“Embrace the new, no matter how uncomfortable, and make it work for you.”

Former Ute quarterback Alex Smith uttered those words during a University of Utah commencement speech 12 years ago. Inspiring the quote is, yes, especially coming from a man who later would fight through a life-threatening leg injury. But for this particular occasion, he made no mention of embracing the new, no matter how comfortable, and making it work.

Well. On Thursday night, much was new at Rice-Eccles Stadium, and it worked just fine.

Morgan Scalley started in on his first season as the boss of Utah football, all as new questions started in alongside him. Nobody was quite sure about telltale signature details that might identify what the new coach was up to, what the Utes would look like under him, and be like and play like and be coached like.

The only things anybody knew with exactness were that the Utes would start a gifted player at quarterback — Devon Dampier — and at running back — Wayshawn Parker — and that the Scalley reign in 2026 would begin with a stone-cold win.

If not … oh, man, shush yo’ mouth.

It was all written in the stars on the one sideline and the lack of them on the other. Idaho was as much a victim here as it was an opponent, a team in a different uniform, but not much of one. They were the FCS Vandals, coming off a 4-8 season a year ago and an opening-game loss last week to Cal Poly, seeking now a paycheck and perfectly willing to accept defeat at the hands and arms and shoulders and legs and feet of the Utes.

Utah accommodated on all counts, Venmo-ing the money and playing out the script, taking victory by the count of 66-14.

The problem with the whole affair was that the aforementioned questions remained mostly unanswered. You know the annual deal against an overmatched team serving as nothing more than a scrimmage. In truth, observers would have learned more about the Ute offense had it been facing its own defense, and more about the defense had it been going up against its own offense.

Instead, everyone at Rice-Eccles, every paying customer, every curious mind so eager to see what the new Utes are, was … how you say it? … Vandalized.

Apologies.

Interesting fact straight from Google: That’s how Idaho’s sports teams got their nickname, way back in 1917, when a reporter for the school’s student newspaper noted that the basketball team played with nasty intent, writing that it competed like a “gang of vandals.”

Yeah, so, the football version of that gang did not show up, not in that manner, in Utah’s season opener. Thing is, they shouldn’t be blamed. They were destined to lose, no matter how well they measured up against themselves.

In a game like this, the only real bit of discovery was whether the Utes would embarrass themselves by winning by fewer than three touchdowns, maybe four. Call the entire arrangement a sad state of what lesser schools must do to earn money to float their program at the expense of their lesser athletes, what greater schools and their greater players must put up with to fill out the schedule, or call it a waste of time. Either way, you’d be right.

Somebody once said a team should never feel sorry for an opponent. That somebody never saw this contest. By night’s end, the Utes seemed to be apologizing for every big hit, every chunk of yardage gained. This is how it all unfolded:

Utah capitalized on two early blunders by the Vandals — a pick and a fumble deep in Idaho territory — leading to a 10-zip advantage. That was stretched to 17-0 in the opening quarter. The Vandals showed some life with a 13-play, 75-yard scoring drive, a move downfield that brought back periodic memories from a season ago when the Ute run defense bent and broke. Turned out, it was no big thing.

It mattered little on this night, as Dampier fired up the offense with a couple of subsequent TD drives, one ending with a pass to Braden Pegan, the other polished off with a throw to Parker, who had three touchdowns in the first half alone.

First half score: 31-7. Lights out. Second half score: Who cared? For those who do, it was 35-7.

A few notables, although all of them are compromised by the aforementioned substandard level of competition:

1) Dampier is as confident as ever, leading his team in a manner that exuded pure self-assuredness, even if he played a fraction of the game. He finished hitting on 13 of 18 passes for 176 yards and three touchdowns.

2) Parker ran for tough yards, gaining 5.9 a pop, and had those three scores, two on receptions.

3) Dampier and Byrd Ficklin look to take up a lot of space in the Utah attack. Not rotating at QB at times, rather playing simultaneously. Why not? Both are athletic, both can run and pass. Both are threats. In this game, Dampier started the first half; Ficklin played most of the second.

4) Utah’s offense will likely be more balanced. Against Idaho, it was run-heavy, with the Utes rushing for 364 yards and passing for 269 — Pegan, the Utah State transfer, is a righteous target (four receptions, 20.9 yards per catch, one touchdown through the air, plus a rushing score).

5) Utah’s defense might be … effective or vulnerable or physical or inconsistent? It yielded only 225 yards to Idaho. What will it do against Big 12 teams?

6) Many, many Ute subs — too many to mention — got time on the field.

As for Scalley, he was poised on the sideline, allowing his coordinators to do their jobs and his players to do theirs. The Utes were well prepared, despite some errors, and they crushed an opponent that was set up to be crushed.

What does it all mean for the Utes and their coach in the days, the weeks, the months, the games ahead? That was a major question left unanswered — through no fault of their own — by a win that was both lopsided and comfortable, but that, in truth, had to be somewhat less than satisfying, less than embraceable. It worked for them, though.