Ok, Now They're Just Screwing With Boise, Right?

[BaltimoreTerp]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5697573


The first BCS standings are out and Boise State isn't No. 1.

In fact, the Broncos aren't among the top two teams who would qualify for the Tostitos BCS National Championship game.

Oklahoma was first and Oregon was second in the standings released Sunday, with Boise State in third place and in need of plenty of help to become the first team from a conference without an automatic Bowl Championship Series bid to play for the BCS title.

:bangwall:

They've been saying all week, "Oh yeah, Boise's definitely going to be #1 in the BCS. They might not stay there, but they'll be at the top to start."

And Ohio State even loses.

AND THEY END UP FRICKIN' THIRD! (http://www.alexmacstandup.com/uploads/1/9/8/0/1980562/2248581.jpg)

What's next? Oklahoma and Oregon lose next week and Auburn jumps them? Are they going to go to the point of a one-loss Alabama jumping them?

Argh! :cussing:

[Big Mac]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5697573



:bangwall:

They've been saying all week, "Oh yeah, Boise's definitely going to be #1 in the BCS. They might not stay there, but they'll be at the top to start."

And Ohio State even loses.

AND THEY END UP FRICKIN' THIRD! (http://www.alexmacstandup.com/uploads/1/9/8/0/1980562/2248581.jpg)

What's next? Oklahoma and Oregon lose next week and Auburn jumps them? Are they going to go to the point of a one-loss Alabama jumping them?

Argh! :cussing:

You're upset about undefeated BCS schools jumping Boise in the rankings? They aren't that good...They've beaten two mediocre BCS schools and a few glorified high school teams...

[waroriole]

You're upset about undefeated BCS schools jumping Boise in the rankings? They aren't that good...They've beaten two mediocre BCS schools and a few glorified high school teams...

Exactly. If a 1 loss BCS school beats them out, then MAYBE you can complain. If anything Auburn and LSU have a major gripe b/c they've played a much tougher schedule and are still behind them.

[BaltimoreTerp]

You're upset about undefeated BCS schools jumping Boise in the rankings? They aren't that good...They've beaten two mediocre BCS schools and a few glorified high school teams...

I'm upset about the lie that is the college football system, and how this is just further proof of it. That a team can do everything in their power to play within the system, and have things outside of their control prevent them from getting to the top.

They play who they can play. All Division I-A teams this season, by the way, which is more than can be said about many of those sitting around them in the BCS standings. The big schools don't have the huevos to play them fair-and-square because they don't HAVE to. Which tells me a lot about why they don't want a playoff since they would have to beat Boise instead of wussing out.

I'm rambling, but its just such an embarrassment.

[waroriole]

I'm upset about the lie that is the college football system, and how this is just further proof of it. That a team can do everything in their power to play within the system, and have things outside of their control prevent them from getting to the top.

They play who they can play. All Division I-A teams this season, by the way, which is more than can be said about many of those sitting around them in the BCS standings. The big schools don't have the huevos to play them fair-and-square because they don't HAVE to. Which tells me a lot about why they don't want a playoff since they would have to beat Boise instead of wussing out.

I'm rambling, but its just such an embarrassment.

Don't get me wrong, I want to see a 4 team playoff but we don't have it this year. So, in the system we have they are getting a decent shake. They started out really high in the polls, and as a result are ahead of some teams from BCS conferences that are undefeated. It will be a shame though if they go undefeated again and get left out again.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Don't get me wrong, I want to see a 4 team playoff but we don't have it this year. So, in the system we have they are getting a decent shake. They started out really high in the polls, and as a result are ahead of some teams from BCS conferences that are undefeated. It will be a shame though if they go undefeated again and get left out again.

But that's the point. Why should they automatically go behind teams in BCS conferences when there's no way of knowing that those teams are better?

[Big Mac]

I can understand frustrations with the system...that's fine. However, the way the system is now, you cannot logically argue that Boise should be ranked ahead of any undefeated BCS team.

Let's take for example the recent three game stretch Alabama played: @ Arkansas, vs. Florida, and then @ South Carolina. Boise has played about three games that tough over the past 5 years, Alabama played them in three consecutive weeks. Now, obviously I'm an Alabama fan so to not be biased let me use a team I despise as an example...

Auburn played a very good Arkansas team this week and now has to play an undefeated LSU team. When has Boise ever played back to back games that are remotely as difficult?

Boise is a good team, I believe they would likely win 8 or 9 games playing a standard SEC schedule, however it is a huge slap in the face to teams like Auburn and LSU that Boise is ranked ahead of them.

[BaltimoreTerp]

I can understand frustrations with the system...that's fine. However, the way the system is now, you cannot logically argue that Boise should be ranked ahead of any undefeated BCS team.

Let's take for example the recent three game stretch Alabama played: @ Arkansas, vs. Florida, and then @ South Carolina. Boise has played about three games that tough over the past 5 years, Alabama played them in three consecutive weeks. Now, obviously I'm an Alabama fan so to not be biased let me use a team I despise as an example...

Auburn played a very good Arkansas team this week and now has to play an undefeated LSU team. When has Boise ever played back to back games that are remotely as difficult?

Boise is a good team, I believe they would likely win 8 or 9 games playing a standard SEC schedule, however it is a huge slap in the face to teams like Auburn and LSU that Boise is ranked ahead of them.

How do you know it's a huge "slap in the face"? There's no way of knowing that since there's no opportunity for the teams to play head-to-head?

And if you are going to do the "in this system..." argument, isn't the judgment of the voters and the computers that they are better all that matters?

[waroriole]

But that's the point. Why should they automatically go behind teams in BCS conferences when there's no way of knowing that those teams are better?

Why should they automatically go ahead of some BCS teams just because that's what people thought they should be ranked before we even played one freaking game. If the pollsters didn't make their first vote until a week ago, would Boise be ranked ahead of Auburn, LSU and Michigan State?

[BaltimoreTerp]

Why should they automatically go ahead of some BCS teams just because that's what people thought they should be ranked before we even played one freaking game. If the pollsters didn't make their first vote until a week ago, would Boise be ranked ahead of Auburn, LSU and Michigan State?

Who knows? Because there is no honest way of knowing whether those teams are better.

[waroriole]

Who knows? Because there is no honest way of knowing whether those teams are better.

Has there ever been? Has Boise being good somehow made this process go from managable to completely impossible. Why can't pollsters do what they're supposed to do, which is watch the games and make a determination based on everything they've seen and say X team is No.1, Y team is No. 2? I don't understand how Boise being a part of this makes it somehow impossible.

I don't think a playoff will necessarily give you a national champion who has been the best all year. It could be the team who got hot, or got a few lucky breaks. So, if Boise or Oregon or Auburn or whoever wins a tournament it doesn't necessarily mean they were the best team all year.

[Birds of B'more]

The fact that Oklahoma, who narrowly defeated heavyweights like Cincinnati, Utah State and Air Force, is #1...despite not being higher than 3rd in any human poll, shows you all you need to know about this "system." The BCS is a joke and Oklahoma is a joke. But like several times over the past decade, I guess it's been pre-ordained that they will play for the championship no matter what happens on the field. Someone associated with that university must be pretty powerful. Why do I think that someday when they pull back the curtain on this BCS thing we're going to see Barry Switzer's fat head?

[square634]

I am just praying that Boise State wins the national championship over an undefeated Oregon/Oklahoma, and Alabama, Ohio St., etc. all miss out with one loss. When -- or if -- a non-BCS school gets in over a one-loss SEC team or other traditional power, then change will be made.

[ThisIsOurHouse]

The BCS messed up last year by putting Boise State against TCU, that year would have been the perfect oppurtunity to put Boise State against like a Florida and see how they did against a bcs quality team. Instead they put two teams with weak scheudules against each others. That was properly the worst thing they could have done.

By doing that the BCS screwed over this year because if Boise would have beaten Florida there would be no discussion whether or not Boise belongs in the elite because they beat an elite team and they return most of their starters this year. If they would have loss to Florida then we can make the Strength of Scheudule arguement and say Boise does not belong. The BCS is basically procrastinating this mess, let Boise in the national championship game or make them play a bcs opponent like a Bama or OSU instead of another unproven team like TCU.

I'm not knocking TCU as they deserve to face an elite team from a bcs conference, but playing two teams that have big question marks is not going to get you an answer.

I want to see how Boise State or TCU plays against Bama/Ohio State/ Oregon/Oklahoma.

[Dr. FLK]

The BCS messed up last year by putting Boise State against TCU, that year would have been the perfect oppurtunity to put Boise State against like a Florida and see how they did against a bcs quality team. Instead they put two teams with weak scheudules against each others. That was properly the worst thing they could have done.

You mean like when they beat Oklahoma?

[square634]

You mean like when they beat Oklahoma?

Yeah, that's another thing. That was one of the greatest/most entertaining bowl games of my lifetime.

[ThisIsOurHouse]

You mean like when they beat Oklahoma?

Yeah and they stood up for the challenge, and now they are left out to dry 3-4 years later. I want to see this team be given a chance because quite frankly I'm tired of hearing whether Boise can hang with the big boys. As far as I'm concerned the BCS is holding Boise back. I don't think Boise is going away any time soon, they should be given the chance to play in the BCS game.

[Dr. FLK]

Yeah and they stood up for the challenge, and now they are left out to dry 3-4 years later. I want to see this team be given a chance because quite frankly I'm tired of hearing whether Boise can hang with the big boys. As far as I'm concerned the BCS is holding Boise back. I don't think Boise is going away any time soon, they should be given the chance to play in the BCS game.

They've proven they aren't just the product of an easy schedule. They scheduled tough OOC teams this season (even though they ended up not being as good as anticipated). I'd love to see how they could match up with someone like Oregon, but I have a feeling that the BCS will do everything in its power to find a way to leave them out.

[Pedro Cerrano]

Take the top 8 teams. Play three rounds of playoffs in three weeks.

Why is this so difficult?!?!

