Tom Holmoe indirectly points the finger at Kyle for trouble scheduling Utah-BYU

[Ma'ake]

It's the offseason, but the Cougars appear to be working themselves up over comments Tom Holmoe made when asked about continuing the Utah-BYU game. He said something about he wants it, Bronco wants it, Chris Hill (apparently) wants it, but Hill can't control what Kyle does with the schedule.

Some other guys elaborated, saying KW has indicated the BYU game is disruptive to Utah's schedule, in that it is a big distraction in the middle of the year, when we really need to be more sharply focused on the PAC schedule.

I don't know what KW thinks on this topic, but I would think this is a smart position to take, at least for a couple of years while we continue to fight our way up the PAC ladder, build up recruiting, etc.

In 2014 and 2015 when we play Michigan, it won't make a difference if we win or lose to UM on whether we get a shot at the Rose Bowl. If we can build up the program and let a little steam out of the Utah-BYU all-consuming rivalry, and we're a better team by the time we resume playing them in 2016, then this makes Kyle look pretty wise, in my view.

[concerned]

It's the offseason, but the Cougars appear to be working themselves up over comments Tom Holmoe made when asked about continuing the Utah-BYU game. He said something about he wants it, Bronco wants it, Chris Hill (apparently) wants it, but Hill can't control what Kyle does with the schedule.

Some other guys elaborated, saying KW has indicated the BYU game is disruptive to Utah's schedule, in that it is a big distraction in the middle of the year, when we really need to be more sharply focused on the PAC schedule.

I don't know what KW thinks on this topic, but I would think this is a smart position to take, at least for a couple of years while we continue to fight our way up the PAC ladder, build up recruiting, etc.

In 2014 and 2015 when we play Michigan, it won't make a difference if we win or lose to UM on whether we get a shot at the Rose Bowl. If we can build up the program and let a little steam out of the Utah-BYU all-consuming rivalry, and we're a better team by the time we resume playing them in 2016, then this makes Kyle look pretty wise, in my view.

I wouldnt want to play it if I were the coach. Too hard to get up for it the third game of the season, and then play USC or ASU et al the next week. IMHO, the letdown was part of the reason we got crushed by ASU. (I said it was PART of the reason, so lay off.) To me there is no upside any longer to continue to play it.

P.S. SoCalPat doesn't have to bother to tell me I am chicken; I know your views on the topic.

[Ma'ake]

I wouldnt want to play it if I were the coach. Too hard to get up for it the third game of the season, and then play USC or ASU et al the next week. IMHO, the letdown was part of the reason we got crushed by ASU. (I said it was PART of the reason, so lay off.) To me there is no upside any longer to continue to play it.

After 4 years of recruiting in the PAC, it may become more feasible. If we get the talent level to the point where playing BYU is like playing USU has been in the past 15 years, I wouldn't have a problem continuing. If getting jacked up for the BYU game costs us any PAC wins, maybe we should go to an every-other-year scenario.

Oregon scheduled 3 FCS teams not because they're chicken of Boise.

[LA Ute]

If that's what Kyle is doing, it's pretty clear he's trying to act in the program's best interests. Despite my nostalgia for the rivalry, I think Kyle's right.

[UTEopia]

I don't think Kyle has a problem with playing BYU. What he wants is a balanced schedule that gives the Utes a good chance of going to a bowl every year. I think the goal of the OOC is to play one team you will never lose to (FCS), one team that you will beat 80% of the time (USU level) and one challenging game. Although the Utes have beaten byu three years in a row, the games with one notable exception have been hotly contested. I cannot remember where I read this, but BYU's model is 4/4/4. 4 games they should always win, 4 games that they should win most of the time and 4 games that are a real challenge. I think their schedule this year is a little more difficult then that, but that was the model I heard discussed at one time.

[UtahsMrSports]

We are absolutely doing the right thing in this case. If tradition has to be shoved to the side for the betterment of the program, than so be it.

[Viking]

I agree. Cut the rivalry altogether. I couldn't care less about playing Utah and I'm tired of losing to them.

[FountainOfUte]

If tradition has to be shoved to the side for the betterment of the program, than so be it.

Does it? Are they mutually exclusive? I don't think so.

Also, if we're blaming last year's ASU prison rape on the BYU game then we are a mentally weak program with bigger issues than we'd like to admit. Seriously, I have a hard time enabling BYU with the power of disrupting our success in the PAC. I think the Utes are doing a great job of flubbing that up on their very own, thankyouverymuch.

