Ranking the 2014 Schedule

The final three! All the games are on the road. Not an easy one among them.



I'm actually going to pick Texas. Here's why. Texas and Boise are both breaking in new coaches. But Boise will have more time to work in the new coach, who was promoted from within, by the time BYU heads up to Boise.



Texas has issues and I don't think one game vs a FCS team is going to be enough to get everything ready for what will be an improved BYU passing offense.



I don't like traveling to Florida.



Here's how the schedule looks so far:

1. ???

2. ???

3. ???

4. vs Houston 80%

5. vs Utah St 78%

6. @ UConn 92%

7. @ Cal 69%

8. @ Middle Tennesse 48%

9. vs UNLV 55%

10. vs Virginia 40%

11. vs Nevada 60%

12. vs Savannah St 96.4%

SpiffCoug wrote:
The final three! All the games are on the road. Not an easy one among them.



I'm actually going to pick Texas. Here's why. Texas and Boise are both breaking in new coaches. But Boise will have more time to work in the new coach, who was promoted from within, by the time BYU heads up to Boise.



Texas has issues and I don't think one game vs a FCS team is going to be enough to get everything ready for what will be an improved BYU passing offense.



I don't like traveling to Florida.



Here's how the schedule looks so far:

1. ???

2. ???

3. ???

4. vs Houston 80%

5. vs Utah St 78%

6. @ UConn 92%

7. @ Cal 69%

8. @ Middle Tennesse 48%

9. vs UNLV 55%

10. vs Virginia 40%

11. vs Nevada 60%

12. vs Savannah St 96.4%

Technically Harsin wasn't promoted from within. He had been the head coach at Arkansas State when hired by Boise State. He had at one time been an assistant under Peterson at Boise State. I personally like BYU''s chances at Boise State much better than Texas. Same time zone, similar weather and altitude and 70,000 less rabid fans.

Good point on the weather. Still plenty hot and humid in Texas in September

Should have been Boise State for a while. I still feel that Houston and USU will be tougher games.

Any road game will be a bear. And BSU is a good home team. However, UT will be very tough and BYU doesn't win in Florida so gotta go with the Smurfs.

Home record over the past 10 years:



BSU- 61-3

Texas- 48-14

UCF- 40-22



Overall UCF is the weakest program of the 3. I picked UCF.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

I Like all the arguments for BSU next. I think they have only a few good players but ovtherwise the shelves have been thinning the past few years.

UT has speed ,athletes, and a huge chip on their shoulder, and a coach with fire. UCF has speed and travel distance. UT is toughest game.

Cougs_Rule wrote:
I Like all the arguments for BSU next. I think they have only a few good players but ovtherwise the shelves have been thinning the past few years.

UT has speed ,athletes, and a huge chip on their shoulder, and a coach with fire. UCF has speed and travel distance. UT is toughest game.

Ditto. My thoughts exactly.



Go Cougs!!!

J. Child

Ammon, ID

Cougs_Rule wrote:
I Like all the arguments for BSU next. I think they have only a few good players but ovtherwise the shelves have been thinning the past few years.

UT has speed ,athletes, and a huge chip on their shoulder, and a coach with fire. UCF has speed and travel distance. UT is toughest game.

The so called recruiting experts think BSU has been outrecruiting both BYU and UCF recently. Here are the combined Scout and Rivals average recruiting ranking over the last 4 years.



2014-

Texas 18

BSU 66

BYU 67

UCF 74



2013-

Texas 24

BSU 53

BYU 67

UCF 81



2012-

Texas 2

BSU 55

BYU 61

UCF 105



2011-

Texas 3

UCF 46

BSU 59

BYU 64



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Those 2011 and 2012 recruiting classes should be ripening in 2014. Bodes well for Texas. Our only hope at Texas is that we catch them early.



It is tough to ignore the Smurf home record, but it was largely build on WAC opponents, and BYU has played them tough up there a couple of times when BSU was decent.



UCF - 2 time zones - heat and humidity - in addition to home field advantage - neck and neck with Texas.



I see a pattern developing due to us giving away a home game advantage annually.



2013 - all 5 losses - Road Games

2014 - 3 most likely losses - Road Games



I went with Donkey State



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Cougarbib wrote:



I see a pattern developing due to us giving away a home game advantage annually.

