Thoughts on Boise State

[91blue14]

they play a bunch of nobodies not even relevant to an sec or bcs conference. they could compete for one game with anybody but could not survive conference play week in and out.

[boilermaker]

Simply the BEST!

[ManitouDan]

boise is setting at # 3 with Auburn having to play bama , and then also play the SEC champ game should they beat bama. all the while BSU is beating/playing NOBODY ........ total fraud. anyone who takes up for or supports he BCS is just as big a FRAUD MD

[LoganElm_grad09]

I agree with all of the said points, but Boise has been obliterating all of those bad teams (the best defensive effort against BSU was 48 points, the best offensive effort got 14). Va. Tech lost by 3 to BSU at a "neutral site" (wink wink nod nod) and took out Oregon State by 13 on the smurf turf.

Give them their shot, if they blow it, the computers were right.

[The General]

Boise State is a very good football team up front on both sides of the ball. 3 Outstanding receivers and 2 game-changing running backs. An outstanding college QB. They scheme it up so well and have tremendous coaches,even with all the attrition of losing guys to places like the SEC. No,they wouldnt go unblemished in the SEC in a normal year or even the Big 12. But who does?..... ..Especially in the SEC. Regardless of their schedule,they are for real and have been for a few years. The BCS has its downfalls. No question about that.I would like to see 11 game regular season. Then an 8 team playoff.14 games. Hell,some teams play that many anyways ..With the playoff,you would sure see some interesting matchups. Matchups mean so much but the cream would usually rise to the top..imo

[Hoggy]

If Boise wins out..and they more than likely will, the will be playing in the National Championship!

It would be hard for the BCS to snub them two years in a row.

[ACCBiggz]

Been awhile since I've been in here and a few things...

I think Boise State shouldve tried to make a run to get into the pac 10 they'd be a btter fit than Colorado an even so Boise State couldve tried to join the Big 12 traveling wise wouldnt be that bad for any of the teams, I think Boise wants to stay in a softer conference so they can continue to shine.

1. Boise State is nowhere near as good a fit for the Pac-10 than Colorado. Colorado was the MAIN objective for the Pac-10 over every other school mentioned (Texas/OU included) during that firestorm. Academics and media market were the main reasons and they obliterate Boise State when it comes to down to that sort of thing. And their total athletic department adds a lot more than simply Boise football.

2. The inane notion that Boise is wanting to play softer competition or that they are ducking people is lunacy and hatred because of the media storm they create. Plain and simple. And trust me, I'm no Boise advocate, but statements like that are simply ignorant. Furthermore, it is almost always the conference that leaks out they are looking at specific schools and not vice versa, so there is none of the "Boise should've tried..." talk to be had.

boise is setting at # 3 with Auburn having to play bama , and then also play the SEC champ game should they beat bama. all the while BSU is beating/playing NOBODY ........ total fraud. anyone who takes up for or supports he BCS is just as big a FRAUD MD

Umm, sorry, this is what kills the me about the perception of the BCS. People throw around words like sham and fraud without knowledge of the system. And I say that to you because your argument contradicts itself. Because Boise is HURT in the BCS for their schedule. As BCS "experts" from every media outlet has been saying, and ignored by analysts and fans, is that the computer heavily favors strength of schedule and it's why Boise gets jumped and would be jumped by BCS schools with one loss. 2/3 of the BCS are HUMAN polls and that's something that helps Boise, the computers are the ones dropping Boise. And, if Alabama has one loss and beats Auburn and wins the SEC title game they would without question jump to the number two slot in the BCS.





Bottom line is that Boise State is a very good football team. What makes them dangerous is the coaching staff. They are one of the absolute best gameplanning crews in college football today and their team is extremely versatile. They can beat you in the trenches (don't kid yourself, if you've actually watched them you know how physical they are) or they can finesse you. Whatever the team's particular weakness is, Boise CAN exploit it.

The road to the National Championship for Boise starts with the Human polls. They have to be at least #2 in both polls to have a chance. Even then they have to have something like Auburn beating Alabama and losing in the SEC title game, and potentially TCU to lose (or simply Utah losing prior to the TCU game). I do think Boise State would eek out over Michigan State and/or Missouri however, or at least Michigan State. Partly because MSU is hurt by not playing Ohio State (which they would be an underdog in anyway). At least Missouri would get an extra game in a championship game against a ranked opponent to add on to their record.

