Utah vs. Auburn...Who would win?

[kalster]

utah played well , but the only team i saw them play against was pitt which looked really bad

i think utah v/s auburn might be an interesting game

 

[Pacfanweb]

Originally posted by: NeoV
Pac, come on....NCAA schedules are made 1-4 years in advance.....for a Mountain West team to schedule a Pac 10, Big 12, and ACC school for their out of conference games is nothing to be ashamed of at all. Was it a weaker schedule than Auburn's? Yes - doesn't mean they aren't a very good team.

You are out of your mind if you think a major program would schedule a game at Utah or Boise St for a pre-conference game - way too much to lose. Best chance is for Utah to get an invite to a kickoff classic game or something along those lines.

Now, maybe, but as you said, the schedules were made 1-4 years ago, and there was no reason for a good team to duck Utah then.
UNC played them AT Utah this year, and UNC wasn't too bad when they scheduled that game. UNC was a very up-and-down team this year, but put together some decent performances to go with some teams **cough**Miami**cough** taking them lightly toward the end of the season.

And I don't remember who it was that said Utah didn't have a close game all year, but they evidently haven't looked at their schedule.

Utah is just another fluke, mid-major team that has happened to get lucky and put together some good talent. They won't be able to sustain the talent level they have. Just like Marshall, Miami-Ohio, Fresno State, ECU, etc, etc, from recent years.
Good for a few years, maybe beat a couple good teams, then back to oblivion.

 

[NeoV]

Maybe they will fade, but I'll say this - they have a huge recruiting tool with their student facilities now - Olympic Village anyone? With the fall of Washington's program, a lot of the kids that aren't going to USC are at least going to look at Utah now....and if the Pac 10 wants to expand and have a playoff game, like the SEC and the Big 12, I would think Utah would be the first team they would consider, which would help them as well.

 

[Electric Amish]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: Electric Amish
Utah can only play 3 teams that aren't in their conference. You can't penalize Utah for having to play 8 in-conference games. It's not Utah's fault that the conference isn't as strong as others.

Most other teams can only play 3 OOC games, too. And you most certainly CAN penalize Utah for being in a suckass conference.
Again, what's the point of playing in the ACC or SEC if it's not recognized that those teams, year in and out, have the toughest conference schedules?
If conference difficulty wasn't taken into account, then if I was Miami, Notre Dame, or any other traditional "big name" school, I'd be looking to get into the MAC or WAC, so I could wipe the field with those pansies, and then schedule 2-3 decent OOC opponents...then look forward to being in the BCS every year.
Utah can't help what conference they're in? Tough. If they'd have scheduled OOC a bit tougher, maybe we wouldn't have been having this conversation.
Replace UNC and Texas A&M on their schedule with say, Miami and FSU or VT. And don't tell me those teams wouldn't schedule them, either, because they most certainly would.

Yeah, I'm sure Miami, FSU, or VT are just dieing to schedule Utah. In your world, that would "weaken" their schedule. Also, why would any top team want to risk a loss to a "weak" OOC team?

You see, it's not as easy as just throwing a top team on the schedule. I'm sure they've tried to work something out. Also, like I said before, these schedules are made 3-5 years in advance. How are you supposed to know how good a team is going to be that far in advance?

 

[BillyBatson]

auburn hands down... come on man

 

[five40]

Originally posted by: rgwalt
Ditka by 24

R

Of course that is a mini-Ditka.

 

[PlatinumGold]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: NeoV
Pac, come on....NCAA schedules are made 1-4 years in advance.....for a Mountain West team to schedule a Pac 10, Big 12, and ACC school for their out of conference games is nothing to be ashamed of at all. Was it a weaker schedule than Auburn's? Yes - doesn't mean they aren't a very good team.

You are out of your mind if you think a major program would schedule a game at Utah or Boise St for a pre-conference game - way too much to lose. Best chance is for Utah to get an invite to a kickoff classic game or something along those lines.

Now, maybe, but as you said, the schedules were made 1-4 years ago, and there was no reason for a good team to duck Utah then.
UNC played them AT Utah this year, and UNC wasn't too bad when they scheduled that game. UNC was a very up-and-down team this year, but put together some decent performances to go with some teams **cough**Miami**cough** taking them lightly toward the end of the season.

And I don't remember who it was that said Utah didn't have a close game all year, but they evidently haven't looked at their schedule.

