Jump to content
[[Template core/front/custom/_customHeader is throwing an error. This theme may be out of date. Run the support tool in the AdminCP to restore the default theme.]]

So let me see if I understand this correctly


GWPFFL BrianW
 Share

Recommended Posts

First of all... Virginia Tech back in the Top 25 with no good wins to speak of, a loss to a mid major, and a loss to FCS East. Can anyone tell me that if preseason polls didn't exist, that anyone would look at that body of work and give them a 25th place vote, much less enough votes to have them in the final poll? Oregon State is now a .500 club. So WHY is Boise State ranked ahead of ANY BCS Conference undefeated team right now (much less many 1 loss clubs?)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 88
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

good call- but why single out Boise? bc they have a free ride the rest of the way?- I am sorry after watching them play- they pass the eye test with flying colors..........they are one of the best teams in the country. period.

 

you can apply that same argument to alot of teams being ranked to high more so from pre-season rankings than body of work - ie Utah, Michigan State, TCU, Ohio State, chit Oregons's non conference was weak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

good call- but why single out Boise? bc they have a free ride the rest of the way?- I am sorry after watching them play- they pass the eye test with flying colors..........they are one of the best teams in the country. period.

 

you can apply that same argument to alot of teams being ranked to high more so from pre-season rankings than body of work - ie Utah, Michigan State, TCU, Ohio State, chit Oregons's non conference was weak.

Was gonna say the same thing. BSU looks great. Why the hate for BSU? Besides, it's week 7. Plenty of ball left to play and plenty of chances for other teams around them to build their resumes with big wins. If LSU or Auburn manage to win out, they were certainly pass them. If the OUs do the same, there's no way BSU gets taken ahead of them. But for now, I don't see many teams that should obviously be ahead of them. Who has anyone played thus far?

 

Are you implying that they should be penalized for not winning in a more dominant fashion vs V Tech and OSU? Well, at least V Tech, because they did beat OSU by 2 TDs. So, should we penalize OU for not handling Utah St or Cinci? And when you consider the V Tech game was week 1, a week that you never really know what you're going to get...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think it's as much that Boise State isn't deserving as it is an example of how the polls are used to place teams where the pollsters want them, rather than where they fall into place...

 

I used to have beef with the computer rankings, but at least they're only biased towards numbers and formulas. I have literally seen a case where one of the BCS voters place an a 3-loss ND team at #5 in their rankings, and put an undefeated UGA team at #22, just because they felt that the other rankings had one too low and the other too high. That is a complete abuse of the system..

 

It was also because of these same biased voters that UGA was literally stripped of a chance to play for the national championship in 2007 because it would have proved the system flawed for a team to slip in without playing in a championship game, but according to the ladder-system of the BCS, that's exactly what should have happened when #1 and #2 lost. Why was the team ranked #3 then, if they don't deserve to be #1 or 2?

 

I'm sorry, but the system is just BS, and this is just one more example of why we shouldn't let the status quo simply decide who is in our national championship game. Let it be decided on the field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but the issue isn't that Boise State is good or not. They are a good football team. The issue is do they deserve to even sniff a National Championship game, and the answer is absolutely not. Plain and simple. Craig James talked about "sandwich games". Not only does Boise have no sandwich games, but they have no games against anyone of quality. Heck the game they were pointing too later this year, and they just got beat by Hawaii. The WAC is a lousy conference, and lousier than normal this year. Take Michigan State. Last 3 games, they beat Wisconsin at home, and Michigan and Illinois on the road. That 3 game stretch right there, is tougher than anything Boise State will see all year long.

 

As far as Georgia in 2007, sorry but in THIS system, you don't win your league title you don't deserve to play for it all. If you're gonna say that only 2 teams will play for the crown, AND you're going to unfairly handicap the season with preseason polls, then an unwritten rule that you must win your conference is MORE than fair. Beat Tennessee. Ya know? Was Georgia one of the best teams by years end? Absolutely. But they didn't take care of business. Now if you had MY 12 team system, then that's a different story. Then a team like UGA would have a shot. Then I wouldn't have a problem with the Boises and TCU's. But if you're gonna say... 2 teams are in it, then it should be earned on the field. And you play the regular season to reach a pinnacle. And that pinnacle is a conference championship. Georgia didn't even earn a division title.