If they get there or not doesn't matter to me because of their schedule, but unlike years past, I wouldn't argue them being in this season. Nearly every conference is down and Boise has shown me in their games all season long they are just as good as anyone else on any given day. They are very balanced on both sides of the ball and physical - the character of championship teams. It won't matter if they get in or get left out, some analysts on ESPN and elsewhere will bark that they got screwed or someone else got screwed because that's what they get paid to do - and sadly the public listens and then starts their uproar based on that alone despite not really knowing what they are talking about... just taking their word for it. Oregon, Boise, Auburn, Alabama have shown me they are the four most impressive teams this season - and as long as they keep winning, any two of those teams are deserving and would make for a great national champion (Auburn/Alabama should be an eliminator as mentioned previously). But I don't think anyone this season is screwed if they get "left out" because everyone has shown weaknesses and unlike years past that we are used to watching there is no dominant team in the NCAA this season.

[JChipwood]

^^ Well said..........

[The General]

Boise State is one outstanding football team...Whoever discounts this as fact is an idiot...They could win this thing. Oregon plays so fast and so precise..Their tempo is unlike anyone elses...If some team with athletes and the coaching to disrupt them somewhat throughout the game and they cant do anything and every thing they want at their speed,they could be knocked off....USC..AND Monte Kiffin anyone?.. Auburn is so much fun....with the nations most outstanding and game-changing offensive player..But realistically,they could lose 3 out of their next 4.At Mississippi and also the nations(at this time best 3-4 squad)Georgia to play,along with the Tide...geez...How can you not love the SEC?..unreal....And Alabama....Greg McCelroy has developed into a hell of a QB.....AND THEY WANT TO THROW IT...and they can..with Julio and the rest of their talented guys...But if Coach finally says "All right. I have seen enough" and decides to emphasize powering people with their run game with Richardson and Ingram..look out...If they win out THEY WILL be in the game and rightfully so.And if you are smart you will not forget about TCU...Very solid and very capable of beating anyone.As is Utah.Going to be fun and interesting to see how this plays out.

[seofan_via_dublin]

And if there was a playoff, this weekends game would lose all the appeal they have now.

I'm for a better system, but not one that relegates the regular season to a lower intensity level.

[Charge]

And if there was a playoff, this weekends game would lose all the appeal they have now.

I'm for a better system, but not one that relegates the regular season to a lower intensity level.

I am for a 10 team playoff, I say take the top 10 teams in the BCS and have playoff. Pair them by record such as 1 against 10, this would make regular season games mean a lot. Ohio State is 11 right know and will have to win out to get in top 10, so regular season games would still mean a lot, it would just give a team that played in a tough conference and had 1 bad game a chance to prove that it was just a bad game. Plus we could actually have a true champ.

[ACCBiggz]

I am for a 10 team playoff

Absolutely not, that rewards mediocrity at the highest level. It's why I hate a playoff idea... reward excellence, not mediocrity.

Plus we could actually have a true champ.

Alabama not a true champ? Statements like this make no sense to me. Just like, "determine it on the field," it is determined on the field throughout the whole season and then the top two teams play for it all. The regular season works like a tournament, for the most part, anyway. If you lose you are virtually out of the race... or did I miss that day in class when losing in a tournament was explained. The current system rewards excellence because you don't just have to be good when it finishes and be the hottest team entering the playoffs, you have to excel from the very first week and not have a let down along the way.

[seofan_via_dublin]

And that my friends is the cold hard truth.

Very well said, and basically why I don't want a playoff

[ManitouDan]

I will not apologize for the 1st thought popping in my mind about a OSU fan saying " i don't want a playoff"

Hell no , If I could cruise thru that mediocre conference every year and play 1 medium OOC tough game per year and still get to the big show I'd say no to a playoff also.

how no one doesn't want to see the best play the best escapes me. the best 4 -6 teams should play it out. until then # 1 is determined by a computer. programmed by humans. MD

[seofan_via_dublin]

We get to see teams play all season, when have we not had the top two teams in the country play for the title in the end?

[Charge]

Who was the true champ in 2003? How about the 2008 Utah team that went undefeated and spanked bama in the Sugar bowl?My point is that no other sport has an unclear champion. The 1998 Ohio State team was best team in the country, but because of a 24-28 loss to Mich St in the regular season gave it to Tennessee. Now does it all make sense, it doesn't make sense not to have a playoff, except for the big money these bowl games give the universities.

[ACCBiggz]

It's hilarious when people bring up the money argument, like the media companies and networks won't make just as much if not more from a playoff... hmmm, now why would they push for a playoff that would try and draw more and more ratings to their networks? Baffling I tell you. LOL. People are gullible and the media are a huge driving force into people's opinions.

I will not apologize for the 1st thought popping in my mind about a OSU fan saying " i don't want a playoff"

Not sure if you were addressing me, but I'm not an OSU fan. Take your hate elsewhere.

