sjmvsfscs08;392925 wrote:Well something to consider is that Utah is a midmajor and those not nearly as consistent as the BCS schools. When they are good, they are fantastic and can beat anyone, but when they are bad they are rather mediocre just like everyone else. There's just a lot of fluctuation with midmajors, and Utah is no exception. Boise State is probably the only school that has been consistent all decade.
That said, considering how good that Oregon team was last year, I'd say they were right in the running with the best teams in the conference. It will be interesting to see how Utah's recruiting fares after they join the Pac-10. They're doing all of this with players the Pac-10 schools miss, now they'll begin to be in every conversation.
http://espn.go.com/video/clip?id=5293939
Agree with everything you say here. Boise State could very well have beaten any Pac 10 team on a given day last year. Certainly
could have contended for a title. The thing is, even great teams can be upset by a good team on the right day. And when you have to play a certain level week in and week out, the chances of that upset are astronomically increased.
See, I expect that USC could have gone undefeated against the WAC last year. They were THAT much better than all of those teams and there really isn't anyone that was close enough to where anything but a monumental upset could derail them. Boise may have been in the same boat. They were THAT much better than the WAC to where they didn't really have to worry about a "trap" game. Now, would Boise have been able to beat Oregon one week, then come back and beat Stanford, Cal, and USC with maybe two of those games being on the road? Completely different story. Even if Boise was the top team in the Pac 10, losing to any of those teams would only be a mild upset and those happen to several good/great teams a year. That is my only beef with the midmajors and all the complaints about equal treatment. It isn't a one game season and now Utah is going to find out what a real grind is.
As for the recruiting, I'm really interested to see how that develops also. As you say, they've won their old conference with players the Pac 10 missed. There's a thought that being in the Pac 10 will automatically help recruiting because they can now sell the additional exposure to potential recruits - basically, they're going to start taking recruits that would've gone to the USCs and Oregons in the past. I wonder if that dynamic will only happen if they compete right away. For example, if they come in and right off the bat are a middle-to-lower-pack program, I can't see how that is going to help their recruiting. At least before, they could sell a winning program with a sprinkle of big time games. If they don't fare well immediately, it seems like they'll be trying to sell a lot of games against big time opponents....that a recruit can expect to lose. Again, it'll be interesting to see where the program is in 10 years after this move.
