Scott Mitchell's argument is that Utah has been pretty good at football for a while. Which is true.
And then a response somehow gets 14 POTD by arguing that their division, the PAC12 South, has been bad at football?  (Which is also true)

Do we really think either of those things are what matter though? That this round of realignment is about performance? If USC and UCLA (PAC12 South teams that have been worse than Utah) getting invited wasn't enough to dispel that it's about your division, let's do a Team A / Team B comparison (using Sagarin ratings as in the initial post)

2021

Team A finished #56, playing in the #9 conference/division
Team B finished #11, playing in the #7 conference/division

2019

Team A finished #40, playing in the #10 conference/division
Team B finished #20, playing in the #7 conference/division

2018

Team A finished #90, playing in the #8 conference/division
Team B finished #23, playing in the #9 conference/division

2017

Team A finished #71, playing in the #7 conference/division
Team B finished #35, playing in the #8 conference/division

2016

Team A finished #31, playing in the #3 conference/division
Team B finished #37, playing in the #9 conference/division

So, if you're looking at that, it's pretty clear that Team B is the better team.  Both played in pretty terrible conferences/divisions (with the surprising exception of 2016), but Team B was consistently solid and always better (or in one case near-par) with Team A.  So the big argument against Utah (who is pretty clearly Team B)...would also be an argument against Team A... who is UNC and has both the B1G and SEC competing to invite them.

I'm not even saying I disagree with the idea that they should pursue UNC.  UNC is 100% a more valuable expansion candidate than Utah.  But it's not because they're a better recent football team than Utah or because they play in a better recent division.  That's not what is driving this round of realignment and insulting the on-field play of Utah's division as an argument against them just perpetuates the idea that on-field performance is what drives things.  UNC has more history, a bigger fanbase, a bigger market, more prestige, and better geography.  And all of that matters a LOT more than how good (or not) they are on the field.  And especially more than how good their division mates have been on the field.