Rockerbraves Posted November 4, 2009 Share Posted November 4, 2009 Little Boise set a New stadium record for attendance 34,127 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KICK A$$ BLASTER Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Little Boise set a New stadium record for attendance 34,127 That's all the place holds. Plans are in place to move the seating capacity up to 40,000 in a few years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Is anyone else out there hoping that somehow little BSU and LSU meet up in January? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprofessor Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 Is anyone else out there hoping that somehow little BSU and LSU meet up in January? I would love that but unfortunately LSU won't have the resume to be able to play the mighty Bronco's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted November 5, 2009 Share Posted November 5, 2009 I would love that but unfortunately LSU won't have the resume to be able to play the mighty Bronco's I was actually thinking of how it might happen. LSU needs to beat Bama this week to get one of the two SEC BCS bids. Then, they'd likely have to lose to FL in the SEC title game. Otherwise, there's a pretty good chance they play in the BCS title game. Then, of course, BSU needs to earn an at large which may not even require finishing ahead of TCU since only the SEC is a shoe in to send two teams. Certainly the Big 12, Big East, ACC, are only getting 1. It's highly unlikely the Big 10 gets 2. It wouldn't be a shocker if the USC and OU get one but hardly a shoe-in. So that opens up the door for both. Then, of course, the Sugar Bowl needs to be willing to risk having an SEC team lose to a small school yet again. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted November 7, 2009 Share Posted November 7, 2009 not that good- still an impressive W over Oregon but these kids change and improve so much from the start of the season. Oregon beats them easily now- and so do the FLA,Bama, Texas, Cincy, TCU, GTech, USC, etc of the world. great program but I really wasn't impressed with what I saw last night on a national-level Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprofessor Posted November 7, 2009 Share Posted November 7, 2009 not that good- still an impressive W over Oregon but these kids change and improve so much from the start of the season. Oregon beats them easily now- and so do the FLA,Bama, Texas, Cincy, TCU, GTech, USC, etc of the world. great program but I really wasn't impressed with what I saw last night on a national-level I disagree that Oregon would beat Boise St easily now. It's difficult to maintain the level of intensity week after week especially going against lower tier teams. I think Boise St. would beat Oregon at a neutral site. Hell, look at what Stanford is doing to them today. Just shows all of us again what a great conference the Pac-10 is. Let's not forget that Boise St controlled that game in Boise this year and absolutely crushed Oregon in Eugene last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wildcat2334 Posted November 7, 2009 Share Posted November 7, 2009 I disagree that Oregon would beat Boise St easily now. It's difficult to maintain the level of intensity week after week especially going against lower tier teams. I think Boise St. would beat Oregon at a neutral site. Hell, look at what Stanford is doing to them today. Just shows all of us again what a great conference the Pac-10 is. Let's not forget that Boise St controlled that game in Boise this year and absolutely crushed Oregon in Eugene last year. that is fine- I don't think there is any question Oregon (even while losing to Stanford) looks like a much better team at this point in the season - but it doesn't necessarily matter what we think. I just watched the LA Tech game last night and Boise St. looked like a solid mid-major and nothing more, certainly not a top 10 team. Stanford is a solid ballclub, and there is a ton of time left and it is only a 10 point game.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted November 7, 2009 Share Posted November 7, 2009 I disagree that Oregon would beat Boise St easily now. It's difficult to maintain the level of intensity week after week especially going against lower tier teams. I think Boise St. would beat Oregon at a neutral site. Hell, look at what Stanford is doing to them today. Just shows all of us again what a great conference the Pac-10 is. Let's not forget that Boise St controlled that game in Boise this year and absolutely crushed Oregon in Eugene last year. xactly Everyone has a bad night, and if your bad night results in a 10 pt win, then I think you get a pass. Now, if Boise was just eking by mediocre team after mediocre team, then you have to start questioning them. Additionally, (given, I didn't see the game and only checked the box score) but it does look like BSU got out to a nice half time lead and then sort of went to sleep. So maybe it's actually just a bad half. Again, that's just coming from the box score. