas, Jason Thompson, Chase Hansen, Brandon Cox, +/- OU transfer
Mobile: Travis Wilson, Donovan Isom
Pocket: Adam Schulz, Conner Manning

DC says he will build his offense to highlight the attributes of the best QB. That said, we've had zero movement of mobile QB's to other positions and have in fact actively added to the roster with transfer(s) of that mold. I know a lot of Utah fans are gunshy about running QB's due to our injury issues, but when you see a coach building the requisite depth to operate an offense with a stable of running QB's, and when his only independent offense featured a running QB, you have to start thinking that his preference is a running QB. We'll certainly see a thinning of the herd, but I'm not sure it will be through position switches for our athletic QB's. Don't think we'll see Wilson ever play football again. We won't see Hansen until next year as he will return January 2015. Whit has to win now. I'm sure they want the best guy in the QB spot. Not sure if they want to put their jobs in the hands of a RS FR.

[LA Ute]

Ted Miller ranks the PAC-12 student sections: (http://m.espn.go.com/general/blogs/blogpost?blogname=pac12&id=69490&src=desktop)


2. Utah: The MUSS -- "The Mighty Utah Student Section" -- numbers just 6,000, but it's well-coordinated and really, really cares. It shows up and bellows even when things aren't going well. Just ask BYU fans how great the MUSS is.

[sancho]

Not sure if they want to put their jobs in the hands of a RS FR.

I'm not sure they have a choice if Wilson is out.

If we land Mr Oklahoma, we may as well consider him a RS FR too. He has no more game experience than Cox/Manning, and he is less familiar with our system/personnel (unless the system is drastically overhauled, in which case we will struggle regardless of who plays QB).

It would seem that those three would be frontrunners with Isom and Thomas as dark horse candidates and Schulz out of the running.

[jrj84105]

I'm not sure they have a choice if Wilson is out.

If we land Mr Oklahoma, we may as well consider him a RS FR too. He has no more game experience than Cox/Manning, and he is less familiar with our system/personnel (unless the system is drastically overhauled, in which case we will struggle regardless of who plays QB).

It would seem that those three would be frontrunners with Isom and Thomas as dark horse candidates and Schulz out of the running.

Schulz is far from out of the running and will get number one reps in spring camp until someone knocks him out of that spot- something that neither Cox nor Manning did last year. I'd put the odds on our starter next year, if Thompson comes, as:
Wilson: 25%
Schulz: 20%
Thompson: 20%
Manning 15%
Cox 10%
Thomas 5%
Isom 5%

[sancho]

something that neither Cox nor Manning did last year.

I am not connected to anything other than what I hear on this board and utefans, so I could be very wrong. My understanding is that Manning looked better than Schulz but they (1) didn't want to burn the RS and (2) didn't want to put Manning in front of a line that was barely functioning.

[Crimsonute]

I am not connected to anything other than what I hear on this board and utefans, so I could be very wrong. My understanding is that Manning looked better than Schulz but they (1) didn't want to burn the RS and (2) didn't want to put Manning in front of a line that was barely functioning.I think we've all seen what Schulz can do. I'd guess Manning is the frontrunner coming out of Spring. I also think Isom will be the second best coming out of the fall, but they'll want to redshirt him, so Cox will be #2 on the depth chart. I wouldn't be surprised to see Schulz end up somewhere like Weber St after spring is over. Jay Hill would make room for him. If the OK guy does some here, the coaches would have to believe he's got a shot to beat out Manning.

[jrj84105]

I am not connected to anything other than what I hear on this board and utefans, so I could be very wrong. My understanding is that Manning looked better than Schulz but they (1) didn't want to burn the RS and (2) didn't want to put Manning in front of a line that was barely functioning.

That's a popular narrative for sure, but doesn't fit with KW's general disregard for RS'ing game ready players. People in the know have a lot more confidence in TW returning, give Schulz a chance, and are pretty silent on the prospects of our RS freshman. Some people are burnt out by our QB injuries, which they attribute to having a running/mobile QB, and have grabbed on to our only remaining QB upon whom they can project aspirations for a great pocket QB. That narrative is based on a few quotes and a lot of wishful thinking IMO.

[Diehard Ute]

That's a popular narrative for sure, but doesn't fit with KW's general disregard for RS'ing game ready players. People in the know have a lot more confidence in TW returning, give Schulz a chance, and are pretty silent on the prospects of our RS freshman. Some people are burnt out by our QB injuries, which they attribute to having a running/mobile QB, and have grabbed on to our only remaining QB upon whom they can project aspirations for a great pocket QB. That narrative is based on a few quotes and a lot of wishful thinking IMO.

Whit made it pretty clear Schulz was playing because they didn't want to burn a redshirt, not because he was necessarily the best option.

He's also made it clear that unless Wilson is 100% and able to be #1 there is no front runner for the job and it would be a wide open competition, which I can't see anyone saying Schulz wins.

[LA Ute]

He's also made it clear that unless Wilson is 100% and able to be #1 there is no front runner for the job and it would be a wide open competition, which I can't see anyone saying Schulz wins.

I think you're right.

[jrj84105]

KW has said that there is a "wide open" QB competition every year, and it's yet to really play out that way. Also, I don't believe for a second that KW went 5-7 when he had a superior game ready QB on his bench. That just didn't happen.

[sancho]

KW has said that there is a "wide open" QB competition every year, and it's yet to really play out that way. Also, I don't believe for a second that KW went 5-7 when he had a superior game ready QB on his bench. That just didn't happen.

It's yet to play out that way? Are you saying we have deliberately gone with lessor QBs when better players were available?

I think KW knew that our superior but green QBs on the bench would not be enough to beat Oregon in Oregon with a dysfunctional offensive line. Maybe he should have burned a RS for the WSU game. At that point, it was experience vs talent. Can't blame him for going with experience, even though it backfired. Maybe if he had gone with Manning, we win, and Whitt is not a part of any "hot seat" discussions. But we can't know that.

[Scratch]

It's yet to play out that way? Are you saying we have deliberately gone with lessor QBs when better players were available?

I think KW knew that our superior but green QBs on the bench would not be enough to beat Oregon in Oregon with a dysfunctional offensive line. Maybe he should have burned a RS for the WSU game. At that point, it was experience vs talent. Can't blame him for going with experience, even though it backfired. Maybe if he had gone with Manning, we win, and Whitt is not a part of any "hot seat" discussions. But we can't know that.

Of course, if you want to make this about Whit looking out for Whit, then you have to realize that if he had started Manning or Cox against WSU and won then the narrative would be that Whit panicked and burned a RS (just like McBride with Alex Smith) when Schulz could have won that game. Now, if he starts Manning and the Utes lose, then not only did Whit panic, but his panicked decision cost us a bowl game.

[jrj84105]

As above, there was a little risk for KW in burning a RS late, but if there was a clear advantage of Manning/Cox over Schulz, the reward of winning 6 would be big enough to take that risk. Schulz was not playing well prior to the WSU game. The bar for being clearly better than Schulz to the point of justifying that risk was obscenely low. Neither Manning nor Cox passed that bar.

Also, remember that TW's RS was burned the first game in 2012 to run a few wildcat plays. TW was nowhere near a game-ready QB at that point, and KW had no hesitation burning that RS. KW burns a lot of RS's for limited special teams play as well. He just isn't a coach who systematically clings to the RS in such a way that it explains the decision to stick with Schulz.

As for the open competition, there has been a strong incumbent advantage with respect to reps that is counter to a truly open competition. Not that a lesser QB is selected, but the guy who started the leader got the coaching required to stay the leader.

[sancho]

Of course, if you want to make this about Whit looking out for Whit, then you have to realize that if he had started Manning or Cox against WSU and won then the narrative would be that Whit panicked and burned a RS (just like McBride with Alex Smith) when Schulz could have won that game. Now, if he starts Manning and the Utes lose, then not only did Whit panic, but his panicked decision cost us a bowl game.

Interesting game theory for Coach Whitt.

[LA Ute]

As above, there was a little risk for KW in burning a RS late, but if there was a clear advantage of Manning/Cox over Schulz, the reward of winning 6 would be big enough to take that risk. Schulz was not playing well prior to the WSU game. The bar for being clearly better than Schulz to the point of justifying that risk was obscenely low. Neither Manning nor Cox passed that bar.

Also, remember that TW's RS was burned the first game in 2012 to run a few wildcat plays. TW was nowhere near a game-ready QB at that point, and KW had no hesitation burning that RS. KW burns a lot of RS's for limited special teams play as well. He just isn't a coach who systematically clings to the RS in such a way that it explains the decision to stick with Schulz.

As for the open competition, there has been a strong incumbent advantage with respect to reps that is counter to a truly open competition. Not that a lesser QB is selected, but the guy who started the leader got the coaching required to stay the leader.

It may well be that what you're saying is depressingly true -- Manning/Cox were so "not ready" that Whit really was forced to stick with Schulz. Don't you think that means the Oklahoma transfer makes a lot of sense, assuming Utah can land him? FWIW, I can't believe that if KW runs spring practice assuming that Wilson isn't coming back, the coaches will stack the QB reps in the spring to favor Schulz. I never want to see Schulz on the field again for Utah, so I hope I am right about what will happen in the spring.

