To Hell With Boise State.

[CALISKING]

But that's not the point.

The point is, they play in the WAC, have a stadium that holds 30,000 and are playing with 3* recruits.

Are they amazing? Yes.

Can they compete with anyone? Yes.

Could they do it regularly? No.

It's so much more draining to play better opponents every week. Physically on the players and mentally on the coaches coming up with game plans. There would be so many more injuries if they were getting hit by 240lb linebackers running 4.50's instead of 225lb linebackers running 4.65's

All true. However, if they were in a BCS conference and therefore sharing the BCS $$ pie, they would have more national exposure, $$ to upgrade facilities and attract bigger, faster players.

Problem is, a lot of posters here will argue, they should just join a BCS conference. It doesn't work that way. School must be invited. BSU has attempted to upgrade their schedule by jumping to MWC next year.

 

[BigPapaVol]

[/B]


All true. However, if they were in a BCS conference and therefore sharing the BCS $$ pie, they would have more national exposure, $$ to upgrade facilities and attract bigger, faster players.

Problem is, a lot of posters here will argue, they should just join a BCS conference. It doesn't work that way. School must be invited. BSU has attempted to upgrade their schedule by jumping to MWC next year.

they can't join those conferences without changes to their academic policies, which would alter the makeup of their football team.

 

[Ohio Vol]

Let's think about this.

When a team plays a schedule so weak that the national sentiment of "If they get through week 1, no one else can challenge them" is 100% accurate, that team has no business being in a national championship game unless everyone else shoots themself in the foot repeatedly.

I'm waiting for the computer polls to come out, so we can see Boise exactly where they belong based on schedule: 11th, 18th, 24th, 17th, 16th.

As for the idea of "These small teams are SO GOOD and will play anyone, but no one gives them the chance"....why don't they play each other? Why not have a two-year Boise/TCU series, if both teams want to boost their SOS and perception?

 

[IPorange]

Let's think about this.

When a team plays a schedule so weak that the national sentiment of "If they get through week 1, no one else can challenge them" is 100% accurate, that team has no business being in a national championship game unless everyone else shoots themself in the foot repeatedly.

I'm waiting for the computer polls to come out, so we can see Boise exactly where they belong based on schedule: 11th, 18th, 24th, 17th, 16th.

As for the idea of "These small teams are SO GOOD and will play anyone, but no one gives them the chance"....why don't they play each other? Why not have a two-year Boise/TCU series, if both teams want to boost their SOS and perception?

So there are some years when USC, Texas, Ohio State, and Oklahoma should not have been eligible for a national title, since there was really only one game that would challenge them at times.

 

[vandyfan71]

Let's think about this.

When a team plays a schedule so weak that the national sentiment of "If they get through week 1, no one else can challenge them" is 100% accurate, that team has no business being in a national championship game unless everyone else shoots themself in the foot repeatedly.

I'm waiting for the computer polls to come out, so we can see Boise exactly where they belong based on schedule: 11th, 18th, 24th, 17th, 16th.

As for the idea of "These small teams are SO GOOD and will play anyone, but no one gives them the chance"....why don't they play each other? Why not have a two-year Boise/TCU series, if both teams want to boost their SOS and perception?

TCU and Boise will be playing every year starting in 2011. Why should they beat up on each other when they have the Pac 10/12 to pick on?

 

[BigPapaVol]

So there are some years when USC, Texas, Ohio State, and Oklahoma should not have been eligible for a national title, since there was really only one game that would challenge them at times.

that's why the beauty contest is garbage. Play it on the field and we don't have to hear this silliness about BSU, Hawaii, TCU, BYU etc.

 

[BigPapaVol]

TCU and Boise will be playing every year starting in 2011. Why should they beat up on each other when they have the Pac 10/12 to pick on?

because apparently the vast majority of voters think their schedule is garbage and they need to do something to end that perception.

 

[IPorange]

Let's think about this.

When a team plays a schedule so weak that the national sentiment of "If they get through week 1, no one else can challenge them" is 100% accurate, that team has no business being in a national championship game unless everyone else shoots themself in the foot repeatedly.

I'm waiting for the computer polls to come out, so we can see Boise exactly where they belong based on schedule: 11th, 18th, 24th, 17th, 16th.