[Birds of B'more]

They've proven they aren't just the product of an easy schedule. They scheduled tough OOC teams this season (even though they ended up not being as good as anticipated). I'd love to see how they could match up with someone like Oregon, but I have a feeling that the BCS will do everything in its power to find a way to leave them out.

We already know that. Boise beat Oregon in 2008 at Eugene, and again in 2009 at Boise. Both times convincingly. The question everyone asks is, what would they do in a BCS conference when they have to play tough opponents regularly...when there are far fewer Idaho's, San Jose State's or Louisiana Tech's on the schedule? Games, where Boise can not only rest their starters in the 2nd half and keep them healthier for the big games, but also get their younger players more experience, which no doubt greatly helps Boise reload after turnover from graduation.

I'd love to see someone like the Big 12 or Pac 10 (12) bring them in just to see how they'd do. It will never happen because they just don't bring enough money to make it worth it. I don't think they would have so many undefeated seasons like they do in the WAC, but I think overall they'd fare just fine....they'd be in the conversation for conference titles most years and maybe the national championship occasionally too. They just have an excellent coaching staff and the national attention they've received has really helped them get better players. And despite what many might think, Boise really is a nice town.

[ThisIsOurHouse]

They've proven they aren't just the product of an easy schedule. They scheduled tough OOC teams this season (even though they ended up not being as good as anticipated). I'd love to see how they could match up with someone like Oregon, but I have a feeling that the BCS will do everything in its power to find a way to leave them out.

I wouldn't give up on Virginia Tech yet, they have won five straight and really have gotten there team back together. They are going to have a tough stretch after the Duke game (GT, UNC, Miami) but all of those teams are very beatable. It wouldn't surprise me if VT wins the ACC Title. Wilson and Evans are running the ball very effectively, it looks like VT should be able to power the ball again. And if Williams gets hot then opposing defenses are in major trouble.

As for Oregon State, they have in my opinion had the toughest schedule so far this year. They faced TCU, BSU, and Arizona. Plus Louisville, ASU and Washington are far from slacks. Oregon State is a very underrated team, i don't think the BCS will recognize this but Oregon State is a pretty good ball club.

The Nevada loss to Hawaii properly cost Boise State the bcs. I was looking forward to seeing to undefeated teams duel it out. That would have been a great oppurtunity for BSU to get some style points against a top 15 program. Unfortunately that is not going to happen.

Got a little off topic there.

[waroriole]

The Nevada loss to Hawaii properly cost Boise State the bcs. I was looking forward to seeing to undefeated teams duel it out. That would have been a great oppurtunity for BSU to get some style points against a top 15 program. Unfortunately that is not going to happen.

Got a little off topic there.

It might cost them some style points, but now they can point to another quality team on their schedule.

[waroriole]

Could we be headed for a Boise-TCU NCG. I say this as an Auburn fan, who just watched his team go to 8-0, but we still have Georgia, Bama, and a possible SEC title game to get to the NCG. Oregon has USC, Arizona and Oregon St. to get there. Oklahoma is losing now, and has OK St and a Big 12 title game.

If Auburn, Oregon and OK lose, do Boise and TCU get there?

[Birds of B'more]

Oklahoma falls. For the 3rd week in a row the #1 team loses.

Oregon should move to #1 in the BCS. Not sure if Boise will rise to #2....they should stay at #2 in the human polls but the computers may give Auburn enough to jump them. At least Virginia Tech keeps winning, so that helps Boise.

It all depends on when and how the teams ahead of Boise St and TCU lose. I think Oregon will be fine right up to the Civil War, but I could see OSU pulling the upset in that game. If that happens, I think the Ducks would drop too far. And there's still way too much to be settled in the SEC West to think about who will come out of there.

A couple big games next week. Missouri goes to Nebraska and Michigan State at Iowa.

[PaulBako]

How in the world is Michigan State 8-0? They have to be the luckiest team out there. They'll have a real road test next week. Also Nebraksa will crush Missouri.

[waroriole]

Oklahoma falls. For the 3rd week in a row the #1 team loses.

Oregon should move to #1 in the BCS. Not sure if Boise will rise to #2....they should stay at #2 in the human polls but the computers may give Auburn enough to jump them. At least Virginia Tech keeps winning, so that helps Boise.

It all depends on when and how the teams ahead of Boise St and TCU lose. I think Oregon will be fine right up to the Civil War, but I could see OSU pulling the upset in that game. If that happens, I think the Ducks would drop too far. And there's still way too much to be settled in the SEC West to think about who will come out of there.

A couple big games next week. Missouri goes to Nebraska and Michigan State at Iowa.

Obviously I'm biased, but what team has done more this year than Auburn? Wins over 4 Top 25 teams, and a good Clemson team. I would think that Auburn jumps Boise, and is possibly #1 in the BCS.

If I am Oregon, the team I would be concerned with is USC. They are looking good right now, and will host the Ducks.

[Birds of B'more]

Obviously I'm biased, but what team has done more this year than Auburn? Wins over 4 Top 25 teams, and a good Clemson team. I would think that Auburn jumps Boise, and is possibly #1 in the BCS.

If I am Oregon, the team I would be concerned with is USC. They are looking good right now, and will host the Ducks.

Auburn will not jump Oregon. I expect lots of scoring in the OR/USC game....but Oregon at least has a decent defense and should be able to stop SC's offense enough times to get a win. USC has no defense at all.

[waroriole]

Auburn will not jump Oregon. I expect lots of scoring in the OR/USC game....but Oregon at least has a decent defense and should be able to stop SC's offense enough times to get a win. USC has no defense at all.

I wouldn't be so sure. Auburn picked up 112 points in the Coaches poll, and Oregon only got 11 more. Auburn will likely be No. 1 in the computer rankings, and much higher than Oregon. Auburn's strength of schedule is 4, while Oregon's is 102, well behind even Boise and TCU. It may go back and forth over the next few weeks, if both teams stay unbeaten, but I would be surprised if Auburn isn't #1 in the BCS this week.

[waroriole]

Woohoo, #1. Let's hold onto it and beat Ole Miss this week.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Woohoo, #1. Let's hold onto it and beat Ole Miss this week.

No offense, because I usually like Auburn, but I hope Ole Miss beats you 100-0.

Of course, than THEY would probably jump Boise...:rolleyes: ;)

[Birds of B'more]

What a load of bull****. I can see it now, the Ducks run the table and get shut out of the BCS CG. I guess all they have to play for now is the AP Championship. The west coast anti-bias is alive and well....except now it just lives in computers somewhere, like a virus. I thought this sort of thing only happened to the non-AQ teams. :rolleyes:

[waroriole]

What a load of bull****. I can see it now, the Ducks run the table and get shut out of the BCS CG. I guess all they have to play for now is the AP Championship. The west coast anti-bias is alive and well....except now it just lives in computers somewhere, like a virus. I thought this sort of thing only happened to the non-AQ teams. :rolleyes:

Wow, are you serious? The computers take strength of schedule into account. Who has Oregon played besides Stanford? Auburn has wins over 4 Top 25 teams. Let's compare schedules:

Auburn:
Ark. St. (3-5)
Miss. St. (#21) (6-2)
Clemson (4-3)
South Carolina (#20) (5-2)
UL-Monroe (3-4)
Kentucky (4-4)
Arkansas (#19) (5-2)
LSU (#12) (7-1)

Oregon:
New Mexico (0-7)
Tennessee (2-5)
Portland St. (2-5)
Arizona St. (3-4)
Stanford (#13) (6-1)
Washington St. (1-7)
UCLA (3-4)

Oregon has played one team with at least a .500 record. Auburn has played 6. I'd like to know why Oregon should be ranked ahead of Auburn in the polls. Is it because they started out higher? That's the only reason they are ranked higher. I'm tired of hearing about the SEC being overrated. If anything they are underrated.

What is more, is that Oregon isn't moving down. They are comfortably in 2nd place, and play a tougher schedule going forward than Boise or TCU. If Oregon keeps winning they will certainly play for a national championship.

[Birds of B'more]

Wow, are you serious? The computers take strength of schedule into account. Who has Oregon played besides Stanford? Auburn has wins over 4 Top 25 teams. Let's compare schedules:

Auburn:
Ark. St. (3-5)
Miss. St. (#21) (6-2)
Clemson (4-3)
South Carolina (#20) (5-2)
UL-Monroe (3-4)
Kentucky (4-4)
Arkansas (#19) (5-2)
LSU (#12) (7-1)

Oregon:
New Mexico (0-7)
Tennessee (2-5)
Portland St. (2-5)
Arizona St. (3-4)
Stanford (#13) (6-1)
Washington St. (1-7)
UCLA (3-4)

Oregon has played one team with at least a .500 record. Auburn has played 6. I'd like to know why Oregon should be ranked ahead of Auburn in the polls. Is it because they started out higher? That's the only reason they are ranked higher. I'm tired of hearing about the SEC being overrated. If anything they are underrated.

Look closer at the computers. One of them has Oregon at #11, another at #10. Are you seriously going to tell me with a straight face that Oregon is no better than the #10 or 11 team in the country? Seriously??? That is totally bogus, and it will keep Oregon on the outside looking in, right next to Boise and TCU.

[waroriole]

Look closer at the computers. One of them has Oregon at #11, another at #10. Are you seriously going to tell me with a straight face that Oregon is no better than the #10 or 11 team in the country? Seriously??? That is totally bogus, and it will keep Oregon on the outside looking in, right next to Boise and TCU.

Yeah, I agree that some of the computer rankings are bogus. BUT, and this is the big thing, is that Oregon hasn't played anyone YET. They are about to start playing some tough games (USC, Arizona, Oregon St.) and that will raise their computer rankings. They have nowhere to go but up in the computers, while teams like Mizzou and Michigan St. (who will both lose) are as high as they are going to be in the computers.

What this means, from what I can tell, is that Oregon's computer rankings will go up, and when that happens they will easily stay in 2nd, or maybe even 1st.

