This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2010, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.
While they did their share of agonizing in June while wondering how the Pac-10's expansion would play out, everybody involved with the University of Utah athletic program is now in an enjoyable state of knowing where they're headed while watching their local rivals squirm about the future.
BYU is standing in the fairway, trying to decide whether to lay up short of the pond or go for the green, surrounded by bunkers.
Utah State is looking for an opening in the trees, just trying to get the ball back into play.
Utah is ordering drinks on the clubhouse veranda, watching the sun sink slowly beyond the 18th green.
So who would you rather be?
Nobody's sure what the Utes did to deserve this, other than winning two Bowl Championship Series football games, maintaining an academic environment that appealed to the Pac-10 and having built an outstanding athletic program with strong support in a good market.
In any case, the prevailing attitude in Uteville is somewhere between smug and sympathetic.
Judging by the tone of exchanges between Utah State's president and athletic director in e-mails obtained by The Salt Lake Tribune, it is easy to imagine the dialogue between Utah president Michael K. Young and AD Chris Hill these days.
Hill: Can you believe what's happening out there?
Young: Yeah, glad we're done with all stuff, huh?
The Utes undoubtedly, if unintentionally, triggered everything that's happening locally this month.
Regardless of how long BYU administrators have studied the issue, some combination of the reality of a Mountain West without Utah and a desire to make their own splash this summer led them to instantly develop a hybrid plan of football independence/WAC membership for other sports. USU was brokering the deal.
The scheme was coming together nicely last week, until the MWC struck back.
Invitations to WAC members Fresno State and Nevada, two of the schools that would have helped anchor BYU's football schedule, spoiled the whole thing.
Hill: I sure feel sorry for the Aggies, even if they were becoming a little too giddy about how enhancing the WAC would punish Boise State for moving to the MWC. I almost feel bad for your old school as well.
Young: C'mon, let's not go that far!
Utah State is now hoping BYU stays in the expanded Mountain West, leaving an opening for a 12th school that logically must be filled. Otherwise, the Aggies will be left in whatever remains of the WAC, struggling more than ever for relevance in major college athletics.
BYU obviously was so determined in its quest for independence that it is keeping that option in play, probably right up until Wednesday's deadline for informing the MWC that it would not compete in the league during the 2011-12 school year. Otherwise, the Cougars could have said by now that they're staying.
Do the Utes have any stake in the Cougars' decision? Only in this sense, I would say: If BYU remains in the MWC, imagine a Saturday in October 2011 when Utah is playing USC and BYU is meeting Colorado State. But if the Cougars are independent, they could be playing Notre Dame in November when the Utes are facing Washington State.
BYU's recruiting might be aided by independence, but not enough to significantly affect Utah.
So the Utes can just wait and allow all of these machinations to play themselves out, secure in knowing where they will be next year while enjoying a potentially big 2010 season.
Hill: The cool thing is, even before we join the Pac-10, we get to play football Thursday against a highly ranked opponent in our sold-out stadium.
Young: See you at the tailgate, buddy.