Why is Boise State being projected into a BCS Bowl?

#27
#27
ddubb76 said:
Am i the only who sees the media using Miami and Florida State to pump up the strength of schedule for these crappy teams that beat them, and then turn around and talk about how bad they are down. Who cares that Louisville beat up a broke down Miami, at the beginning of the season, before we seen Miami loose to everyone else. I could see that as an accomplishment then, but not now. Clemson beat Fl State, but who hasn't? And who the hell has Wisconsin beat? Do they play football there?
Click to expand...
when miami was put on thier schedule, i can just about bet no one expected them to be bad. you schedule teams like miami with the expectation that it will be a big game and should you win, would garner you some semblence of national respect.

it's not l'ville's falut Miami sucks this year. it's miami's. and L'ville beat the crap out of 'em. how Miami did this year doesn't discount the fact that they did schedule them in lieu of a sun belt, conf. usa, mac, wac etc...type team. they scheduled a team that has won 1 and played for 2 natiaonal titles this decade.
 
#28
#28
ddubb76 said:
Am i the only who sees the media using Miami and Florida State to pump up the strength of schedule for these crappy teams that beat them, and then turn around and talk about how bad they are down. Who cares that Louisville beat up a broke down Miami, at the beginning of the season, before we seen Miami loose to everyone else. I could see that as an accomplishment then, but not now. Clemson beat Fl State, but who hasn't? And who the hell has Wisconsin beat? Do they play football there?
Click to expand...
The discussion is about scheduling. When Louisville scheduled the "U," the Canes were in the process of embarking on a 25+ game winning streak. I'd say that's gutsy scheduling. The rest of your post has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
 
#29
#29
hatvol96 said:
The discussion is about scheduling. When Louisville scheduled the "U," the Canes were in the process of embarking on a 25+ game winning streak. I'd say that's gutsy scheduling. The rest of your post has nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Click to expand...

I beleive the discussion was about why BS is in the mix for a bcs bowl game. Either way I veered off topic, and guts do not change the fact that both teams are crappy and other crappy teams are getting benefits for beating those crappy teams, and the media uses it to which ever advantage point they happen to be talking about at that time.
 
#30
#30
ddubb76 said:
I beleive the discussion was about why BS is in the mix for a bcs bowl game. Either way I veered off topic, and guts do not change the fact that both teams are crappy and other crappy teams are getting benefits for beating those crappy teams, and the media uses it to which ever advantage point they happen to be talking about at that time.
Click to expand...


I don't know if you have noticed but this year most of teams are "crappy".
 
#31
#31
another thing to consider...Clemson and FSU are in the same conf. and play each other anyway....so that's no fault of clemson.

and Wisconsin is 11-1 in the Big 10. it'd be no different if USC went 11-1 in the SEC...would anyone not think USC was any good if they accomplished that? we all know what we think about USC...so in order for that to happen, i guess UF, UGA, TN, Aub, LSU and the rest of the conf. must be extremely down if one of the traditional powers doesn't win the whole thing? Or is there any room to think that if a 2nd tier conf. team from a BCS league does well, that they actually accomplished something? Or is it always going to be that the traditional powers are just down? this whole system is based on name recognition and name value. if a name school is not in the hunt, then the ones that are more or less just lucky the name schools are down....i guess you can't win for losing huh?

Judging by some of the posts, it seems not.
 
#32
#32
jakez4ut said:
another thing to consider...Clemson and FSU are in the same conf. and play each other anyway....so that's no fault of clemson.

and Wisconsin is 11-1 in the Big 10. it'd be no different if USC went 11-1 in the SEC...would anyone not think USC was any good if they accomplished that? we all know what we think about USC...so in order for that to happen, i guess UF, UGA, TN, Aub, LSU and the rest of the conf. must be extremely down if one of the traditional powers doesn't win the whole thing? Or is there any room to think that if a 2nd tier conf. team from a BCS league does well, that they actually accomplished something? Or is it always going to be that the traditional powers are just down? this whole system is based on name recognition and name value. if a name school is not in the hunt, then the ones that are more or less just lucky the name schools are down....i guess you can't win for losing huh?