Utah is just another fluke, mid-major team that has happened to get lucky and put together some good talent. They won't be able to sustain the talent level they have. Just like Marshall, Miami-Ohio, Fresno State, ECU, etc, etc, from recent years.
Good for a few years, maybe beat a couple good teams, then back to oblivion.

you can't have it both ways, 1. claim that utah only scheduled weak OOC teams and then 2 try and convinces us that Utah scheduling with UNC is proof that utah could have scheduled better teams.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
Utah is just another fluke, mid-major team that has happened to get lucky and put together some good talent. They won't be able to sustain the talent level they have.

You know I agree, they won't sustain because they were obviously such a fluke that nearly the entire coaching staff was just hired away (Urban had offers from ND and Miami), and the quarterback just announced he is going to go to the NFL.

Personally I think they could have beat Auburn, and they don't get the "tough" schedule because the teams with the "tough" schedule won't play teams like Utah because some years Utah is smoking hot and can destroy a big conference teams ranking. For a team with a weak recruiting ability, a small recruiting pool and an underfunded athletic program they do really really well.

 

[Pacfanweb]

Originally posted by: PlatinumGold
you can't have it both ways, 1. claim that utah only scheduled weak OOC teams and then 2 try and convinces us that Utah scheduling with UNC is proof that utah could have scheduled better teams.

That's not having it both ways. Someone said that no BCS conference teams wanted to play Utah because they might lose and hurt their schedule strength. I pointed out that UNC playing AT Utah is proof that isn't true.

I also pointed out that BCS teams play teams like Utah all the time, and gave examples. Like FSU playing AT Louisville a year or two ago.

Then, it was said that hey, nobody would come to Utah or Boise State for an OOC game. I say, see my last sentence.

I agree in the case of some top teams, but those same teams WILL schedule Utah or Boise for a home game. They aren't deserving (yet) of a home and home series with a BCS team, for the most part.
BUT, it can be done, I pointed out, since UNC played AT Utah this season.

And I also pointed out that Utah can't use the "nobody will play us because we might beat them" excuse that mid-major schools use, because that same poster pointed out that the schedules were made far in advance.....and several years ago, nobody good was scared of losing to Utah. So that's NOT why they don't have a tough OOC schedule.

Look, Utah didn't play THAT bad of a schedule overall. It's just that the other teams played better schedules, in conference and OOC. Too bad Utah is in a crappy conference. You have play who's in front of you, and hope for the best, but there's no way you'll ever convince anyone but Utah fans that Utah's schedule was as challenging, week in and week out, as Auburn's. That's why Auburn is ranked higher.

 

[Pacfanweb]

Originally posted by: rahvin

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb
Utah is just another fluke, mid-major team that has happened to get lucky and put together some good talent. They won't be able to sustain the talent level they have.

You know I agree, they won't sustain because they were obviously such a fluke that nearly the entire coaching staff was just hired away (Urban had offers from ND and Miami), and the quarterback just announced he is going to go to the NFL.

Personally I think they could have beat Auburn, and they don't get the "tough" schedule because the teams with the "tough" schedule won't play teams like Utah because some years Utah is smoking hot and can destroy a big conference teams ranking. For a team with a weak recruiting ability, a small recruiting pool and an underfunded athletic program they do really really well.

Oh horsecrap. When has Utah EVER been worth a crap, other than recently? And as I pointed out earlier, the games are scheduled years in advance, so when this year's games were actually schedules, Utah was just another gimme game for any top team.

As far as the coaching staff and players go, again, FLUKE. You were being sarcastic, but you are actually dead on.
You think they'll keep having the kind of talent that goes pro early? Have they ever before? No, and No.
They simply got lucky, and got some prospects that maybe flew under the radar, or really blossomed in college. That happens, and that's what makes college ball so great. But don't expect it to continue.
How many small schools have had a miracle, one or two year run, then their coach becomes the hottest prospect one year, gets hired by a big-name school, and flops?
Plenty of times, more than anyone can count. Will it happen to Urban? Maybe, maybe not. Remember, the Gator fans will not be happy with 8-9 wins like Utah fans are. He'll be expected to win every game at UF.
Maybe he will. He may be the exception to the rule. Time will tell.

 

[Mill]

Perfect? Of course not. Remember the 12-0 Utah Utes?

``Who's to say they weren't the best?'' Tuberville said.

Well, former Utah coach Urban Meyer, for one.

`I wouldn't put us [Utah] in the class of the three [USC, Auburn, Oklahoma],'' said Meyer back in December before beginning the job at Florida. ``I don't think we did as much as they did.''

Their own Coach said that -- before he even took the Florida job.



Linkie

 

[Thraxen]

Utah could beat Auburn. No doubt. But they could easily lose to Auburn as well. Utah was great this year. Period. Fluke or not doesn't matter one bit to the question asked.