 

If there were no preseason polls, no one in their right mind would come out in Week 7, and say, Boise State is a top 5 football team. There body of work isn't impressive at all. The only thing you can say is they blow out teams they should blow out. And theres something to be said for that, but if you're gonna say only 2 teams play for it all, then there is no way Boise deserves it. No way at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry but the issue isn't that Boise State is good or not. They are a good football team. The issue is do they deserve to even sniff a National Championship game, and the answer is absolutely not. Plain and simple. Craig James talked about "sandwich games". Not only does Boise have no sandwich games, but they have no games against anyone of quality. Heck the game they were pointing too later this year, and they just got beat by Hawaii. The WAC is a lousy conference, and lousier than normal this year. Take Michigan State. Last 3 games, they beat Wisconsin at home, and Michigan and Illinois on the road. That 3 game stretch right there, is tougher than anything Boise State will see all year long.

 

As far as Georgia in 2007, sorry but in THIS system, you don't win your league title you don't deserve to play for it all. If you're gonna say that only 2 teams will play for the crown, AND you're going to unfairly handicap the season with preseason polls, then an unwritten rule that you must win your conference is MORE than fair. Beat Tennessee. Ya know? Was Georgia one of the best teams by years end? Absolutely. But they didn't take care of business. Now if you had MY 12 team system, then that's a different story. Then a team like UGA would have a shot. Then I wouldn't have a problem with the Boises and TCU's. But if you're gonna say... 2 teams are in it, then it should be earned on the field. And you play the regular season to reach a pinnacle. And that pinnacle is a conference championship. Georgia didn't even earn a division title.

 

If there were no preseason polls, no one in their right mind would come out in Week 7, and say, Boise State is a top 5 football team. There body of work isn't impressive at all. The only thing you can say is they blow out teams they should blow out. And theres something to be said for that, but if you're gonna say only 2 teams play for it all, then there is no way Boise deserves it. No way at all.

 

couldn't disagree more- Boise would be top 5 in every poll in the country SO FAR- what in the world are you talking about? I would love to see who you would have ahead of Boise?? Oregon and maybe OKL or Auburn - that is it. Teams keep winning they will drop - the WAC wiill keep them out of the NC game.

 

Mich State? yer nuts - there schedule is garbage - Illinois? MIch? please both are average at best, and in true fashion they loaded up on Western Mich, Floriday Atlantic and Northern Colorado in their non conference.. In fact Boise has had a tougher schedule so far than MSU - yer off base on this one..there are some teams ranked too high, but Boise is not one of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

wildcat, thats my point. Michigan and Illinois are average teams. Find a 3 game stretch on Boise's schedule tougher than that average stretch for MSU? You can't. As far as who I would have ahead of them. For starters, every BCS team that's still undefeated.

 

Edit to Add: MSU's SOS is T 29th, Boise is Tied for 73rd. That's so far this year.

Edited by GWPFFL BrianW
Link to comment
Share on other sites

wildcat, thats my point. Michigan and Illinois are average teams. Find a 3 game stretch on Boise's schedule tougher than that average stretch for MSU? You can't. As far as who I would have ahead of them. For starters, every BCS team that's still undefeated.

 

Edit to Add: MSU's SOS is T 29th, Boise is Tied for 73rd. That's so far this year.

 

 

cmon - yer just not making sense now - you would honestly vote LSU, Utah, Mizzoue and TCU ahead of Boise??

 

SOS is subjective- here is how Sagarin has the SOS for the undefeated teams.......

 

OU - 15

LSU - 36

Aub - 38

Mizzou - 47

Oregon - 50

BSU - 55

TCU- 64

Mich St - 76

Utah - 110

 

my top 5........

 

Oregon

Auburn

Boise St.