Judging by some of the posts, it seems not.
Click to expand...

My point was not that Clemson sucked, even though they do, but that the press is very irritating when they come on TV, radio or whatever and talk about how good Louisville or Clemson are because they beat FL state and Miami. Then they turn around and talk about how bad these teams are. You cant say a team is good because they beat a certain team, and then turn around and say that that certain team is bad, why would a team be good fo beating a bad team. And if your notable win for the season just happens to be a team that is bad then you really dont hav a notable win do you? And I was aware that Clemson is in the same conference as FL State and that they do have to play each other, but last year when we sucked I dont think that many sec teams got much credit for beating us, and the ones that lost to us really took a hit in the poles.
 
#34
#34
A lot of words: There's always the POSSIBILITY of an upset, no matter who UT plays. IMO, the game wouldn't even be close.
 
#35
#35
ddubb76 said:
My point was not that Clemson sucked, even though they do, but that the press is very irritating when they come on TV, radio or whatever and talk about how good Louisville or Clemson are because they beat FL state and Miami. Then they turn around and talk about how bad these teams are. You cant say a team is good because they beat a certain team, and then turn around and say that that certain team is bad, why would a team be good fo beating a bad team. And if your notable win for the season just happens to be a team that is bad then you really dont hav a notable win do you? And I was aware that Clemson is in the same conference as FL State and that they do have to play each other, but last year when we sucked I dont think that many sec teams got much credit for beating us, and the ones that lost to us really took a hit in the poles.
Click to expand...
the media talking one team up or down really doesn't matter to me. i don't understand why people get so worked up about it.

and it's not like every team a team plays on their schedule is going to be great. all you can do is play the teams on your schedule. every team every year has teams that disappoint and surprise.

take us for example...many of us before the season started thought that UGA was going to be this HUGE game that we neeeded to win...and that it was a game that was a "might" win....turns out after 11 weeks....we should've beaten UGA and had we lost that game...we'd look at it as a bad loss.

conversely...Arkansas was a game that we all thought would be tough, but was a game that we should win...turns out Arkansas is playing for the SEC title and is the only undefeated team in conf. play after 11 weeks, and as such, doesn't look so bad of a loss now.

Same thing with your posts...you don't know how good or bad your opponents will be week to week, you just go play. and i'm not going to condemn a L'ville or Clemson for beating the teams on their schedule because FSU and Miami turned out not to be so great. It's not their fault. they beat them. and as it turns out, they should have. They do deserve credit for winning those games, just as both Miami and FSU deserve criticism for havin seasons like they have had....remember, they set their own standard...and bashing them for their season so far is not necessarily an indictment to the teams they've played, rather it's an indictment on the expectation level most have for those teams based on previous experience watching them play. Same thing happened to us last year. You think Vandy doesn't think last year's w in Knoxville was any less a big deal just because we sucked? NO. but losing to vandy just made our season that much worse, based on the expectations we have set for ourselves.
 
#36
#36
Boise St is being projected as a BCS because:


"3. The champion of Conference USA, the Mid-American Conference, the Mountain West Conference, the Sun Belt Conference, or the Western Athletic Conference will earn an automatic berth in a BCS bowl game if either:

A. Such team is ranked in the top 12 of the final BCS Standings, or,
B. Such team is ranked in the top 16 of the final BCS Standings and its ranking in the final BCS Standings is higher than that of a champion of a conference that has an annual automatic berth in one of the BCS bowls. No more than one such team from Conference USA, the Mid-American Conference, the Mountain West Conference, the Sun Belt Conference, and the Western Athletic Conference shall earn an automatic berth in any year. If two or more teams from those conferences satisfy the provisions for an automatic berth, then the team with the highest finish in the final BCS Standings will receive the automatic berth, and the remaining team or teams will be in the pool of teams eligible for selection by the bowls as at-large teams."
 
