That is why BYU was the FIRST G5 team to get an invite into the P5 table.

Firstly...it's not really accurate.

If we're looking for G5 (or G5 equivalents) getting the P5 invite, the order is probably

1. Utah
2. TCU 
3. Rutgers
4. Louisville
5. BYU + Cincy + Houston + UCF
6. SMU

If you want to be pedantic and argue G5 and P5 weren't designations yet for Utah and TCU, then Rutgers and Louisville were still earlier, from the AAC to the B1G and AAC.  And that same pedantry would disqualify BYU since we also weren't technically ever a G5 then.

It's unhelpful and demeans our friends

Utah is making a bad name for themselves coming in and telling everyone they're better than the rest of the conference. Which is a nice distraction from us coming in and telling everyone we're better than the rest of the newbies (or in some cases loudly proclaiming we're better than the rest of the conference - see the "BYU raised the per team payout by $5M" posts). There were 4 teams added at the same time. Some behind the scenes sources suggest we may have been first choice of those. Maybe we were. Not sure we want to continually make a big deal of it.  It's very Utah "we get a full share and are therefore better than you" type of action.

It contradicts another beloved narrative 

Expansion decisions come down to $$$ - whether through brand, viewership, donations, markets etc.  Which is why BYU was first. Except that we weren't. Utah was the first.  And pretty much nobody on this board chooses to believe it was because Utah brought more value (financial or otherwise).  So now our argument becomes "Expansion is driven by which team is the most valuable when we're the team being chosen, but not when other teams are being chosen for promotion"