[sancho]

As above, there was a little risk for KW in burning a RS late, but if there was a clear advantage of Manning/Cox over Schulz, the reward of winning 6 would be big enough to take that risk. Schulz was not playing well prior to the WSU game. The bar for being clearly better than Schulz to the point of justifying that risk was obscenely low. Neither Manning nor Cox passed that bar.

I'm still not buying. I just don't see enough evidence to conclude that Manning/Cox look worse than Schultz in practice, especially when everything else I read says that Manning has looked great.



Also, remember that TW's RS was burned the first game in 2012 to run a few wildcat plays. TW was nowhere near a game-ready QB at that point, and KW had no hesitation burning that RS. KW burns a lot of RS's for limited special teams play as well. He just isn't a coach who systematically clings to the RS in such a way that it explains the decision to stick with Schulz.


TW redshirt was burned because they were intentionally trying to establish him as a change of pace, option QB. Something of a poor man's Bell-dozer. Whittingham seems to value QB redshirts quite a bit.

[Utah]

Here are some facts:

Schulz is not a PAC-12 QB. He can't move like a running QB, he can't throw like a PAC-12 QB.

Whitt has played three true freshmen QB's: BJ, Wynn, Wilson. All three spent the rest of their careers hurt. Don't underestimate how much this played into Whitt's decision to start Schulz.

Last year, Whitt could have burned Manning's RS, and played ANOTHER freshman QB (risking wasting him like he did BJ, Wynn and Wilson to injury) or known he would lose to Oregon no matter what, and unless Schulz threw two pick sixes (damn) he would beat WSU and Colorado.

Here is my opinion:

Whitt made the right decision. Utah should have beaten WSU last year, and it took Schulz playing dumber than a brick to have Utah lose. Also, remember how we played against Colorado?

Recovered fumble - led to a touchdown.
Recovered fumble - led to a touchdown.
one pass, 7 rushes - TD

Whitt made sure Schulz didn't touch the ball. He did what should have been done in the WSU game: let WSU play against our defense and tell Schulz to get the heck out of the way. We go bowling if we do that.

NOW, all that being said, and I admit I think Whitt is a great coach and should have two more years regardless of what happens this fall, BUT if Schulz ever sees the field again, I think Whitt should be fired on the spot. When you have Manning, Cox, Thomas, Isom and the transfer kid (maybe), then there is no excuse for playing Schulz. NONE.

[UTEopia]

Brian Johnson backed up Alex as a true freshman and was injured the second to last game of his true sophomore year.

[jrj84105]

I'm still not buying. I just don't see enough evidence to conclude that Manning/Cox look worse than Schultz in practice, especially when everything else I read says that Manning has looked great.

TW redshirt was burned because they were intentionally trying to establish him as a change of pace, option QB. Something of a poor man's Bell-dozer. Whittingham seems to value QB redshirts quite a bit.

Manning did have a great RS year, but that's not the same as being a game ready QB. I didn't say he or Cox were worse than Schulz, just that they weren't decisively better. IMO there is still a lot of ground between decisively better than Schulz and adequate. Now part of that is that Schulz was grossly misused in an offense that didn't adequately adjust to the difference in skillsets between Schulz and Wilson. I don't think that Schulz is as bad as he was made to look last year. I'm not very confident that our staff has gotten the most mileage out of the sometimes limited QB ability we've had. I gave up on the 2012 team when I saw Jordan Wynn drilling read option during fall practice. I won't have any confidence in the 2014 offense if Manning or Schulz are doing the same come fall.

The decision to use a change of pace QB was made to get Chase Hansen involved as a true freshman. Wilson was put in that role despite the fact that he was TERRIBLE at running the option his freshman year. It was a pretty willy-nilly plan B redshirt burn IMO.

[Applejack]

I think JRJ34598345 (name change, please!) is owning this thread. Whit is a smart dude so he knows (1) about how game-ready certain players are, (2) that by winning at WSU (and bowling) he would have saved himself a LOT of heartache. All Utenation is crying for his head right now, but if he won one more stinking game everyone would be saying Utah is back! Given that, I can't see him sitting Cox when he knew he had a better shot of winning with him than with Schultz.


Manning did have a great RS year

That, my friend, is a fantastic line. I remember when Schultz dominated his redshirt year.

[sancho]

I can't see him sitting Cox when he knew he had a better shot of winning with him than with Schultz.


I think everyone agrees with this. The real question is whether Schulz is the frontrunner for the starting job if Wilson is out. I think he is not, and the WSU choice is not evidence to the contrary.

I do agree with JR on Schultz. He is not a bad QB; he was put into a bad situation. He has a strong arm and experience. But I don't think he will be our QB next season.

[Utah]

I'm sorry, but Schulz was a bad QB. Borderline terrible. His adjusted QBR is one of the lowest in the nation. He single hand idly gave WSU 14 points and a bowl game. His record was 1-5, including two games where the opposing team scored less than 21 points.

With a a half decent QB, we go AT WORST 7-5 last year. AT WORST.

I love Whitt, but if Schulz ever plays again and we aren't up 30 pts...that would be unacceptable.

[jrj84105]

The bottom line is that we didn't have a game ready number 2 QB last year. I think there were a few contributing factors.
1) Cox looked like a legitimate second option in spring camp. He certainly impressed DE in that respect. Then Cox was injured which either caused him to fail to progress or possibly led to some regression. I suspect that had DE not been so impressed with Cox, he would have brought in a transfer rather than enter fall camp with Schulz as #2.
2) Now if we still had Chow's offense, I think Schulz could have performed better than Hays and eeked out enough W's to get us into a bowl. Schulz didn't have that advantage though. I don't think DE had the energy to prepare a new offense for Schulz or Manning, and BJ simply lacked the aptitude. Watching Schulz try and sell the read option while being completely ignored by a WSU defense that was collapsing on our RB's was sadder than watching the interceptions. It was a farce of an offense to be running with that QB, and the hard truth is that Manning wouldn't have fared any better.

I think we have some serious concerns at QB heading into 2014. The question is whether or not DC can tailor an offense to get the most out of limited talent/experience like what Chow did with Hays, or if we'll continue to have questionable talent that still manages to underperform as we saw in 2012 and the end of 2013.

[Utah]

The bottom line is that we didn't have a game ready number 2 QB last year.

I agree 100%


2) Now if we still had Chow's offense, I think Schulz could have performed better than Hays and eeked out enough W's to get us into a bowl. Schulz didn't have that advantage though. I don't think DE had the energy to prepare a new offense for Schulz or Manning, and BJ simply lacked the aptitude. Watching Schulz try and sell the read option while being completely ignored by a WSU defense that was collapsing on our RB's was sadder than watching the interceptions. It was a farce of an offense to be running with that QB, and the hard truth is that Manning wouldn't have fared any better.

The hard truth about Manning...huh. How many games has anyone seen Manning play? How much has anyone see Manning practice? Schulz was just a terrible QB. The problem was, the rest of this Utah team was really, REALLY good. We beat Stanford. We had 6 TO's vs UCLA and almost won. We held an amazingly explosive ASU team to 20 pts. The rest of the team went toe to toe with an energized USC team.

Here is where we were with two games to go: We needed two wins and both teams we played weren't better than us with NO QB. All we needed was Schulz to go out and not throw picks. Heck, had he done nothing but sat down, we would have beaten WSU.

WSU is NOT a good team. They aren't "up and coming" like everyone likes to say about them. We went toe to toe with them, and we had NO QB. NONE. We were completely one dimensional, just like they are. The game came down to two plays, and both those plays were pathetic plays by Schulz.

Hays never had bone head plays like Shulz did. I was a Hays hater, but we probably go 7-5 with Hays this year. Schulz is that bad.

Again, how can anyone say that Manning isn't better when we haven't seen him play? We should have beaten WSU, even with Schulz. We were good enough. The only player that didn't belong on the field at that time was Schulz. Once we lost that game, there was no point in playing Manning the last game.

Just because Manning didn't play says nothing about his talent, ability, or progression in comparison to Schulz.


I think we have some serious concerns at QB heading into 2014. The question is whether or not DC can tailor an offense to get the most out of limited talent/experience like what Chow did with Hays, or if we'll continue to have questionable talent that still manages to underperform as we saw in 2012 and the end of 2013.

Wow. We see two completely different Utah teams. Utah's QB situation is the best it's been since...forever. We've never had this much talent at QB at once in...ever. Look at us in the PAC-12:

2011: Wynn and Hays
2012: Wynn, Hays and Wilson
2013: Wilson and Schulz
2014: Manning, Cox, Thomas, Isom, Schulz and maybe Wilson

I have concerns at QB as well, but I feel better about the QB position than...ever. We actually have options.

DC has done quite well with Freshman/RS Freshman QB's. DC doesn't have limited talent. He is surrounded by talent at the QB position. Hays overachieved at QB. Wilson overachieved at QB while healthy. Schulz underperformed big time.

We don't have questionable talent. We have talent. And, most of out talent hasn't underperformed. Most has overachieved.