Basically, if Auburn and Oregon stay unbeaten they will play for the NC. Here's hoping we do too.:beerchug1:

[Birds of B'more]

Yeah, I agree that some of the computer rankings are bogus. BUT, and this is the big thing, is that Oregon hasn't played anyone YET. They are about to start playing some tough games (USC, Arizona, Oregon St.) and that will raise their computer rankings. They have nowhere to go but up in the computers, while teams like Mizzou and Michigan St. (who will both lose) are as high as they are going to be in the computers.

What this means, from what I can tell, is that Oregon's computer rankings will go up, and when that happens they will easily stay in 2nd, or maybe even 1st.

Basically, if Auburn and Oregon stay unbeaten they will play for the NC. Here's hoping we do too.:beerchug1:

I don't know about that. The Pac-10 is doing a good job of beating up on each other right now. It's a strong conference this year, but only Oregon really stands out. The only remaining ranked opponent on their schedule is Arizona. Even if the Ducks win them all, the computers will devalue their opponents because the 2nd tier of teams in the conference (Stanford, USC, Arizona, Oregon St) are pretty much even and each could have 3 losses in conference, and when all is said and done none of them may be ranked in the Top 25. Then the Ducks will start getting jumped by the 1-loss teams. I will say that even though these things are arranged years in advance, Oregon picked the wrong year to play a crappy non-conference schedule. Could you maybe tell some of your SEC brethren to ease up on Tennessee a bit? That might help. :(

[waroriole]

I don't know about that. The Pac-10 is doing a good job of beating up on each other right now. It's a strong conference this year, but only Oregon really stands out. The only remaining ranked opponent on their schedule is Arizona. Even if the Ducks win them all, the computers will devalue their opponents because the 2nd tier of teams in the conference (Stanford, USC, Arizona, Oregon St) are pretty much even and each could have 3 losses in conference, and when all is said and done none of them may be ranked in the Top 25. Then the Ducks will start getting jumped by the 1-loss teams. I will say that even though these things are arranged years in advance, Oregon picked the wrong year to play a crappy non-conference schedule. Could you maybe tell some of your SEC brethren to ease up on Tennessee a bit? That might help. :(

Nah, there is no way Oregon falls below 2. Even if Wash. St. beats Stanford, it won't affect much because you beat both. Just actually getting some quality opponents on the schedule will lift Oregon in the computers.

No can do with the Vols. The only team I'd enjoy seeing winless in the SEC more than Tennessee is Alabama.

[J.D.]

At this point, teams will continue to leap frog Boise until:

A) Auburn, Missouri, and Michigan State lose.

B) Alabama loses again.

C) The BCS computers become self-aware and enslave humanity.

[Pedro Cerrano]

What a load of bull****. I can see it now, the Ducks run the table and get shut out of the BCS CG. I guess all they have to play for now is the AP Championship. The west coast anti-bias is alive and well....except now it just lives in computers somewhere, like a virus. I thought this sort of thing only happened to the non-AQ teams. :rolleyes:

I can see why you're upset, but how can a computer be biased? Unless that was tongue in cheek?

[Birds of B'more]

I can see why you're upset, but how can a computer be biased? Unless that was tongue in cheek?

It was somewhat tongue in cheek. But how can you take a computer ranking seriously that has Oregon at #10 or 11, which 2 of the computer rankings do? I know they haven't played many good teams, but I thought a computer would at least take into account how they've pretty much annihilated anything that gets in front of them.

But I know it's not the computer....it's the mouth-breathing tub of goo living in his mom's basement who programmed the computer, some nerd who wouldn't know a football if it landed in his "groin."

[DuffMan]

I'm not a fan of the BCS either, but lets wait until the regular season is over before we stomp and yell about how they got it wrong.

[Birds of B'more]

I'm not a fan of the BCS either, but lets wait until the regular season is over before we stomp and yell about how they got it wrong.

Why wait? Griping about the BCS all season long is as much a tradition in college football as tailgates and marching bands. :D

[Crazysilver03]

I'm not a fan of the BCS either, but lets wait until the regular season is over before we stomp and yell about how they got it wrong.

You are asking for rationalization from a board who thinks the Ravens have lost a game with 20:00 minutes left and the Orioles have lost the game when they are losing 2-0 in the 2nd inning? :laughlol:

[CrimsonTribe]

No offense, because I usually like Auburn, but I hope Ole Miss beats you 100-0.

Of course, than THEY would probably jump Boise...:rolleyes: ;)

Boise doesn't deserve to be #1.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Boise doesn't deserve to be #1.

If there was a playoff we would know the answer, either way...

[waroriole]

If there was a playoff we would know the answer, either way...

Maybe, but his point remains the same. Boise doesn't deserve it b/c they are not tested every week in the same way that schools with real schedules are. The schools that Boise plays for 10 games are the schools that SEC schools schedule to guarantee a win. Boise might could beat a Top 10 team any given week, but the real test is when you have to play a quality team every week and survive with a 12-0 or 11-1 record.

Where is the outrage for Jacksonville State? They get one tough game against Ole Miss and win it. But, nobody lets the poor 1-AA school compete for the BCS title.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Maybe, but his point remains the same. Boise doesn't deserve it b/c they are not tested every week in the same way that schools with real schedules are. The schools that Boise plays for 10 games are the schools that SEC schools schedule to guarantee a win. Boise might could beat a Top 10 team any given week, but the real test is when you have to play a quality team every week and survive with a 12-0 or 11-1 record.

Where is the outrage for Jacksonville State? They get one tough game against Ole Miss and win it. But, nobody lets the poor 1-AA school compete for the BCS title.

No strawmen please.

[CrimsonTribe]

If there was a playoff we would know the answer, either way...

We all get it. You hate the BCS, but for now it is what it is and Boise doesn't deserve it under the current system.

FWIW, I'd love to see a playoff.

[CrimsonTribe]

No strawmen please.

You're the one bringing up the strawman.

[Birds of B'more]

Maybe, but his point remains the same. Boise doesn't deserve it b/c they are not tested every week in the same way that schools with real schedules are. The schools that Boise plays for 10 games are the schools that SEC schools schedule to guarantee a win. Boise might could beat a Top 10 team any given week, but the real test is when you have to play a quality team every week and survive with a 12-0 or 11-1 record.

Where is the outrage for Jacksonville State? They get one tough game against Ole Miss and win it. But, nobody lets the poor 1-AA school compete for the BCS title.

They actually get a chance to win a real championship.

[CrimsonTribe]

They actually get a chance to win a real championship.

Too bad it's William & Mary's championship this year. Poor Gamecocks.

[waroriole]

No strawmen please.

That wasn't meant to be taken seriously. But, where is your response to the rest.

[BaltimoreTerp]

That wasn't meant to be taken seriously. But, where is your response to the rest.

The same: we have no idea of knowing, first, because there isn't a playoff system, and second, because no team that would give them a real game will play them fair and square.

And I figured the Jacksonville State thing wasn't serious; just being sure :p

[waroriole]

The same: we have no idea of knowing, first, because there isn't a playoff system, and second, because no team that would give them a real game will play them fair and square.



How do you know this? Oregon St. and Va. Tech played them this year. The problem, and this isn't really in their control, is that their conference schedule is a joke. Luckily they are taking Utah's spot in the MWC next year. Teams like La. Tech, Idaho, New Mexico St.. How can you be tested like an Alabama or Oregon or Auburn when you play a schedule like that.

[Crazysilver03]

Too bad it's William & Mary's championship this year. Poor Gamecocks.

I foresee Delaware vs. William and Mary in that championship game.

After the game on Saturday, many WM fans said that Delaware was still the better team.

[BaltimoreTerp]

How do you know this? Oregon St. and Va. Tech played them this year. The problem, and this isn't really in their control, is that their conference schedule is a joke. Luckily they are taking Utah's spot in the MWC next year. Teams like La. Tech, Idaho, New Mexico St.. How can you be tested like an Alabama or Oregon or Auburn when you play a schedule like that.

Yeah, they played Virginia Tech on the least-neutral ground since Rocky fought Drago. You think there's any chance the Hokies are playing them next year in Salt Lake City?

And I can tell you how you can be tested in that situation, but you obviously don't like it when I repeat myself ;)

[waroriole]

Yeah, they played Virginia Tech on the least-neutral ground since Rocky fought Drago. You think there's any chance the Hokies are playing them next year in Salt Lake City?

And I can tell you how you can be tested in that situation, but you obviously don't like it when I repeat myself ;)

Why should someone give them a "fair deal?" They are the ones trying to prove themselves. It's a lot easier to cry in the corner and say it's not fair, than it is to say "anybody, anywhere, any amount of money." Like Florida State did back in the 70's. That is how you come from out of nowhere when you don't play in a good conference. It's not the responsibility of the big powers to say "OK, we'll give you a home and home even though we'll make no money by coming to your place."

[BaltimoreTerp]

Why should someone give them a "fair deal?" They are the ones trying to prove themselves. It's a lot easier to cry in the corner and say it's not fair, than it is to say "anybody, anywhere, any amount of money." Like Florida State did back in the 70's. That is how you come from out of nowhere when you don't play in a good conference. It's not the responsibility of the big powers to say "OK, we'll give you a home and home even though we'll make no money by coming to your place."

They did that for a while. Now they are one of the big boys, but the big boys don't want to play them fair.

You think Florida would demand a two-for-one or single road game from Nebraska or Texas?

All the college football world is doing is showing everyone why their system should be blown up instead of why it is so great. And for those associated with institutions of higher learning, that's just sad.

[CrimsonTribe]

They did that for a while. Now they are one of the big boys, but the big boys don't want to play them fair.

You think Florida would demand a two-for-one or single road game from Nebraska or Texas?

All the college football world is doing is showing everyone why their system should be blown up instead of why it is so great. And for those associated with institutions of higher learning, that's just sad.

You don't seem to understand that they aren't one of the big boys. Their stadium seats something like 35,000. Financially, it's just ridiculous to ask a Florida or Texas or Nebraska or Alabama or whoever to play a home and home against Boise. Like it or not, it's not that these teams are afraid of playing Boise. It's that there's no money in it for them. Remember, the big boys don't need Boise, Boise needs them.