Oklahoma

TCU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

cmon - yer just not making sense now - you would honestly vote LSU, Utah, Mizzoue and TCU ahead of Boise??

 

SOS is subjective- here is how Sagarin has the SOS for the undefeated teams.......

 

OU - 15

LSU - 36

Aub - 38

Mizzou - 47

Oregon - 50

BSU - 55

TCU- 64

Mich St - 76

Utah - 110

 

my top 5........

 

Oregon

Auburn

Boise St.

Oklahoma

TCU

 

 

I absolutely would vote them over Boise. No questions asked. Boise 1 win over VT. VT loses to a Division 1 AA East the next week. Oregon State is ,500. Once again, I ask you, find a 3 game stretch on Boise's sched that can compare to MSU's average 3 game sched the last 3 weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I absolutely would vote them over Boise. No questions asked. Boise 1 win over VT. VT loses to a Division 1 AA East the next week. Oregon State is ,500. Once again, I ask you, find a 3 game stretch on Boise's sched that can compare to MSU's average 3 game sched the last 3 weeks.

 

 

you keep coming back to Oregon State being .500..... you do realize if they played Mich St. non conference sched they would be 5-1 and knocking on the top 10 right? Boise has 2 quality wins - VT and Oregon State. Mich St has 1 - Wisky.

 

Either way, what is your reasoning for EVERY analyst in the country voting Boise in their top5. ESPN power rankings are out - Boise is #2 and the lowest any voter has them is #4 - is this because they started ranked very highly pre-season? or more because they deserve to be there?

 

not really sure what your point on this Boise hate is all about?

 

u should be more concerned with the Big 10's early elimination from the National Championship game.........

 

although I do think Iowa is the best team in the Big 10

Edited by wildcat2334
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Im not concerned about anyone other than Iowa. And Iowa has Wisconsin this week. Nothing else matters to me in all reality. As far as the MNC goes, I honestly don't care if a Big Ten wins it or not. If they are there, I will root for them, but if they aren't, then it's no biggie. It's a total crapshoot and you have to get extremely lucky to even get to that game to begin with. Which brings me to my point...

 

My point is, if the first poll came out in Week 7, instead of preseason, what would you see? You would see Boise State beating a Virginia Tech team on a neutral field, that lost to James Madison the very next week. They would also see a win over an average Oregon State team at their trash can home. However they were a highly ranked preseason team, and everyone and their dog hyped up the game against another overly ranked preseason team. Bottom line is you have 2 spots for that game. Passing the "eyeball" test by itself, doesn't fly with me when you're talking about 2 teams. The fact that a Boise State squad that has no stretch at all of tough grind it out games against even average teams. Forget about good teams. They aren't even facing average teams. I know that isn't what they can control, but Alabama couldn't control having to face South Carolina at Columbia. Playing middle of the pack Big Ten teams on the road mixed in with a very good Big Ten team at home, and having to face what you call the best Big Ten team on the road in 2 weeks, is ALWAYS going to be tougher than facing freaking San Jose State, Idaho School for the Blind, and Toledo. Much less anyone else left on their schedule. At the end of the year, if Boise State is in the MNC game, I think it sets a bad standard. It's a longshot, but the reality is, there is no truly great team that has established itself. Oregon hasn't been tested at all. Oklahoma has the blowout win against FSU, but as you pointed out, had a tough time with Utah State and Air Force. So you don't know what you got with them. Point being, no one should be shocked if they fall. Auburn has a championship offense, but no defense. LSU has a championship defense but no offense. Michigan State still doesn't have a signature road win (neither does Boise). Missouri gets their first shot to prove themselves against Oklahoma this week. But all of these teams have one thing in common. They all will actually be tested week in and week out. Boise will not, but yet if they all lose (which EASILY could happen) then Boise has a legit shot at getting in, and they do not deserve it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian, your whole argument assumes the Big 10 is anything at all. MSU's main calling card is having beat Wisc, who's main calling card is having beaten OSU. Well, what if OSU isn't really all that good? Then what? Then you've got this whole argument that is taken out of context. A bunch of adequate but not particularly great teams beating up on each other and feasting on very poor OOC teams in the meantime. So, nobody knows if that 3 game stretch of MSU's that you point to is really anything impressive at all.

