This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.

The original was posted on /r/cfb by /u/dbzbudokai77 on 2024-03-19 04:06:05.

Over the last 9 months there has been no shortage of realignment discussion as well as takeaways from the aftermath of the Pac-12 collapse.

One trend I’ve been seeing has been a lot of opposition specifically from Utah flairs towards their new conference, with a lot of emphasis from them and Utah administration that it’s a short-term stop for the university. I get this under the premise that the Big 12 is not a P2 and therefore looking at CFB’s future from the outside looking in. However, what is interesting to me is why a lot of this disinterest and hostility is coming primarily from Utah and its fans relative to the other P12 additions as well as remaining hateful-8 members. I tried summarizing reasons why Utah could be dissatisfied with its current affiliation:

-Geography: Obviously the P12 was an ideal geographic scenario for Utah, which is located in between many of the west coast universities as well as Colorado and Arizona schools. However, that is a sunk cost at the collapse of the conference. With the current landscape, the B12 is actually the most ideal for Utah, with the four corners along with BYU being relatively close in location. While the B10 has some of the West Coast universities, Utah would also run the risk of traveling much further East for more conference games during the year.

-Rivalries: Again, the B12 is a pretty good fit for Utah. Their biggest rival is in the same conference (which they may or may not prefer). Further, they continue their series with the Arizona and Colorado schools, while also resuming an old-but-underappreciated TCU rivalry. While they were developing a bit of a rivalry with USC, I get the feeling Utah would’ve been lost in the shuffle as USC has its sights set on primetime matchups with Michigan, Ohio State, and PSU.

-Academics: This is a solid argument against the B12. Between AAU-affiliation and commitments to research, the B10 (and formerly the P12) were above that of the Big 12. However, if this were that big of a concern would Utah not have chosen to join the ACC relative to the Big 12 last fall? I presume an invite would’ve been extended considering the conference’s choice to add Calford and SMU.

-Prominence: This one seems to be the most common argument I see, where Utah fans (and members of the university) see themselves as above the B12 from a success & prominence standpoint. This also leads into the belief that Utah will be on the short list of invitees to the P2 during the next realignment cycle. However, I’ll play devil’s advocate to this argument:

  • Utah has been a consistently solid football program with 2 consecutive P12 conference titles. However, from an accolades standpoint Utah has not necessarily outdone all of its B12 conference mates. From the time Utah joined the P12 in 2011, they only had 2 NY6 appearances. In that same time, Baylor also appeared in 3 NY6/BCS games, along with Ok State (2), TCU (2), and KSU (2).
  • Utah has the growing SLC market. However, it’s yet to be proven whether the market itself is valuable enough to vault Utah over other universities. Amongst its P12 counterparts in the Big 12, it’s a pretty fair argument that both the Phoenix and Denver markets would be desirable from the perspective of the B10 or SEC. Further, in the B12 you also see larger universities in the heart of other major cities such as Houston & Orlando.

TL;DR: I’ve seen most internal resentment or opposition to the new Big 12 both on this sub and in press articles from Utah fans/administration/athletic staff, as compared to other schools in the conference. However, I don’t know if Utah has an argument over other P12 adds or existing B12 members to be expressing this type of attitude.

Utah fans & others on this sub, please fill me in if there’s something I’m overlooking on this. I primarily posted this to ensure I have my facts straight before I respond to similar posts like this in the future.