Oh yeah Corey, I watch Boise State a lot, and I watched that game the entire game. One of the best college games I've ever seen. What i said was that I believe that you decided as you did this year with Utah that they were the best team in the country. I believe that was true. There is no doubt that almost every year it's possible to make a case for another team. And there is little doubt in my mind that when that happens, almost every year, you, Corey, will take the position another team should be the champ. It's just a cross that us fans of some teams have to bear this time of year. :twisted: :twisted: Outbound, I do think that most of us would like to see a playoff. Only thing is we don't have one and I for one choose to make the best of what we have and be happy. My personal gripe is the computers that make these decisions. 2003 is the worst example where as Corey said USC was first in both polls and the computers dropped them to 3rd. That resulted in a split Championship as the AP did the right thing and kept USC at number 1 then withdrew their poll from the BCS. Both in 2006 and 2008 the Gators made the game in spite of the computer polls. Part of the problem with the computers is a requirement that the NCAA imposes about margin of victory, the other part I can't explain except that the computers seem to have a natural bias toward some conferences, and in spite of Corey's feelings about the SEC, the computers don't help the SEC at all. By the way Outbound, don't confuse these little exchanges for real anger. Corey and I for instance have known each other on the internet since Prodigy days in the 90's. I respect him and think he respects me. I just don't buy all his ideas, especially as they frequently relate to the Gators. :roll: :roll:
Anger never entered my mind and I for one have always been pro playoff, how can it be a national champion if it wasn't decided on the field. A computer never played a game.
I'm pro playoff also but don't see how we get there for several years. While the computers don't decide the NC, they do have a big hand in deciding who gets to play in the game.
Excellent points Terry. Aquila....careful on the 2007 Ohio State argument....that's liable to start a war of biblical proportions on this board. Corey has been vehemently against me on that one so of course he would not agree with you.
Corey, So strength of schedule and past years performance do play a role? It seems like you don't put much credence in those points elsewhere.
Bill, that was directed at Aquila but since you answered it.. You watched a whole game.. sorta makes my point about not watching a lot of Boise football. Those plays aren't 'trick plays' anymore than the offense Florida runs is a 'trick play' offense. You make a great point about the computers, however those became 'needed' because the humans couldn't be trusted.. Of course, this ignores potential prejudice of the humans programming the computer program... Only a playoff eliminates this nonsense. KP, SOS can be used when you have 3 or 4 teams that are tied equally. In this case, you had OU, Auburn and USC. All unbeaten, all from 'power' conferences... Where you and I differ is that you think the SEC and others are 'automatically' tough while other schedules are automatically weak. My position is that you won't know until the dust is settled about SOS.. by then it is too late. Outbound, Don't worry about the anger thing. Bill always thinks I am angrier than I am. Passion and anger are different animals. Bill is a fantastic individual who does a great job here. He is as fair a poster and moderator as you could ask for.. I just think his moral compass gets askew when the magnetic subject of the Florida Gators is involved Dave, what the hell are you talking about? I am against you on the Ohio State thing? The Michigan sucking this year thing?
The Ohio State "thing" was last year's NC worthiness issue due to the schedule lacking quality opponents. But that's old news and I was actually pulling for the Buckeyes tonight and least they showed up...finally.
Utah deserved a shot at the title. No doubt. But so did Oklahoma, Texas and Florida. I would have included Texas Tech in that but well you saw what happened to them.
Here's a question for you guys. Seems like every college coach out there has a state police (or other law enforcement) escort after the game, but I can't remember if the NFL has the same escort for their coaches after the games? Do they? If not why do the college coaches need them?