Yep we're just GIVING THEM AWAY people try to play us straight up, but we actually refuse to do so. If they don't 2 for one us away to home, we'll sue them! We hate having great home games for the fans. Texas was trying and trying and trying to schedule us straight up, and we said, "no way - we're GIVING you an extra game, you don't even have to ask!"

ABYUFAN wrote:

I see a pattern developing due to us giving away a home game advantage annually.

Yep we're just GIVING THEM AWAY people try to play us straight up, but we actually refuse to do so. If they don't 2 for one us away to home, we'll sue them! We hate having great home games for the fans. Texas was trying and trying and trying to schedule us straight up, and we said, "no way - we're GIVING you an extra game, you don't even have to ask!"

Who said that. What we are doing is setting precedent which reinforces that others might demand the same thing. Then the train goes off the track. We have open home slots with NO MORE open road slots TO GIVE IN RETURN.



Then BAM



savanna state

weber state

Idaho state

and whomever else will give us a 1 and done



I love those great home games that we got, but the consequence of giving all of the road games for them is the annual crapola state game or two.



I was not one of the fans whining that we lost 5 games last year.

I am not one of the fans expecting to run the table this year.



If we beat Texas this year - that will make that series worth the price paid. If we lose, we will continue to hear Ute Trolls and disgruntled fans complain that we always lose to good teams and the data will support that.



My only issue with all of this is when the bashing of our own players and coaches starts when they cannot overcome the deck stacked against them.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Cougarbib wrote:



Who said that. What we are doing is setting precedent which reinforces that others might demand the same thing. Then the train goes off the track. We have open home slots with NO MORE open road slots TO GIVE IN RETURN.

The key being "might demand" All of the recent P5 schedules have been one for one's. Texas, ND and the one and dones were needed to schedule an Indy schedule at the last minute. Holmoe should have done enouogh by now to earn your trust regardign scheduling, and yet you still harp on about "giving away" home games. When is the last time thtat that happened anyway?

ABYUFAN wrote:

Who said that. What we are doing is setting precedent which reinforces that others might demand the same thing. Then the train goes off the track. We have open home slots with NO MORE open road slots TO GIVE IN RETURN.

The key being "might demand" All of the recent P5 schedules have been one for one's. Texas, ND and the one and dones were needed to schedule an Indy schedule at the last minute. Holmoe should have done enouogh by now to earn your trust regardign scheduling, and yet you still harp on about "giving away" home games. When is the last time thtat that happened anyway?

You might want to research that yourself before firing off a series of sarcastic posts.



1. There have been a bunch of 1 and done, 2 for 1, and neutral site games that were not neutral. Ane even then, some of the return dates still have not been scheduled or are rumored to be cancelled. Research it. Some were recent.



2. Holmoe did not need to do it to get an Indy schedule. He could have scheduled the teams that will play us straight up and quite frankly, they would have been the same type of teams we had always played. He did need to do it, to get Texas, ND, Ole Miss, Wisconsin, Michigan, Oklahoma, and probably someone I have forgotten on the schedule. Hopefully we will get the promised return dates. Texas came. Ole Miss was 1 and done. ND has been 2 and none so far. Wisconsin is 1 and none so far. Michigan is a 1 and done iirc or a 2 for 1 that has not been scheduled. Okie was 1 and done and was prior to Independence. So, exactly what great home games did this get us so far?

EDIT: I forgot that TCU one and done. I do not see a return date scheduled with Nebraska or West Virginia.



Answer: Texas. That is it.



3. Holmoe should have earned my trust in scheduling by now. Unfortunately, he has not quite done that. I actually enjoy BYU Football win or lose - just do not enjoy fans with unrealistic expectations going ballastic on players and coaches when they lose these games. I trust you will be right there with me defending the coaches and players when the attacks come right after Texas, UCF, or BSU spoils the perfect season that some fans will feel entitled to in 2014.



And, if we run the table at home and vs the weak road opponents and pull upset wins at BSU and UCF who played us straight up, but lose that extra road game we gave to Texas - I trust you will understand the price we paid to get them to Provo last year. I will. And I will be perfectly OK if that happens.