As for the idea of "These small teams are SO GOOD and will play anyone, but no one gives them the chance"....why don't they play each other? Why not have a two-year Boise/TCU series, if both teams want to boost their SOS and perception?

Could have sworn BSU is moving to the MWC... And I also could have sworn everyone said "big deal, it's just TCU" when BSU beat them last year which negates any advantage in playing one another.

Also, BYU, TCU, and Utah are all in the same conference and play each other. BSU is joining it.

Don't pretend like what you posted would really change your mind, because most of it is already the case.

 

[vandyfan71]

So there are some years when USC, Texas, Ohio State, and Oklahoma should not have been eligible for a national title, since there was really only one game that would challenge them at times.

Last year was one of those for Texas. Their marquee wins were over 3 and 4 loss teams, most of which lost in bowl games. Their best "win" was a game they lost.

 

[IPorange]

that's why the beauty contest is garbage. Play it on the field and we don't have to hear this silliness about BSU, Hawaii, TCU, BYU etc.

Agreed. But saying BSU should get no shot when all they are doing is winning games is the same beauty contest garbage.

 

[BigPapaVol]

Could have sworn BSU is moving to the MWC... And I also could have sworn everyone said "big deal, it's just TCU" when BSU beat them last year which negates any advantage in playing one another.

Also, BYU, TCU, and Utah are all in the same conference and play each other. BSU is joining it.

Don't pretend like what you posted would really change your mind, because most of it is already the case.

BSU is not joining the conference, but BYU and Utah departed. It's still garbage.

 

[vandyfan71]

because apparently the vast majority of voters think their schedule is garbage and they need to do something to end that perception.

They have been trying to improve their schedule. Moving to the MWC next year. In OOC only Oregon, Oregon St, Va Tech, and Ole Miss have taken the challenge from them.

 

[Vercingetorix]

Last year was one of those for Texas. Their marquee wins were over 3 and 4 loss teams, most of which lost in bowl games. Their best "win" was a game they lost.

But that was still a hell of a lot tougher road to hoe than Boise does in the WAC. Do you realize that Boise has only lost two WAC games ever? They're something like 62-2 in conference play there. And it sure isn't because they're unbeatable -- just ask TCU (2008), East Carolina (2007), Washington (2007), Georgia (2005), Oregon State (2005), Boston College (2005), etc etc. It's because the easiest possible Big 12 or SEC schedule is still vastly tougher than playing in the WAC. It's just impossible to play in the WAC and pile up a resume that's comparable to what the champions of the power conferences can offer. It's not fair, but that's the system.

 

[GreveHaller]

They have been trying to improve their schedule. Moving to the MWC next year. In OOC only Oregon, Oregon St, Va Tech, and Ole Miss have taken the challenge from them.

Take the "challenge" or agreed to their high price to play?

 

[sjt18]

Yes their schedule is weak but if they get past Oregon State and run the schedule like they should they deserve a shot at the NC. You can't fault them for playing in a weaker conference. Each time they have played one of the big boys they have beaten them.

No one is faulting them. But you shouldn't reward them unfairly either.

 

[GahLee]

Non-AQ teams have been knocking on this door for some time now.
If Boise State is allowed to play in the National Title game, they ( and other non-AQ teams ) will have a distinct advantage over every other AQ team. They play a much weaker schedule every year.

Once they are let in, there is no getting them out. Everyone that wants to see Boise or TCU in the title game is failing to realize that a playoff isn't coming anytime soon and by letting them in, you are giving them a fast track to the game every year.

They have not lost a conference game since 2007, That tells you all you need to know about the schedule they play. Even the best teams from the AQ schools aren't winning at a clip like that, not even close.

What if Nevada goes undefeated this year? Is anyone going to be pushing for the Wolfpack to be in the title game? No way. Boise has built collateral with their previous efforts and it seems that people feel they deserve a shot based off what they have done over the last 5 years or so.

Them playing in a BCS game and picking up that fat check every year should be award enough for them until there is a playoff system.

I say we ( UT ) go Independent, that way we make our own schedule from top to bottom, maybe we can play a bunch of lousy teams and a couple of good teams and go to a BCS game every year.

 

[vandyfan71]

Take the "challenge" or agreed to their high price to play?

WKU is worth 750k, Montana St 650k, Navy a cool $1 mil.
Arkansas St is getting $1m from Auburn and Vatech, 750k from Nebraska, and 900k from Iowa.

