We went over bowl games a couple days ago and most Ute fans feel the Utes are going to the Alamo Bowl. Surprisingly, 41% Utah fans believe the team will make some sort of BCS bowl game - whether the national title (6%), Rose Bowl (25%) or another BCS bowl entirely (10%). I think that might be a bit optimistic, however, I guess if Utah does go 10-2, they will have a legitimate shot at playing in either the Rose Bowl or another BCS bowl game.

So, we think Utah is either going to the Alamo or the BCS, with a small number, 19%, predicting, or expecting, the Holiday Bowl (full disclosure, that's the one I voted for). But how many wins will they have heading into their bowl game?

Utah's schedule is pretty favorable. Once again, they miss Oregon and Stanford and get USC at home. Even so, three of their conference losses last season (ASU, Washington & Colorado) are now road opponents, so, I wouldn't say anything is even remotely close to a given. Those three games, coupled with a trip to the Rose Bowl to play UCLA and Corvallis to take on Oregon State, will test this team. None of those games are sure-wins and expecting a loss at least once or twice on the road should be the level-headed answer here. But that's just me. I'm cautiously optimistic and believe this team can push 10 wins, but I'm not quite sure I'm ready to expect it.

But what about you? What are you expecting?

I told you to soak up spring ball because once it was over, the time would drag. Well, it's dragging. We're only in May and I'm already dying for some football.

But I guess talking about football might help get through these next few days - especially when it comes to pumping up expectations.

We expect good things, right? How good, though? CFN predicts Utah to finish 10-2 and #13th nationally. A bit too positive, don't you think? Yeah, I really do think. But I'll take it! I like preseason buzz. It helps build excitement for the upcoming season (not that we really need a boost there). It might prove wrong, but in May, does it really matter?

So, knowing what you know - Jordan Wynn's health, Travis Wilson's leap during spring, Brian Johnson calling the offense, the overall schedule - how do you see this season going? Will Utah contend for the Pac-12 South or is it pretty much USC's for the taking? Can Utah get back to 10 wins or even make a run for a BCS bowl?

I don't think anyone knows. The reality is, the best case scenario is pretty sweet, but who knows if that's even attainable. The realistic outlook probably puts Utah 2nd or 3rd in the South and playing in either the Alamo or Holiday Bowl. Not bad, right? I'd take it.

Instead of asking you to spill your guts on everything from wins to points per game, let's start with just one question - what bowl game will Utah make?

Then we'll visit other expectations throughout the summer. Might help spark a conversation in what has proven to be a very dead period.

If you buy The Sporting News, it's Bronco Mendenhall.

I'm guessing most here would disagree. Is Mendenhall the 15th best coach in the nation, while Whittingham 21st - behind such coaches as Paul Johnson, Brian Kelly, Mike Leach and Mark Dantonio?

Personally, I think Whittingham deserves a top-fifteen ranking, not Bronco. That isn't to say Bronco isn't up there, he is, but almost every factor is in Whittingham's favor - from most recent game, to head-to-head, to undefeated seasons.

So, who's the better coach and where do you think, nationally, Whittingham should rank?

If I did a list, I'd probably flip Whittingham & Bronco.

The Sporting News has decided this spring that they're going to rank the coaches in every conference. Well, today, they finally got around to the Pac-12 and place Kyle Whittingham fourth on their list - behind Chip Kelly, Mike Leach and Lane Kiffin.

While the top coach is a no-brainer, as Kelly has easily proven himself one of the best coaches in the country, I am a bit perplexed why Leach is ranked 2nd. I think he's a very good coach, clearly, and he very well may grow into the 2nd best coach in the conference - but he's still not coached a game yet in the Pac-12. And while he had flashy offenses and exciting teams at Texas Tech, what has he done to be placed above Whittingham?

I guess that's my question. I think Leach is deserving of a high ranking, but I question placing him that high. He did do great in 2008, guiding the Red Raiders to an 11-2 season - but that's the only ten-win season he's ever had as a coach and his overall winning percentage, 66-percent, doesn't exactly have greatness written all over it.

I know, I know! But he did it in Lubbock! And if you've been to Lubbock, you'd know how difficult it is to pull in recruits and win there. I get that. I respect that. Hell, I agree with it. The fact he was able to sustain winning in Lubbock shows just how great of a coach he is and I'm not disputing that. He's a great coach and I expect he'll continue being a great coach in a similarly tough place to coach - Pullman, Washington.