 

Now, I'm not saying this the case, but saying that you have to assume it isn't in order for your argument to hold water and there's no actual data to support that. What's the Big 10's OOC calling card? OSU beating Miami? Miami is not a team that is immune from laying an egg big time.

 

None the less, let's just say it is harder. It's only part of the equation and even if you assume that stretch is, in fact tougher than anything BSU has faced, it's not such a murderer's row that it should trump. Now, if you had someone that had gone through, say 3 top 10 teams and made it through unscathed, now you've got something. But you don't. You've got 3 teams who have names we recognize as being typically good programs who are all likely good enough to beat most teams if they don't show up. One of which may, possibly, be very good (assuming the OSU wasn't vastly overrated all along).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Brian, your whole argument assumes the Big 10 is anything at all. MSU's main calling card is having beat Wisc, who's main calling card is having beaten OSU. Well, what if OSU isn't really all that good? Then what? Then you've got this whole argument that is taken out of context. A bunch of adequate but not particularly great teams beating up on each other and feasting on very poor OOC teams in the meantime. So, nobody knows if that 3 game stretch of MSU's that you point to is really anything impressive at all.

 

Now, I'm not saying this the case, but saying that you have to assume it isn't in order for your argument to hold water and there's no actual data to support that. What's the Big 10's OOC calling card? OSU beating Miami? Miami is not a team that is immune from laying an egg big time.

 

None the less, let's just say it is harder. It's only part of the equation and even if you assume that stretch is, in fact tougher than anything BSU has faced, it's not such a murderer's row that it should trump. Now, if you had someone that had gone through, say 3 top 10 teams and made it through unscathed, now you've got something. But you don't. You've got 3 teams who have names we recognize as being typically good programs who are all likely good enough to beat most teams if they don't show up. One of which may, possibly, be very good (assuming the OSU wasn't vastly overrated all along).

 

 

detlef, I'm using this one 3 game stretch as one example of many. And my argument isn't exclusive to Michigan State. If you want to make it that, then let's look at Alabama. What is there calling card? A 24-3 domination of Penn State at home? Iowa did that. 24-3 in pretty much the same dominant way, and the Lion frosh QB had a couple more games under his belt. Beyond that they beat a .500 Florida club. How good are they? From what I can tell this Gator team is worse than all of Ron Zooks Gator team. My point is you want to do eyeball tests? Well the eyeball test in anyones mind should say, Boise plays teams that would struggle in FCS, and they play those teams week after week after week. Michigan State plays average-good-great teams week after week after week. Mix in a extremely lousy Minnesota team (Vaderbilt? every bcs conference has at least one) So if your argument is that the Big Ten is worse than the WAC, then the argument is dead in the water. Your argument seems to be that the only way to justify Michigan State ahead of Boise is if they beat 3 top ten teams? First of all, no one does that (and if I'm wrong then by all means point it out, but "ranked" teams "at the time" doesn't count) . If that is a standard you're gonna hold to a team like Michigan State or Oklahoma State in comparison to Boise State, then once again I ask, what has Boise State done to begin with then? Even taking into consideration previous success (which shouldn't mean a thing when talking about 2010) they have only 1 signature road win over a BCS team ever in the last 5 years. When they do leave their trash can home to play BCS teams on their field, they lose. They have a couple nice BCS wins mixed in there as well which I don't overlook but hold a lot of credit when saying "Boise looks like a team that should play for a MNC as 1 of only 2 teams in all of FBS."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

