This is an interesting and unusual scenario! Based on NCAA football rules, the actions of the University of Utah athletic director walking onto the field during a play would likely result in a penalty, potentially affecting the outcome of the play. Let’s break this down according to NCAA rules and regulations.

### 1. **NCAA Rule on Personnel on the Field**:
- According to NCAA football rules, only players, coaches, and officials are allowed on the field during a live play. Anyone else who enters the field, including an athletic director, would typically be considered to be interfering with the game.
- Rule 9-1-1 states that "No person, other than the players, coaches, and officials, shall be allowed on the field during a live ball or a dead ball." The presence of an athletic director on the field would likely be considered a violation of this rule, as the individual is not part of the allowed personnel during the live play.

### 2. **Unsportsmanlike Conduct**:
- In this case, the athletic director entering the field in the middle of a live play could be seen as "unsportsmanlike conduct." NCAA Rule 9-2-1 defines unsportsmanlike conduct as any action that is deemed to be inappropriate or disruptive to the game. This can include players, coaches, or anyone associated with the team.
- The penalty for unsportsmanlike conduct is typically 15 yards, and it could be assessed either on the next play or immediately, depending on when the infraction is noticed.

### 3. **Effect on the Play**:
- If the athletic director interfered with the play, such as by obstructing a player or disrupting the flow of the game, the play could be called back and a penalty assessed.
- However, if the athletic director merely entered the field without directly interfering with the play, the officials would likely assess an unsportsmanlike conduct penalty after the play was over, but the result of the play (a score, for example) might stand unless the officials ruled that the play was disrupted.

### 4. **Possible Outcome**:
- If the Utah Utes scored during that play, and the athletic director’s actions did not directly impact the play (e.g., no physical interference), the touchdown would likely stand, but a 15-yard penalty could be assessed on the ensuing kickoff or next possession.
- If the athletic director’s presence on the field did cause a disruption to the play, such as by influencing a player’s movement or causing confusion, the touchdown could potentially be nullified, and the play might be called back. In this case, the team would likely be penalized 15 yards for unsportsmanlike conduct.

### 5. **Judgment of Officials**:
- Ultimately, it would be up to the game officials to judge whether the athletic director's actions directly affected the play. NCAA football officials are given significant discretion when it comes to enforcing rules related to unsportsmanlike conduct, including determining whether the actions of non-players (like an athletic director) are disruptive.

### Conclusion:
In this scenario, the play could be called back if the athletic director’s presence interfered with the live play. If there was no direct interference, the touchdown could stand, but a penalty (likely 15 yards) would be assessed for unsportsmanlike conduct, and the University of Utah could be penalized on the ensuing play or possession.

Does that align with your thoughts on the situation, or is there another angle you want to explore?