I really don’t know. I don’t think it makes sense either. Both schools are big schools . Arizona State is huge and has plenty of reasons why a young athletic guy would want to attend the school. Maybe there’s too many other things to do.
I feel like Utah is in it’s own special bubble when it comes to the PAC-12. I don’t know that they culturally fit in the league. They have different politics and values than probably every other school and state. They’ve been consistently good since Urban was there and have passionate fans. Utah and Oregon are the only ones I feel like that have fans that really invest in their programs. Probably Oregon State and Wazzu too, but who is going to Pullman? I don’t think it’s a coincidence that Utah and Oregon are the programs that don’t have NFL teams .
One thing that would seem to separate Arizona/Arizona St from Utah/Oregon is the leadership (at least within the ADs) at the respective universities. It is remarkable that the guy who replaced Urban at Utah (Kyle Whittingham) is still there. Oregon's HC situation has been in flux since Chip Kelly left, but they had a lot of stability before that (from 1977-2012, they only had 3 different HCs). Of course, it also helps when you have unlimited support from a billionaire booster. Overall, maybe Oregon/Utah's leadership had simply been more competent than Arizona/Arizona St's. Lord knows, as UT fans, we know that makes a difference better than anyone. Arizona and Arizona St have both whiffed on multiple coaching hires.
You'd think that universities like Arizona and Arizona St, schools that have some forces working in their favor athletically, would be able to attract good people to run the programs. Or, even if they don't have the best people running the programs, you'd think they'd be able to have some success anyway despite that. Arizona St in particular is a
huge school, located right in the middle of a dynamic metro area.