detlef, I'm using this one 3 game stretch as one example of many. And my argument isn't exclusive to Michigan State. If you want to make it that, then let's look at Alabama. What is there calling card? A 24-3 domination of Penn State at home? Iowa did that. 24-3 in pretty much the same dominant way, and the Lion frosh QB had a couple more games under his belt. Beyond that they beat a .500 Florida club. How good are they? From what I can tell this Gator team is worse than all of Ron Zooks Gator team. My point is you want to do eyeball tests? Well the eyeball test in anyones mind should say, Boise plays teams that would struggle in FCS, and they play those teams week after week after week. Michigan State plays average-good-great teams week after week after week. Mix in a extremely lousy Minnesota team (Vaderbilt? every bcs conference has at least one) So if your argument is that the Big Ten is worse than the WAC, then the argument is dead in the water. Your argument seems to be that the only way to justify Michigan State ahead of Boise is if they beat 3 top ten teams? First of all, no one does that (and if I'm wrong then by all means point it out, but "ranked" teams "at the time" doesn't count) . If that is a standard you're gonna hold to a team like Michigan State or Oklahoma State in comparison to Boise State, then once again I ask, what has Boise State done to begin with then? Even taking into consideration previous success (which shouldn't mean a thing when talking about 2010) they have only 1 signature road win over a BCS team ever in the last 5 years. When they do leave their trash can home to play BCS teams on their field, they lose. They have a couple nice BCS wins mixed in there as well which I don't overlook but hold a lot of credit when saying "Boise looks like a team that should play for a MNC as 1 of only 2 teams in all of FBS."

Hey, I'm not the one that is saying that BSU should be behind every undefeated BCS school and some that have one loss. Though I typically do feel the Big 10 is overrated, I was simply going with the MSU example because you brought it up. However, thanks for making my point by showing that there's really no undefeated team that can point to a schedule that, thus far, has been strong enough to use that as a game-set-match argument.

 

And no, beating 3 top 10 teams is not the only way I could see MSU being ranked ahead of BSU, it's just the one way that the "body of work" argument would trump all. As it stands, however, since no undefeated team can point to a murderer's row thus far, it's not an argument that holds enough water to make the sort of sweeping statements like you're making. See, I'm not saying that BSU absolutely deserves to be ahead of the other teams, rather countering your statement and explaining why they could be.

 

Short of anyone having played a schedule where everyone agrees has been brutal, we're back to opinions. Which, mind you, I do wish would not be the ultimate decider as to which 2 teams get to play for it all. But, it is the fact none the less. That saying MSU got through Mich, Ill, and Wisc, in and of itself, is not enough to automatically push them past anyone else.

 

That's really it.

Edited by detlef
Link to comment
Share on other sites

cmon - yer just not making sense now - you would honestly vote LSU, Utah, Mizzoue and TCU ahead of Boise??

 

SOS is subjective- here is how Sagarin has the SOS for the undefeated teams.......

 

OU - 15

LSU - 36

Aub - 38

Mizzou - 47

Oregon - 50

BSU - 55

TCU- 64

Mich St - 76

Utah - 110

 

my top 5........

 

Oregon

Auburn

Boise St.

Oklahoma

TCU

 

Only thing I have to add... Auburn is not the second best team in the nation, probably not even in the top 8, they have NO defense. They could very easily lose three games before the year is over. They have LSU, UGA and Bama left on their schedule. UGA always beats Auburn in Auburn 9Auburn always beats UGA in Athens. THough, we did beat them in Athens last year, so maybe they need to beat us this year to balance it out...)

 

Boise, they look good. I agree that they don't play a tough schedule and are not as taxed by the end of the season as many of the other teams in power conferences. I really want Boise to end up in the title game against an elite team this year, unless said team is Oklahoma. NCAA Football fans got screwed last year when those BCS SOB's put them and TTU in a bowl together....

 

ETA: Sagarin is on crack with regard to his system and rankings...

While Auburn has played some patsies they have also played and beaten - South Carolina 21, Kentucky, Arkansas23, Clemson, and a decent Miss. St. team 24.

 

LSU has played and beaten N. Carolina, Miss. St 24, W. VA 20, and UF.

 

Oklahoma has played and beaten FSU 17, Texas and Air Force...