[jrj84105]

If UNLV goes ahead with a new stadium, I could see something like this:
2016
BYU@Utah
UNLV@BYU
Utah@UNLV
2017
Utah@BYU
UNLV@Utah
BYU@UNLV
2018
UNLV@BYU
UNLV@Utah
Utah/BYU@Las Vegas (media rights to Utah, tickets allotted 40:40:20 to Utah, BYU, and UNLV).

Utah and BYU would each have, in aggregate, a 3-2-1 (H-H-N) with Utah getting 4 games of media rights and BYU 3. UNLV would have a 2-4 with two games of media rights and a cut of BYU v Utah @ Las Vegas ticket sales. (*Edit* you could probably substitute SDSU or Hawaii in this kind of arrangement). I would really like this kind of arrangement actually, establishing a recurring presence in recruiting territories of Nevada, HI, and SD.

[401k Ute]

I like the idea of playing UNLV (especially in place of an FCS game) because we recruit the Vegas area, but I can't imagine a scenario where Utah would agree to play BYU at a neutral site, with the possible exception of a bowl game, which is a possibility.

[Scorcho]

indirectly then you have to blame Whitt for the creation of this site ( :D ).

[HuskyFreeNorthwest]

After 4 years of recruiting in the PAC, it may become more feasible. If we get the talent level to the point where playing BYU is like playing USU has been in the past 15 years, I wouldn't have a problem continuing. If getting jacked up for the BYU game costs us any PAC wins, maybe we should go to an every-other-year scenario.

Oregon scheduled 3 FCS teams not because they're chicken of Boise.

We are kinda chicken of Boise, they popped our balloon a couple of times!

[Crimsonute]

Ask Tony Bergstrom how much he loves playing BYU. Or Nai Fotu. Ask them about the cheap shots they took, and thought their careers were over. Bergstrom was lucky. It was only a few weeks. Fotu was out for a year, and got depressed, and we know what happened to him. DeVonte took a helmet to the face, and there was no call. He's lucky he kept playing in that game. I would rather play someone that will play you straight up. I bet if you asked Kyle, along with the AFA, he'd be fine never playing BYU again.

[wuapinmon]

It sounds like both sides are trying to convince themselves of something they don't really believe. Maybe if we keep saying it enough, we'll start to believe it.

[UTEopia]

I want to see us continue to play BYU, but I am fine with the game going away for a couple of years. I think we will see how important or not important that game is to us as fans if we don't have it for a couple of years. My guess is that we will all be fine either way. I understand the desire to create a schedule that allows for a successful stadium and I think I might have underestimated to some extent the difficulty of playing in the PAC 12. It looks like we will have an FCS game each year and I guess I am okay with that since it appears that most other schools play someone similar. It also looks like we will have a "tough" OOC game each year. Michigan fills that position in 2014 and 2015. We can debate as to whether BYU is fits that slot, but that is how they are being treated by the administration at this point. The big question for me is the other game. I don't think we want to over schedule and get us in a position where we are in jeopardy of going 1-2 in OOC. Given the resurgence of USU, I think that this years schedule is very challenging. We will see how it plays out. I would certainly be disappointed to go 1-2 in OCC, but not totally surprised. I don't see the value of playing BYU in a neutral site game. Since, 2014 and 2015 are complete, here is what I would like to see:
2016
SUU (already scheduled)
BYU (already scheduled)
@ UNLV, Houston, SMU or Rice (somewhere we recruit)
PAC: 4 H; 5 A

2017
FCS
Utah State
@ high profile Ohio State, Texas, Oklahoma, Texas A&M
PAC 5 H; 4 A

2018
FCS
@USU
Home vs 2017 marquee opponent
PAC: 4 H; 5 A

2019
FCS
@ BYU
Return trip from 2016 away game
PAC 5 H; 4 A

2020
FCS
BYU
@ mid level team where we recruit

[UtahsMrSports]

Ask Tony Bergstrom how much he loves playing BYU. Or Nai Fotu. Ask them about the cheap shots they took, and thought their careers were over. Bergstrom was lucky. It was only a few weeks. Fotu was out for a year, and got depressed, and we know what happened to him. DeVonte took a helmet to the face, and there was no call. He's lucky he kept playing in that game. I would rather play someone that will play you straight up. I bet if you asked Kyle, along with the AFA, he'd be fine never playing BYU again.