[CrimsonTribe]

I foresee Delaware vs. William and Mary in that championship game.

After the game on Saturday, many WM fans said that Delaware was still the better team.

You may have that distinction so long as we get the W. Fair?

[Pedro Cerrano]

You don't seem to understand that they aren't one of the big boys. Their stadium seats something like 35,000. Financially, it's just ridiculous to ask a Florida or Texas or Nebraska or Alabama or whoever to play a home and home against Boise. Like it or not, it's not that these teams are afraid of playing Boise. It's that there's no money in it for them. Remember, the big boys don't need Boise, Boise needs them.

So why not play Texas one year in Dallas and Boise one year in the Seahawks' stadium?

[waroriole]

So why not play Texas one year in Dallas and Boise one year in the Seahawks' stadium?

According to mapquest, that is an 8 hour drive. Also, even if it were closer, what's to say that Boise is wiling to do that. They are playing Ole Miss next year at Ole Miss without a return trip to Boise. Why settle on Ole Miss when I'm sure some big name team would be willing to give them a one game road trip.

[CrimsonTribe]

So why not play Texas one year in Dallas and Boise one year in the Seahawks' stadium?

Beats me, logistics? I don't make the deals; I just know why they won't do a home-and-home.

[waroriole]

They did that for a while. Now they are one of the big boys, but the big boys don't want to play them fair.



That's BS. The only teams that Boise has played since they started being good are Oregon and Oregon State. Oh wait, they went to Georgia and got shellacked, then decided they didn't want to schedule games like that anymore. That is hardly the Florida St. mentality of anybody, anywhere, any price.

I don't know if they have any plans for it, but they should also look into greatly expanding their stadium if they want the big boys to come to Boise.

[Pedro Cerrano]

That's BS. The only teams that Boise has played since they started being good are Oregon and Oregon State. Oh wait, they went to Georgia and got shellacked, then decided they didn't want to schedule games like that anymore. That is hardly the Florida St. mentality of anybody, anywhere, any price.

I don't know if they have any plans for it, but they should also look into greatly expanding their stadium if they want the big boys to come to Boise.

I agree that Boise State is certainly not a big boy but I'm fairly certain that big name schools won't play there for more than just the fact that their stadium blows. I can imagine a Nick Saban or Mac Brown being absolutely terrified trying to win a game up there.

[Birds of B'more]

You don't seem to understand that they aren't one of the big boys. Their stadium seats something like 35,000. Financially, it's just ridiculous to ask a Florida or Texas or Nebraska or Alabama or whoever to play a home and home against Boise. Like it or not, it's not that these teams are afraid of playing Boise. It's that there's no money in it for them. Remember, the big boys don't need Boise, Boise needs them.

And yet Alabama played a home-and-home series with Duke, the game at Durham played just this season, at a stadium with a listed capacity of just under 34,000. :laughlol:

I see your overall point (no one "owes" Boise St anything), but you walked right into that one.

[Crazysilver03]

You may have that distinction so long as we get the W. Fair?

Heh, I wish we had the W to go along with it.

I think it would be cool if the IAA champion could somehow match up against a team in a bowl, say against the ACC champ.

[Crazysilver03]

And yet Alabama played a home-and-home series with Duke, the game at Durham played just this season, at a stadium with a listed capacity of just under 34,000. :laughlol:

I see your overall point (no one "owes" Boise St anything), but you walked right into that one.

Actually, IIRC, Bama wanted to play at an NFL stadium but Duke didn't want to leave campus.

[Birds of B'more]

Actually, IIRC, Bama wanted to play at an NFL stadium but Duke didn't want to leave campus.

I'm sure they did, but the fact remains that Alabama played a home-and-home with a school that has a stadium capacity of about 34,000. Unless when they did the paperwork the Duke AD got the Alabama AD drunk and he thought he was signing off on a basketball series. :beerchug1:

[waroriole]

I agree that Boise State is certainly not a big boy but I'm fairly certain that big name schools won't play there for more than just the fact that their stadium blows. I can imagine a Nick Saban or Mac Brown being absolutely terrified trying to win a game up there.

Yeah, I can't imagine it would be a place that many teams would want to go regardless of stadium capacity. But, I can also see Boise thinking that they are better off playing the sympathy card and crying every year than they would be to actually go on the road to big names and try to win. They don't play anyone in conference, so they need to schedule 2-3 really tough games every year to get any credibility.

They looked like they might be trying this year, but next year they scheduled Ole Miss, Toledo, Wyoming and Tulsa OOC. Seems to me like they aren't really trying to get tough games.

[square634]

Yeah, I can't imagine it would be a place that many teams would want to go regardless of stadium capacity. But, I can also see Boise thinking that they are better off playing the sympathy card and crying every year than they would be to actually go on the road to big names and try to win. They don't play anyone in conference, so they need to schedule 2-3 really tough games every year to get any credibility.

They looked like they might be trying this year, but next year they scheduled Ole Miss, Toledo, Wyoming and Tulsa OOC. Seems to me like they aren't really trying to get tough games.

I'm not sure how far in advance the schedule is decided, but it could be that the coach knows essentially what he will have in terms of talent each year, and schedules accordingly. The problem for Boise is that even if they schedule 2-3 really tough games, the total strength of schedule will still lag behind. So even then, they'd need a season in which no two BCS conference teams are undefeated.

[waroriole]

I'm not sure how far in advance the schedule is decided, but it could be that the coach knows essentially what he will have in terms of talent each year, and schedules accordingly. The problem for Boise is that even if they schedule 2-3 really tough games, the total strength of schedule will still lag behind. So even then, they'd need a season in which no two BCS conference teams are undefeated.

Yeah, you might be right, depending on the season. However, it wouldn't be as likely that a 1 loss BCS school jumps an unbeaten Boise. Also, it would create alot more credibility with voters.

[CrimsonTribe]

And yet Alabama played a home-and-home series with Duke, the game at Durham played just this season, at a stadium with a listed capacity of just under 34,000. :laughlol:

I see your overall point (no one "owes" Boise St anything), but you walked right into that one.

Yeah, that was definitely an abnormal thing. Duke had the option to play the game in a larger stadium though, but declined. I don't think Alabama expected that. Duke has a history of selling its homegames for cash.


The home team had an option to move the game to a larger, neutral site but chose instead to keep the game in the cozy on-campus stadium. That left a potentially more lucrative plan on the table because NFL stadiums in Atlanta and Charlotte could have accommodated much larger crowds in the return game of a home-and-home series. Alabama won the first meeting 30-14 in 2006.

...

Back in the 1990s, Duke traded the rights to host ACC opponent Florida State to Jacksonville and Orlando for cash effectively selling home games back to the already-superior home team.


http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2010/09/15/1268625/alabama-football-durham-all-abuzz.html

Plus, playing Duke is not like playing Boise. It's like us paying $900K or $1M to San Jose State to come in and take a beating. Big boys will pay for a guaranteed win, but no one is going to pay that to a team that has the chance of knocking you off. If Boise State wants to be treated like a big boy, come in and play and drop the financial demands of the creampuffs.

[CrimsonTribe]

Yeah, I can't imagine it would be a place that many teams would want to go regardless of stadium capacity. But, I can also see Boise thinking that they are better off playing the sympathy card and crying every year than they would be to actually go on the road to big names and try to win. They don't play anyone in conference, so they need to schedule 2-3 really tough games every year to get any credibility.

They looked like they might be trying this year, but next year they scheduled Ole Miss, Toledo, Wyoming and Tulsa OOC. Seems to me like they aren't really trying to get tough games.

They did turn down a 2-for-1 offer from Nebraska starting in 2015.

[waroriole]

They did turn down a 2-for-1 offer from Nebraska starting in 2015.

You will probably know more about this than me, but I read somewhere that they were complaining that Alabama wouldn't play them, but someone from Bama (maybe AD) said they were never contacted by Boise.

[CrimsonTribe]

That's BS. The only teams that Boise has played since they started being good are Oregon and Oregon State. Oh wait, they went to Georgia and got shellacked, then decided they didn't want to schedule games like that anymore. That is hardly the Florida St. mentality of anybody, anywhere, any price.

I don't know if they have any plans for it, but they should also look into greatly expanding their stadium if they want the big boys to come to Boise.

Just did a quick Google search on the FSU-Boise State comparison. This is the first article I found. Here's an excerpt.


To compare Boise State today to Florida State 30 years ago is a joke. In fact, it’s insulting.

Boise Sate got drilled by Georgia in 2005. They beat Oklahoma in a bowl game four years ago. They beat Oregon home and away in 2008 and 2009. They beat Oregon State home and away the last two years. They also split bowl games with TCU the last two years. This year they beat Virginia Tech.

Don’t get me wrong, this is nice work, but at no point did Boise play two tough games back-to-back. Heck, it’s tough to find more than two tough games on their schedule in a given year. But this is where national talking head says, “Well, they can only play who is on their schedule.”

Exactly. Because Boise State is not trying to make the schedule any more difficult than it is.

If Boise State wants to play for the national title they need to stop cherry picking. Suck it up and really be Florida State.

In 1980, Bobby Bowden’s team opened the season in Death Valley on a Saturday night. They beat LSU, 16-0. Then two weeks later they began this little three-game stretch — at Miami (lost 10-9), at No. 3 Nebraska (won 18-14) and at home against No. 4 Pitt (won 36-22, Pitt’s only loss on the way to finishing No. 2 in the country).

Boise State hasn’t played three teams like this in a calendar year, nevermind in successive weeks. The Noles went 10-2 (both losses by a point), rose as high as No. 2 in the polls before finishing at No. 5.

Did the Seminoles rest on their laurels? No.

In 1981, they played arguably the toughest stretch of games in college football history.

After losing in late September at Nebraska (34-14), in the first four weeks of October, FSU played Ohio State, Notre Dame, Pitt and LSU. All on the road! Back-to-back-to-back-to-back. They won three of them (Pitt got revenge 42-14).