 

[95SS]

It's just that the other teams played better schedules, in conference and OOC

How is Louisiana Monroe, Louisiana Tech, and The Citadel better than Texas A&M, UNC, and Utah State?? Even if Auburn had played Bowling Green instead of The Citadel, Utah had a better OOC schedule.

That's why Auburn is ranked higher.

I haven't read that anyone disputed Auburn being ranked ahead of Utah. The question was who would win if they played. Unfortunately, we will never know, since there is no Div 1A playoff. It's all up to speculation.

 

[Thraxen]

BTW, one note about all this fluke talk... having a perfect season and beating some good teams is not a fluke. It still takes good coaching to win. There are plenty of teams that squander good talent.

 

[Pacfanweb]

Originally posted by: 95SS

It's just that the other teams played better schedules, in conference and OOC

How is Louisiana Monroe, Louisiana Tech, and The Citadel better than Texas A&M, UNC, and Utah State?? Even if Auburn had played Bowling Green instead of The Citadel, Utah had a better OOC schedule.

That's why Auburn is ranked higher.

I haven't read that anyone disputed Auburn being ranked ahead of Utah. The question was who would win if they played. Unfortunately, we will never know, since there is no Div 1A playoff. It's all up to speculation.

1. Yes, Auburn had a weak OOC schedule, that's why their overall SOS is 60. But they followed up those weak teams with Tennessee, Arkansas, Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee again in the SEC title game.
Utah has nothing to compare with that.
I will say, if Auburn had the balls to play a better OOC schedule, they would have been in the BCS title game ahead of USC.
But still, Auburn got tested much more than Utah.

2. I agree, there should be a playoff. I disagree that Auburn would lose to Utah, though. There is no reason to think differently. Auburn played and beat some very good teams. Utah didn't. Lots of teams would have gone undefeated against Utah's schedule, not many would have vs. Auburn's.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: 95SS

It's just that the other teams played better schedules, in conference and OOC

How is Louisiana Monroe, Louisiana Tech, and The Citadel better than Texas A&M, UNC, and Utah State?? Even if Auburn had played Bowling Green instead of The Citadel, Utah had a better OOC schedule.

That's why Auburn is ranked higher.

I haven't read that anyone disputed Auburn being ranked ahead of Utah. The question was who would win if they played. Unfortunately, we will never know, since there is no Div 1A playoff. It's all up to speculation.

NCAA SOS

Auburn beat 4 10 Win teams. UT, UT, VT, UGA, and 1 9 win team(LSU, who should have won 10), and Utah beat 3 7-5 teams and one 8-4 team. Auburn also played against 4 of the top 20 Defenses in the nation, including 3 in the Top 10. Utah played what Top Defense?

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: Pacfanweb

Originally posted by: 95SS

It's just that the other teams played better schedules, in conference and OOC

How is Louisiana Monroe, Louisiana Tech, and The Citadel better than Texas A&M, UNC, and Utah State?? Even if Auburn had played Bowling Green instead of The Citadel, Utah had a better OOC schedule.

That's why Auburn is ranked higher.

I haven't read that anyone disputed Auburn being ranked ahead of Utah. The question was who would win if they played. Unfortunately, we will never know, since there is no Div 1A playoff. It's all up to speculation.

1. Yes, Auburn had a weak OOC schedule, that's why their overall SOS is 60. But they followed up those weak teams with Tennessee, Arkansas, Alabama, Georgia, and Tennessee again in the SEC title game.
Utah has nothing to compare with that.
I will say, if Auburn had the balls to play a better OOC schedule, they would have been in the BCS title game ahead of USC .
But still, Auburn got tested much more than Utah.

2. I agree, there should be a playoff. I disagree that Auburn would lose to Utah, though. There is no reason to think differently. Auburn played and beat some very good teams. Utah didn't. Lots of teams would have gone undefeated against Utah's schedule, not many would have vs. Auburn's.

dont think so

usc was #1 in both polls, even if Auburn would have beaten both USC and OU in computer polls they would have been #2 at best, ahead of OU maybe but not ahead of USC

anyway Auburn had a good season congrats to them, too bad we couldnt find out how usc would have fared against them, they did well the past 2 times they met, but ofcourse Auburn is a much improved team this year, although I did read Coach Tubbervile say how USC's 3 drop offense negated Auburn's pass rush , i am sure there secondary would have been much better than OU's, but then again Norm Chow is a genius, you never know

 

[sciencewhiz]

If Utah and Auburn changed OOC schedules in the Colley system, Auburn would move past USC to #1, while Utah would remain 5th.