What we need is depth (which we have). Look at last year. When Wilson was healthy, we were 4-2, with a win over a top 5 program, running a top 25 offense. When Wilson was hurt, we went 1-7. But the rest of our team was good.

In our first 6 games, Wilson had 13 TD's vs 10 INT's. The offense was putting up 38 points per game.

Our last 6 games, we lost to Arizona by 11 points, and Arizona only scored 35 points.
We lost to USC by 16 points, and USC only scored 19 points.
We lost to ASU by 1 point, and ASU only scored 20 points.
We were killed by Oregon.
We lost to WSU by 15 points, but Schulz threw two pick sixes, and WSU scored 49 points.

You can't tell me that a healthy Wilson, who was leading a top 25 offense and had just beaten a top 5 team, would not have won at least two more games last season.

If we would have had a real QB instead of Schulz, we are all on here talking about how great Whitt is, how we destroyed CSU, how awesome we will be this fall, blah, blah, blah. Imagine if Hansen didn't go on his mission. Instead of having a terrible walk-on at QB, we have a RS freshman come in, in his second year of being on the team, who can run the read option very well...we win at least 7 games.

Our problem has always been QB depth. We have depth now. I'm excited to see what happens this fall. Better depth everywhere and an easier schedule. Fun stuff.

[Utah]

I think JRJ34598345 (name change, please!) is owning this thread. Whit is a smart dude so he knows (1) about how game-ready certain players are, (2) that by winning at WSU (and bowling) he would have saved himself a LOT of heartache. All Utenation is crying for his head right now, but if he won one more stinking game everyone would be saying Utah is back! Given that, I can't see him sitting Cox when he knew he had a better shot of winning with him than with Schultz.



That, my friend, is a fantastic line. I remember when Schultz dominated his redshirt year.

jr's whole stance is because Manning didn't play against WSU and Schulz did, Manning isn't as good. Not the strongest argument.

Schulz never dominated his RS year. The only people that talked about him were fans who saw one pass go for a TD against Utah's third string defense, which at the time was terrible (no depth). Never once did anyone around the team imply Schulz had any future with this team. Schulz was so terrible, Whitt went with Wilson who couldn't throw over Schulz. The only reason Schulz saw the field last year was Wilson's LIFE was in danger. Basically, until it looked like Wilson might DIE, Whitt chose Wilson over Schulz. Not the biggest endorsement. And even then, Whitt almost went with Manning. BUT, Whitt probably didn't think that Schulz would do the stupid thing and throw two pick sixes..that's what freshmen do.

Again, all Schulz had to do against WSU was sit down, and we would have won. He was a terrible QB, and him playing has nothing to do with Manning or Cox's talent, but everything to do with how good the rest of this Utah team was.

[UTEopia]

Hays never had bone head plays like Shulz did. I was a Hays hater, but we probably go 7-5 with Hays this year. Schulz is that bad.



Except he did. Pick 6 against USC late in the third quarter or early in 4th. Pick 6 against Georgia Tech. I think they are basically the same quality of QB. There is no way that Utah goes 8-5 with Hays without a very good OL and a dominant John White IV. Add those two elements and Schulz at QB and the records are the same.

[concerned]

Except he did. Pick 6 against USC late in the third quarter or early in 4th. Pick 6 against Georgia Tech. I think they are basically the same quality of QB. There is no way that Utah goes 8-5 with Hays without a very good OL and a dominant John White IV. Add those two elements and Schulz at QB and the records are the same.

And Chow knew how to run that offense and manage Hays effectively (relatively).

[jrj84105]

Except he did. Pick 6 against USC late in the third quarter or early in 4th. Pick 6 against Georgia Tech. I think they are basically the same quality of QB. There is no way that Utah goes 8-5 with Hays without a very good OL and a dominant John White IV. Add those two elements and Schulz at QB and the records are the same.

All of this- I'd also add Shawn Asiata.

[U-Ute]

Wow. We see two completely different Utah teams. Utah's QB situation is the best it's been since...forever. We've never had this much talent at QB at once in...ever. Look at us in the PAC-12:

2011: Wynn and Hays
2012: Wynn, Hays and Wilson
2013: Wilson and Schulz
2014: Manning, Cox, Thomas, Isom, Schulz and maybe Wilson


What year did Shreve switch to baseball? Wasn't losing him the reason we had to pick up Hayes?

[UBlender]

What year did Shreve switch to baseball? Wasn't losing him the reason we had to pick up Hayes?

Shreve was still at Utah when they picked up Hays, but his lack of progress was a big reason that they needed to go get Hays.

[Utah]

The craziest thing is this:

Here we are debating Schulz like crazy, when the most likely thing that happens is Schulz is the starter come opening day...for Weber State.

[sancho]

Speaking of QB transfers...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20140219/college-quarterback-transfers-kliff-kingsbury-texas-tech/?eref=sihp

We have a lot of QBs now. We will probably see both position changes (Thomas, Hansen, Thompson?) and transfers.

[Hot Lunch]

Shreve was still at Utah when they picked up Hays, but his lack of progress was a big reason that they needed to go get Hays.

My understanding is that Shreve was dumber than dirt. Hard to play qb at that level if that was indeed the case.

[concerned]

Shreve was still at Utah when they picked up Hays, but his lack of progress was a big reason that they needed to go get Hays.

We got Hays because Chow saw that both Shreve and Robles couldn't cut it.

[jrj84105]

2013 QB performance (or implied/expected performance had they played)- in graph form!

1045

[LA Ute]

I'm not buying the Travis Wilson semi-bashing here. A lot of smart football people (including Chow) thought he had what it takes to be a very good PAC-12 QB. Yes, he made some horrible decisions in 2013 but the kid is a gamer and has some unique physical tools. We may never know how well he'd have done with a decent offensive line. And -- I remember when many people who post on these boards (including me) doubted Brian Johnson and thought he'd never be a solid D1 QB. The sophomore BJ was very frustrating and many said he had happy feet. I'd have happy feet too if a bunch of 250-lb. guys with bulk and speed were chasing me with the intent of crashing into me or throwing me to the ground (or both).

[sancho]

2013 QB performance (or implied/expected performance had they played)- in graph form!


Each of those boxes moves up two inches if the QBs are playing for USC or Stanford instead of Utah.

[jrj84105]

^Yup^

I'm pretty cool with a QB who functions at a poor MWC level when he has a pourous O-line, one receiver, and a non-functional throwing hand because that guy happens to look like an elite QB when you take away just one or two of those impediments. TW's low end has performance has a lot to do with his injury and his supporting cast. TW's high end performance is pretty much all TW, IMO.

[Utah]

I've been a Wilson homer from day one. I haven't seen any Wilson bashing on here. The kid was compared to Drew Bledsoe when he was recruited.

If he can play, we will have a great season next year (8+ wins).

[Utah]

If Wilson had stayed healthy, we beat Arizona, USC, ASU, and WSU plus probably win our bowl for 10 wins last year.

[mpfunk]

If Wilson had stayed healthy, we beat Arizona, USC, ASU, and WSU plus probably win our bowl for 10 wins last year.

:rofl:

Not sure how you make that claim at all. Wilson struggled even before he got hurt.

[Utah]

:rofl:

Not sure how you make that claim at all. Wilson struggled even before he got hurt.

4-2,win over Stanford, top 25 offense, averaging 38 pts a game...I'll take that type of struggle any day of the week.

[jrj84105]

:rofl:

Not sure how you make that claim at all. Wilson struggled even before he got hurt.

Wilson initially injured his hand versus BYU. Was sick as hell versus UCLA (after going to his best friend's funeral), and really exacerbated the injury midway through Furd. He played hurt nearly the entire season.

[Hot Lunch]

Wilson initially injured his hand versus BYU. Was sick as hell versus UCLA (after going to his best friend's funeral), and really exacerbated the injury midway through Furd. He played hurt nearly the entire season.

This is the first time I have heard about this happening vs. BYU. Everything I have heard and read, the injury happened vs. Stanford. I find this hard to believe.

[jrj84105]

What I heard (and it seemed pretty probable given TW's release point) is that he banged it on a helmet vs BYU (not so big a deal) but is was versus Furd when the skin got caught and peeled back. I thought I saw it happen too, because it gave me a flashback to when Wynn cracked his hand versus Pitt in 2010- which also seemed to be underreported.

[Jarid in Cedar]

This is the first time I have heard about this happening vs. BYU. Everything I have heard and read, the injury happened vs. Stanford. I find this hard to believe.

I have to look at the film again, but I think he had a bandage on a large gash on the back of his thumb hand when we played UCLA. It was a big cut that wouldn't close, and I believe he got it at the end of the BYu game. he then injured the thumb joint(and opened the gash even more) when we played Stanford

[U-Ute]

Speaking of QB transfers...

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20140219/college-quarterback-transfers-kliff-kingsbury-texas-tech/?eref=sihp

We have a lot of QBs now. We will probably see both position changes (Thomas, Hansen, Thompson?) and transfers.

Interesting to see Eubanks transfer from ASU. I wonder why. It is rare to have a QB go through a season without getting hurt. Unless he's now the #3 guy...?

