Utah should be a better football team this year IMO
Welcome Cyclones Fans! › Forums › Utah Utes Sports › Football › Utah should be a better football team this year IMO
- This topic has 15 replies, 13 voices, and was last updated 5 years, 9 months ago by Central Coast Ute.
-
AuthorPosts
-
-
ProudUteParticipant
However, I believe that USC, Arizona and UCLA will be much better than last year. I think Colorado will be similar and I don’t know about ASU. We will be replacing Oregon and Stanford with OSU and Cal, and that should be in our favor. I think BYU will be better than last season. I have no idea about NIU and ISU should be a gimme.
In the end, I believe we will be a better football team. But, I am not sure the record will be better than 9-3. The USC and WSU games (first two conference games) could define our season.
Go Utes!!!
-
TednabParticipant
Still to early .. Offensive line linebackers and depth at WRs are all concerns
-
Dwight89Participant
I agree. 9-3 seems most likely to me too. People forget that we beat Oregon and Stanford in 18′, so swapping those two schools out doesn’t really change our 2018 losses.
My point being, as usualy, we will beat teams we shouldn’t and we will lose games we shouldn’t.
My predicted losses are USC, one of the Arizona schools, and probably Washington (cuz Christ Petersen).
-
Dwight89Participant
So I didn’t mean to write “Christ Petersen” but I’m going to leave it as it seems fitting.
-
Tony (admin)Keymaster
Freudian slip.
-
PlainsUteParticipant
Don’t eff with the Jesus.
-
-
-
Central Coast UteParticipant
I agree with you overall. 9-3 seems about right. However, BYU might be better but the Utes aren’t playing them, a meaningless game, the last game of the season right before the CCG. I expect the full strength, undistracted Utes to play better the first game of the year.
-
NavyUteParticipant
I thought our worthless game was the first game of the season, not last?
-
Central Coast UteParticipant
Last year it wasn’t. This year it is.
-
-
-
Dante GuardiParticipant
wouldn’t be surprised with 11-1. 10-2 seems the most likely to me
-
Tony (admin)Keymaster
Depending on where those wins and losses fell, one might argue that’s a better season than 2004 or 2008.
-
-
HCHooliganParticipant
DL – most likely better
CB – most likely better
WR – potential to be better with Enis, Boyd, Nacua, Simpkins, Boyd, & Covey’s experience & a healthy Thompson & a different scheme
TE – most likely better
RB – most likely better – especially with a run-centered scheme
OL – ??
LB/S – ?? tough to match last year’s productivity at LB
ST – ?? same as LB
Coaching – ?? If Ludwig can improve our Oh-fensive productivity, watch out! This team could be very good!
-
darklightningParticipant
I thought Boyd moved to CB?
-
noneyadbParticipant
He did. But please don’t let facts get in the way of why the WR group will be okay
-
chinngiskhaanParticipant
Apparently there are two Boyds in our wr group, and one as a CB
-
-
-
FtheYParticipant
Not to go all Mr. Manyung on this, but this season is 10-2 or bust.
Right/wrong/indifferent, media perception matters whether we like it or not. If we want to ascend the ranks from a good p5 program to a perrenial powerhouse, it’s on us to demonstrate that. This also bleeds into recruiting and other things.
It’s already an uphill battle with recruiting. No matter how many transfers, RMs, average star ranking etc we have, the national perception is that we underperformed this class (due to signing less guys).
National folks don’t understand our depth by position and other things we know and discuss here. All they will see is an “easier” schedule with our best core players returning. They also see the PAC as a down conference. Translation – the national expectation is that we win more games than last year.
The only way 9-3 is acceptable is if we get to the pac12 championship game and win it.
The point is that we have to have a better season than last year if we want to continue this upward trend. There are too many things stacked against us otherwise.
Here’s to 10-2!!
-
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.