My point is that no other sport has an unclear champion.

My only point that I made is that a tournament in today's college football climate rewards mediocrity. People complain about teams scheduling "cupcake" games as it is, what do you think will happen with a playoff? Furthermore, the BCS conferences are not going to let it go based on a ranking system as they'll claim their "conference champion" earns the right for winning the conference. No system is perfect, but I think what we have now is close to being as best we can get. I don't want an 8+ team tournament with multiple teams from the same conference and so forth. The current format rewards teams for winning throughout the season.

What is my ideal system? I've always been in favor of a +1 system on a year-by-year basis. It's an unrealistic goal, but easily doable. Reason being is that in most years we have a clear #1 and #2, but in some years a third team (2004 Auburn) have a legitimate claim to the #2 spot. There is a full month before the national championship and if there were some clear cut rules made they could make the decision hours after the completion of the last conference championship game. If Team A is within X points of Team B or if #3 is undefeated also... something, I've not got that detailed into this plan but the gist of it is there. This would give everyone in the BCS bowls ample time to determine who is playing where and for the teams to prepare. With the full month between the end of the season and the big bowl games there is no reason why it could not be done as there is plenty of time. But again, unrealistic expectation - so while I wouldn't like a +1 system I would definitely settle for it over a full playoff that rewards mediocrity and teams that should not have a chance to say they are a national champion.

[seofan_via_dublin]

The Buckeyes should have won the game against MSU in 98.
Tennessee still had to beat a very good FSU team that year, and UT earned the title on the field.

Sure the Buckeyes had a great team in 98, but they should have won all their games, if they would have they would have had the shot at the title.

Utah can complain all they want, are they in a BCS conference, NO.
They are changing that, so now they may have an argument.

Boise, Utah, TCU, these teams are good, nobody is saying they are not.
But, until they join a major conference, and have to endure the schedule that comes along with it,
then they void any claim to a title.
Boise and TCU have had their chances to petition the Big 12, Pac 10, or any other conference,
they have chosen not to.

If you start a playoff, the conferences are never going to go along if they don't have an inclusion for all the conference winners.
They won't agree to a plan that breaks up the current money factory that is the bowls, without having a playoff that guarentees a spot for each conference champion.

So say we do an 8 team playoff. You have 6 conference champions and the best two teams that are not conference champs.
Teams like Boise, TCU, Utah, Notre Dame, or any other non-AQ school would be part of the pool that the other 2 spots go to.

Using this system and the BCS rankings from week 15 to determine seedings for last years championship would have given us a playoff that would look like this.

Bama vs. Georgia Tech
Texas vs. Ohio State
Cincinnati vs Oregon
TCU vs. Florida

second round
Bama vs TCU/Florida winner
OSU/Texas winner vs. Cincinnati/Oregon winner

This would have made for good TV, but in the end Bama still wins the title.

[ACCBiggz]

So say we do an 8 team playoff. You have 6 conference champions and the best two teams that are not conference champs.
Teams like Boise, TCU, Utah, Notre Dame, or any other non-AQ school would be part of the pool that the other 2 spots go to.

And let's take this one step further using the rankings from 2008. In 2009 as you pointed out only TCU gets in (who btw for all you BCS haters saying they keep out non-AQ schools had Texas lost TCU would have jumped to #2 and played for the national championship)...

(Florida and Oklahoma were #1 and #2 in the BCS and played for the national championship)
ACC Champion: Virginia Tech (9-4)
Big East Champion: Cincinnati (11-2)
Big Ten Champion: Penn State (11-1)
Big XII Champion: Oklahoma (12-1)
Pac-10 Champion: USC (11-1)
SEC Champion: Florida (12-1)

So who are the two "at-large" teams? Boise, TCU, Utah, etc? As with most years, NO... the two highest rated teams that would get those two bids: Texas and Alabama who were ranked #3 and #4 respectively. So even in this system we would hear moans about them getting left out in the majority of years. It's how it is. Believe it or not, as long as they play good out of conference like they've been doing and trying the BCS system is just as if not easier to get them to the national championship because of how the rankings work and the voting being 2/3 human.

2007 at-large: Georgia and Missouri
2006 at-large: Michigan and LSU
2005 at-large: Ohio State and Oregon
2004 at-large: Texas and California

I'll stop there as my point is made, but gee, look at all those non-AQ schools getting into that playoff... looks strangely like teams that didn't win their conference during the regular season to begin with (I will edit here that the 2007 Texas team was shafted by the Big XII tie-breaker which they have henceforth fixed due to that misstep, but again that's the fault of the conference itself and not the BCS).