[Hot Lunch]

I have to look at the film again, but I think he had a bandage on a large gash on the back of his thumb hand when we played UCLA. It was a big cut that wouldn't close, and I believe he got it at the end of the BYu game. he then injured the thumb joint(and opened the gash even more) when we played Stanford

Maybe I am mistaken. I had no idea something happened vs. BYU.

[UTEopia]

Interesting to see Eubanks transfer from ASU. I wonder why. It is rare to have a QB go through a season without getting hurt. Unless he's now the #3 guy...?


He wants to be the No.1 guy and not rely on an injury to get playing time. Taylor Kelly played both of the last two years without injury. Why would Eubanks think he would get injured this coming year?

[Utah]

Interesting to see Eubanks transfer from ASU. I wonder why. It is rare to have a QB go through a season without getting hurt. Unless he's now the #3 guy...?

How different is Utah if Eubanks came to Utah?

2011: Wynn, Eubank, Hays
2012: Wynn, Eubank, Hays
2013: Eubank, etc

Are we coming off three straight bowls? Are we coming into the 2014 season with a shot to win the PAC-12 with a SR QB with 4 years experience? Is BJ the greatest thing in coaching right now, and we are all worried that some BCS school will make him a HC this offseason?

Who knows, maybe he just sucks, but you have to think he would be better than Hays or Schulz.

Oh, well, at least we have a light at the end of the tunnel with a great OC and 3, maybe 4 really, really good QB prospects.

[U-Ute]

How different is Utah if Eubanks came to Utah?

Him or Brown.

Not sure if they would have panned out, but it would probably have been better than going the route we did.

[jrj84105]

I have to look at the film again, but I think he had a bandage on a large gash on the back of his thumb hand when we played UCLA. It was a big cut that wouldn't close, and I believe he got it at the end of the BYu game. he then injured the thumb joint(and opened the gash even more) when we played Stanford

You're right. The skin was opened up. Travis Wilson is a Badass.
1046

[Hot Lunch]

You're right. The skin was opened up. Travis Wilson is a Badass.
1046

I have always loved Travis when healthy. He is a baller. Had no idea the injury had occurred that early in the year. Sorry for call you out like that.

[jrj84105]

No problem. I was definitely wrong about the extent of the injury at that point anyway.

Going back to the 2010 season, not only have we had devastating QB injuries, but we've been playing with QB's that were probably too injured to play for most of the season. As I mentioned before, Wynn hurt his hand pretty badly at the end of the first half of the 2010 Pitt game. We couldn't score during the second half and required a Blechen interception to pull out that victory. Despite lopsided victories in the next three games, he was not throwing the ball the same. Of course following a bye week he was back to form at ISU before blowing out his shoulder. He still continued to play until ultimately requiring surgery at the end of the season. Had we had a serviceable backup, I'm not sure that Wynn even finishes the Pitt game and definitely wouldn't have played beyond ISU.

In 2011 Hays finished the season with a knee injury which probably would have sidelined anybody not named Marcus Mariotta.

In 2013 Wilson played most of the season with a throwing hand injury, and judging by the resulting rapid increase in interceptions and decrease in productivity, probably would have been benched to heal had we had a serviceable backup.

That's why I refuse to buy the "snakebit" story line, because due to lack of depth we're repeatedly putting some pretty dinged up QB's out on the field which is sort of asking for more serious injuries/lasting harm. It's also why I'm less focused on finding the "best QB" in 2014 and would place a higher priority on finding a system where we can have/recruit the necessary depth to sit an injured QB on the bench without changing our offensive identity.

[LA Ute]

FWIW. Ted Miller:


Jake from North Salt Lake City writes: What's the outside perception of Utah? Because right now it's terribly negative around here about the future. People are assuming this is [Kyle Whittingham’s] last year and there's not a lot of momentum. Pretty gloomy around here. I personally feel we are closer than it feels and have just had some bad luck. When you lack quality depth injuries are magnified. So are we closer than it feels or are we doomed?

Ted Miller: You're doomed. All is lost. Go read some Sylvia Plath or Samuel Beckett. Or go listen to some Radiohead.

Wait. You, Jake, do retain some optimism. Good.

My first thought is, as I've written before, Utah fans might want to slow down on pushing Kyle Whittingham out the door. He's a good coach with a proven track record. Many Utah fans probably had an overly optimistic expectations for the ease of transition to Pac-12 play.

For comparison's sake, consider the travails of TCU, another former Mountain West power that moved up to an AQ conference. Horned Frogs coach Gary Patterson was once viewed as a super-elite coach, but his team went 2-7 in the Big 12 last year, a down one for the conference.

What we're learning is Utah and TCU as MWC powers were able to beat quality AQ teams on any given day -- even in BCS bowl games (TCU over Wisconsin in the Rose Bowl, Utah over Alabama in the Sugar Bowl) -- but it's not so easy to play, say, Stanford, Arizona, USC, Arizona State and Oregon over a stretch of six weeks.

Has Whittingham been flawless? No. His revolving door at offensive coordinator hasn't been a good thing, and the Utes lack of depth at quarterback has bitten them in the rear the past three seasons.

I don't really think you can get a good measure of Utah in the Pac-12 until it's gone through a full recruiting cycle in the conference -- four or five years of telling recruits they will be playing in the Pac-12.

As for next year, the Utes have a lot of questions, starting with the long-term health of QB Travis Wilson (http://espn.go.com/college-football/player/_/id/531051/travis-wilson). It won't be easy to gain ground in an improved and deep South Division. It seems reasonable to hope for bowl eligibility, but it's also difficult to imagine a roof any higher than seven or eight wins.

While that might feel like doom and gloom to Utes fans right now, to me, it's more a matter of measured, realistic patience.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/69660/mailbag-awaiting-bielema-apology

[UTEopia]

"it's more a matter of measured, realistic patience." Who does he think we are? We are fans, short for fanatics. If we were measured, realistic and patient, we would be writing on the Utah Symphony message board.

[Hot Lunch]

Kendal Thompson is a Ute.

This is a great get for many reasons. Based on my sources, I am still concerned for Travis's health with his current situation. He already had other injury issues last season.

Kendal will also push Travis to get better. He will know that there is a good qb that is game ready to step in and play if he isn't getting the job done. As much as I loved him at the start of the year, he did make some bonehead decisions.

I will be surprised if Adam Schultz sticks around. He should be on the phone with Jay Hill up at Weber right now checking to see if he would be able to come in and play next year.

[concerned]

Kendal Thompson is a Ute.

This is a great get for many reasons. Based on my sources, I am still concerned for Travis's health with his current situation. He already had other injury issues last season.

Kendal will also push Travis to get better. He will know that there is a good qb that is game ready to step in and play if he isn't getting the job done. As much as I loved him at the start of the year, he did make some bonehead decisions.

I will be surprised if Adam Schultz sticks around. He should be on the phone with Jay Hill up at Weber right now checking to see if he would be able to come in and play next year.


Would you suppose that Dave Christensen was instrumental in this transfer, to the point that Thompson could be considered his guy, or the guy for his offense???

[Hot Lunch]

Would you suppose that Dave Christensen was instrumental in this transfer, to the point that Thompson could be considered his guy, or the guy for his offense???

I am sure he was. DC has ties to Big 12 country from his time at Mizzou. I have to assume that Thompson was told that he would have a fair share of winning the job. I doubt he would have came here otherwise. He had a lot of other options.

[Applejack]

Kendal Thompson is a Ute.

This is a great get for many reasons. Based on my sources, I am still concerned for Travis's health with his current situation. He already had other injury issues last season.

Kendal will also push Travis to get better. He will know that there is a good qb that is game ready to step in and play if he isn't getting the job done. As much as I loved him at the start of the year, he did make some bonehead decisions.

I will be surprised if Adam Schultz sticks around. He should be on the phone with Jay Hill up at Weber right now checking to see if he would be able to come in and play next year.

Really interesting. I like the pickup because we need bodies at QB (and unlike my sunny-side up friend, Utah, I don't trust redshirt or true freshman). Hopefully he can contribute, either on the field or in practice pushing the others to compete.

[UBlender]

I just think it's great that in two days we went from having Schulz battle it out with a group of freshmen to now having two talented juniors in the mix. I still like some of the young QBs, but now we should be able to bring them along in the proper timeframe while having two good options that are game-ready right now.

[LA Ute]

I just think it's great that in two days we went from having Schulz battle it out with a group of freshmen to now having two talented juniors in the mix. I still like some of the young QBs, but now we should be able to bring them along in the proper timeframe while having two good options that are game-ready right now.

+ + + + +

[Utah]

Really interesting. I like the pickup because we need bodies at QB (and unlike my sunny-side up friend, Utah, I don't trust redshirt or true freshman). Hopefully he can contribute, either on the field or in practice pushing the others to compete.

I literally lol at this. Nice.

I do agree 100% with you. While I do think Manning and Cox are better than Schulz, I'll take two JR's over two freshmen any day of the week. Things are looking promising.

[Utah]

I saw a post awhile back that gave points to certain star levels (I think a two star kid was worth 60 points). I can't remember if it was here on on UFN.