Granted, I don't, but I think you'd have to be kidding if you tried to tell me that the Statue of Liberty play is something they run every game. Anyway, since I don't watch a lot of Boise I thought I'd do a little research. Of course, we know that this year they had a nice season which ended with a loss to a TCU team from the now respected Mountain West. The Broncos also had a very, very nice win over Oregon @ Oregon. They also beat Fresno State. OK, they had two quality wins. Please, spare me the argument about whether San Jose St., Nevada, and New Mexico should be considered tough games. Oh yeah they did beat Hawaii as well who lost to your Fighting Irish on their home turf. Two wins on their entire schedule inspire me. They did play a tough TCU team that Oklahoma beat handily and they battled tooth and nail with the Frogs. OK, let's go back and see how they've done from 2000-07. I think most people know that Boise St. has a fantastic record this decade. Let's go look at how they've fared courtesy of http://football.stassen.com/records/confres.html. Let's just suffice it to say that they've dominated the Big west, MAC, Moutain West, Sun Belt, and WAC (own conference) to the tune of 75-4. That's good stuff. How about the rest? vs. Big 12: 2-0 with wins over the aforementioned Oklahoma and they also beat Iowa St. back in '02. ISU was 7-7 that year. Not bad. A very good win over OK and a not bad win over the Cyclones. vs. CUSA: 2-2 Now this is Conference USA we're talking about....They lost to an 8-5 East Carolina in '07. They also lost to Louisville (in C-USA at the time) in '04. Louisville was 11-1 that year. I wouldn't be too proud of these losses but not too bad. vs. Pac-10: 2-5 Man, this isn't very good. They did, however, beat a 10-4 Oregon St. in 2006 and a 7-5 Oregon St. team in 2004. Otherwise, not that great... vs. ACC: 0-1 Boise lost to a 9-3 BC team on their own blue turf in 2005. vs. SEC: 0-4 I know they haven't had a lot of opportunity to play the boys from down South but this doesn't help your arguments AT ALL. Let's look at the individual games, granted none were played in Boise. But isn't that how you prove you belong? Beat any team anywhere??? @ Georgia (2005) L, 48-13-UGa finised 10-3 that year @ Arkansas (2002) L, 41-14-Ark finished 9-5 that year @ South Carolina (2001) L, 32-13-USCe finished 9-3 that year vs. Arkansas (@ Little Rock, 2000) L, 38-31-Ark finished 6-6 that year. Let's see, so in four game vs. the SEC this decade, Boise has been outscored, on average, 40-18. I know you can say that none of those games happened in 2006. That's true, but you seem to be very trigger-happy in throwing out the fact that USC beat the piss out of Arkansas and Auburn in the past years leading up to the 2004 season in your arguments to keep Auburn out of the NC game. Overall, Boise St. from 2000-2007 was 79-16. 1/4 of those 16 losses came against SEC schools. And you would have me to believe that they would survive an SEC slate undefeated??? I think not.
Again, you are reading (which is a start) but you are losing the context. Boise State use to be a member of the Big West conference, which basically dissolved for football purposes so that it could concentrate on other sports. This put Boise in a position in which they were forced to be more competitive or go the way of Cal State Fullerton, Long Beach State or Pacific. They moved into the WAC in 2001 (the year they went 8-4) and decided to start playing football with the big boys. Keep in mind, this is a program that was 1-AA until 1996. That means in 10 years of playing Division 1 (bowl subdivision football) they've gone from being neophyte to BCS/FiestaBowl champion in a decade. It's OK if you didn't realize that Boise State was a newcomer to the game. Most people don't. As crazy as it sounds, what happened at Boise in 2000 doesn't have much to do with what is going on there today. That was TWO coaching staffs in the past (Koetter left to go to Arizona State in 2001, and McCarthy left for Colorado in 2005). To look at Boise fairly, you have to see where they came from and where they are going. But if you want to go back to 2000, you can. I just don't see much use in it. Unlike Michigan, you're not talking 100+ years of Division 1 football history here. I notice also that you don't give those losses much context. For example, you mention that they lost to Arkansas (in a game played in their 6th DI season BTW)... That Arkansas team was the SEC West Champion. You say 'they were a 9-5 team that year'... but 2 of those losses came in the SECCG (to Georgia) and in the bowl (to Minnesota). That 6-6 Arkansas team beat Alabama and LSU as well. In fact, Boise State (in just their 4th year of playing Division I football) was playing Arkansas just as tough as Alabama (7 point loss) did in back-to-back weeks.. LSU managed to get beat worse by that 6-6 team. BTW-That 2005 Georgia team you mentioned that finished 10-3.. You also failed to mention that they were SEC East and SEC champions that year. Just like that South Carolina team... that team beat Ohio State in their bowl game.. That SCAR team beat Alabama, Georgia, and Clemson as well as others... That was Boise in their 6th D1 season... playing SEC bowl teams and 2 SEC champions.... You guys better watch out... They've stopped losing those games with regularity.
