Hall has first year starter lockonitis

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96

Until after Ty Detmer BYU played on national TV as frequently as they do now. There is no question the TV situation is a debacle. I don't know how long that trend will continue.

I see no evidence of BYU backing down from a challenge. The schedule is what it was under Lavell. Simply because the preseason games are no more is not proof that BYU is backing down from a challenge. Further BYU is adding Hawaii and the extra game if that makes your nipples hard.

If BYU were in the Pac-10 I actually think its ability to win a national championship would be less than what is presently is. The reality that BYU is never going to win a national championship is totally out of BYU's ability to control and your whining about that aspect is the largest indicator on the pussie meter that you are heading in the wrong direction. In some threads you pull string that BYU is really not that good and the winning means nothing because they don't beat anyone of relevence, now you are pulling string that BYU will not be handed an NC for beating a bunch of shitty teams. Make up your mind already.

The bowl landscape and the fact that every BCS team that wins 6 games goes to one is killing BYU's chance to get good bowl opponents. If good bowl opponents is your bag did you know that the two top ranked bowl opponents BYU has played were games in Memphis and Detroit? Regardless, the Holiday Bowl was about as relevent as the current Vegas Bowl until BYU's program made it something more. Could it happen with Vegas, I doubt it because of the bowl landscape. However, with the current BCS scenario methinks your pussitis is causing you to abandon ship too early. I think that if BYU finishes this year strong that BYU could be in a BCS bowl next year if it goes 3-1 OOC and undefeated in conference play. Would a 4th tier BCS bowl be exciting enough for you?

1. The number of nationally televised games back in Ty's day is probably only 30% of the number today. There are just more games on TV. That is why satellites picking up the mtn will mean nothing for BYU's exposure. BECAUSE NO ONE WILL WATCH IT OR EVEN KNOW IT EXISTS. So the loss in exposure goes for beyond the # of games on national TV.

2. I will always choose to join a BCS league. This is BYU's lifeline to longterm survival. BYU is not in a league with its peers (support).

3. The reason BCS bowl game would be nice is due to better opponent (BCS money only delays the inevitable reality that Wyoming is not as important in the landscape as Texas Tech).

4. If you think BYU could never challenge for a NC in a BCS conf., all I have to say is "oh ye of little faith".

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Well, that's the problem when you sign contracts 8 to 10 years in advance (which is how long ago this series was set up).

Perhaps Army will be ranked in 2010 and 2011 and the toast of Service Academy football? Who is with me?

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

4. If you think BYU could never challenge for a NC in a BCS conf., all I have to say is "oh ye of little faith".

I never thought I would find you being that naive about BYU football.

[MikeWaters]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

I never thought I would find you being that naive about BYU football.

I have a 50 year outlook.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I have a 50 year outlook.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

I never thought I would find you being that naive about BYU football.

I agree with Waters on the national championship issue. Arizona, ASU, Washington, Colorado--all these schools have been in the national championship hunt in the last 20 years. We are as good as any of these programs.

Also, look at Utah 2004. In the MWC, no chance for national championship. In a BCS conference? It would have at least been possible.

But it's like straining at gnats because it's not up to us whether we go to the Pac 10. If we were somehow resisiting BCS affiliation it would be a worthy discussion point.

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

1. The number of nationally televised games back in Ty's day is probably only 30% of the number today. There are just more games on TV. That is why satellites picking up the mtn will mean nothing for BYU's exposure. BECAUSE NO ONE WILL WATCH IT OR EVEN KNOW IT EXISTS. So the loss in exposure goes for beyond the # of games on national TV.

2. I will always choose to join a BCS league. This is BYU's lifeline to longterm survival. BYU is not in a league with its peers (support).

3. The reason BCS bowl game would be nice is due to better opponent (BCS money only delays the inevitable reality that Wyoming is not as important in the landscape as Texas Tech).

4. If you think BYU could never challenge for a NC in a BCS conf., all I have to say is "oh ye of little faith".

On #1 I think I said the tv situation is a debacle. However, what will drive BYU's exposure is wins and players. What I mean by that is if the mtn is on sattellite and Max Hall is a Heisman candidate folks are going to tune in to watch him.

#2. I agree. I think BYU is doing all it can to bring that to pass. I think the best way to package itself is to continue to win its conference and compete with Pac-10 teams in OOC games. It seems to me that BYU is presently trying to schedule Pac-10 OOC games more exclusively than the other BCS conferences. They beat a mediocre team in Provo and brought a lot fans to the Rose bowl and shot themselves in the foot. Next year they go to Seattle and I think will either win or compete again and bring a buttload of fans. I also bet they beat a mid tier Pac-10 team in Provo next year.

#3: I reiterate BYU's best bowl opponents was Tulane and Marhsall, ever. What we really want is a program with a history in a game on TV that pays out well. I think lower tier BCS bowl games provide that. The competition will be similar to KSU in the '96 Cotton Bowl.

#4: I am not one of little faith, I am one that was perhaps a bit more sober, or a few years older, than you were during BYU's glory days. But I would rather BYU in a BCS conference even though I firmly believe that BYU's winning %s would take a hit. I just believe many who think it would be great would whine about the losses.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96

I just believe many who think it would be great would whine about the losses.

We should stop talking about W-L record and consolidate on using computer ranking when discussing how good teams are, current and historical. Whether we're 10-2 with SOS 100 or 7-5 with SOS 25 really shouldn't matter to a fan.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by jay santos

We should stop talking about W-L record and consolidate on using computer ranking when discussing how good teams are, current and historical. Whether we're 10-2 with SOS 100 or 7-5 with SOS 25 really shouldn't matter to a fan.

Yeah, you'd think that.... but we all know it's all about wins and losses and perpetually going 6-6 and 7-5 isn't gonna cut it, and BCS conference membership isn't going to assuage the fanbase.

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Yeah, you'd think that.... but we all know it's all about wins and losses and perpetually going 6-6 and 7-5 isn't gonna cut it, and BCS conference membership isn't going to assuage the fanbase.

What do you man by "isn't going to cut it"? Let's say our SOS would jump 50 spots (i.e. 80 to 30) which roughly equates to two losses. This year, instead of going 10-2 if we went 8-4 and finished middle of Pac 10 and went to a bowl, would the fans really think it's not as satisfying due to the extra two losses? I would enjoy it more. I have to think so would the average fan.