Blog Entry

Utah is No. 1!

Posted on: January 3, 2009 7:36 am
Edited on: January 6, 2009 11:52 am

FT. LAUDERDALE, Fla. -- You expected a bit of a letdown for Alabama after losing the SEC championship game.

You didn't expect the Tide to be on Vicodin.

For those of you not up on your prescription pharms, that's what the dentist gives you before he removes your wisdom teeth. Yeah, it felt about like that for Alabama after one of the most humiliating losses in the program's history.

Louisiana-Monroe was bad. A two-touchdown beatdown by Utah in the Sugar Bowl is worse.

That first Bama team was rebuilding. This one was turning the corner.


Don't give me anything about a "rebuilt" offensive line. It was missing one player from arguably the best offensive line in the country. Left tackle Andre Smith was suspended.

Sure, the Tide were down to a third-string replacement for Smith. But let's call this what it was -- a choke. Alabama-did-not-come-to-play. For Utah, this was the biggest game in school history. For Bama, it was a consolation prize after losing what was  essentially a national semifinal loss to Florida in the SEC championship game.

Still, shouldn't Alabama be able to smack Utah on 364 out of 365 days of the year?  Sure, but it's a new year, some will say a new era.

This wasn't a fluke. Utah became the first non-BCS school to go undefeated in two seasons. You will begin to hear a cry for the Mountain West joining the BCS conferences. I can't disagree. The league was better overall than the Pac-10 in the regular season and just defeated a top-five powerhouse from the SEC.

There is some convoluted formula for "evaluating" the automatic qualifier status of BCS conferences. It won't happen any time soon but it should: Drop the ACC or Big East from the ACC and elevate the Mountain West. Now.

This should be more about Utah than Alabama. Saban and the Tide will have to deal with an enough taunts in the offseason ("Ute ought to be able to beat Utah!").

I'm looking for reasons not to make Utah No. 1. It has beaten four top-25 teams, two teams in the top 10 (TCU, Alabama). It beat the only team to beat USC (Oregon State). I will put Utah's non-conference schedule against Florida's and Oklahoma's.

Will Utah get the final No. 1 in AP? Not likely. Brand names still rule in the polls. Should the Utes be No. 1. One word: Undefeated. In this age of parity, there was only team in the whole land that can make that claim. It walked into the belly of the SEC beast and embarrassed Bear's boys.

I can't think of another team more deserving of being No. 1 right now. The Utes just took a small chunk of relevance out of that game they're playing down here in a few days.

What do they call it, the BCS title game? That sounds kind of shallow after what happened in New Orleans.

Category: NCAAF

Since: Mar 15, 2007
Posted on: January 4, 2009 9:19 pm

Utah is No. 1!

Some credit for Dodd.  I usually can't stand him and am one of the first to rip him for his laziness in his blogs.  Dennis, I applaud you for subtly changing your tune.  It does show some improvement and less arrogance.  Instead of saying the MWC is superior to the Pac 10 you now more appropriately say "The league was better overall than the Pac-10 in the regular season"  which is factual and not inflammatory opinion.  

Also, the ACC is a basketball conference for sure, but it does have enough true football powers to merit an automatic BCS bid.  Miami, Va Tech, and Florida St. in that league give it credibility.  The same cannot be said for the Big East.  Unless the programs and Pitt and Cincinnatti improve a lot, the Big East does not have the anchor team that will be consistently top 20.  Heck, I can point to at least one perennial top ten team in each of the other BCS leagues.  Not the Big East.  Good job Dodd.  I don't get to say that very often.

Since: Apr 9, 2007
Posted on: January 4, 2009 2:06 pm

Utah is No. 1!

I agree completely! Utah should have been included in the title mix all along. The big conferences use the BCS to keep out teams like Utah. End this please! I have seen several playoff systems that would work.

Since: Apr 9, 2007
Posted on: January 4, 2009 2:00 pm

Utah is No. 1!

I am in full agreement. Utah should have been in the title mix all along. The Big conferences protect themselves from teams like this with the BCS system. Get rid of it! I have seen several playoff that would work.

Since: Aug 31, 2008
Posted on: January 4, 2009 3:37 am

Utah is No. 1!

Seriously...I am interested in the logic as to how you want to replace a conference who has won their BCS games more often than not?

Not saying the MWC should be in the cold, but I want to know why you can justify replacing a current BCS conference.