Boise State wouldn’t play Nebraska this year. Nebraska offered to come to Boise once, if the Broncos would come to Lincoln twice. Didn’t happen.

Bobby Bowden went 1-1 against Michigan, 3-0 against Ohio State and 4-2 against Nebraska during his time at Florida State. Not one of those 11 games was played in Tallahassee.

So Nebraska offered to do for Boise State what they wouldn’t do for Florida State. Boise State still said no.

Yet we are suppose to believe that Boise State is the 21st century version of Florida State in the early 1980s. When Boise State in 2010 doesn’t even come close to the Seminoles?

http://www.naplesnews.com/news/2010/oct/16/david-moulton-boise-st-fsu-way-back-when-there-no/

[CrimsonTribe]

You will probably know more about this than me, but I read somewhere that they were complaining that Alabama wouldn't play them, but someone from Bama (maybe AD) said they were never contacted by Boise.

I think I heard that too, but it was in the context of a lot of big powers not playing them. Personally, I'd love to play Boise.

I have read somewhere that they've been searching for a 2011 opponent and that no one will play them (prob b/c they are demanding a guarantee of $1M). Alabama is already playing Penn State on the road in 2011 so that's a no go.

[waroriole]

I think I heard that too, but it was in the context of a lot of big powers not playing them. Personally, I'd love to play Boise.

I have read somewhere that they've been searching for a 2011 opponent and that no one will play them (prob b/c they are demanding a guarantee of $1M). Alabama is already playing Penn State on the road in 2011 so that's a no go.

Same here, I'd love for Boise to come to Auburn. But, I could certainly understand why nobody would be willing to go to Boise.

I think they are searching for a 2011 game b/c they are moving to the MWC and they already had Wyoming (MWC member) scheduled as an OOC game.

[square634]

I think I heard that too, but it was in the context of a lot of big powers not playing them. Personally, I'd love to play Boise.

I have read somewhere that they've been searching for a 2011 opponent and that no one will play them (prob b/c they are demanding a guarantee of $1M). Alabama is already playing Penn State on the road in 2011 so that's a no go.

Now that Boise and TCU have gotten so much national play, they have become a good risk as opponents for bigger schools. When the small schools are marginalized and overlooked, there's no reason to play against them. Now that their true talent is probably overrated in the polls and thus computers, beating them becomes an easier way to get a boost in the rankings. But of course, what everything ultimately comes down to is that the system is crap.

[waroriole]

But of course, what everything ultimately comes down to is that the system is crap.

I think we would all agree there. I think a 16 team playoff is way too many ( I would prefer 4 or 6), but if we had one, here is what it would look like right now, with every conference represented:

1. Auburn v. 16. Troy
8. Utah v. 9. Oklahoma
4. TCU v. 13. East Carolina
5. Michigan St. v. 12. Florida State
3. Boise State v. 14. Northern Illinois
6. Missouri v. 11. Ohio State
7. Alabama v. 10. Wisconsin
2. Oregon v. 15. Pittsburgh

It sure would be exciting.

[square634]

I think we would all agree there. I think a 16 team playoff is way too many ( I would prefer 4 or 6), but if we had one, here is what it would look like right now, with every conference represented:

1. Auburn v. 16. Troy
8. Utah v. 9. Oklahoma
4. TCU v. 13. East Carolina
5. Michigan St. v. 12. Florida State
3. Boise State v. 14. Northern Illinois
6. Missouri v. 11. Ohio State
7. Alabama v. 10. Wisconsin
2. Oregon v. 15. Pittsburgh

It sure would be exciting.

Yeah, this would be great. I think the system that will one day be put in place will somehow incorporate a couple of first round byes, in order to protect against the complaints that a playoff system would allow a few teams to mail it in at the end of the season. To me, representing every conference is key, but that would be easier to do if there were 10 conferences instead of 11. It becomes even more difficult to defend if a 12th conference crops up down the line.

[CrimsonTribe]

I think we would all agree there. I think a 16 team playoff is way too many ( I would prefer 4 or 6), but if we had one, here is what it would look like right now, with every conference represented:

1. Auburn v. 16. Troy
8. Utah v. 9. Oklahoma
4. TCU v. 13. East Carolina
5. Michigan St. v. 12. Florida State
3. Boise State v. 14. Northern Illinois
6. Missouri v. 11. Ohio State
7. Alabama v. 10. Wisconsin
2. Oregon v. 15. Pittsburgh

It sure would be exciting.

My problem with a playoff is that it is a logistical pain in the butt. Just dealing with W&M in the FCS playoffs last year was ridiculous. Had they made the Championship game, they would have played in Chattanooga and I would have gone. But you don't find out if that is going to happen until one or two weeks before the game. Then you have to find tickets, a hotel room, and probably a flight. You can book early, banking on them to make it, but a lot of times hotels are booked by the other teams' fans in the playoffs or are nonrefundable. Flights are also mostly nonrefundable. The school wouldn't even put tickets on sale until they knew we were going to make it (we didn't). I can't imagine the mess that would be caused by the much larger, more rabid fanbases of FBS schools.

[square634]

My problem with a playoff is that it is a logistical pain in the butt. Just dealing with W&M in the FCS playoffs last year was ridiculous. Had they made the Championship game, they would have played in Chattanooga and I would have gone. But you don't find out if that is going to happen until one or two weeks before the game. Then you have to find tickets, a hotel room, and probably a flight. You can book early, banking on them to make it, but a lot of times hotels are booked by the other teams' fans in the playoffs or are nonrefundable. Flights are also mostly nonrefundable. The school wouldn't even put tickets on sale until they knew we were going to make it (we didn't). I can't imagine the mess that would be caused by the much larger, more rabid fanbases of FBS schools.

Fans of NFL teams manage it for the Super Bowl.

[CrimsonTribe]

Fans of NFL teams manage it for the Super Bowl.

True. I didn't say I was against it. It's just nerve wracking for me.

[CrimsonTribe]

Heh, I wish we had the W to go along with it.

I think it would be cool if the IAA champion could somehow match up against a team in a bowl, say against the ACC champ.

Yeah, that or the Big East champ. Good shot of winning.

W&M actually plays UNC this weekend. Looking forward to that.

[Birds of B'more]

Yeah, that was definitely an abnormal thing. Duke had the option to play the game in a larger stadium though, but declined. I don't think Alabama expected that. Duke has a history of selling its homegames for cash.



http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/2010/09/15/1268625/alabama-football-durham-all-abuzz.html

Plus, playing Duke is not like playing Boise. It's like us paying $900K or $1M to San Jose State to come in and take a beating. Big boys will pay for a guaranteed win, but no one is going to pay that to a team that has the chance of knocking you off. If Boise State wants to be treated like a big boy, come in and play and drop the financial demands of the creampuffs.

You can also make the point (a valid one) that travelling from Tuscaloosa to Durham to play in a small stadium is much less costly than travelling from Tuscaloosa to Boise and playing in a small stadium. Of course you can also make the point (again, a valid one) that leaving Durham with a victory is a near guarantee, while leaving Boise with one is far less certain.

[Birds of B'more]

I think I heard that too, but it was in the context of a lot of big powers not playing them. Personally, I'd love to play Boise.

I have read somewhere that they've been searching for a 2011 opponent and that no one will play them (prob b/c they are demanding a guarantee of $1M). Alabama is already playing Penn State on the road in 2011 so that's a no go.

A lot of that will depend on what happens with the whole MWC/WAC realignment. If Nevada and Fresno are able to move to the MWC next season with Boise, the Bronco's schedule will be full. If not, they will actually need to schedule two opponents for next season.

[CrimsonTribe]

You can also make the point (a valid one) that travelling from Tuscaloosa to Durham to play in a small stadium is much less costly than travelling from Tuscaloosa to Boise and playing in a small stadium. Of course you can also make the point (again, a valid one) that leaving Durham with a victory is a near guarantee, while leaving Boise with one is far less certain.

Which is why I related that to paying a team like San Jose state $1M to come play a big program, but refusing to do that for Boise. The big programs are willing to pay big or take a financial hit for a guaranteed win, but aren't going to pay that for a team that has a legitimate shot at beating them.

Right now Boise wants to get the benefit of boosting their credibility by playing the big programs AND getting paid like a creampuff. They can't have it both ways.

[Birds of B'more]

Which is why I related that to paying a team like San Jose state $1M to come play a big program, but refusing to do that for Boise. The big programs are willing to pay big or take a financial hit for a guaranteed win, but aren't going to pay that for a team that has a legitimate shot at beating them.

Right now Boise wants to get the benefit of boosting their credibility by playing the big programs AND getting paid like a creampuff. They can't have it both ways.

Thing is, Boise State has bills to pay just like the creampuffs do, so I understand why they want the same payout to travel across the country to play a big program with no return game. And since so few big schools will come to their place, that becomes their only option to get the revenues they need to survive while playing a respectable enough schedule to be taken seriously. But I also understand why the big programs are hesitant to agree to that. Boise is in a bit conundrum. Although they didn't exactly help themselves by going to the MWC, who has a worse TV deal than the WAC despite being a better football conference. I'm sure they were hoping for an automatic BCS bid eventually, but with BYU leaving that becomes less likely. And the Boise-FSU comparison mentioned earlier isn't exactly apples to apples. The landscape of college football was much different 30 years ago.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Which is why I related that to paying a team like San Jose state $1M to come play a big program, but refusing to do that for Boise. The big programs are willing to pay big or take a financial hit for a guaranteed win, but aren't going to pay that for a team that has a legitimate shot at beating them.

Right now Boise wants to get the benefit of boosting their credibility by playing the big programs AND getting paid like a creampuff. They can't have it both ways.

Since it may seem like I'm arguing just to be argumentative (which happens often enough around here) you and waroriole are making some very good points. I may not agree completely with them, but they are valid.

However, what it all comes down to is whether or not Boise is on the same level as these other schools. Considering they are all "Division I-Football Bowl Subdivision" schools and therefore supposed to be on the same level, anything that puts them on a different level is simply wrong.