My point is that you claim in your original post that we continue to "give away" home and homes annually. I get that in your mind you could easily do a better job than Holmoe did in the past. That's a stupid thing to fight over, your subjective understanding of the ease in which to create a schedule)



But, what I was saying is that we are NOT currently "giving them away" annually. Your best argument is that we are currently playing the games that we "gave away" in the past (as if anyone would have preferred a home and home with Wyoming rather than a 2 for one with Texas.) You say that I'm wrong on the facts, so Ill say this: I'll claim I am one hundred percent wrong if you can show me where we are currently "giving away" those games (as opposed to playing out the contracts that we had earlier made.) Stated another way, when is the last time we scheduled anything other than a home and home? My best recollection was that it was over a year ago. If I am right, I will once again ask you to "let it go." Your cardiologist will thank you for it I'm sure.

frdbtr wrote:
Should have been Boise State for a while. I still feel that Houston and USU will be tougher games.

Agreed. Should end: 1. Texas 2. UCF 3. Houston

ABYUFAN wrote:
My point is that you claim in your original post that we continue to "give away" home and homes annually. I get that in your mind you could easily do a better job than Holmoe did in the past. That's a stupid thing to fight over, your subjective understanding of the ease in which to create a schedule)



But, what I was saying is that we are NOT currently "giving them away" annually. Your best argument is that we are currently playing the games that we "gave away" in the past (as if anyone would have preferred a home and home with Wyoming rather than a 2 for one with Texas.) You say that I'm wrong on the facts, so Ill say this: I'll claim I am one hundred percent wrong if you can show me where we are currently "giving away" those games (as opposed to playing out the contracts that we had earlier made.) Stated another way, when is the last time we scheduled anything other than a home and home? My best recollection was that it was over a year ago. If I am right, I will once again ask you to "let it go." Your cardiologist will thank you for it I'm sure.

it was about a year ago. They could not give any more this year because THEY HAVE NO OPEN HOME DATES LEFT TO GIVE, having already committed so many. NCAA does not allow teams to play too many gsmes on the road to keep certain programs from allowing themselves to sell theemselves out for money.



So, when BYU is trying to find opponents now, there is no room left at the Inn. BYU would have given 1 to Alabama for 2015 a few weeks ago, but, they had none to give.



If BYU has given their last one - I will assume Tom Holmoe learned something.



it seems a little odd, though, that you would happily have given the ND and Texas deals when they were given but think BYU would not do it in the future for the very same reason they did it in the first place.



I would be happy to see BYU play more PAC teams. They may not want us in their conference, but they do play us straight up.



Nothing has changed. Texas, Okie, Michigan, Alabama, etc., will not be giving us straight up deals in the future. Some will not even do 2 for 1. They will not come to Provo.



The math is simple. Give 1 team a year an extra game at their place and you need to find a future opponent every year who will give us 1 and done. It is a myth that it has helped our home schedule.



Texas so far. Once. That is it.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

Cougarbib wrote:
it was about a year ago. They could not give any more this year because THEY HAVE NO OPEN HOME DATES LEFT TO GIVE, having already committed so many. NCAA does not allow teams to play too many gsmes on the road to keep certain programs from allowing themselves to sell theemselves out for money.

Your premise is false, and at worst made-up. Michigan exposed the lack of such a rule in 2011 where the only road games it played were it's conference scheduled road games and all four nonconference games were home games. It opened some debate about whether there should be a rule, but nothing ever came of it.



Here's the link to the NCAA rulebook if you want to try and prove your premise:



http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D110.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



To help you out, Section 17.9 is the football scheduling section.

snoscythe wrote:

it was about a year ago. They could not give any more this year because THEY HAVE NO OPEN HOME DATES LEFT TO GIVE, having already committed so many. NCAA does not allow teams to play too many gsmes on the road to keep certain programs from allowing themselves to sell theemselves out for money.

Your premise is false, and at worst made-up. Michigan exposed the lack of such a rule in 2011 where the only road games it played were it's conference scheduled road games and all four nonconference games were home games. It opened some debate about whether there should be a rule, but nothing ever came of it.



Here's the link to the NCAA rulebook if you want to try and prove your premise:



http://www.ncaapublications.com/productdownloads/D110.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;



To help you out, Section 17.9 is the football scheduling section.

The rule I heard was not limiting the number of home games. It limited the number of road games. It said a team could not make its players go on the road every week. Otherwise some teams that cannot afford to fund a program would rollover for someone every week to get money. I could be wrong about that rule. I heard it many years ago.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">

I think the last 2 for 1 was USC more than a year ago. Lately we have gotten 1 for 1 deals with Cal, Stanford and UCLA.



I think TH did the 2 for 1's to make a splash, get us on the map as we started the indy. Now that we have established ourselves there will be few 2 for 1 deals.