I think you're holding Utah to an unrealistic standard—I get that it's Utah, and it's fun to dunk on Utah, but you're still making a bad argument.

The reality of CFB in an era of easy transfers is that good QBs typically move to better programs, and good backups move around (usually to worse programs) in the hopes of winning a starting job. They're very mercenary when making these decisions, very thoughtful about who is already in the QB room, who else is getting recruited, and which HS players are committed.

The way I see it:

• Utah did a good job keeping Rising (I'm certain that there were teams that tried to poach him)
• Utah did a good job landing a 4* HS QB and getting him enrolled early (best-case scenario, he develops for a year and they have a smooth transition; worst-case, at least he had spring ball to learn the offense)
• Given a strong starter and an heir apparent, Utah did as well as any program could hope to do in the transfer portal by securing Huard

Utah's living out the worst-case scenario right now, but any team other than Texas would be in a similar position—no great QB is going to transfer somewhere just to be a contingency plan/a bridge between star senior and highly-recruited freshman. There's bound to be a drop-off when your star QB is lost for the year...

Surely your argument is not that Utah should have two starting-caliber QBs on their roster, plus Wilson in development? That would be a tall order for any program, including Georgia, Oregon, and Ohio State.