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 This theme may be out of date.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.]]

Bye Bye Boise


neilfish2
 Share

Recommended Posts

And my point is, that as far as I'm concerned the WAC is exactly the same as it was last week. I think we're on the same page this time around somehow. I agree with you in regards to the SEC and Pac 10 argument.

 

WAC was a horrible conference last week, and it's a horrible conference this week to, however.

Well, FWIW, that looks like it's going to change next year. Have you seen the new MWC? I forget the specifics, but I saw on TV yesterday. Assuming TCU stays, they add BSU and, I think Fresno St, Nevada, and I think Hawaii. Again, I forget the specifics, but I remember being impressed and thinking that they had just basically peeled off the 4 teams in the WAC that were any good and added them to the MWC. That means you have two great programs in TCU and BSU, a very solid Nevada, plus Air Force, Hawaii, and Fresno St who are least decent. That's 1/3 of the conference in the top 20 and half in the top 50.

 

That may not be the SEC, but it sure looks better than the Big East of ACC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Absolutely. I'm sure the kicker feels awful. I'm specifically referring to the kneejerk fans that ALWAYS point to missed fg's or some late calls that didn't go their way, or whatever, all the while completely overlooking the other 58 minutes (or more) of the game. Very much like that Miami-Ohio State National Championship game. Cryami fans talk about the PI in OT, overlooking the fact that A. They were massively favored in this game and were outplayed most of the game and B. A blatant PI that WASN'T called on them in Regulation, where Ohio State could've ran the clock out and overtime wouldn't have been an issue.

 

 

 

It was a bad PI call. I tried to find footage on the gamble play in regulation but came up empty. I think you're right about that though...

 

*******************************

 

And you're right about the BSU kicker's place in all of this. But he does need to take some special blame here. Both of those were chip shots. My biggest concern is that he's just a kid (and NOT getting paid, like a pro - which is a whole other discussion... we're not sitting here talking about lacrosse). I hope he's a senior and can get out of dodge soon. He's gonna carry that with him forever. I was completely stunned for those last few minutes. I didn't even think about Scott Norwood until I started trying to put those FG misses in perspective after the game was over. But I think this was worse than Norwood. I think the BSU FG's might have been the worst FG debacles I've ever seen.

 

Which sucks because there were a TON of missed blocks and tackles for BSU during the ENTIRE 2nd half. And a few dropped passes. And also a bogus "return man interference" call which would have given BSU the ball deep in Nevada territory, and would have probably sealed the game if BSU had scored a TD.

 

But none of that will be on people's radars. It will always be about the kicks... Poor kid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I didn't even think about Scott Norwood until I started trying to put those FG misses in perspective after the game was over. But I think this was worse than Norwood.

Why do people always bring Norwood up? Norwood missed a 47 yarder! That isn't easy under any circumstances.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why do people always bring Norwood up? Norwood missed a 47 yarder! That isn't easy under any circumstances.

 

Actually, I rooted for the Bills all four of those years :wacko: (I cried after the third one). You're absolutely right about Norwood - that was a 47-yarder that just missed wide. But unfortunately (and unfairly?), because of the stakes, that kick is always going to be brought up whenever a conversation turns to major FG misses.

 

Btw, those Bills teams went up against a brutal NFC East lineup in every one of those years (even the first one). I hate the fact that Kelly & Co. gets labeled "losers" because of the four losses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yep. And I'm sure that's how the coach and QB will explain it. But, unfortunately, that's not going to mean dick to the kicker himself.

Chris Peterson was already saying it - "one play can't lose you a game; it might win a game for you, but you don't lose on a single play."

 

In other words, EVERY loss is a TEAM loss.

 

Obviously this takes Boise out of the title picture (which is good for my Badgers). But lump me in with the people who see losing on the road in OT to the #19 team in the country as hardly being "fraudulent"; Boise is a damn good team who lost to a damn good team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Honestly, I think the new Mountain West (and even the mountain west as it stands now) is a better conference than the Big East. The Big East with an AQ is a complete joke. They should've lost it when the ACC raided it.

 

 

The way the BCS shakeup LOOKED like it was going to go, the major conferences would've been the Pac 10, Big Ten, SEC, and MWC. The ACC and Big East would have faded down to C-USA level, and the Big XII would have disappeared off the face of the earth.

 

One thing that WILL hurt the new-look MWC is BYU going independent. They are a recognizable brand to even the casual CFB fan.

 

But it was only a minor tremor, not the massive rejiggering it looked like it was going to be.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's not my point. My point is that it certainly doesn't hurt the WAC's rep. After all, Rocker was trying to base some case against TCU on the fact that BSU lost to a division rival in OT. And that's just stupid because it's a net zero sum. It's like when Rocker was trying to discredit the Pac 10 because USC lost badly to OSU. Somehow, SEC teams beating up on each other proves what a murderer's row the SEC is. But other schools losing to other schools in their conference means their conferences must suck.

Maybe I did, but could you show me where I discredit the Pac 10?

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