 

Not a chance that any rational person can say that Oklahoma has had a tougher SOS than either LSU or Auburn

Edited by SEC=UGA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

wildcat, thats my point. Michigan and Illinois are average teams. Find a 3 game stretch on Boise's schedule tougher than that average stretch for MSU? You can't. As far as who I would have ahead of them. For starters, every BCS team that's still undefeated.

 

Edit to Add: MSU's SOS is T 29th, Boise is Tied for 73rd. That's so far this year.

 

 

to answer yer question - VTech, Wyoming and Oregon State are tougher for starters......

 

The WAC is terrible, no one is arguing otherwise. How about giving some credit for their nc slate though. I just have no respect for a team like MSU that schedules Western Mich, FLA Atlantic, and Northern Colorado - like Det said their signature win is against Wisky - who wa pushed around all over the field at Camp Randall by ASU - and had no business evern winning that game.

 

I am not saying Boise State is deserving of a NC shot either, just at this point they look like they belong in the discussion and are at worst a top 5 team in the country any way you look at it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You guys can argue about Boise all you want, but whether or not they're good enough to justify their ranking isn't really the issue/question. The bottom line is the system is about as flawed as you can get, and without a playoff of some kind, I don't see how they can be ranked where they are. For all of the things that people say are wrong with college hoops, the post-season is the one thing that college basketball does right, while college football does not. Imagine what would happen if hoops did what football does... Just invite the four #1 seeds to a four-team tournament (football actually only invites two), and leave out the rest. The winner of that four-team tournament is the national champ. Teams like Gonzaga would never stand a chance (they wouldn't ever be invited)... they don't do enough, in-season, to justify a #1 seed... EVER.

 

Same goes for Boise... let them prove it in a playoff, if they want a chance at a national title. But, as long as there isn't a playoff, there's no way anyone can reasonably justify them being in the mix. At least, not based on their complete body of work THIS SEASON, so far. Let's face it... What has Boise done this year? They've beaten two borderline top 25 teams, one of which has since fallen out of the top 25. Sure, that's not much less than anybody else has done at this point. But, it's not any more, either. Oregon, Oklahome, Auburn, Michigan State, Missouri, LSU, Oklahoma State... I would even give a couple of one-loss teams the benefit of the doubt, just because of who they lost to. Putting Boise ahead of the majority (Missouri and OSU have yet to play anybody, really, which is why I say majority) of those teams is questionable. How have they (Boise) done anything to put themselves in the discussion for national champion, based on THIS SEASON alone?

 

Don't get me wrong... I'm not a Boise hater. I just wish there was a better system in place, so that they could justify themselves. The way it is now, there will always be a debate surrounds teams like them, TCU, Utah, etc. I would love to see them win 2-3 games in a playoff, and prove that they are the best team in the country. But, as long as they don't have that opportunity, I don't think they've done enough to prove that they're what we think they might be. Again, it's the equivalent of giving Gonzaga a #1 seed. We've all seen how they've lived up to the hype (or failed to do so, actually) when given a high seed in the basketball tournament. More often than not, they've failed to live up to expectations. In fact, it could be argued that their greatest successes took place when they were seeded very low... the higher they've been seeded, the worse they've failed.

 

Hate to say it, but I think Boise is in the same boat. Let's call a spade a spade... they're a mid-major that has proven that they can play with the big boys (like Gonzaga). But, give them the opportunity to win 2-3 straight games (like Gonzaga has been given the opportunity to win 5-6 in the tournament) against top competition, and I think they would have a tough time coming out of that stretch without a loss (just like Gonzaga has). I could be wrong, and it wouldn't disappoint me in the slightest if I was, but until we have the opportunity to see that (a playoff) happen, all of this is pure speculation. The same thing (speculation) happens to be a lot of what Boise's ranking is based off of, to be honest.

 

Put it this way... If we were able to wipe our memory banks of everything that has happened, in relation to college football, prior to this season, do you think Boise would be a top 2-3 team in the polls? Heck no. We've seen what they can do in the past, and they're getting some benefit from that. Otherwise, again, I have to ask... What have they done THIS YEAR to justify the ranking, over some of the other teams who have not yet lost?