I'm sorry, Corey, but I'm choosing to end this debate with you. I'm surprised you didn't bring up the cross-country flight thing which I may have even conceded to you. Boise State does not belong in the national title discussion in 2006, simple and the numbers bear it out. They play two, maybe three tough games per year and when they step up to the plate against an SEC school they get hammered on a consistent basis. SEC programs have provided 25% of Boise's losses yet they only constitute about 4% of the games played in the period I covered. You accuse many on this board of not listening to reason on a consistent basis, yet when reasonable FACTS are presented to you you dismiss them based on the context. MCG often provides context for games the Gators lose by providing players they were without due to injury, emotion, motivation, etc. and it is no problem for you to dismiss that as an afterthought. It seems consistently that you're a guy who looks at what happened on the field when validating an argument when it's in your favor. I present you with facts about what happens when Boise St. has played the big boys and you dismiss that as taken out of context. When Boise started playing D-1 football is irrelevant WRT their worthiness in 2006. The fact is that they have consistently gotten hammered by SEC teams. Yes, those SEC teams were good but they all lost SEC games during the seasons that Boise St. played them and Boise was beaten by an average score of 40-18. You cannot reasonably tell me that you think Boise St. would have gone undefeated in 2006 if they had played in the SEC or any other major conference with the possible exceptions of the Big East and ACC. If you can't say that then case closed, end of discussion for Boise St. in '06. Utah in '08 is a little different story. They beat some very good BCS conference teams along the way, even doing it far from home. I give them credit for that and I think it is unfair that they will not be able to prove their mettle on the field. However, to declare them the OBVIOUS champion is a bit of a reach.
You chose to leave out some important facts when downplaying those teams. If you choose to end the topic, that's fine. I doubt you read all that. They played teams that won SEC titles back when they were a new DI program and that matters not to you. If you chose to not see what is evolving in that program, that's on you.... and like I mentioned, they have stopped losing those games with regularity. Cross country flight has nothing to do with it. You're trying to compare the Peterson led team in 2006 with teams led by guys who had been gone for 6 years. You find that a fair comparison? It had long been held that Peterson was the real brains behind the Boise outfit... to date, that appears to be true. Tell me, how relevant is Gerry Faust to Lou Holtz ND teams? Mike DuBose to Nick Saban at Bama? Gerry DiNardo to Nick Saban at LSU?
I have a great amount of respect for what Boise St. has accomplished. In fact, I read an article recently talking about how Boise developed their "brand" and how the blue turf was a part of that. I think it is very interesting and I see where the program is headed. That's great, I'm happy for them. However, to make an argument for them as NC in '06 is a reach. In 2005, one year prior, they got shellacked by Georgia, an SEC team. Florida, an SEC team, won the national title in '06 by pasting Ohio State. Boise St. played virtually no one on their way to that Fiesta Bowl victory over Oklahoma in '06. They didn't play a single ranked team. Their best victory was a resounding win over Oregon State which finished the season ranked 21. However, if you really want to look at context, Oregon State started the season 4-3 and then came back to have a stellar season so Boise St. got them early. Anyway, enough about Boise St., I just wanted to make it clear that I don't doubt the direction of Boise State's program, I do, however, doubt their worthiness to be in the NC discussion in 2006. The Boise State discussion has little to do with this year anyway. My original debate regarded the fact that the BCS has somehow magically made the SEC teams NC contenders on a regular basis. I will grant you that the system is far from perfect and does heavily favor the haves over the have nots but in every single year that an SEC team won the title they deserved to at least be in the discussion and in '98 and '06 they absolutely deserved the titles they won. I can certainly see your argument for USC in '03 and '07, especially in '03. Other than that, I think there is no evidence for any sort of huge conspiracy promoting the SEC. I do agree that the Pac-10 has gotten screwed more than once but the SEC had nothing to do with that in 2000 or '01. I'm not certain as to why the Pac-10 always seems to get the short end of the stick but I do agree that it has happened.