[CrimsonTribe]

Since it may seem like I'm arguing just to be argumentative (which happens often enough around here) you and waroriole are making some very good points. I may not agree completely with them, but they are valid.

However, what it all comes down to is whether or not Boise is on the same level as these other schools. Considering they are all "Division I-Football Bowl Subdivision" schools and therefore supposed to be on the same level, anything that puts them on a different level is simply wrong.

I agree that the system sucks. I haven't said otherwise. But it is the system we have now and under that system Boise is not deserving of playing in the NCG over an undefeated team from an AQ conference and a few one-loss teams from some of those conferences. Sucks for them, but it is what it is.

[utvolzac]

I'm so sick of hearing about mid-majors crying the blues. They want to be treated "fairly", yet they also want to maintain an unbalanced schedule.

Teams in the SEC, Big 10, Pac 10, Big-12 have brutal conference schedules. Meanwhile Boise State has 2-3 tough games a year and then plays a bunch of cupcakes the rest of the year. It's easy to have a high powered team when you can rest your starters week in week out at halftime cause your blowing out some patsy opponent.

You put Boise State in the SEC and they would be exposed after a few of their starters go down to injury and they have to rely on their depth, like other BCS schools do.

The BCS contract is up for negotiation soon. If the mid-majors want to be taken seriously they should organize and make a case for BCS status. If the WAC and the Mountain West take their best teams and form a 12 team conference they would easily have enough evidence to make a case for BCS status. Especially considering how weak the Big East and ACC have been recently. A consolidated WAC/MW conference is clearly superior to the Big East.

If they do that, I'd have no problem putting them on the same level as the BCS schools, since then they'd be playing a comparable conference schedule. Until then they should get their token spot in a BCS Bowl, if that.

[BaltimoreTerp]

I'm so sick of hearing about mid-majors crying the blues. They want to be treated "fairly", yet they also want to maintain an unbalanced schedule.

Proof?


The BCS contract is up for negotiation soon. If the mid-majors want to be taken seriously they should organize and make a case for BCS status.

They've been trying to do that, but the other conferences don't want to let them in. One of the conferences has to get rated higher than one of the six BSC conferences to replace them.

[ledzepp8]

I'm so sick of hearing about mid-majors crying the blues. They want to be treated "fairly", yet they also want to maintain an unbalanced schedule.

Teams in the SEC, Big 10, Pac 10, Big-12 have brutal conference schedules. Meanwhile Boise State has 2-3 tough games a year and then plays a bunch of cupcakes the rest of the year. It's easy to have a high powered team when you can rest your starters week in week out at halftime cause your blowing out some patsy opponent.

You put Boise State in the SEC and they would be exposed after a few of their starters go down to injury and they have to rely on their depth, like other BCS schools do.

The BCS contract is up for negotiation soon. If the mid-majors want to be taken seriously they should organize and make a case for BCS status. If the WAC and the Mountain West take their best teams and form a 12 team conference they would easily have enough evidence to make a case for BCS status. Especially considering how weak the Big East and ACC have been recently. A consolidated WAC/MW conference is clearly superior to the Big East.

If they do that, I'd have no problem putting them on the same level as the BCS schools, since then they'd be playing a comparable conference schedule. Until then they should get their token spot in a BCS Bowl, if that.

Do you honestly believe that teams like Boise State, TCU, Utah, etc are trying to only play cupcakes? They desperately want to be considered for the "championship game" of the division in which they play in but are being kept out due to reasons beyond their control. Do you think if teams like Alabama, Florida, Auburn, Texas, USC, etc were willing to play them on equal terms that they would not jump at the chance?

[Orioles1954]

I'm so sick of hearing about mid-majors crying the blues. They want to be treated "fairly", yet they also want to maintain an unbalanced schedule.

Teams in the SEC, Big 10, Pac 10, Big-12 have brutal conference schedules. Meanwhile Boise State has 2-3 tough games a year and then plays a bunch of cupcakes the rest of the year. It's easy to have a high powered team when you can rest your starters week in week out at halftime cause your blowing out some patsy opponent.

You put Boise State in the SEC and they would be exposed after a few of their starters go down to injury and they have to rely on their depth, like other BCS schools do.

The BCS contract is up for negotiation soon. If the mid-majors want to be taken seriously they should organize and make a case for BCS status. If the WAC and the Mountain West take their best teams and form a 12 team conference they would easily have enough evidence to make a case for BCS status. Especially considering how weak the Big East and ACC have been recently. A consolidated WAC/MW conference is clearly superior to the Big East.

If they do that, I'd have no problem putting them on the same level as the BCS schools, since then they'd be playing a comparable conference schedule. Until then they should get their token spot in a BCS Bowl, if that.

In most cases you might be accurate. However, Boise State IS a big game school. Every single time they've been put on a national stage they've passed with flying colors.

[waroriole]

Do you honestly believe that teams like Boise State, TCU, Utah, etc are trying to only play cupcakes? They desperately want to be considered for the "championship game" of the division in which they play in but are being kept out due to reasons beyond their control. Do you think if teams like Alabama, Florida, Auburn, Texas, USC, etc were willing to play them on equal terms that they would not jump at the chance?

Why should those teams play them on even terms? They lose money by going to Boise. If Boise is actually interested in sitting at the big boy table then they need to 1.) expand their stadium OR 2.) stop crying and go on the road to play teams

[Birds of B'more]

Why should those teams play them on even terms? They lose money by going to Boise. If Boise is actually interested in sitting at the big boy table then they need to 1.) expand their stadium OR 2.) stop crying and go on the road to play teams

I think they're willing to do that, but most schools don't want to pay them the same money (around $1 million per game) as they do one of the "guaranteed victory" schools. And Boise needs to get that amount in order to pay their bills (and perhaps help expand their stadium).

[waroriole]

I think they're willing to do that, but most schools don't want to pay them the same money (around $1 million per game) as they do one of the "guaranteed victory" schools. And Boise needs to get that amount in order to pay their bills (and perhaps help expand their stadium).

Well, they turned down a 2 for 1 with Nebraska. It seems to me that they are willing to not toughen up their schedule and get an almost guaranteed BCS berth, which pays a good $15M. That way they get the money they need, and get into a BCS game every year, while leaving open the possibility of backing into a NC game. If they play those tough OOC games they risk going undefeated and getting a huge BCS pay day.

[Birds of B'more]

Well, they turned down a 2 for 1 with Nebraska. It seems to me that they are willing to not toughen up their schedule and get an almost guaranteed BCS berth, which pays a good $15M. That way they get the money they need, and get into a BCS game every year, while leaving open the possibility of backing into a NC game. If they play those tough OOC games they risk going undefeated and getting a huge BCS pay day.

They just accepted a 2 for 1 with Michigan St. The first game being in East Lansing next season, but the next 2 games aren't until next decade. Not sure what sort of financial guarantees Boise is getting, but I expect they will get some TV money, since ESPN has already said they will show the game in prime time. Maybe Boise didn't want the 2 games they would have played at Nebraska to be buried on the Big 10 Network.

[Birds of B'more]

Ugly win by the Ducks tonight. Don't be fooled by the final score, they were behind until late in the 3rd Qtr against a bad USC team. I'm thinking the human polls drop them to #2 tomorrow, and combined with Oregon's already poor computer ranking, Boise St could be moving up to the #2 spot in the BCS.

[PaulBako]

Oregon/Boise should be a great NC game. Those are the two best teams in the country.

I don't really mind Auburn since they are not Alabama and not a true powehouse with tose annoying fans and are anti Nike, but I don't think they will win at Alabama.

[Big Mac]

Oregon/Boise should be a great NC game. Those are the two best teams in the country.

I don't really mind Auburn since they are not Alabama and not a true powehouse with tose annoying fans and are anti Nike, but I don't think they will win at Alabama.

If Bama wins out, they will almost surely be in the NC game...

[BaltimoreTerp]

If Bama wins out, they will almost surely be in the NC game...

The best part of that would be destroying the basic BCS-defender argument that every game matters and you have to win your games to make the championship game.

[waroriole]

The best part of that would be destroying the basic BCS-defender argument that every game matters and you have to win your games to make the championship game.

If Bama wins out, they will have the more impressive resume between themselves and Boise or TCU or Utah. Did they lose once? Yes, and they played a schedule that those teams couldn't even dream of playing.

[waroriole]

How did the computers have such a drastic change with Oregon? Last week they were 12th (I think) in the computers, this week they are 2nd.

[Big Mac]

The best part of that would be destroying the basic BCS-defender argument that every game matters and you have to win your games to make the championship game.

Or the best part would be, you know, actually putting the better team in the title game.

If they hypothetically win out, Bama would have wins over: Penn St, Arkansas, Florida, Ole Miss, Tennessee, LSU, Miss St, Auburn, and either Florida/South Carolina

The resume of Boise, TCU or Utah isn't even comparable. Each one of those teams would top out around 8 wins if they played Bama's schedule.

[BaltimoreTerp]

Or the best part would be, you know, actually putting the better team in the title game.

But as has been mentioned ad nauseum, there's no real way of knowing that under the present system.

And since the fallback argument against a playoff system has always been that you have to win your games to put yourself in the position to play for a championship, a one-loss team jumping not one but two undefeated teams would be a complete refutation of that talking point.

Giving more and more ammunition to the pro-playoff crowd.

[Big Mac]

But as has been mentioned ad nauseum, there's no real way of knowing that under the present system.

And since the fallback argument against a playoff system has always been that you have to win your games to put yourself in the position to play for a championship, a one-loss team jumping not one but two undefeated teams would be a complete refutation of that talking point.

Giving more and more ammunition to the pro-playoff crowd.

True, and I am part of the pro-playoff crowd. However, under the current system Bama winning out and jumping Boise and TCU/Utah would be completely justified.

[Birds of B'more]

How did the computers have such a drastic change with Oregon? Last week they were 12th (I think) in the computers, this week they are 2nd.