Still, this is about besting Whittingham and I just don't see it. Whittingham has the better overall winning percentage, more ten-win seasons, a better bowl record and, more importantly, something that seems to be often ignored by many when compiling these lists, an undefeated season.

Whittingham's best season also came in 2008, when he guided Utah to perfection, a number two ranking nationally and a Sugar Bowl victory over Alabama. Leach, for all he's done, still could not get Texas Tech to a BCS bowl game and maybe that's solely because of where he coached and not necessarily about his skills. But, in the end, Whittingham has done it - Leach hasn't.

So, where do you come down on this debate? I think Whittingham is the second best coach in the conference and will probably put him there when I do my annual rankings later this season. I can, however, see the justification for putting Kiffin at number two based on what he did last year. But putting Leach above Whittingham seems to be done only because of this unreasonable legend status he attained in the wake of his firing at Texas Tech. I get it. Leach is a fun guy. He's awesome. He's great all around - but on resume, on wins and losses, bowl success, top-25 success, BCS success, none of that matters. At least, it shouldn't. There, plain old boring Whittingham wins.

Utah basketball picked up another commitment yesterday, as guard Dakarai Tucker, who's out of Gardena, California, is expected to sign with this year's class. Tucker had offers from a slew of western programs, though most were either from the WAC or WCC (Saint Mary's - take that, Randy Bennett!, Santa Clara, Loyola Marymount, Santa Clara and Nevada being those programs).

Tucker is now the fourth guard to sign with Utah, and completes what we can now call Larry Krystkowiak's first real class.

Are you impressed?

With Utah State and San Jose State on their way to the Mountain West soon, the WAC, which is one of the oldest continuous athletic conferences in the nation, is on its last breath. I'm sad to see that. While Utah hasn't been a member of the WAC since the 1998-'99 season, and since has joined two conferences (the Mountain West and then the Pac-12), it was still the conference that housed most my memories as a kid growing up. Most deal with basketball, though some are of the football variety.

I became a Utah fan in the 1990s, at the height, really, of the conference. It had expanded, too much so, as we later found out, in 1996, and it ultimately declined from there, forcing Utah, BYU and a slew of other programs to bolt the conference and form their own. But for a period, between the early-90s and until the end, the conference was pretty excellent. There were rivalries, great basketball, powerhouse football programs, and a sense of remarkable history. This was, after all, the conference that gave us some great BYU teams, a Utah basketball championship run that, unfortunately, ended in heartbreak, and exceptional consistency from Air Force and Colorado State on the football field.

Continue reading this post »

Pretty surprised that Tony B was the only Ute taken in the NFL Draft. When I saw him go at the end of round 3, I figured there would be at least one other Ute that would be taken in the final four rounds.

Why not? No Matt Martinez? No Conroy Black? No Derrick Shelby?

And yet Utah State had three players drafted, including BOTH of their running backs?

I guess the only consolation is that at least BYU had zero players drafted... though that's not too unusual.

Continue reading this post »

The BCS is dead. Long live the BCS Four-Team Playoff?

That's what it's looking like. The BCS has announced its proposals for a four-team playoff and will now present those options to conference commissioners, who'll ultimately decide which one they want.

So, what are your thoughts on a four-team playoff? Is it enough? Too radical of a change? Too tied to the BCS? Do you like Utah's chances down the road if, err, when college football adopts these changes?

In '04 and '08, it's unlikely an undefeated Utah team would've qualified for the playoffs. Of course, now that they're a member of the Pac-12, going 12-0, or even 11-1, most likely would secure them a spot in the playoff - at the expense of a non-BCS team, of course.

This is the way I see it: The playoffs help produce a truer champion than what we've had. With four teams, instead of two, it's not hard to see why this is the case. However, it's hard to imagine any non-BCS team, outside an amazing multi-season run or extreme parity among other BCS teams, getting into this new playoff. Especially if it's based on a certain BCS formula. Only TCU in '08 '10 would have qualified for a spot in the postseason under the current BCS rules. That's not going to sit well with those other non-BCS conference presidents.

But do you like it?