Topic: Week 1 College Football (9-6-2010)

[FreebirdSTF]

Hell of an end to Navy/Maryland.  Navy shoots themselves in the foot numerous times while going in for scores.  Goes for it on fourth and goal from inside 1 and is stopped.  Currently down by three and looks like ballgame.

[FreebirdSTF]

VT stupidly brings the ball out of the end zone to start the game and runs a flea flicker from the 15.  Gets a PI and then fumbles the next play.  Boise starts at VT's 31.

[KoppoKick]

The Most Hated Team In America, per Dan Wetzel, leads 10-0.

[FreebirdSTF]

ESPN SportsNation seems to support Boise tonight.

[KoppoKick]

Tight game going into the 4th.

[FreebirdSTF]

Crazy game with a bunch of shitty special teams play. 

[FreebirdSTF]

Should be an exciting 2 minutes.

[FreebirdSTF]

Illegal block doesn't help.  It was blatant, but I thought they refs might actually miss it.  Another special teams issue btw.

[FreebirdSTF]

They picked up the flag, but I still thought it was in the back. 

[KoppoKick]

Cinderella lives.

When's an SEC team gonna get the stones and go play at the Blue Turf anyway?

[FreebirdSTF]

Cinderella lives makes no sense when they are #3 in the country (Brent Musburger said the same thing fwiw). 

I'd love to play them out there, but I don't really know what's in it for teams that think their schedule will end up being pretty tough. 

The Boise Problem as I call it is how this BCS System is not setup at all to deal with a team like them that looks legit, but doesn't get the opportunity to build a very impressive resume.  They knocked off VT (nice win), but beating Oregon State and a bunch of WAC teams isn't going to be all that impressive.  They better hope that VT plays like freaking worldbeaters from this point on (which I'm not sure VT can do).

[Proud Virgin]

And the above is why even if they go undefeated they have no right playing for the national title over a one loss team with a tougher schedule.

Play some actual teams Boysee state and I'll respect you more.

[SupTool]

They better hope that VT plays like freaking worldbeaters from this point on (which I'm not sure VT can do).

I think they have a shot, looking at their schedule, it doesn't really get tough until GA Tech.  And after that who knows what's going to happen with UNC and all that crap.  Then you have Miami, so I wouldn't count them out, it's very possible they could run the table in the ACC. 

[FreebirdSTF]

And the above is why even if they go undefeated they have no right playing for the national title over a one loss team with a tougher schedule.

Play some actual teams Boysee state and I'll respect you more.

It's not really that simple though because like Koppo mentioned you have to have teams be willing to play them.  The Boise Problem is a symptom of this stupid BCS disease more than anything.  I was impressed with their performance and in this game they certainly look like they belong.  The issue comes when they beat the Hokies and (for the sake of argument) the Beavers and then a bunch of trash.  In this BCS system of resume building and SOS that doesn't look so freaking impressive.

[TH]

And the above is why even if they go undefeated they have no right playing for the national title over a one loss team with a tougher schedule.

Play some actual teams Boysee state and I'll respect you more.

Uh, I'd call travelling halfway across the country to play VT and then playing Oregon State (both teams who are co-favorites to win their conferences) playing some "actual teams".

[FreebirdSTF]

And the above is why even if they go undefeated they have no right playing for the national title over a one loss team with a tougher schedule.

Play some actual teams Boysee state and I'll respect you more.

Uh, I'd call travelling halfway across the country to play VT and then playing Oregon State (both teams who are co-favorites to win their conferences) playing some "actual teams".

He's making his point badly, but Boise still doesn't have the grind that most of the "big boys" do.  That's a fact.  It's also a fact that it's not their fault.  Lastly, the system is the real problem, not Boise.

All that being said it will be interesting to see if they run the table where they end up.  Especially interesting if you have an SEC or other conference champ sitting there with one loss.  People used to gripe about USC's schedule and road to the Nat'l Title, I can't even imagine what it will sound like if Boise gets there with essentially a two team schedule. 

Nice win last night.  They out VTed VT in pretty much every phase of the game (early at least).  BEAMER BALL! (LOL)

[TH]

$10 says that M4M agrees with this article

http://www.everydayshouldbesaturday.com/2010/9/7/1673805/bcs-demands-birth-certificate-of

[FreebirdSTF]

Joe Schad said on Twitter:  "VT has gone to 17 straight bowls.  Give Boise due respect.  Do they have to schedule the Saints?"

That really misses the point that most are making.  I give them all the credit in the world for winning that game especially in that environment.  It's Boise's resume at the end of the season if they run the table that is the issue, not that they aren't able to "hang with the big boys."  It's unfortunate because it is out of Boise's hands for the most part and they do all they can do, but the system sucks.  Until the system is fixed I'm not advocating for a team that wins two big games a year to play in the BCS Title game unless we have something really odd happening.

[TH]

And the above is why even if they go undefeated they have no right playing for the national title over a one loss team with a tougher schedule.