I forgot about this. If you go back to byutv.org, they still (at least last time I checked) had the 2011 massacre available to watch online for free. The announcers during the play where Devonte gets lit up in the endzone is CLASSIC BYU-homerism. The guys are pointing out how its not helmet to helmet and that its just a good clean play. Its obvious to anyone watching that it was helmet to helmet and should have been flagged. There have been some classic over-the-top homerism moments from BYU play by play guys over the years (NO! that is impossible! That is impossible!) but this one is right up there with the best of them.

[UtahsMrSports]

Does it? Are they mutually exclusive? I don't think so.

Also, if we're blaming last year's ASU prison rape on the BYU game then we are a mentally weak program with bigger issues than we'd like to admit. Seriously, I have a hard time enabling BYU with the power of disrupting our success in the PAC. I think the Utes are doing a great job of flubbing that up on their very own, thankyouverymuch.

I am not saying that they are mutually exclusive. I am saying that perhaps there is wisdom in not playing such an emotionally-charged game in week 3. There is no other rivalry game in the country that means so little in the long term that is played this early in the season. not one, or anything even close to it.

[Ma'ake]

The BYU game at #4 is a coaching challenge. That said, this year we have what should be a pretty good opener vs USU, then Weber, THEN Oregon State, and BYU following, with a BYE week after that.

The BYE helps a lot with the hangover effect, and I'd like to think we're getting up into the 95% range by Week 3 vs Oregon State, in terms of the team maturing. BYU will have a BYE before us, and I'm sure our guys won't have a problem getting up for the game in Provo, but it will be nice to have 12 days before UCLA.

The OSU game looms large. We need to get that win. The BYU game will be a fist fight. It always is. It would be great if we can beat them comfortably, just to end this chapter on an up-note and keep climbing in the PAC.

[SoCalPat]

Does it? Are they mutually exclusive? I don't think so.

Also, if we're blaming last year's ASU prison rape on the BYU game then we are a mentally weak program with bigger issues than we'd like to admit. Seriously, I have a hard time enabling BYU with the power of disrupting our success in the PAC. I think the Utes are doing a great job of flubbing that up on their very own, thankyouverymuch.

I could not agree more emphatically.

If this is really Kyle's excuse, then he's gotta explain how BYU showed up in Pullman looking like Washington State in 2011 the week before the Colorado game.

[SoCalPat]

I forgot about this. If you go back to byutv.org, they still (at least last time I checked) had the 2011 massacre available to watch online for free. The announcers during the play where Devonte gets lit up in the endzone is CLASSIC BYU-homerism. The guys are pointing out how its not helmet to helmet and that its just a good clean play. Its obvious to anyone watching that it was helmet to helmet and should have been flagged. There have been some classic over-the-top homerism moments from BYU play by play guys over the years (NO! that is impossible! That is impossible!) but this one is right up there with the best of them.

So we stop playing BYU because their announcers are homers (thanks for the newsflash) and that we might suffer injuries against them (like we would against any other team)? Stop already, please.

[LA Ute]

If Kyle thinks that because of the current position of our program it is better for us not to play BYU for a couple of years, that is fine with me.

[SoCalPat]

If Kyle thinks that because of the current position of our program it is better for us not to play BYU for a couple of years, that is fine with me.

Are we really to believe that playing BYU is an unmovable obstacle in Utah football getting to 10 wins, winning the South or making it to the new four-team playoff? Like FOU said earlier, I'm not going to give BYU that much credit.

Personally, I don't think Kyle knows of any other way to prepare for BYU than he did when the game was at season's end, and he's not willing to experiment on the fly. Now, if he feels like he needs a break from the rivalry so he can be better prepared for how to handle it once we begin playing again, I can live with that. But there are some things you just can't cop to publicly, and this is one of them. Not playing BYU isn't necessary for the betterment of the program, but it might be for the betterment of Kyle as a head coach going forward.

[concerned]

If Kyle thinks that because of the current position of our program it is better for us not to play BYU for a couple of years, that is fine with me.

i dont think it has to do with the "current position" of the program. I think Kyle thinks it is better for the program not to play the Y early in the season. I trust his judgment, and I think he is right too.

[LA Ute]

Are we really to believe that playing BYU is an unmovable obstacle in Utah football getting to 10 wins, winning the South or making it to the new four-team playoff? Like FOU said earlier, I'm not going to give BYU that much credit.