So, now with the additions of Lotulelei, Thompson, and the 4-5 kids we ended signing for the heck of it, how many additional points was this class awarded? Did we end up in the 30-40's where we should be? Is our "terrible" class really pretty average?

Actually, it should be better than average, because Thompson, Lotulelei, Booker and others that have joined should help this fall, not in 2-3 years.

[sancho]

I don't trust redshirt or true freshman


went from having Schulz battle it out with a group of freshmen to now having two talented juniors in the mix


having two good options that are game-ready right now


I'll take two JR's over two freshmen any day of the week.

I'm happy to have Thompson too, but how is he different than our freshmen? He has, what, 10 real game snaps? Maybe just being older is an advantage, but he certainly doesn't have enough experience to think he's any more game-ready than Manning, Thomas, Cox, or Isom.

The only QBs with real experience are Wilson, Schultz, and the other Thompson from Wyoming. (Is that right? Do we have two QBs named Thompson now?)

Can Wyoming Thompson play another position? Thomas to safety, right?

[Diehard Ute]

I would venture Thomas leaves before switching positions.

I also, based on what I know, am far less worried about Wilson than others. Of course I've been saying that for some time and getting told I'm wrong ;)

[LA Ute]

I would venture Thomas leaves before switching positions.

I also, based on what I know, am far less worried about Wilson than others. Of course I've been saying that for some time and getting told I'm wrong ;)

Keep saying it! That will increase the chances of it actually happening. You have a track record, buddy, don't blow it!

[U-Ute]

Keep saying it! That will increase the chances of it actually happening. You have a track record, buddy, don't blow it!

I will keep disagreeing with him if it helps.

[LA Ute]

I will keep disagreeing with him if it helps.

Absolutely, please do. It's a team effort.

[mpfunk]

I'm thrilled that Thompson is coming to Utah.

[jrj84105]

I saw a post awhile back that gave points to certain star levels (I think a two star kid was worth 60 points). I can't remember if it was here on on UFN.

So, now with the additions of Lotulelei, Thompson, and the 4-5 kids we ended signing for the heck of it, how many additional points was this class awarded? Did we end up in the 30-40's where we should be? Is our "terrible" class really pretty average?

Actually, it should be better than average, because Thompson, Lotulelei, Booker and others that have joined should help this fall, not in 2-3 years.

There's some truth to this. We've had a pretty bad run lately of "star attrition" where a several high star kids each year fail to make it to campus or ever become Utes. This spring is like the year of reverse attrition- which probably has its own word :/

[ute4eva]

]I'm happy to have Thompson too, but how is he different than our freshmen? He has, what, 10 real game snaps? Maybe just being older is an advantage, but he certainly doesn't have enough experience to think he's any more game-ready than Manning, Thomas, Cox, or Isom.

The only QBs with real experience are Wilson, Schultz, and the other Thompson from Wyoming. (Is that right? Do we have two QBs named Thompson now?)

Can Wyoming Thompson play another position? Thomas to safety, right?

Wyoming Thompson was originally recruited to be a safety but wanted to play quarterback so he ended up where a safety can play quarterback (Wyoming). Hopefully with his transfer to Utah he will go back to safety and continue the DB excellence that is the University of Utah.

[LA Ute]

From Oklahoma's website about Thompson (http://www.soonersports.com/ViewArticle.dbml?ATCLID=208409642):

2013
Played in two of 13 games ... came off the bench at Oklahoma State (12/7) to complete two of nine passes for 17 yards ... made Sooners debut against Iowa State (11/16), completing two of four passes for 47 yards and a touchdown and rushing twice for 21 yards
2012
Did not play.

2011
Redshirted.

High School
Under Armour All-American ... four-star recruit by Tom Lemming's MaxPreps ... three-star recruit by ESPN.com, Rivals.com and Scout.com ... played in just three games as a senior due to an injury in the season's second game ... completed 25-of-34 passes for 295 yards with five touchdowns and no interceptions in those three games while logging 42 rushing attempts for 237 yards and one TD ... completed 166 of 259 passes in 2009 for 2,793 yards and 29 touchdowns while rushing for 466 yards and 10 TDs ... as a sophomore in 2008, threw for 1,025 yards and 13 TDs with 76 completions on 148 attempts while rushing for 136 yards and one TD.

http://graphics.fansonly.com/schools/okla/graphics/auto/tiny_arrow3.gifNo. 14 quarterback (Rivals.com)
http://graphics.fansonly.com/schools/okla/graphics/auto/tiny_arrow3.gifNo. 17 quarterback (ESPN.com)
http://graphics.fansonly.com/schools/okla/graphics/auto/tiny_arrow3.gifNo. 21 combo quarterback (Tom Lemming's MaxPreps)
http://graphics.fansonly.com/schools/okla/graphics/auto/tiny_arrow3.gifNo. 2 player in Oklahoma (Rivals.com)
http://graphics.fansonly.com/schools/okla/graphics/auto/tiny_arrow3.gifNo. 2 player in Oklahoma (Scout.com)

Personal
Son of Charles and Kori Thompson ... father played quarterback at OU in 1987 and 1988 ... cousin of former OU defensive back Antonio Perkins and current West Virginia wide receiver Jordan Thompson ... majoring in communication.

[concerned]

He has really not played much at all--not even his senior year in high school

[Utah]

He has really not played much at all--not even his senior year in high school

In my "glass is overflowing" view, it sounds like we have ourselves a future made for tv movie here coming up this fall.

[U-Ute]

In my "glass is overflowing" view, it sounds like we have ourselves a future made for tv movie here coming up this fall.

Is it too early to call Scott Bakula?

[FountainOfUte]

I'm happy to have Thompson too, but how is he different than our freshmen? He has, what, 10 real game snaps?

This is kind of my feeling as well. I'm not going to stare a gift horse in the mouth, but on the other hand, I don't get the joygasm going on with this kid. I agree, his experience is basically less than Schulz's. I'd actually give Manning the edge on Thompson simply by having a full year throwing to Ute receivers, building familiarity and rapport with the school and coaches, etc.

So, for the folks already penciling Thompson in as our #2, I'm not sure that says good things about our recruiting if a guy stuck on a bench for two years at another school is better than what we've already brought in as our future starters.

I wish good luck to all the guys competing for the job this spring and summer. I hope Wilson is the obvious choice.

[UBlender]

So, for the folks already penciling Thompson in as our #2, I'm not sure that says good things about our recruiting if a guy stuck on a bench for two years at another school is better than what we've already brought in as our future starters.


I'm not ready to anoint anyone as anything, but I'm just glad we have several options, both juniors and staggered freshmen. Having said that, if you read/listen to Oklahoma people, you have not characterized his situation accurately. Thompson was behind a top flight QB in Landry Jones and then this past year when the job was open he was looking good before breaking his foot. That put him out of the equation to start and a sophomore has now taken the job and run with it. Many OK folks seem to think we're getting a good one and some think he didn't really get a fair shake.

I don't think it's quite accurate to simply say he didn't play so therefore he must suck.

[UBlender]

I would venture Thomas leaves before switching positions.

I also, based on what I know, am far less worried about Wilson than others. Of course I've been saying that for some time and getting told I'm wrong ;)

I know that I am still a bit mystified by all those who keep saying "I'm really worried about how Travis will perform knowing that one hit could end his career." People don't seem to understand that, by being medically cleared, he is at no greater risk than anyone else on the football field. Now we don't know how he will be mentally, but physically he will not be at any higher risk than, say, Conner Manning. If he was at higher risk he wouldn't be cleared.

[Utah]

All I know is that I'm PUMPED for spring ball.

[DrumNFeather]

All I know is that I'm PUMPED for spring ball.

3 weeks, right?

Sent from my LG-E970 using Tapatalk 2

[DrumNFeather]

Spring Capsul from ESPN:




UTAH

http://a.espncdn.com/i/teamlogos/ncaa/med/254.gifSpring start: March 18
Spring game: April 26

What to watch:


Wilson's road back: Travis Wilson (http://espn.go.com/college-football/player/_/id/531051/travis-wilson) is expected to be the Utes' starting quarterback next season, but he'll be limited to non-contact drills during the spring. That's about the best news Wilson could have received following an early November discovery that he had an undiagnosed injury to an intracranial artery -- a condition that threatened his career. Oklahoma transfer Kendal Thompson (http://espn.go.com/college-football/player/_/id/514737/kendal-thompson) will not join the team until after he graduates in May, but he'll be immediately eligible to play.
Revolving OC door: Dave Christensen moves in, Dennis Erickson moves over and Brian Johnson moves out. Kyle Whittingham introduced the Utes' seventh offensive coordinator is seven years in early January. Christensen believes in similar philosophies to what the Utes had under Erickson/Johnson, but the terminology will change and the tempo will increase.
Pressure building? Utah was used to winning big before it got to the Pac-12 in 2011. Whittingham lost just 20 games in his six full seasons as the school's head coach while a member of the Mountain West Conference. In the three years since, Utah's dropped 19 and qualified for just one bowl. No one should doubt Whittingham's ability as a coach -- he's a good one -- but the jump in competition has been difficult.