#37
#37
DowntownVol said:
Here's a thought: if teams like Boise St., TCU, even Louisville, etc. want to merit serious consideration for the NC game, or a BCS bowl in general, make 'em start scheduling better teams in the non-conference schedule. What are they afraid of, exactly? Personally, I would love to see Boise St. play a home-and-home two-game series vs. UT.
Click to expand...
Yeah, it would be great if Boise played a tough non-conf game. Maybe if they traveled to Georgia...
 
#39
#39
jakez4ut said:
so wait...L'ville if i remember correctly, is a MEMBER OF A BCS LEAGUE, RIGHT?

and the other teams...they do have conferences they play in. and they don't always necessarily get to decide who their ooc games will be. remember, the big boys are the ones that go out and find fillers for their schedules. And a lot of the big boys are fililng those games with better opponents, not all, but some. And then in the Pac 10, instead of adding another non conference team, they added another conference game. so there's 10 teams and 10 games a year taken away from some of these non bcs league teams to play a BCS school.

and as far as "afraid"....why do you think they want a shot to play in the BCS is in the first place? they want to prove it on the feild...when in actuality, it's the BCS conf. schools seeking 1-AA schools as filler games instead of some of those teams....

reality is the non bcs leagues have very little control over who they play non conference wise.
Click to expand...

Why BCS schools need to play a tougher non-conference schedule instead of scheduling a bunch of patsies: the 2004 Auburn Tigers.

Yes, Louisville is in a BCS conference, but we all know that the Big East is like the annoying little tagalong sister of the power conferences.

I understand your argument about there being no benefit for UT scheduling Boise St. (nothing to gain, too much to lose), but what about mid to bottom tier teams for the power conferences? Vandy went to Ann Arbor and hung tough with Michigan for 3 quarters. How about Boise St. vs., say, Kentucky? TCU vs. Rutgers?
 
#40
#40
I am not sure, but I guess Boise State is not from a BCS conference. So if they get into top 12 with some other criterions, they can play BCS bowl game.
 
#42
#42
DowntownVol said:
Why BCS schools need to play a tougher non-conference schedule instead of scheduling a bunch of patsies: the 2004 Auburn Tigers.

Yes, Louisville is in a BCS conference, but we all know that the Big East is like the annoying little tagalong sister of the power conferences.

I understand your argument about there being no benefit for UT scheduling Boise St. (nothing to gain, too much to lose), but what about mid to bottom tier teams for the power conferences? Vandy went to Ann Arbor and hung tough with Michigan for 3 quarters. How about Boise St. vs., say, Kentucky? TCU vs. Rutgers?
Click to expand...
so you're honestly saying that Michigan gets more credit for playing Vandy and beating them than Boise playing Oregon St and beating them? Why? cause their Michigan? is the rest of the Big 10 minus OSU and Wisconsin THAT much better than the rest of the WAC this year?

the whole premise of the argument is that these mid major teams don't play in a "real" conference. how is plaing the lower teir teams in the BCS conferences earning them any more respect than playing their own inter conference games that apparently is the equivelant of playing the KY's, Vandy's of the world?

we can't have it both ways.

and just for instance, take Rutgers...from your tag along little sister conf. they've taken a beating cause of SOS...but by your rationale, it's not that bad: played UNC, Ill and Navy OOC. a big 10 and ACC team, both bottom tier teams in those conferences, but other BCS leagues none the less.

Boise St has beaten everyone in their conference and they have one quality win OOC, against Oregon St., who right now is 3rd in the Pac 10 with a victory over #3 USC.