The aggregate computer ranking for Oregon last week was #8. One of the computers had them at #11, another at #10. To move them all the way up to #2 after a win that I personally wasn't as impressed with as so many other people seemed to be is baffling and just shows that computer rankings should have no role whatsoever in the BCS. Not that we should completely trust human polls either, they are far from infallible and are heavily influenced by personal biases. But each year the system just continues to look worse and worse. Still, it will take a Boise or TCU somehow getting into the NCG over one of the AQ schools before a change is made....and even then I think an actual playoff, at least as we think of it, will be an evolutionary thing more so than something that just all of a sudden happens.

[OregonBird]

There were times when USC was ahead of Oregon but I don't think anyone who was watching the game could really think that the game was ever in any doubt. Oregon's offense is just a thing of beauty. They were just gouging USCs defense on so many plays, both with the run and the pass.

I don't think many pundits were doubting SC's offense but yes their defense is suspect.

Oregon will have a tough time at Cal and Oregon State. I don't think they can run the table but it will be fun to watch.

[Big Mac]

There were times when USC was ahead of Oregon but I don't think anyone who was watching the game could really think that the game was ever in any doubt. Oregon's offense is just a thing of beauty. They were just gouging USCs defense on so many plays, both with the run and the pass.

I don't think many pundits were doubting SC's offense but yes their defense is suspect.

Oregon will have a tough time at Cal and Oregon State. I don't think they can run the table but it will be fun to watch.

Arizona is going to be a huge game for them...

[waroriole]

The resume of Boise, TCU or Utah isn't even comparable. Each one of those teams would top out around 8 wins if they played Bama's schedule.

Not so fast. The problem with these teams is that we just don't know. It could be that they would go 13-0, or 8-4. From what I've seen TCU can compete with anyone, I'm not so sure about Boise. However, if the season ended with Alabama 12-1 and TCU or Boise 12-0, then Alabama would deserve to be in the NCG, IMO. That doesn't mean that they are actually better than TCU or Boise, just that their schedule was much more daunting and they would get the benefit of the doubt.

In a perfect world, we would have a 4 or 6 team playoff to determine a NC.

[OregonBird]

Arizona is going to be a huge game for them...

It will be a big game but its in Eugene, probably the biggest home field advantage in the Pac 10. It will be a good game but one I expect Oregon to win by a few TDs.

[waroriole]

Missouri has the 2nd toughest schedule in the country so far? Really? This is the 2nd toughest?

Sep 4 Illinois Won 23-13
Sep 11 McNeese State Won 50-6
Sep 18 San Diego St. Won 27-24
Sep 25 Miami (Ohio) Won 51-13
Oct 9 Colorado Won 26-0
Oct 16 @Texas A&M Won 30-9
Oct 23 Oklahoma Won 36-27
Oct 30 @Nebraska Lost 17-31

[Birds of B'more]

Arizona is going to be a huge game for them...

It might be huge in terms of gaining in the computer rankings, since Arizona is the only ranked team left on Oregon's schedule. But make no mistake, the Ducks will win that game. The Civil War will be the biggest hurdle for Oregon.

[Birds of B'more]

Missouri has the 2nd toughest schedule in the country so far? Really? This is the 2nd toughest?

Sep 4 Illinois Won 23-13
Sep 11 McNeese State Won 50-6
Sep 18 San Diego St. Won 27-24
Sep 25 Miami (Ohio) Won 51-13
Oct 9 Colorado Won 26-0
Oct 16 @Texas A&M Won 30-9
Oct 23 Oklahoma Won 36-27
Oct 30 @Nebraska Lost 17-31

What's the method of determining strength of schedule? If it's just opponent's record, then sure. That may not be the most accurate way of portraying it, but Oklahoma and Nebraska are both 7-1 and SD State is 6-2. The only team with a losing record on that schedule is Colorado.

[Birds of B'more]

Not so fast. The problem with these teams is that we just don't know. It could be that they would go 13-0, or 8-4. From what I've seen TCU can compete with anyone, I'm not so sure about Boise. However, if the season ended with Alabama 12-1 and TCU or Boise 12-0, then Alabama would deserve to be in the NCG, IMO. That doesn't mean that they are actually better than TCU or Boise, just that their schedule was much more daunting and they would get the benefit of the doubt.

In a perfect world, we would have a 4 or 6 team playoff to determine a NC.

It will be interesting to see next week's computer rankings, because one of TCU or Utah will have just beaten a Top 5 team. If it's Utah, they would likely jump Boise and be #3 next week. Not sure if TCU would jump Auburn or Oregon if they win, but with these damn computers you never know.

[waroriole]

It will be interesting to see next week's computer rankings, because one of TCU or Utah will have just beaten a Top 5 team. If it's Utah, they would likely jump Boise and be #3 next week. Not sure if TCU would jump Auburn or Oregon if they win, but with these damn computers you never know.

Well, TCU is already 3rd in the computers, so there isn't alot of room to move up for them. If Oregon and Auburn both win out, we'll see you for the NC.

[Birds of B'more]

Well, TCU is already 3rd in the computers, so there isn't alot of room to move up for them. If Oregon and Auburn both win out, we'll see you for the NC.

True. But if one or both of Oregon/Auburn lose a game, the TCU/Utah winner could be sitting pretty. A win by one over the other will solidify their position and might help prevent them from being jumped by a 1-loss team.

[CrimsonTribe]

But as has been mentioned ad nauseum, there's no real way of knowing that under the present system.

And since the fallback argument against a playoff system has always been that you have to win your games to put yourself in the position to play for a championship, a one-loss team jumping not one but two undefeated teams would be a complete refutation of that talking point.

Giving more and more ammunition to the pro-playoff crowd.

I don't think you'll find anyone here defending the BCS, but the fact that we don't know who is better under the present system is all the more reason to give the teams with the best resumes the shots at the title.

[Big Mac]

It might be huge in terms of gaining in the computer rankings, since Arizona is the only ranked team left on Oregon's schedule. But make no mistake, the Ducks will win that game. The Civil War will be the biggest hurdle for Oregon.

We'll see...Arizona with a healthy Nick Foles is a damn good team. They will give Oregon all they can handle.

[utvolzac]

I don't think you'll find anyone here defending the BCS, but the fact that we don't know who is better under the present system is all the more reason to give the teams with the best resumes the shots at the title.

Agreed. I'd be in favor of a playoff as well. But until that happens, you can only judge the quality of a team by the resume they have on the field. In college football, all wins aren't created equal. 13-0 in the WAC is not as impressive as 12-1 in the SEC.

Right or wrong, the college football bowl system is pretty entrenched. If mid-majors want to get a chance at a national title under the current system, then they need to adapt to the system. If the top mid-majors would get together under one conference they would have a resume that matches the other BCS conferences. Either that or do what Utah did and play well enough to get invited to a BCS conference.

[Birds of B'more]

So now Boise State goes from playing in no less than the Rose Bowl, with an outside shot at the championship game, to not even winning the WAC. Which means they don't even get to play on their smurf turf in the Humanitarian Bowl. Instead, they'll probably head to beautiful Albuquerque to play in the New Mexico Bowl. I imagine that Bronco kicker is probably feeling about as awful as a human being can right now.

[Majin Buu]

So now Boise State goes from playing in no less than the Rose Bowl, with an outside shot at the championship game, to not even winning the WAC. Which means they don't even get to play on their smurf turf in the Humanitarian Bowl. Instead, they'll probably head to beautiful Albuquerque to play in the New Mexico Bowl. I imagine that Bronco kicker is probably feeling about as awful as a human being can right now.

He's feeling really bad especially after missing two kicks to win it. I think even if Boise escaped with a 1 point win or won in OT they would not get the benefit of doubt from the BCS like Auburn will. Its a shame too, most of the voters who don't watch the non AQ conferences have not seen the programs like Nevada, Fresno, or Hawaii mature into good programs.

[ShaneDawg85]

A lot of people out there are likely thumping their chests at Boise losing, but doing so is: 1. Downright offensive to a team like Nevada, and 2. Overlooking of every single season where teams from BCS conferences have blown their chance by losing to someone else, particularly of inferior quality (USC I'm looking in your general direction, and 2007). Nevada is a good football team, and they came back from a 17 point deficit to beat a team that to that point had a dominant defense and offense.

I'm extremely disappointing that Boise is almost guaranteed not to play in a BCS bowl this season, but you have to give credit to Nevada for not giving in and coming back.

[Burg]

A lot of people out there are likely thumping their chests at Boise losing, but doing so is: 1. Downright offensive to a team like Nevada, and 2. Overlooking of every single season where teams from BCS conferences have blown their chance by losing to someone else, particularly of inferior quality (USC I'm looking in your general direction, and 2007). Nevada is a good football team, and they came back from a 17 point deficit to beat a team that to that point had a dominant defense and offense.

I'm extremely disappointing that Boise is almost guaranteed not to play in a BCS bowl this season, but you have to give credit to Nevada for not giving in and coming back.

Boise State has now played two ranked teams (VT and Nevada). In one, they needed a score with less than a minute to go to win and in the other they lost in OT. In both games, they gave up 30 or more points.

Boise is a good team in a downright awful conference. Had they been forced to play in the SEC (like Auburn) or the PAC-10/Big Ten/Big Twelve they more than likely are a 2-3 loss team.

Can you imagine Boise State going into Alabama and winning? Neither can I.

[Burg]

He's feeling really bad especially after missing two kicks to win it. I think even if Boise escaped with a 1 point win or won in OT they would not get the benefit of doubt from the BCS like Auburn will. Its a shame too, most of the voters who don't watch the non AQ conferences have not seen the programs like Nevada, Fresno, or Hawaii mature into good programs.


Nor should they. I must have missed BSU beating top ten SEC teams on the road in front of 90K.

And Fresno State, Hawaii, and Nevada are not LSU, Alabama, etc. They just aren't.