[U-Ute]

The OC position at Utah is starting to look like the Defense Against The Dark Arts position at Hogwarts.

[DrumNFeather]

Spring prospectus released: http://grfx.cstv.com/photos/schools/utah/sports/m-footbl/auto_pdf/2013-14/prospectus/prospectus.pdf

[Scorcho]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/24483893/acc-supports-deregulation-of-conference-championship-games-would-change-postseason-structure

didn't know where this fit in the forum but thought it was interesting.

Basically ACC is in favor of putting their 2 best teams in their football conference championship game vs. the traditional way of pairing up the two divisions champions within the ACC.

[Utah]

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/writer/dennis-dodd/24483893/acc-supports-deregulation-of-conference-championship-games-would-change-postseason-structure

didn't know where this fit in the forum but thought it was interesting.

Basically ACC is in favor of putting their 2 best teams in their football conference championship game vs. the traditional way of pairing up the two divisions champions within the ACC.

I'd say the biggest downside is that the two best record teams might not be the two best due to differences in scheduling (which I guess you could say that with the division winners). I like division winners playing against each other. Especially with how the college post season plays out, great teams won't be left out.

I like the division winners, which creates inter-division rivalries, make the intra-division games bigger, creates conference and division loyalties, etc. North vs. South, hippies vs yuppies, everyone in the division rooting against USC/Oregon the rooting for the division later on...fun stuff.

[U-Ute]

Apparently, the spring prospectus put out by the U of U last week mentions that Kendal Thompson will not be graduating in May. He will need to take summer classes at Oklahoma and won't join the Utes until fall.

Ouch.

EDIT: The only mention I can see in the online PDF is on page 5 where it says "expected in the fall". But there is no corresponding "will be here this summer" so that could just be a formality. Maybe the fully printed guide is different.

[LA Ute]

Apparently, the spring prospectus put out by the U of U last week mentions that Kendal Thompson will not be graduating in May. He will need to take summer classes at Oklahoma and won't join the Utes until fall.

Ouch.

EDIT: The only mention I can see in the online PDF is on page 5 where it says "expected in the fall". But there is no corresponding "will be here this summer" so that could just be a formality. Maybe the fully printed guide is different.

Apparently the curse on Utah football's QB fortunes has not quite been lifted.

[Diehard Ute]

Apparently the curse on Utah football's QB fortunes has not quite been lifted.

It really doesn't make a big difference. He couldn't work with the coaching staff, only the strength staff

While it's nice to throw with the receivers and be around the team, I don't think it's really a big deal. If he'd been expected for spring that would have been another story.

[U-Ute]

Apparently the curse on Utah football's QB fortunes has not quite been lifted.

Liz Abel confirmed with the radio station that it is only a formality. "Fall" means "between May and August".

[LA Ute]

It really doesn't make a big difference. He couldn't work with the coaching staff, only the strength staff

While it's nice to throw with the receivers and be around the team, I don't think it's really a big deal. If he'd been expected for spring that would have been another story.

I understand the coaches pretty much expected this.

[Hadrian]

Right now, Micah Thomas is wearing a QB jersey and playing WR. Seems like his fate is rather undecided.

[sancho]

Right now, Micah Thomas is wearing a QB jersey and playing WR. Seems like his fate is rather undecided.

Start getting him used to the idea. I prefer my qbs to transition to the defense, though.

[Applejack]

Start getting him used to the idea. I prefer my qbs to transition to the defense, though.

:highfive:

[Hadrian]

Okay, I wasn't crazy. I thought I saw Kendal Thompson watching practice today but I didn't know for sure. Confirmed.
(https://twitter.com/matthew_piper/status/446045468053618688/photo/1)
I don't know enough to give any real assessment, but I'll relay my thoughts here. I wasn't really impressed with any of the quarterbacks today. Wilson looked a little less sharp than I remember last season at spring practice, but he looks fairly confident. Manning throws a nice ball and Schultz looked pretty good. Cox had moments but he tends to underthrow receivers. As I said before, Thomas mostly played WR. The defense looked good to me and the coaches were fun to listen to; Scalley and Shaw are the loudest coaches on the field and the defense plays with a lot of energy. At RB, first team reps were split between Poole, Marcus Williams, and Dre'Vian Young. They looked strong to me. I think Radley was with the second team and Oliver was with the third team. The new offensive coaches are a bit more loud and animated than the old ones, so that's a positive. Practice in general seemed faster paced than last year.

[Diehard Ute]

Okay, I wasn't crazy. I thought I saw Kendal Thompson watching practice today but I didn't know for sure. Confirmed.
(https://twitter.com/matthew_piper/status/446045468053618688/photo/1)
I don't know enough to give any real assessment, but I'll relay my thoughts here. I wasn't really impressed with any of the quarterbacks today. Wilson looked a little less sharp than I remember last season at spring practice, but he looks fairly confident. Manning throws a nice ball and Schultz looked pretty good. Cox had moments but he tends to underthrow receivers. As I said before, Thomas mostly played WR. The defense looked good to me and the coaches were fun to listen to; Scalley and Shaw are the loudest coaches on the field and the defense plays with a lot of energy. At RB, first team reps were split between Poole, Marcus Williams, and Dre'Vian Young. They looked strong to me. I think Radley was with the second team and Oliver was with the third team. The new offensive coaches are a bit more loud and animated than the old ones, so that's a positive. Practice in general seemed faster paced than last year.

Radley is out with an injury until fall

[Hadrian]

It must have been McCormick then.

[LA Ute]

Video clip from spring practice:

http://player.vimeo.com/video/89940887

This helps get to know a few of the players a bit.

[UTEopia]

I attended practice on Saturday and Tuesday and here are some general observations:

The defense dominated the day on Saturday and I left practice wondering if the Utes would be able to win a game next year. Tuesday was a totally different story as the offense took charge. What i concluded from both practices is that this team will rise or fall based on OL and QB play. If the OL can be a force and the QB can eliminate a lot of the turnovers from a year ago, this team has enough playmakers in other positions to get to the 7 or 8 win mark. If the OL and QB play like they did a year ago, it will be tough to get to 5 wins.

The OL rotation right now is:

LT: Albers/Dielman
LG: Poutasi/Friel
C: Aiono/Nowakicki
RG: Lutui/Uhatafe
RT: Asiata/Falemaka/Barton

Salt and Pouvave are not participating,

The first thing I noticed about the OL is their splits. In the past, the splits were about 1 foot. The splits now are a full 3 feet. They want to spread the DL out and create some space to work in.

I like Harding's demeanor. He was enthusiastic but also demanding of the little things. My experience is that coaches start out very enthusiastic and encouraging and then as players make the same mistakes over time they become more negative and vocal. It will be interesting to see his demeanor at the end of spring and in fall camp.

Poutasi is much better suited to interior line than tackle. He can be a road grader at guard and use his power and strength. Aiono has good quickness for a center which helps him get into and vertical out of double teams.

The tackles are still a work in progress, but Asiata now looks like a man and not a doughy boy. Dielman appears to have put on some weight and has very good feet. Falemaka surprised me with both his length and size. Albers saw his first action on Tuesday and was a little behind the others. Barton has great size but needs a lot of work on technique. He will be best served by a redshirt year.

The QBs are still running Wilson, Schulz, Manning, Cox. Thomas worked solely with the WR's on Tuesday. Hopefully he buys into that role because he is not going to play QB at Utah. The QB's are up and down. Wilson mostly works with the 1's, Schultz and Manning get reps with both the 1's and the 2's and Cox the the 3's and a few with the 2's. Unlike some, I think Cox has shown well and would like to see what he can do with a few more reps. In fairness to all of the QB's I think it is tough to play when you get 4 or 5 plays and then sit for a while.

We have more versatility at RB than we have had for a long time. Radley is out. Despite that we have power in Booker and Williams, a slasher in Bubba and some speed in McCormick and Young. Oliver has also shown some nice things. If I had to rank guys it would be Bubba/Booker for the No. 1 position, Williams for the heavy package and McCormick for the light package.

Scott and Dres continue to lead at WR. Allen backs up Scott and sees most of the reps in team periods as it looks like they are keeping Scott out of contact. Norwood and Hatfield are in a battle for the slot receiver spot. Lewis backs up Dres. There is sufficient talent at WR to compete but a couple of guys need to step up and demand to be accounted for on every play. Scott can be that guy and so can Dres if he can catch the ball. I think by the time the season rolls around Hatfield will supplant Norwood. I am not sure where McClellon fits in all of this. Right now he seems to be the third option at most positions.

Tonga continues to lead the TE's, but it Siale is improved and Handley is a huge target. Reese will not see the field much IMO and neither will Moeai. It will be interesting to see how this group develops and is used. They could be difference makers.

I did not spend a lot of time watching the defense. The guy who has impressed me most with improvement is Mokofisi. The guy has a motor.

[Sullyute]

Thanks for the great write up.

[crazyute]

I think when all is said and done hatfield and mcclellon will be the slot receiver guys. They just bring so much more speed and athleticism than norwood does.