Now, i'm not saying that these teams are as good as the 3rd, 4th best teams in the SEC, Big 10 etc...just saying we can't just blame those teams for their conf. schedules when they have to play those games. they each have non conf. games that will enhance their schedules and if they win those games, like Rutgers had and BSU has, it's worth noting.

But not every top tier team in these mid majors can play the big boys each year in the BCS leagues...for reasons stated above...

could Rutgers or BSU have the same type of season if they played in the SEC or Big 10? NO. but they don't play in those leagues, so that just doesn't matter to me. What does is that they beat everyone on their schedule in a D1 conf. And if i'm a fan of one of those schools i'd be a little ticked off too that these BCS leagues have basically monopolized the National Championship format. Mid major teams in D1 football have 0 chance for playing for a national title. and in the Big East, only 3-4 teams have legitimage shots at possibly playing for a national title and that's only under the strictest of circumstances--they HAVE to go undefeated and hope that there is only one other or no other undefeated teams left at the end. And if you're UConn, S. FL, cincy, Syr, Rutgers i'm not sure that doing that would get you in...and YOU play in a BCS league.

Under the current landscape....the SEC, ACC, Big 10, Big 12 and Pac 10 are the only conferences that can have represenatives elligible to play for a national title. and there's something wrong with that when there's 62 other D1 football teams that start every season with absolutely NO shot at even playing for, much less winning, a national title.

SO i just don't have any heartburn whatsoever about BSU getting an at large bid to play in a BCS game. remember, this is about money...each of the 6 BCS leagues is GUARANTEED at least one spot in the BCS and a sure big pay day. at least two of those conferences will get two teams in so BONUS money.

then take in to consideration the bowl payouts for all the other New Year's day bowls the rest of those conferences will play in, in addition to the BCS bowls, and rich get richer. If BSU has no shot at the BCS with an undefeated season and top 12 ranking, their destination is what? Boise for the Humanitarian Bowl as WAC champs? and how many other bowls will WAC teams go to? probably none...so at least this way that conf. gets one huge pay day and a shot to play a big boy in a HUGE game on national TV.

it boils down to money....it's not about best teams available.
 
#43
#43
Oregon State is a quality win? Surely your joking, they are 7-4 and nowhere close to being ranked in the top 25. The majority of teams Boise St has played don't even have winning records.
 
#44
#44
oklavol said:
Oregon State is a quality win? Surely your joking, they are 7-4 and nowhere close to being ranked in the top 25. The majority of teams Boise St has played don't even have winning records.
Click to expand...
I bet USC wishes they had a victory over Oregon State on their resume.
 
#45
#45
oklavol said:
Oregon State is a quality win? Surely your joking, they are 7-4 and nowhere close to being ranked in the top 25. The majority of teams Boise St has played don't even have winning records.
Click to expand...
i was using that in relation to calling Michigan's win over Vandy a quality win just because of the conference they're in.

so no, i don't think Beating OSU west is of any consequence. but for BSU, it is something to hang your hat on, since they did beat USC and are currenlty in 3rd place in a BCS league.

that's all.
 
#47
#47
3.jpg

PLAYOFF!??!?
 
#50
#50
Hey watch this. I'm going to compare Boise's OOC schedule to some SEC schools' OOC schedules. First, Arkansas:

Oregon St < USC
Utah > Utah State
Wyoming > ULM
Sac State = SE Missouri St

Seems like Boise has a tougher OOC schedule.

Ok, let's try LSU.

Oregon State > Arizona
Utah > Tulane
Wyoming > Fresno State
Sac State < ULL

Boise wins!

Let's try Auburn.

Oregon State = Washington State
Utah > Tulane
Wyoming > Arkansas State
Sac State < Buffaol

Boise again!

Here's Florida.

Oregon State = Florida State
Utah > S. Miss
Wyoming > C. Florida
Sac State < W. Carolina

Boise barely. Hmmmm.

Yes, the above teams have tougher in conference schedules than Boise State, obv. However, Boise has tougher OOC schedules. Now what?
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top