Personally, I don't think Kyle knows of any other way to prepare for BYU than he did when the game was at season's end, and he's not willing to experiment on the fly. Now, if he feels like he needs a break from the rivalry so he can be better prepared for how to handle it once we begin playing again, I can live with that. But there are some things you just can't cop to publicly, and this is one of them. Not playing BYU isn't necessary for the betterment of the program, but it might be for the betterment of Kyle as a head coach going forward.

We are all speculating, but maybe Kyle just thinks that with everything else on the coaches' and team's plate, he'd just rather not have the rivalry game there too. He's the coach, I say.

America is a great country. We get to argue about trivial stuff like sports. :D

[Ma'ake]

We are all speculating, but maybe Kyle just thinks that with everything else on the coaches' and team's plate, he'd just rather not have the rivalry game there too. He's the coach, I say.

America is a great country. We get to argue about trivial stuff like sports. :D

LOL.

This may be one of those situations where we're over-thinking things. I remember Chris Hill talking about his days on the NCAA hoops tournament selection committee and responding to all the bracketology speculation. "We really didn't factor in *all* of those things they're talking about. We're not that smart".

I think this is about Utah getting ready for a yearly PAC-12 / Big-10 game and jumping on a H-H series with Michigan, which put our schedule at 10 games of non-optional scheduling, and according to UTEopia, we were looking for 3 types of opponents in the three non-PAC games, and Michigan took BYU's spot as a the tough game for years 2014 & 2015.

We re-scheduled BYU for 2016, assuming that by then our talent level would be higher and the BYU game would move toward less of a slugfest and a little more like scheduling USU.

People can speculate that Utah was trying to do damage to BYU by not scheduling them for two years, but I really, seriously don't believe Hill & KW got to that level of sophistication in their rationale. We have to take care of Utah in the PAC-12, which is enough on the plate. BYU will take care of BYU.

With the PAC-12 / Big-10 yearly matchup off the table, I would imagine we'd be wanting to extend the Utah-BYU series beyond 2016. If the PAC ever decides to go to 8 game schedule, that would solidify the desire to extend Utah-BYU, it seems to me.

[Scorcho]

LOL.

This may be one of those situations where we're over-thinking things. I remember Chris Hill talking about his days on the NCAA hoops tournament selection committee and responding to all the bracketology speculation. "We really didn't factor in *all* of those things they're talking about. We're not that smart".

I think this is about Utah getting ready for a yearly PAC-12 / Big-10 game and jumping on a H-H series with Michigan, which put our schedule at 10 games of non-optional scheduling, and according to UTEopia, we were looking for 3 types of opponents in the three non-PAC games, and Michigan took BYU's spot as a the tough game for years 2014 & 2015.

We re-scheduled BYU for 2016, assuming that by then our talent level would be higher and the BYU game would move toward less of a slugfest and a little more like scheduling USU.

People can speculate that Utah was trying to do damage to BYU by not scheduling them for two years, but I really, seriously don't believe Hill & KW got to that level of sophistication in their rationale. We have to take care of Utah in the PAC-12, which is enough on the plate. BYU will take care of BYU.

With the PAC-12 / Big-10 yearly matchup off the table, I would imagine we'd be wanting to extend the Utah-BYU series beyond 2016. If the PAC ever decides to go to 8 game schedule, that would solidify the desire to extend Utah-BYU, it seems to me.

agreed!

Whitt (not Hill) carries all the risk for scheduling both BYU and Michigan in 2014 and 15. It's understandable why Whitt would want a more conservative schedule.

[U-Ute]

I think this is about Utah getting ready for a yearly PAC-12 / Big-10 game and jumping on a H-H series with Michigan, which put our schedule at 10 games of non-optional scheduling, and according to UTEopia, we were looking for 3 types of opponents in the three non-PAC games, and Michigan took BYU's spot as a the tough game for years 2014 & 2015.

This.

It isn't rocket science.

People read too much into things and assign malice to every move, when in fact things are done for much more practical reasons.

It's kind of a blend of Occam's and Hanlon's razors.

[Crimsonute]

This.

It isn't rocket science.

People read too much into things and assign malice to every move, when in fact things are done for much more practical reasons.

It's kind of a blend of Occam's and Hanlon's razors.Did you notice that the Pac 12 released their early TV schedule on the same day Holmoe had his sit down chat. So trying to one up BYU.

[LA Ute]

Did you notice that the Pac 12 released their early TV schedule on the same day Holmoe had his sit down chat. So trying to one up BYU.

But I heard they made a courtesy call to him before they did that.