I attended practice on Saturday and Tuesday and here are some general observations:

The defense dominated the day on Saturday and I left practice wondering if the Utes would be able to win a game next year. Tuesday was a totally different story as the offense took charge. What i concluded from both practices is that this team will rise or fall based on OL and QB play. If the OL can be a force and the QB can eliminate a lot of the turnovers from a year ago, this team has enough playmakers in other positions to get to the 7 or 8 win mark. If the OL and QB play like they did a year ago, it will be tough to get to 5 wins.

The OL rotation right now is:

LT: Albers/Dielman
LG: Poutasi/Friel
C: Aiono/Nowakicki
RG: Lutui/Uhatafe
RT: Asiata/Falemaka/Barton

Salt and Pouvave are not participating,

The first thing I noticed about the OL is their splits. In the past, the splits were about 1 foot. The splits now are a full 3 feet. They want to spread the DL out and create some space to work in.

I like Harding's demeanor. He was enthusiastic but also demanding of the little things. My experience is that coaches start out very enthusiastic and encouraging and then as players make the same mistakes over time they become more negative and vocal. It will be interesting to see his demeanor at the end of spring and in fall camp.

Poutasi is much better suited to interior line than tackle. He can be a road grader at guard and use his power and strength. Aiono has good quickness for a center which helps him get into and vertical out of double teams.

The tackles are still a work in progress, but Asiata now looks like a man and not a doughy boy. Dielman appears to have put on some weight and has very good feet. Falemaka surprised me with both his length and size. Albers saw his first action on Tuesday and was a little behind the others. Barton has great size but needs a lot of work on technique. He will be best served by a redshirt year.

The QBs are still running Wilson, Schulz, Manning, Cox. Thomas worked solely with the WR's on Tuesday. Hopefully he buys into that role because he is not going to play QB at Utah. The QB's are up and down. Wilson mostly works with the 1's, Schultz and Manning get reps with both the 1's and the 2's and Cox the the 3's and a few with the 2's. Unlike some, I think Cox has shown well and would like to see what he can do with a few more reps. In fairness to all of the QB's I think it is tough to play when you get 4 or 5 plays and then sit for a while.

We have more versatility at RB than we have had for a long time. Radley is out. Despite that we have power in Booker and Williams, a slasher in Bubba and some speed in McCormick and Young. Oliver has also shown some nice things. If I had to rank guys it would be Bubba/Booker for the No. 1 position, Williams for the heavy package and McCormick for the light package.

Scott and Dres continue to lead at WR. Allen backs up Scott and sees most of the reps in team periods as it looks like they are keeping Scott out of contact. Norwood and Hatfield are in a battle for the slot receiver spot. Lewis backs up Dres. There is sufficient talent at WR to compete but a couple of guys need to step up and demand to be accounted for on every play. Scott can be that guy and so can Dres if he can catch the ball. I think by the time the season rolls around Hatfield will supplant Norwood. I am not sure where McClellon fits in all of this. Right now he seems to be the third option at most positions.

Tonga continues to lead the TE's, but it Siale is improved and Handley is a huge target. Reese will not see the field much IMO and neither will Moeai. It will be interesting to see how this group develops and is used. They could be difference makers.

I did not spend a lot of time watching the defense. The guy who has impressed me most with improvement is Mokofisi. The guy has a motor.

[jrj84105]

Follow up question on the RB's: I hear we'll be seeing two backs more frequently this year. Which RB's are we seeing on the field at the same time in the two back personnel groups? For instance, are we seeing Poole (the intermediate size/speed guy) mostly in single back situations and Booker + McCormick in the two back situations or more of random pairings right now?
Thanks

[UTEopia]

Follow up question on the RB's: I hear we'll be seeing two backs more frequently this year. Which RB's are we seeing on the field at the same time in the two back personnel groups? For instance, are we seeing Poole (the intermediate size/speed guy) mostly in single back situations and Booker + McCormick in the two back situations or more of random pairings right now?
Thanks

It looks to me that Booker and Poole are the primary running backs. If they go to 2 backs they bring in Williams for power and McCormick for speed. I have seen both Williams and McCormick in on their own, but not very often.

[jrj84105]

It looks to me that Booker and Poole are the primary running backs. If they go to 2 backs they bring in Williams for power and McCormick for speed. I have seen both Williams and McCormick in on their own, but not very often.

Second follow up: When we bring in a second back, is that with 2WR 1 TE or with 3 WR typically? Also, have you seen many/any two TE sets?

[Utebiquitous]

This is just terrific stuff uteopia. Thank you for taking the time to attend and to write this. I hope you'll get to a few more.

[UTEopia]

Second follow up: When we bring in a second back, is that with 2WR 1 TE or with 3 WR typically? Also, have you seen many/any two TE sets?

I did not see any 2 TE sets, but they are only in day 4 of the install, so that could be a package. I am very bullish on the TE's. I have seen 2 back sets with all other alignments. I don't think I can give an accurate accounting of the breakdown. The TE is typically flexed although there are sets where he is attached to the OL and also off the line next to the tackle.

[wally]

I know that he is not playing spring ball, but what are the chances that Kendal Thompson swoops in and starts next season? Seriously, it seems like KW has truly turned things completely over to DC and he has expressed the desire for a mobile QB. Seems to me like Kendal Thompson is best suited for that.

Also, to address the elephant in the room: what coach wants to play a QB with Travis Wilson's condition? Could one hard hit kill him? Would any coach want to make that call? I ask this because it has been on my mind all along. I would love for TW to be completely healthy, but there is always that nagging doubt...

[sancho]

I know that he is not playing spring ball, but what are the chances that Kendal Thompson swoops in and starts next season? Seriously, it seems like KW has truly turned things completely over to DC and he has expressed the desire for a mobile QB. Seems to me like Kendal Thompson is best suited for that.


I hope it's Wilson. I think his experience is worth a lot. Thompson, Manning, and Cox all have zero experience. Of course, if DC's system is completely new, experience matters a little less.

[Diehard Ute]

I know that he is not playing spring ball, but what are the chances that Kendal Thompson swoops in and starts next season? Seriously, it seems like KW has truly turned things completely over to DC and he has expressed the desire for a mobile QB. Seems to me like Kendal Thompson is best suited for that.

Also, to address the elephant in the room: what coach wants to play a QB with Travis Wilson's condition? Could one hard hit kill him? Would any coach want to make that call? I ask this because it has been on my mind all along. I would love for TW to be completely healthy, but there is always that nagging doubt...

The coach isn't making the call. Some of the best physicians in the world are, in consultation with Travis and his family.

Reality? Any player could be killed because of a hit. Life is what it is. Do you not get in a car because you might die?

[concerned]

I hope it's Wilson. I think his experience is worth a lot. Thompson, Manning, and Cox all have zero experience. Of course, if DC's system is completely new, experience matters a little less.


Speculation on talk radio that the offense is being structured in the spring to suit Thompson's skill set. But he is less experienced than anybody--4 passes in college; injured and out his senior year in high school.

[sancho]

offense is being structured in the spring to suit Thompson's skill set

What does that mean? Drastic changes in our scheme? Just some read option like we already do? Will we look like a poor man's Arizona all of a sudden? What is Thompson's skill set? Will this structure also work if Thompson goes down and Manning comes in? I guess the answer is wait and see.

[LA Ute]

What does that mean? Drastic changes in our scheme? Just some read option like we already do? Will we look like a poor man's Arizona all of a sudden? What is Thompson's skill set? Will this structure also work if Thompson goes down and Manning comes in? I guess the answer is wait and see.

From what I've gathered Thompson is the type of QB who is equally likely to run as to pass, and pretty good at both. Arguably Wilson isn't all that different because he likes to run too and can be good at it, but I understand Thompson has true speed and can really make plays with his feet. Not sure how to know that, given his lack of recent in-game playing time. Emotionally I'd like to see Wilson starting, but whatever it takes to win.

[sancho]

From what I've gathered Thompson is the type of QB who is equally likely to run as to pass, and pretty good at both.

That's the word on Cox too. It seems now that we have had a chance to look at Cox, people (fans, media, and coaches) are somewhat down on him and are putting their hopes on the unknown Thompson.



Arguably Wilson isn't all that different because he likes to run too and can be good at it

Wilson ran really well last season, but I agree that there's a difference between him and a true running QB.


whatever it takes to win.

Amen, and I do trust our coaching to make a good choice here (or, to at least make a better and more informed choice than I can).

[concerned]

What does that mean? Drastic changes in our scheme? Just some read option like we already do? Will we look like a poor man's Arizona all of a sudden? What is Thompson's skill set? Will this structure also work if Thompson goes down and Manning comes in? I guess the answer is wait and see.

It sounded to me like more shorter, underneath routes that don't require as strong or accurate arm, for one thing. They also talked about formations, but I wasn't paying attention to the specifics.

[Diehard Ute]

That's the word on Cox too. It seems now that we have had a chance to look at Cox, people (fans, media, and coaches) are somewhat down on him and are putting their hopes on the unknown Thompson.


As Cox has rarely had a chance to play with the best players I think this is pure speculation.

Of course I think many of the judgements passed by the talking heads during spring ball are worthless.