Play some actual teams Boysee state and I'll respect you more.

Uh, I'd call travelling halfway across the country to play VT and then playing Oregon State (both teams who are co-favorites to win their conferences) playing some "actual teams".

He's making his point badly, but Boise still doesn't have the grind that most of the "big boys" do.  That's a fact.  It's also a fact that it's not their fault.  Lastly, the system is the real problem, not Boise.

All that being said it will be interesting to see if they run the table where they end up.  Especially interesting if you have an SEC or other conference champ sitting there with one loss.  People used to gripe about USC's schedule and road to the Nat'l Title, I can't even imagine what it will sound like if Boise gets there with essentially a two team schedule. 

Nice win last night.  They out VTed VT in pretty much every phase of the game (early at least).  BEAMER BALL! (LOL)

It's a very flawed system, and people have been complaining about it since Oregon was snubbed for the title game for a Nebraska team that didn't even win its Big 12 division. It's terrible and exclusionary, especially to a team that has jumped through every hoop the NCAA has put in its place. Am I saying that the WAC is on par with the SEC? No, and you'd have to be on drugs to think that. But let's not pretend that Boise State has any culpability for their schedule outside of scheduling top-notch OOC teams and let's not live in a fantasy world where we can magically make them play an SEC schedule and have them going 8-4.

The truth of the matter is, if Boise played an SEC schedule, that means they probably would have been members of the SEC, and thus would have the same recruiting advantages of playing in the SEC. That means more national TV money. More prestige for playing in the best football conference in the country. More opportunities to visit the fertile recruiting grounds of Florida and the rest of the southeastern USA, where football is religion, instead of the Rocky Mountain states, where football is just a pastime. You mean to tell me that with all those advantages in toe that Boise State, a team that has rocked the house playing in a podunk little conference, couldn't be a top 2 team every year with that administration in check? Bullshit.

I know you're not disagreeing with me here, Dave, and this reply isn't directed towards you as much as it is to the M4Ms and mikeys of the world who think that because Boise had to work its way up, pull itself up from its bootstraps in a terrible WAC to become the national power it is today, that it should be excluded from the conversation because it's not old money. Fuck that sentiment. It's that very sentiment that is blocking what REALLY needs to happen, and that's postseason reform.

[The Big Don]

I'm a fan of the SEC who's team is an SEC school but i'm tired of SEC marks bitching about shit like this.  The fact is the SEC is a huge part of the problem as there league is filled with total pussies who refuse to schedule tough non-conference opposition more often than not. It's a fucking disgrace that the Gamecocks win over Southern fuckin Miss was arguably the best win an SEC team had in the first week of the season.  I understand that they play in a tough conference but that's no excuse for scheduling the sort of god awful non-con opposition these teams do on the reg and the fact is they ARE to pussy to play a team like Boise even in their own buildings, let alone on the road. 

All of this is not to say that Boise are the best team in the country, but this is a team that returned 21 of 22 starters on an undefeated team that won a BCS bowl against another undefeated team who many people thought was the best playing team in football coming into that game.  If we can exclude them from any national title consideration because of the conference they play in - especially given the fact that they have by far the most impressive win of any team in the country right now (with the arguable second most impressive win being either Utah or TCU I might add) - than the NCAA ought to step in and boot them out of Division 1-A or whatever the fuck they are calling it these days.  The fact that they have won nearly every major game they've played in the last ten years - including a 2-0 record in BCS bowls - would make such a decision stupid of course but that's par for the course when it comes to the powers that be in college football.

[FreebirdSTF]

I'm a fan of the SEC who's team is an SEC school but i'm tired of SEC marks bitching about shit like this.  The fact is the SEC is a huge part of the problem as there league is filled with total pussies who refuse to schedule tough non-conference opposition more often than not. It's a fucking disgrace that the Gamecocks win over Southern fuckin Miss was arguably the best win an SEC team had in the first week of the season.  I understand that they play in a tough conference but that's no excuse for scheduling the sort of god awful non-con opposition these teams do on the reg and the fact is they ARE to pussy to play a team like Boise even in their own buildings, let alone on the road.

I don't see the big deal here.  In spite of a weak OOC schedule most SEC teams have tougher schedules than these teams like Boise.  I know that hurts Boise unfairly, but that's not BAMA, LSU, Auburn etc's problem.  There is no upside for them to play a tougher OOC schedule when that will really only widen the divide in SOS between Boise and teams like that.  If BAMA went to the blue turf out there this year then you give Boise a third tough game and BAMA an SEC slate plus Penn St plus Boise.  I'm not sure I see what it matters how tough the SEC's first week scheduling is when you will soon be pointing out how many cupcakes Boise plays while SEC teams are grinding through their schedules.  Also as a BAMA fan I do have to point out that while they play Georgia State/San Jose State/etc they have also scheduled at least one big OOC game each year over the past three years since Saban arrived (Clemson/VT/Penn State) and that trend isn't stopping.  I think the weak SEC OOC argument is just about as overrated as the Boise would lose 7 games in the SEC one tbh.