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bonedaddies Posted November 7, 2009 Share Posted November 7, 2009 xactly Everyone has a bad night, and if your bad night results in a 10 pt win, then I think you get a pass. Now, if Boise was just eking by mediocre team after mediocre team, then you have to start questioning them. Additionally, (given, I didn't see the game and only checked the box score) but it does look like BSU got out to a nice half time lead and then sort of went to sleep. So maybe it's actually just a bad half. Again, that's just coming from the box score. I did watch the game and am still wondering why with under 10 mins in the game after a TD to go up 8, BSU went for 2 to go up 10 vs. 9, kicking the PAT puts it at a 2 score game, but they risked a 2-pt conversion to go up 10??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted November 7, 2009 Share Posted November 7, 2009 I did watch the game and am still wondering why with under 10 mins in the game after a TD to go up 8, BSU went for 2 to go up 10 vs. 9, kicking the PAT puts it at a 2 score game, but they risked a 2-pt conversion to go up 10??? The number of times guys go for 2 continues to baffle me. Unless 1) you're completely desperate or 2) you are literally at a stage of the game where there may be one or two more possessions remaining, it almost never makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted November 8, 2009 Share Posted November 8, 2009 I would love that but unfortunately LSU won't have the resume to be able to play the mighty Bronco's Guess we'll find out this upcoming weekend if LSU can hang with Boise since the Tigers will be playing the only common opponent LA Tech on Saturday. Didn't watch the Boise vs Tech game, but based on the final score LSU better quickly get over their lost vs the Tide. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameltosis Posted November 9, 2009 Share Posted November 9, 2009 I would want no part of Boise State. Its a no win situation. If you destroy them its because they're Little Boise State. If you loose you become OU from a couple of years ago. No thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 I would want no part of Boise State. Its a no win situation. If you destroy them its because they're Little Boise State. If you loose you become OU from a couple of years ago. No thanks. That's why, with a few exceptions, the big boys either take on the big boys, or creampuffs. Just look at Texas and Florida's non-conference slate this year, as evidence of that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 That's why, with a few exceptions, the big boys either take on the big boys, or creampuffs. Just look at Texas and Florida's non-conference slate this year, as evidence of that. Yea, Florida's out of conference sux. However, there was no way to know that FSU would be so down. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 Yea, Florida's out of conference sux. However, there was no way to know that FSU would be so down. Very true, and there is zero excuse for Texas. They don't even have another BCS school on their schedule this year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted November 10, 2009 Share Posted November 10, 2009 I would want no part of Boise State. Its a no win situation. If you destroy them its because they're Little Boise State. If you loose you become OU from a couple of years ago. No thanks. I think that notion has gone the way of Gonzaga being little Gonzaga in hoops. BSU has been goon long enough now that I don't think it's such a no-win situation for teams any more. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigrocks Posted November 11, 2009 Share Posted November 11, 2009 In a game that really meant something, i.e. National Championship game... Boise State would get beat by 2 or 3 TDs to the elite in the SEC or Big 12. I know, I know... Boise State surpised OU in a bowl game a few years ago and there are those who will point to Utah's thrashing of Alabama in the Sugar Bowl last year as proof the lower tiered conferences can stand up to the big boys. But neither of those games meant anything to OU or Bama. Let's think about that Sugar Bowl game logically. In its previous game (SEC Championship), Bama was leading Florida (the eventual national champ) in the 4th quarter, but ending up losing. Of course Alabama was down after that. The Sugar Bowl meant nothing to them. Was it right for them to feel that way? Of course not.... it was a game they should have put their all into. On the other hand, those bowl games meant everything to Boise and Utah as it was their chance to show what they had on the national stage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GWPFFL BrianW Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 (edited) In a game that really meant something, i.e. National Championship game... Boise State would get beat by 2 or 3 TDs to the elite in the SEC or Big 12. I know, I know... Boise State surpised OU in a bowl game a few years ago and there are those who will point to Utah's thrashing of Alabama in the Sugar Bowl last year as proof the lower tiered conferences can stand up to the big boys. But neither of those games meant anything to OU or Bama. Let's think about that Sugar Bowl game logically. In its previous game (SEC Championship), Bama was leading Florida (the eventual national champ) in the 4th quarter, but ending up losing. Of course Alabama was down after that. The Sugar Bowl meant nothing to them. Was it right for them to feel that way? Of course not.... it was a game they should have put their all into. On the other hand, those bowl games meant everything to Boise and Utah as it was their chance to show what they had on the national stage. Only an Alabama or Oklahoma fan would feel that way though, and it's convenient to say after the fact. If that can make Tide and Sooner