Worthless yet interesting to my simple mind.
What would this year look like if the second game the Utes play this year would have been the first and the first game would have then been second.
Honestly, I don’t think it would have been much different. Playing SUU doesn’t do much to tell you how good you are (or aren’t).
I will still watch the game, but I don’t like FBS teams playing non-FBS teams. I think the practice needs to go away. It does nothing for you if you win, but if you lose; shame on you. Plus, it is very uninteresting for the fans. Even worse when these games are played late in the year, like in the SEC.
1 Like
With our most of the time being slow starters, I think it would have helped us get in a better rhythm. Having SUU as anything other than the first game is a waste of time and effort.
I have never liked the fact that we schedule a “Sister’s of the Poor” game in football every season. Beating up some I-AA school in what is tantamount to a practice game is just garbage.
I will take one from @ghostofOCGreg from some time back (and I am sure he stole it from pro wrestling), “To be the best, you have to beat the best.” SUU ain’t even the best in the Big Sky, not that it matters much. Would prefer seeing our team go back to playing USU every year over watching tomorrow’s train wreck.
2 Likes
The intrastate politics is still important here. This body bag game for SUU is a fiscal godsend, and it reaffirms to the all mighty legislature that the Utah athletic dept. and the university as a whole are helping additional state schools by keeping both sides of the money local, creating a double benefit. I agree I’d rather see USU but we’re still achieving a good political objective by holding this game.
WAC now. With titans Abilene Christian, Tarleton, Stephen F. Austin, Sam Houston, and Utah Tech.
1 Like