No team can say $1m for a Boise or TCU game that would be on national television is too much of a payout when they are paying nearly that for nothing more than local/ regional coverage.

 

[Vercingetorix]

WKU is worth 750k, Montana St 650k, Navy a cool $1 mil.
Arkansas St is getting $1m from Auburn and Vatech, 750k from Nebraska, and 900k from Iowa.

No team can say $1m for a Boise or TCU game that would be on national television is too much of a payout when they are paying nearly that for nothing more than local/ regional coverage.

Okay, then. This Saturday night Alabama plays Penn State on ESPN, Tennessee plays Oregon on ESPN2, and Arkansas plays Louisiana-Monroe on the regional SEC thing. How much extra -- if any -- do Alabama and Tennessee get paid on top of what they'd otherwise get from the ESPN contract just from being in the conference? How much more -- if any -- will Alabama and UT make than Arkansas just from the TV coverage this weekend?

I don't know how the contract works, so I don't know the answer. But I bet it isn't enough more to warrant A) writing a million-dollar check to the visiting team and B) risking a loss, when the system doesn't reward you for taking that risk.

 

[justingroves]

Okay, then. This Saturday night Alabama plays Penn State on ESPN, Tennessee plays Oregon on ESPN2, and Arkansas plays Louisiana-Monroe on the regional SEC thing. How much extra -- if any -- do Alabama and Tennessee get paid on top of what they'd otherwise get from the ESPN contract just from being in the conference? How much more -- if any -- will Alabama and UT make than Arkansas just from the TV coverage this weekend?

I don't know how the contract works, so I don't know the answer. But I bet it isn't enough more to warrant A) writing a million-dollar check to the visiting team and B) risking a loss, when the system doesn't reward you for taking that risk.

The TV deal is split 12 ways. It's irrelevant who plays who.

They all share it.

 

[justingroves]

they can't join those conferences without changes to their academic policies, which would alter the makeup of their football team.

In a very bad way.

 

[vandyfan71]

Okay, then. This Saturday night Alabama plays Penn State on ESPN, Tennessee plays Oregon on ESPN2, and Arkansas plays Louisiana-Monroe on the regional SEC thing. How much extra -- if any -- do Alabama and Tennessee get paid on top of what they'd otherwise get from the ESPN contract just from being in the conference? How much more -- if any -- will Alabama and UT make than Arkansas just from the TV coverage this weekend?

I don't know how the contract works, so I don't know the answer. But I bet it isn't enough more to warrant A) writing a million-dollar check to the visiting team and B) risking a loss, when the system doesn't reward you for taking that risk.

Not sure on exact amounts. It was made public that the television revenue was enough to be a sticking point for Nebraska when deciding to leave the Big 12 due to Texas being guaranteed more television time.

As for Tennessee-Oregon and Penn St-Alabama, both of those matchups are home and home. Boise merely asks for the same. Arkansas and La-Monroe have played many times over the last 10 years. To date all of those games have been in Little Rock as a neutral field agreement. Not sure about this years matchup but I would think La-Monroe is getting a decent share.

 

[vandyfan71]

The TV deal is split 12 ways. It's irrelevant who plays who.

They all share it.

That depends on the conference. The Big 12 awards a substantial portion of the television revenue to whichever team makes the tv appearance.

 

[milohimself]

that's why the beauty contest is garbage. Play it on the field and we don't have to hear this silliness about BSU, Hawaii, TCU, BYU etc.

Agreed 100%. We can all agree this means we need a playoff.

I'll say it again, it's a fundamental flaw when 50+ different teams in a division could win all their games and never have the chance to be crowned the best.

 

[Sabanocchio]

Agreed 100%. We can all agree this means we need a playoff.

I'll say it again, it's a fundamental flaw when 50+ different teams in a division could win all their games and never have the chance to be crowned the best.

Here. Here.

I'd like to see BSU go independent.

 

[WA_Vol]

We were talking about this at work. A lot of people stopped following college football and follow the NFL more because the perception is, without a playoff it's not a true champion.

A team like Boise St. making the NC game with their weak schedule is an example of what they are talking about. It's very unlikely a team like Boise St. makes it that far in a playoff format, but they have a good shot at getting in the NC game now.

College football is starting to lose some of their fanbase to the NFL.