fans feel better about the result at night, then more power to them. Very convenient indeed. Edit to add: If the result went the other way, Alabama fans would be hooting and hollering like nobodies business, hell they would probably claim another national title for the win. Edited November 12, 2009 by GWPFFL BrianW Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 To a degree, I agree with Bigrocks. I feel certain that going to the Sugar Bowl was not what Alabama wanted last year. However, making it to the Sugar Bowl was HUGH for Utah. I think underestimating the motivation of the players concerned, particularly at the college level, is an error. It does not excuse Alabama's loss, but I certainly believe that in part, it explains it. I wonder what the outcome might have been if the Sugar Bowl match up was a first round playoff game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 Let's think about that Sugar Bowl game logically. In its previous game (SEC Championship), Bama was leading Florida (the eventual national champ) in the 4th quarter, but ending up losing. Of course Alabama was down after that. The Sugar Bowl meant nothing to them. Was it right for them to feel that way? Of course not.... it was a game they should have put their all into. On the other hand, those bowl games meant everything to Boise and Utah as it was their chance to show what they had on the national stage. Perhaps this is why the Sugar Bowl does not normally take the SEC Championship Game LOSER. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 In a game that really meant something, i.e. National Championship game... Boise State would get beat by 2 or 3 TDs to the elite in the SEC or Big 12. I know, I know... Boise State surpised OU in a bowl game a few years ago and there are those who will point to Utah's thrashing of Alabama in the Sugar Bowl last year as proof the lower tiered conferences can stand up to the big boys. But neither of those games meant anything to OU or Bama. Let's think about that Sugar Bowl game logically. In its previous game (SEC Championship), Bama was leading Florida (the eventual national champ) in the 4th quarter, but ending up losing. Of course Alabama was down after that. The Sugar Bowl meant nothing to them. Was it right for them to feel that way? Of course not.... it was a game they should have put their all into. On the other hand, those bowl games meant everything to Boise and Utah as it was their chance to show what they had on the national stage. I understand this point but also don't like to discount the fact that this is a serious indictment of the character of the team. The same was said about Michigan after they lost to OSU (and thus lost out on their chance to play in the NC game) as to one of the reasons they got pounded by USC in the Rose Bowl. Is the fact that you couldn't get up for the Sugar/Fiesta/Rose Bowl an excuse as to why you lost or simply something that exposed a serious flaw in your team. ie: heart. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprofessor Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 I don't buy the notion at all that Boise State beat Oklahoma and Utah dominated Alabama because the two so called "elite" teams didn't care. I can guarantee that every player on Oklahoma and Alabama were motivated to win these games, especially given the fact that there was so much buildup to the game and they were played on a national stage. And Boise St. losing to the Big 12 or SEC elite by 2-3 TD's obviously someone has not been paying attention. I'd put Boise State up against any team in the nation in a BIG game. I have watched Peterson out scheme the opposing coach time after time and my $$$ would be on the Bronco's. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bigrocks Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 II can guarantee that every player on Oklahoma and Alabama were motivated to win these games, especially given the fact that there was so much buildup to the game and they were played on a national stage. I guess that's why Alabama's best offensive lineman and Outland Trophy winner basically decided his college career was at an end and contacted an agent prior to the Sugar Bowl -- resulting in his suspension from the team. Listen, I am not defending Alabama coming out completely flat and unmotivated. I hated to see that displayed in the Sugar Bowl.... but the facts are simple: the Tide played Florida to a virtual standstill for 3+ quarters in the SEC Championship, then came out the next game and got waxed by a MAC team. So, I guess Utah would have beaten Florida and Oklahoma too had they played. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 I guess that's why Alabama's best offensive lineman and Outland Trophy winner basically decided his college career was at an end and contacted an agent prior to the Sugar Bowl -- resulting in his suspension from the team. Listen, I am not defending Alabama coming out completely flat and unmotivated. I hated to see that displayed in the Sugar Bowl.... but the facts are simple: the Tide played Florida to a virtual standstill for 3+ quarters in the SEC Championship, then came out the next game and got waxed by a MAC team. So, I guess Utah would have beaten Florida and Oklahoma too had they played. See this is why a playoff wouldn't be any better. Fans and especially Bama fans would still make excuses even when they get soundly defeated. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.