Aquila, You're choosing to make it just about the SEC. I've held that this system benefits the super conferences (Big12/SEC). It is the brain child of Roy Kramer and I don't think it is any accident that it rewards the SEC means of doing business. That being said.. You're talking about Boise getting whacked the year before they won the title... That was under Dan Hawkins btw, but you've established that you don't care about that... The year before Stoops won the NC at OU: -Blown out by UCLA 41-24 -Blown out by Texas 45-12 -They also lost to TCU, in Norman, 17-10. Sometimes a year can make a huge difference. Hawkins was halfway out the door shopping his brand all over the place, Peterson took over the next year and they looked much better.
I will say this... You and I aren't far apart.. I just want an end to favoritism. 11 conference champs+5 wildcards=No excuses. I don't want to hear it can't be done. It's been done by DII and DIII for a long time. The big time conferences don't want to put their nuts on the line. Why would they? They can have 30 'mini champions' with the bowl system where everyone gets a hug, a t-shirt and a fresh new start. The Bowls make a killing financially.. Not that there is anything wrong with that... just don't tell me it is about finding a champion...because it isn't.
In your previous post regarding Auburn getting a shot at the NC in '04: I'm sure I could dig a little deeper and find some more posts were you mention USC beating Arkansas handily, etc. in prior years. I completely understand a coaching change making a difference but if you just look at 2006, Boise had one quality win before beating Oklahoma. The rest of their schedule (feel free to enlighten me with how good these teams were in 2006): Sacramento St. @ Boise @ Wyoming Hawaii @ Boise @ Utah Louisiana Tech @ Boise @ New Mexico St. @ Idaho Fresno St. @ Boise @ San Jose St. Utah St. @ Boise @ Nevada Man, that's a schedule loaded with juggernauts!!! Florida's Schedule in '06 Southern Miss UCF @ Tennessee UK Bama LSU @ Auburn, loss here to an 11-2 team that finished #9 AP Georgia @ vandy South Carolina Western Carolina @ FSU Arkansas You tell me whose schedule was tougher. Yes, Boise State beat Oklahoma, a team that suffered a big loss to Texas during the regular season and also lost to Oregon (albeit a questionable loss). I'm sorry but I'll take Florida's 13-1 anytime against Boise State's 13-0.
In my opinion, it won't be done in D-1 until the NCAA takes a heavy hand involvement and makes it happen. The NCAA could make it happen. If they don't do it, it won't get done. The bowls and the BCS conferences are getting way too rich off the system in place. Also, I don't think you'll hear a lot of complaining from Utah either. Sure, the coaches and players will say that they want a shot at the title on the field. However, the guys behind the scenes in the Mountain West are laughing all the way to the bank to the tune of 17.5 million dollars. I think they're happy about that. Granted, I think a playoff could generate multiple more millions but I've never heard anyone complain much about 17.5 million dollars for 3 hours of work.
Nice research Aquila. No doubt Corey will have a response and it will be in favor of Boise State. But the balls in his court. I'll be back after bowling to check. 8) 8)
I have a question for Corey: "How many Boise State games have you seen in person? This is not meant to strike an argument, I have been to three games at the blue turf. The latest was Sept 31st 2006. I had the opportunity to see a game, Thursday night game, while teaching in Boise. I forget who they played but they won easily by a score of way too much to way too little... something like 50 - 0. It was six years earlier that I saw them for two games, back to back weeks. I remember that the first week was I think Eastern washington, a team that should have received one of those 50 - 0 smack downs. That was a hard fought game that Boise scored a couple of late TDs to make the score look like it was not as close as it was. The next week was North Texas, a team coached by Daryl Dickey. Since Daryl was the QB that put the smack down on Miami in the sugar Bowl, I had an interest in this game other than entertainment while on a teaching assignment. Boise wraped them up, put a bow on the package and tossed them back on their bus. That score was something like 60 - 0. I have seen them look great and seen them look average... IN PERSON!