 

Okahoma - Beat FSU and Texas, both ranked higher than VTech or Oregon State.

Auburn - Beat SC and Arkansas, both ranked higher than VTech or Oregon State.

LSU - Beat WV (ranked higher than VTech), and North Carolina and Florida (both ranked higher than Oregon State).

MSU - Beat Wisconsin (ranked significantly higher than anyone Boise has beat).

 

That's five teams (if you include Oregon, obviously) that are undefeated, play in much tougher conferences, and have beaten better opponents (at least on paper) than Boise. So, at best, they are at the top of the second tier of teams... I'd put them slightly ahead of most one-loss teams, as well as the likes of Utah/TCU. Still, anything higher than #6-7 in the country, at this point, is very questionable. Unfortunately, due to the system in place, we don't get a chance to see how questionable (or justified) it really is. :wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gopher - I appreciate your post- all solid points. BUT similar to Gonzaga, Boise is no longer a mid-major, they just aren't - what more do you want them to prove?? ask Bama, TCU and Oklahoma if they are legit........for christs sake they returned 19 starters from a team that went 14-0, and you guys are questioning their ranking??? :wacko: I just don't get it

 

. Of course the system sucks, no on is arguing otherwise. It is a popularity contest, and up to this point Boise is a hot piece of ass. I watch a ton of football, and I can tell you there is no doubt in my mind they are MUCH better (at this point) than the MSU, LSU, OKState, Okis State etc of the world. Oregon St. is a great example - they palyed 2 top 5 teams - unheard of, and they are easily ranked if they played a softer non conference and their 3-3 record is misleading

 

Sorry, I can't disagree more - Boise is THAT GOOD - they are a veteran team, returning damn near everyone from last year. Until the Big 10 (yet again) proves anythin out of conference, I honestly don't want to hear about any of them.......I see nothing that suggest anyone is any good except maybe Iowa and maybe maybe Wisky or OSU.

 

I really don't have a problem with the BCS rankings, and I think they will do a decent job of sorting this out. Teams win out, Boise will fall, simple as that. Oklahoma struggled badly in 2 wins, but have looked great of late.

Edited by wildcat2334
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The conference you are in defines who is a mid-major, not how good a team is. Otherwise, middle-of-the-road teams (from major conferences) would be defined as such, which has never been the case. I'm not saying BSU is a mid-major in the sense that they're not very good. Their conference is not a major conference, so they are therefore a tier below the rest, simply by default.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

:wacko: So tired of hearing about the Big 10, and how they haven't proven anything. How does that make them any different than anybody else, six weeks into the season? Nobody has proven anything, at this point. This isn't about the Big 10, it's about teams being ranked based on what they've done to earn that ranking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, now that past performance is working in favor of a team like BSU, everyone is all hot and bothered about it. But the very fact that major programs get the benefit of the doubt and get seeded in a position from the beginning of the season that the NC game is theirs for the taking is because of tradition (read: past performances). And I'm not talking conferences, I'm talking programs. If Bama or Florida or USC or OSU or Texas or OU has a good looking team, they're right there at the top. If Auburn or Illinois or Cal does, they get a #15 and have to prove it on the field. Hell, that's exactly what kept Auburn out of the NC game the year USC crushed OU. The fact that we handed the NC game to USC and OU before the season started and simply told them not to mess it up because we already knew they were the two best teams. Why? Because of history and the fact that they had good looking squads.

 

But now, now that BSU has routinely proven itself on against the nation's elite over the last few years to illustrate that the program is not a fluke. Now we're supposed to ignore the past. But that's the thing, one of the things that pollsters take into account (and whether or not they release an official pre-season poll, any voter worth a crap is going to research the field going in) how good a team was last year and how many guys they have coming back. Well, guess what, BSU was pretty damned good last year and basically returned the whole team.