The BCS system is the problem and Boise and the SEC OOC are just symptoms. 

[The Big Don]

The big deal is SEC fanboys that will scream and bitch about a team like Boise playing a "weak" schedule at the same time their schools are scared shitless to play these schools which is precisely why Boise has ended up with so many OOC cupcakes over the years.  I don't blame the SEC teams for scheduling some cupcakes - this is a discussion about the idiocy of the fanbase (ftr I'm not referring to you here as you seem to have a pretty reasonable disposition on the subject). 

[jerseyboy]

I'm sorry, but the "Boise doesn't play the SEC grind" or the "they don't belong because they play in the WAC" argument is the gayest.  argument.  ever.  For a number of reasons:

1. How many times does Boise State have to jump up and beat an elite program for people to take them seriously?  It isn't as if Boise State hasn't been doing this for years - they're what, 5-1 in their last six games against teams that finished in the top-10 in the year-end rankings.  5-1.  I defy you to find another program that has a similar record.  At some point when you continually beat elite teams, using the "they don't belong argument" rings hollow.

2. In what other sport does this petulant, whiny argument about conference strength come into play?  Nobody in the NFL punishes a team because their division was weak and their out-of-conference schedule was soft.  And even in college basketball, the only thing SOS really does is parse through the middling teams from power conferences to determine who gets that coveted last 12 seed.  Again, if Boise State had been blown out year after year when playing powerhouse programs, or if the Oklahoma game was the only win, then you could make the argument the Broncos don't belong.  But not now.

3. How great are some of these SEC schedules, anyway?  Boise State's playing three bowl teams (Wyoming, Oregon State, Virginia Tech) in their OOC, two of them on the road.  Is any other SEC team playing two other bowl teams on the road?  And sure, the top level of the SEC is dynamite, but there's also the Vanderbilts of the world, too.  Nevada and Fresno State aren't great, but they're at least equivalent to Vandy or Missisippi State or Kentucky, aren't they?  Nobody argues running the table in the WAC is equivalent to running the table in the SEC, but if that happened, Boise State would be piss out of luck anyway.

[The Big Don]

Another part of the grind argument that is stupid is the fact that the WAC requires insane travel that SEC teams do not have to deal with.  The WAC stretches from LA Tech to Hawaii.  No SEC team has to face the possibility of traveling that far for conference play not once but twice. 

[FreebirdSTF]

I'm sorry, but the "Boise doesn't play the SEC grind" or the "they don't belong because they play in the WAC" argument is the gayest.  argument.  ever.  For a number of reasons:

1. How many times does Boise State have to jump up and beat an elite program for people to take them seriously?  It isn't as if Boise State hasn't been doing this for years - they're what, 5-1 in their last six games against teams that finished in the top-10 in the year-end rankings.  5-1.  I defy you to find another program that has a similar record.  At some point when you continually beat elite teams, using the "they don't belong argument" rings hollow.

2. In what other sport does this petulant, whiny argument about conference strength come into play?  Nobody in the NFL punishes a team because their division was weak and their out-of-conference schedule was soft.  And even in college basketball, the only thing SOS really does is parse through the middling teams from power conferences to determine who gets that coveted last 12 seed.  Again, if Boise State had been blown out year after year when playing powerhouse programs, or if the Oklahoma game was the only win, then you could make the argument the Broncos don't belong.  But not now.

3. How great are some of these SEC schedules, anyway?  Boise State's playing three bowl teams (Wyoming, Oregon State, Virginia Tech) in their OOC, two of them on the road.  Is any other SEC team playing two other bowl teams on the road?  And sure, the top level of the SEC is dynamite, but there's also the Vanderbilts of the world, too.  Nevada and Fresno State aren't great, but they're at least equivalent to Vandy or Missisippi State or Kentucky, aren't they?  Nobody argues running the table in the WAC is equivalent to running the table in the SEC, but if that happened, Boise State would be piss out of luck anyway.

1.  I take them seriously, but the fact is they basically get up for a game or two a year and then pick on inferior opponents.  Not the same as grinding through a schedule with four to six of those type of games.  Not even close.

2. It comes into play because in all those other sports you have a playoff to kind of even things out.  In college football at the FBS level you don't so it's a completely different animal and SOS makes perfect sense.  Like I've said 1000 times it's not Boise's fault that we have a broken system, but so long as we have it SOS is part of the equation as to who deserves to get selected for the 1 and 2 spots.

3.  Bowl team doesn't really mean all that much to me since there's roughly a billion bowl games.  If you just look at the teams that BAMA/UF/LSU/SCar/etc have to play I don't see how you can argue that Boise has it nearly as rough.  Not to say they aren't a legit team, but in this resume building way the BCS works you do have to take that into account.