[waroriole]

And in the "Wow people are stupid" observation of the day. ESPN's poll question is "Does Boise's loss hurt TCU's national title hopes" First of all, how does ESPN think that is possible. Second, 39% of the respondents think that it does hurt TCU. Huh?:confused:

[Majin Buu]

Nor should they. I must have missed BSU beating top ten SEC teams on the road in front of 90K.

And Fresno State, Hawaii, and Nevada are not LSU, Alabama, etc. They just aren't.

The truth is, no one today deserves the benefit of the doubt. Fresno State, Hawaii, and Nevada may not be Alabama, LSU, or Auburn etc.,but Alabama, Nebraska, and especially Notre Dame are not the programs they were from the dynasty years either due to reductions in scholarships, television etc. That is what the power conferences are afraid of. Of course, we won't know who is really the best until it is settled in a "real" playoff.

[Burg]

The truth is, no one today deserves the benefit of the doubt. Fresno State, Hawaii, and Nevada may not be Alabama, LSU, or Auburn etc.,but Alabama, Nebraska, and especially Notre Dame are not the programs they were from the dynasty years either due to reductions in scholarships, television etc. That is what the power conferences are afraid of. Of course, we won't know who is really the best until it is settled in a "real" playoff.


No they aren't. But they are still head and shoulders above Fresno State, Nevada, and Hawaii. Well, not Notre Dame, but Bama and LSU certainly are.

[Majin Buu]

No they aren't. But they are still head and shoulders above Fresno State, Nevada, and Hawaii. Well, not Notre Dame, but Bama and LSU certainly are.

I'll agree with you that they are better, but I can't give much credence to it unless they do it on the field. Just like Boise State must prove they are a top ten program on the field; programs like Bama and LSU have to prove they are better than the upstarts by beating them. Of course we won't see that either since the bowl tie-ins for all of the lower tier bowls ensure mostly bad match ups.

[Birds of B'more]

I'll agree with you that they are better, but I can't give much credence to it unless they do it on the field. Just like Boise State must prove they are a top ten program on the field; programs like Bama and LSU have to prove they are better than the upstarts by beating them. Of course we won't see that either since the bowl tie-ins for all of the lower tier bowls ensure mostly bad match ups.

That's my issue. Boise St played their way out of the NC and BCS Bowl last night, and I don't think anyone can argue that at all. But they are still deserving of a much better bowl game than a middling Mountain West team in New Mexico. I'd love to see Boise play Alabama in something like the Capital One Bowl, or Nevada play Nebraska in the Cotton Bowl. As much as I want a playoff, I do love me some college bowl season....but enough of these conference tie-ins for every bowl game that don't create the best matchups. This is the one opportunity to put some great matchups on the field, and best of all for the powers-that-be, it ought to create more money for the bowls, the schools and ESPN.

[Majin Buu]

That's my issue. Boise St played their way out of the NC and BCS Bowl last night, and I don't think anyone can argue that at all. But they are still deserving of a much better bowl game than a middling Mountain West team in New Mexico. I'd love to see Boise play Alabama in something like the Capital One Bowl, or Nevada play Nebraska in the Cotton Bowl. As much as I want a playoff, I do love me some college bowl season....but enough of these conference tie-ins for every bowl game that don't create the best matchups. This is the one opportunity to put some great matchups on the field, and best of all for the powers-that-be, it ought to create more money for the bowls, the schools and ESPN.

That's all I am saying. If you are Bama and LSU, why should we have to wait five years to put Boise St or Nevada on the schedule. Why can't we do it now in the bowl game. If you say you are the best, go take care of business on the field. Thats what I want to see. The bowl match ups are boring now. They are mostly Power Conference vs. Power Conference and Non AQ vs. Non AQ.

[waroriole]

I'll agree with you that they are better, but I can't give much credence to it unless they do it on the field. Just like Boise State must prove they are a top ten program on the field; programs like Bama and LSU have to prove they are better than the upstarts by beating them. Of course we won't see that either since the bowl tie-ins for all of the lower tier bowls ensure mostly bad match ups.

I disagree with this. If you want to be the man, you have to beat the man. It doesn't work the other way around. The onus is on the Boise's of the world to go on the road (like Penn St. and Florida St. used to do) and prove that you're a force. Teams like Bama and LSU prove their worth with games against teams like Auburn, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Bama, Arkansas etc.

[Majin Buu]

I disagree with this. If you want to be the man, you have to beat the man. It doesn't work the other way around. The onus is on the Boise's of the world to go on the road (like Penn St. and Florida St. used to do) and prove that you're a force. Teams like Bama and LSU prove their worth with games against teams like Auburn, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Bama, Arkansas etc.

I know, I know, Ric Flair did say that, but great champions like Flair took on all challengers. Boise State has beaten Oregon, Oklahoma, TCU, and VT in the past few years. I can't buy that Fresno State, Nevada, and Hawaii are can't stay with some of the programs in the power conferences when they don't really play. The SEC guys "say" they are the best out there and the WAC/MWC guys "say" we are just as good. I say show me. You remember the 92' Sugar Bowl when Alabama play Miami?

[waroriole]

I know, I know, Ric Flair did say that, but great champions like Flair took on all challengers. Boise State has beaten Oregon, Oklahoma, TCU, and VT in the past few years. I can't buy that Fresno State, Nevada, and Hawaii are can't stay with some of the programs in the power conferences when they don't really play. The SEC guys "say" they are the best out there and the WAC/MWC guys "say" we are just as good. I say show me. You remember the 92' Sugar Bowl when Alabama play Miami?

The difference between the SEC and the MWC/Whoever is that the SEC proves it on the field. Four straight national champions.

[Majin Buu]

The difference between the SEC and the MWC/Whoever is that the SEC proves it on the field. Four straight national champions.

A BCS National Championship that is the equivalent of the Million Dollar man's million dollar belt. Only those who have enough money can play. Look, I'm not saying the SEC isn't good, all I am saying is national championships should be decided via a playoff. Okay, you are obviously an SEC guy, In 2004 when Auburn went 12-0 but didn't at least win the AP "national championship" was that fair? Auburn placed third in the popularity contest with USC and Oklahoma despite winning the toughest division in college football. That's why we need a playoff.

[Birds of B'more]

I disagree with this. If you want to be the man, you have to beat the man. It doesn't work the other way around. The onus is on the Boise's of the world to go on the road (like Penn St. and Florida St. used to do) and prove that you're a force. Teams like Bama and LSU prove their worth with games against teams like Auburn, Florida, Georgia, LSU, Bama, Arkansas etc.

And I think bowl season is a perfect time to do that. Screw these conference tie-ins that put too many 7-5 or 6-6 teams in what should be good games. Pick Boise to play in a bowl against one of the better teams from the SEC or Big 10 or Big 12....and let's start settling this once and for all. Based on their two Fiesta Bowl appearances Boise St fans seem to travel very well, so ticket sales for the bowl committees shouldn't be an issue. And casual fans of college football will want to watch just to see if they are for real, so the TV ratings should be there as well.

[BaltimoreTerp]

I know, I know, Ric Flair did say that, but great champions like Flair took on all challengers. Boise State has beaten Oregon, Oklahoma, TCU, and VT in the past few years. I can't buy that Fresno State, Nevada, and Hawaii are can't stay with some of the programs in the power conferences when they don't really play. The SEC guys "say" they are the best out there and the WAC/MWC guys "say" we are just as good. I say show me. You remember the 92' Sugar Bowl when Alabama play Miami?

What exactly are we remembering?

[Birds of B'more]

What exactly are we remembering?

I think the point is that Alabama was a huge underdog in that game and wound up spanking Miami pretty good. Not sure that's entirely germane to the discussion but I guess I can see a somewhat of a correlation.

[Majin Buu]

What exactly are we remembering?

You remember the swagger the Miami players had before the game? Check out some of the interviews ESPN had with some of the Miami players. Everyone was ready to crown Miami national champion before they even played a down, but Alabama completely dominated Miami in that game. I understand that most SEC fans have a swagger about their league, but the truth is there is more parody this year.

[BaltimoreTerp]

You remember the swagger the Miami players had before the game? Check out some of the interviews ESPN had with some of the Miami players. Everyone was ready to crown Miami national champion before they even played a down, but Alabama completely dominated Miami in that game. I understand that most SEC fans have a swagger about their league, but the truth is there is more parody this year.

I gotcha. I misread what you were saying and thought you were arguing the opposite. So I agree :p

And not to be That Guy, but as appropriate as that word is for what college football has become, I believe you mean "parity" :)

[Majin Buu]

I gotcha. I misread what you were saying and thought you were arguing the opposite. So I agree :p

And not to be That Guy, but as appropriate as that word is for what college football has become, I believe you mean "parity" :)

My mistake, I've had a few too many beers today if you know what I mean ;)

[waroriole]

A BCS National Championship that is the equivalent of the Million Dollar man's million dollar belt. Only those who have enough money can play. Look, I'm not saying the SEC isn't good, all I am saying is national championships should be decided via a playoff. Okay, you are obviously an SEC guy, In 2004 when Auburn went 12-0 but didn't at least win the AP "national championship" was that fair? Auburn placed third in the popularity contest with USC and Oklahoma despite winning the toughest division in college football. That's why we need a playoff.

Great analogy. I agree that the NC should be decided with a playoff. My only problem is determining how many teams get in. I think the 16 team format is way over-inclusive. Some years, the BCS formula is exactly what you need. Perhaps this is one of those years. Some year, a four team playoff would be great, or a 6, or an 8.

[Majin Buu]

Great analogy. I agree that the NC should be decided with a playoff. My only problem is determining how many teams get in. I think the 16 team format is way over-inclusive. Some years, the BCS formula is exactly what you need. Perhaps this is one of those years. Some year, a four team playoff would be great, or a 6, or an 8.

Agreed. 16 would be too much. Keeping it simple, I'll take the four team playoff.
Maybe a Boise State and TCU wouldn't both make it, but at least one would get a shot to prove it on the field. It also serves as a buffer against those who play a weak schedule (BYU 84'). You would have to at least play two worthwhile games if you want to be NC. It also can keep a 1 loss power conference school in the discussion.