 

Listen, I want this BS pageant to end as much as the next guy and have a proper play-off, but that's not the case. So as long as we have this lame system, I can't see why it's so precious that it can't be defiled by the inclusion of an outsider like BSU. Which, like SEC_UGA said above, makes me really pissed that they chickened out last year and put TCU vs BSU rather than giving them another chance to prove themselves against the big boys.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, now that past performance is working in favor of a team like BSU, everyone is all hot and bothered about it. But the very fact that major programs get the benefit of the doubt and get seeded in a position from the beginning of the season that the NC game is theirs for the taking is because of tradition (read: past performances). And I'm not talking conferences, I'm talking programs. If Bama or Florida or USC or OSU or Texas or OU has a good looking team, they're right there at the top. If Auburn or Illinois or Cal does, they get a #15 and have to prove it on the field. Hell, that's exactly what kept Auburn out of the NC game the year USC crushed OU. The fact that we handed the NC game to USC and OU before the season started and simply told them not to mess it up because we already knew they were the two best teams. Why? Because of history and the fact that they had good looking squads.

 

But now, now that BSU has routinely proven itself on against the nation's elite over the last few years to illustrate that the program is not a fluke. Now we're supposed to ignore the past. But that's the thing, one of the things that pollsters take into account (and whether or not they release an official pre-season poll, any voter worth a crap is going to research the field going in) how good a team was last year and how many guys they have coming back. Well, guess what, BSU was pretty damned good last year and basically returned the whole team.

 

Listen, I want this BS pageant to end as much as the next guy and have a proper play-off, but that's not the case. So as long as we have this lame system, I can't see why it's so precious that it can't be defiled by the inclusion of an outsider like BSU. Which, like SEC_UGA said above, makes me really pissed that they chickened out last year and put TCU vs BSU rather than giving them another chance to prove themselves against the big boys.

I agree... Past should have nothing to do with any of it, for any school. That still doesn't answer my question... What has Boise done THIS YEAR to deserve a top-three ranking in the country? I'll keep waiting.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I agree... Past should have nothing to do with any of it, for any school. That still doesn't answer my question... What has Boise done THIS YEAR to deserve a top-three ranking in the country? I'll keep waiting.

In 7 weeks? No more or less than a bunch of other teams at the top have done. I mean, what has Oregon or OU done? Maybe a bit more, but not a ton. What had OSU done to deserve the #2 spot they held before last weekend? So, now you're forced to just decide who you think is best. And when you do that, it's hard to ignore the fact that the team returns basically all it's starters from an undefeated team last year.

 

Again, it's not up to me to prove they deserve the top 3 ranking, it's up to those who insist they don't to prove that. All I'm saying is that they have as much right to it as anyone else and that they pass the eyeball test. If others with tougher games ahead survive those games, I'll be hard pressed to keep that opinion. But, for now, I have a hard time ignoring that they've passed every test put before them. This year and in recent years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only thing I have to add... Auburn is not the second best team in the nation, probably not even in the top 8, they have NO defense. They could very easily lose three games before the year is over. They have LSU, UGA and Bama left on their schedule. UGA always beats Auburn in Auburn 9Auburn always beats UGA in Athens. THough, we did beat them in Athens last year, so maybe they need to beat us this year to balance it out...)

 

Boise, they look good. I agree that they don't play a tough schedule and are not as taxed by the end of the season as many of the other teams in power conferences. I really want Boise to end up in the title game against an elite team this year, unless said team is Oklahoma. NCAA Football fans got screwed last year when those BCS SOB's put them and TTU in a bowl together....

 

ETA: Sagarin is on crack with regard to his system and rankings...

While Auburn has played some patsies they have also played and beaten - South Carolina 21, Kentucky, Arkansas23, Clemson, and a decent Miss. St. team 24.

 

LSU has played and beaten N. Carolina, Miss. St 24, W. VA 20, and UF.

 

Oklahoma has played and beaten FSU 17, Texas and Air Force...

 

Not a chance that any rational person can say that Oklahoma has had a tougher SOS than either LSU or Auburn

 

finally a guy with some reason. i HATE sagarin because his system is insane. wildcat always brings up sagarin, and its freaking ridiculous because sagarins rankings are a joke.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information