OK, I have done your homework for you . . . Against BCS conference teams, the WMC teams have combined for an 11-5 record including the bowl games.  The Big East combined for a 9-9 record against BCS conference teams outside of the Big East.  'Nuff said.  I don't think that proves that the Big East should be out in the cold this year, but definitely that the MWC should have an auto birth this year and the weakest BCS conference shouldn't have an auto birth.

It just makes sense that each conference needs to earn the auto-bid each year by comparing out of conference wins/losses records.  This year, the MWC would have easily earned an auto berth, and that would mean that one of the regular BCS conferences would be out in the cold this year, and deservedly so.  Tell me another sport where your heritage or club affiliations determine your seeding in the post season, rather than your play on the field/court/pool/track/road/gym/sno

wy hill or icy rink etc.  Don't take it so personally when your conference gets suggested as being near or at the bottom of the BCS pool this year.  Try rooting for a team that isn't a part of the good ol' boy system that started this whole mess and see how you feel when a 9-4 team gets 12 million or more for getting invited to a BCS bowl game while your team goes undefeated all season and only gets chump change like Boise State.  (Virg Tech from the ACC was 9-4 this year . . . why should their school get the cash when Boise State or TCU for that matter proved on the field that they could compete and had earned the invitation more?)

Since: Dec 17, 2008
Posted on: January 3, 2009 9:28 pm

Utah is No. 1!

TCU lost to two teams this year /  Oklahoma handled them,but they fought hard / And Utah,but TCU SHOULD have beaten them/SO people,when you say that Utah would probably beat FLORIDA and Oklahoma,please leave Oklahoma out of that sentence

Since: Dec 17, 2008
Posted on: January 3, 2009 9:23 pm

Utah is No. 1!

You can say Alabama choked but I don't think anybody could have beaten Utah last night.

OMG / You are MAD  

but  deserve to be no1? perhaps

Since: Dec 18, 2008
Posted on: January 3, 2009 8:35 pm

Utah is No. 1!

In my opinion, only a hand full of teams are capable of being number 1 at seasons end and this is in large part do to scheduling. Any program who intends to be number 1 needs to consider strength of schedule before the season even begins. It's unfortunate that Utah is in the Mountain West but it is what it is and Utah didn't set themselves up for ultimate success over the summer when games were being scheduled. Maybe next year Utah will dip into the Big 12 or the SEC and see where they stand along the way. Kudos to Utah for the BCS more win over a top ten team and we'd be raising the national title banner in the great state of Utah.

Why not change the PAC 10 to the PAC 12 and bring in Utah and BYU. Go Cougars!!!

Since: Jan 6, 2007
Posted on: January 3, 2009 7:39 pm

Utah is No. 1!

You said it brother!!  Just watch as Ohio St craps their pants against Texas perpetuating the stench of the Big !0.   That conference is the one that is overrated.   How many more years of controversy are necessary before we can get a real national champ in NCAA Division 1 Football?  

Since: Jan 3, 2009
Posted on: January 3, 2009 7:32 pm

Utah is No. 1!

I have seen it noted several times, but I have yet to see a response from any of the MWC homers...

With the Big East having success in recent BCS games, losing this year to VT, what logic do ANY of you have for replacing them in the BCS formula?  Wins over the ACC, Big 12 and SEC...that certainly must disqualify the Big East from the BCS bid slot.

Anyone?  Anyone?

Seriously...I am interested in the logic as to how you want to replace a conference who has won their BCS games more often than not?

Not saying the MWC should be in the cold, but I want to know why you can justify replacing a current BCS conference.

Something tells me that you don't really follow any happenings outside of your conference, and you got swept up in the media hype and bashing after the ACC raid.  The bowl results have spoken for themselves over the past several years.  Strongest conference?  No.  BCS-worthy?  Yep.

FACT.  The records don't lie.

Since: Jan 3, 2009
Posted on: January 3, 2009 6:25 pm

I don't disagree with the playoff

But your comment still smacks of BCS elitism and ignorance.  Those teams you mentioned are supposed to make the MWC shake??  We're not taking basketball here.  Even the crappiest of MWC teams went in to Tennessee's  vaunted home (and yes I know they were down and yes I know I just switched conferences) and beat them this year.  Wyoming also clobbered a "good" Virginia team a couple of years ago.  

The gap is not as wide as you portray it.

The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or