[sancho]

It sounded to me like more shorter, underneath routes that don't require as strong or accurate arm, for one thing. They also talked about formations, but I wasn't paying attention to the specifics.

That's okay, I wouldn't be able to follow the specifics anyway.

Shorter, underneath routes sounds good for all our QBs. Short passes are where Wilson had more success. From what I hear, Manning played that kind of offense in high school. Schulz is our only "huge arm" guy, and we didn't have the WRs to take advantage of it.

[sancho]

As Cox has rarely had a chance to play with the best players I think this is pure speculation.

Of course I think many of the judgements passed by the talking heads during spring ball are worthless.

I agree that it's pure speculation. I'm just saying that is the type of speculation I am hearing.

[UTEopia]

Speculation on talk radio that the offense is being structured in the spring to suit Thompson's skill set. But he is less experienced than anybody--4 passes in college; injured and out his senior year in high school.

I don't know what that means, but in the two practices I have watched there has been very little read option work and no sprint out passes. I have heard that the goal this spring is to identify a top 3. When Thompson arrives he will get a lot of reps to see where he is at. It will be interesting to see what he can do. I would like to see cox get some more reps but don't think that will happen.

[LA Ute]

Of course I think many of the judgements passed by the talking heads during spring ball are worthless.

Look, those people have to make a living too. Cut them some slack. :o

[Diehard Ute]

Look, those people have to make a living too. Cut them some slack. :o

McDonalds is always hiring

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

It's being reported that Jacoby Hale is out with a torn ACL. Whit saying that he could be out anywhere from 4-7 months, so it must only be a partial tear. But any blow to the LB corps gets a frantic thumbs down from me.

[LA Ute]

It's being reported that Jacoby Hale is out with a torn ACL. Whit saying that he could be out anywhere from 4-7 months, so it must only be a partial tear. But any blow to the LB corps gets a frantic thumbs down from me.

Rats. I wish that kid could stay healthy. Fortunately, we actually seem to have some depth at LB in this coming season.

On the subject of the 2014 season, this Riley-Olson interview with Yogi Roth is pretty interesting, especially his insights on the QB situation:

http://espn.kall700sports.com/yogi-roth-pac-12-football-analyst-3-14-14/

Good to listen to while you're driving or out for a walk or a workout.

[Diehard Ute]

It's being reported that Jacoby Hale is out with a torn ACL. Whit saying that he could be out anywhere from 4-7 months, so it must only be a partial tear. But any blow to the LB corps gets a frantic thumbs down from me.

It's a full tear....Whit's comments were that he's seen an athlete come back in 4 months, but 7 months is more likely.

[Slim]

It's a full tear....Whit's comments were that he's seen an athlete come back in 4 months, but 7 months is more likely.

Man if it's a full tear, I would not hold my breath on being ready for the season. Seeing how he has already used his redshirt, hopefully he can get some sort of hardship. That's rough, feel terrible for the kid.

[Diehard Ute]

Man if it's a full tear, I would not hold my breath on being ready for the season. Seeing how he has already used his redshirt, hopefully he can get some sort of hardship. That's rough, feel terrible for the kid.

He'd likely get a hardship, and he's having surgery soon. The hardship application decision won't be made until they see where he's at come fall

[Dwight Schr-Ute]

Man if it's a full tear, I would not hold my breath on being ready for the season. Seeing how he has already used his redshirt, hopefully he can get some sort of hardship. That's rough, feel terrible for the kid.

Yeah. Unless it's certain that he's not going to be given another year or that there's no reason to keep him around any more, I see no reason to try and bring someone into the mix that late into the season. Let him heal up, get his strength up, then his conditioning up to come back strong next spring.

[Utah]

The good news is, even without him, this defense is going to be very, very nasty. Our defense was exceptional last year, and didn't get enough credit, but it will be even better this year. We are so big and fast. For the first time ever, we look like a PAC-12 team. We have NFL talent at all three levels (DL, LB and Secondary). We will win 6 games this year just on that defense.

As far as the offense goes, the OL isn't there yet. Tons of mistakes, not a lot of depth. RB is very deep and very good. The RB position is a very good PAC-12 team depth.

The WR/TE's are solid. I'd put them middle of the road PAC-12 depth. We are getting there. If Scott can step up and have a big year, the we will be very good and look a lot deeper.

QB - Wilson is the #1, and there isn't a competition. He is just better. He still forces things and is a little slow on reads, but he is better than Manning or Schulz. Better arm, accuracy is as good as Manning's, quicker on his reads, etc. Also, I can see why he was a team captain last year. He gets into it. I think he and Paul fight every single practice.

#2 is a ways back and the competition is between Manning and Schulz. Schulz is there because of experience, he is smart with the ball. Manning is there because of talent. Manning will be the #2 coming out of spring and Schulz will never be heard from again. Manning is small. He needs to add 20 lbs of muscle or he will get killed. He looks like Jordan Wynn.

#4 - Cox. I don't think he ever plays QB for us. He floats too many balls. He would have a ton of INT's if he was asked to throw a lot. The ball just takes too long to get to the WR. Throw in a little wind...I don't think he ever plays for us.

I think what will happen is that Wilson will remain the clear #1 through spring. Manning will win the #2 job. Thompson will come in over the summer. This fall, Wilson and Thompson will take 90% of the snaps, Manning will take the scraps. Would not surprise me if Cox moves positions or transfers. Same with Schulz.

Thompson will be given every opportunity to win the job, but in the end, I think Wilson's experience will prevail and Wilson will be our starter. Having a kid that has already started two seasons, with two seasons left, will be hard to pass up. If Thompson wins the job, it will be because he is really, really amazing.

I think we get 6 wins just off our defense alone this next year. The question will be whether or not the OL is good enough to get us to 7 or 8 wins.

[LA Ute]

Ted Miller gives us an antidote to our pre-season Kool-Aid, ranking Utah's defense 5th in the PAC-12 South, one slot ahead of Colorado.


5. Utah (http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/254)

LB Gionni Paul (http://espn.go.com/college-football/player/_/id/517586/gionni-paul), OLB Jacoby Hale (http://espn.go.com/college-football/player/_/id/503044/jacoby-hale), S Eric Rowe (http://espn.go.com/college-football/player/_/id/516284/eric-rowe)

The skinny: Paul, a Miami transfer, is drawing raves this spring. He was a terror on the scout team a year ago. Hale is likely to replace Trevor Reilly (http://espn.go.com/college-football/player/_/id/482335/trevor-reilly), who led the Utes in tackles and sacks last year, at the "stud" linebacker. He was second on the Utes with 10 tackles for a loss and 6.5 sacks a year ago. As for the Utes’ leader for interceptions, well, funny you should ask about a team that had just three picks all of last year, tied for fewest in the nation. We're going with Rowe, even though he didn't have a pick in 2013 and had just one in 2012.

http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/70569/defense-3-headed-monsters-pac-12-south

I can't blame Ted for being in the "show me" category.

[Utah]

Ted Miller gives us an antidote to our pre-season Kool-Aid, ranking Utah's defense 5th in the PAC-12 South, one slot ahead of Colorado.



http://espn.go.com/blog/pac12/post/_/id/70569/defense-3-headed-monsters-pac-12-south

I can't blame Ted for being in the "show me" category.

I especially don't blame Ted. He jumped on the Utah bandwagon and was burned. He won't be overly complimentary of us until we show him something. We are close, but close is still a loss.

[Utah]

Doesn't ASU lose 10 of their 11 top tacklers from last year? If we aren't better than them, then Whitt should be gone. The only reason we end up fifth is if our offense bombs again. If our offense can do any sort of offensing, we will be third, behind USC and UCLA.

[Scorcho]

Utah #11

http://www.fbschedules.com/2014/04/2014-college-football-strength-of-schedule-ncaa-method/

:groin:

[LA Ute]

Utah #11

http://www.fbschedules.com/2014/04/2014-college-football-strength-of-schedule-ncaa-method/

:groin:


Oh, great.

[Scorcho]

I also stumbled across this ...


AUSTIN, Texas -- Texas (http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/251/texas-longhorns) athletic director Steve Patterson said Tuesday that he's not looking to schedule a nonconference football matchup against Texas A&M (http://espn.go.com/college-football/team/_/id/245/texas-a&m-aggies), at least not in the short term ...

"There's a lot of great tradition with Texas A&M. At some point in time, does it make some business sense, some branding sense to play again? I don't know," Patterson said. "It's not at the top of my list. I'm really more focused on how we grow the footprint of the department."

He sees Texas as being in a unique position to grow its international brand and said it's essential to use athletics as a platform to tell the university's story.
Patterson has repeatedly said since his hiring in November that he is not pushing for a rematch with Texas A&M following its departure from the Big 12 for the SEC.
Shortly after Patterson was hired, Texas A&M associate athletic director Jason Cook told ESPN.com and the San Antonio Express-News that the lack of interest is mutual, saying, "We hope to play them again in a BCS bowl or playoff game at some point."

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/10710069/texas-longhorns-ad-steve-patterson-not-interested-rivalry-texas-aggies

Would love to hear Chris Hill simply say that "scheduling BYU isn't at the top of his list."