# Boise State and TCU for the BCS Championship.



## yosoyellobo (Nov 1, 2006)

Anybody else beside me rooting for this outcome. What I would really like is some sort of playoff and such a game might get us one.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

No...both are overrated teams playing in extremely weak conferences.


----------



## yosoyellobo (Nov 1, 2006)

sigma1914 said:


> No...both are overrated teams playing in extremely weak conferences.


If that is true then they should say at start of the season that non-bcs team are not eligible for the championship.


----------



## Doug Brott (Jul 12, 2006)

yosoyellobo said:


> If that is true then they should say at start of the season that non-bcs team are not eligible for the championship.


works for me


----------



## yosoyellobo (Nov 1, 2006)

Lets also eliminate the Big East and ACC. Also about twenty-five of the bowl games.


----------



## stevenv (Aug 4, 2004)

It will probably be Auburn vs. Oregon in the National Championship.


----------



## fluffybear (Jun 19, 2004)

stevenv said:


> It will probably be Auburn vs. Oregon in the National Championship.


I'm not sure on this one! I have a strange feeling that Oregon may be going down this Friday. Given, Arizona has not been playing great ball lately but Arizona (over the years) has had a reputation for taking down highly ranked teams


----------



## chevyguy559 (Sep 19, 2008)

Boise is hands down the best team in the country....everyone uses the "strength of schedule" argument but no one WANTS to play them...and the "they couldn't win with an SEC schedule" argument is weak as well, because if they played in the SEC, they'd have an SEC budget, the SEC recruiting draw, etc. Its NCAA FBS College Football, there should be NO reason teams should be left out of winning the NCAA Championship because of the conference they are in.

If they're not gonna put the in the championship game against each other, put one against Oregon and one against Auburn....I'd put $$ on both Boise and TCU to win :contract::contract:


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

I'm also confused...

Auburn is supposed to be so much better than Boise & TCU according to the experts... and yet a 2-loss Alabama team is favored by 5 points this weekend. Why does that make Auburn so good when a 2-loss team is expected to beat them?

I also hate the strength of schedule argument for two reasons.

1. Hard to get teams to schedule home-and-home with Boise & TCU.. someone already mentioned this.

2. A lot of the "big" teams play week out of conference schedules AND how do we know their conference is so good?

Consider...

In NCAA basketball teams play 30+ games, so we get a lot of outside conference play to judge the relative strength of each conference... and to some extent you can rank conferences based on that.

With a 12 game schedule, and usually only 4-5 non-conference games... it is really hard to gauge.

Consider...

Who has LSU beaten outside of the SEC that is any good?
Who has Auburn beaten outside of the SEC that is any good?
Who has Alabama beaten outside of the SEC that is any good?
and so forth...

Much of the "strength" of the SEC has to do with how people decided to rank that conference before the season even started... and since there isn't a long list of great teams beaten by SEC teams outside their conference... the whole house of cards supporting their being a strong conference doesn't hold up.

James Madison beat Virginia Tech... that game (if Tech had won) wouldn't even count towards bowl-eligibility! And yet, I can guarantee you that if Boise or TCU had lost to James Madison they wouldn't even be sniffing the top 25, much less the top 15 like Virginia Tech is!

And Pittsburgh... not much above .500 overall, will win the Big East and be in a big time bowl game. Why?

Now for the surprise ending!

I don't want to see Boise play TCU for the championship because people will still say they aren't good enough to play against the "big" teams.

Last year... both were undefeated and played each other. They get ripped for not playing "tough" teams and then the BCS people who could have put them against other top teams pit them against each other and then keep ripping them for not playing anyone good!

I have seen Oregon, and Auburn, and Boise... I haven't seen TCU this year. I have a hard time distinguishing what I've seen on the field between those 3 undefeated teams that I have seen.

So now I find myself rooting for Oregon to lose... or Auburn to lose... possibly Auburn to lose twice... so Boise or TCU can get into a title game vs Oregon (or Auburn).

I hate doing that... because Oregon and Auburn are good teams too. NOT because they are in the Pac-10 (or whatever ##) or SEC.. but because they actually are good teams period. Same is true for Boise, and possibly TCU... and it's just a shame we can't get at least a 4 team (I prefer 8) playoff for seasons like this and see it on the field.


----------



## Davenlr (Sep 16, 2006)

+1. Hate the way its currently scored.


----------



## rkr0923 (Sep 14, 2006)

I'm an Auburn fan but I too think Bosie should play for the Championship. They would give Auburn or Oregon all they wanted.


----------



## Herdfan (Mar 18, 2006)

yosoyellobo said:


> Anybody else beside me rooting for this outcome. What I would really like is some sort of playoff and such a game might get us one.


Yes, for the same reason, but I don't think even one of them will get in, much less both. The powers won't let it happen.


----------



## Game Fan (Sep 8, 2007)

This is just another reason college football needs some type of playoff system. It's not going to happen, but it sure would be nice.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

TCU barely beat SDSU at home! So, you argue, "They beat Utah!" Yeah, the same Utah who got blasted by sorry Notre Dame.

Who's BSU beat? VT you say? VT got beat by freakin' James Madison! Who? Exactly.

BSU & TCU are good, very good. But, TCU wouldn't survive in the Big XII. And if they could, then why won't they join? There's 2 new vacancies with Colorado & Nebraska leaving. Utah had the guts to join the new Pac-10, why didn't BSU?


----------



## chevyguy559 (Sep 19, 2008)

sigma1914 said:


> BSU & TCU are good, very good. But, TCU wouldn't survive in the Big XII. And if they could, then why won't they join? There's 2 new vacancies with Colorado & Nebraska leaving. Utah had the guts to join the new Pac-10, why didn't BSU?


They can't just "join" another conference. They have to be invited....


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

sigma1914 said:


> TCU barely beat SDSU at home! So, you argue, "They beat Utah!" Yeah, the same Utah who got blasted by sorry Notre Dame.
> 
> Who's BSU beat? VT you say? VT got beat by freakin' James Madison! Who? Exactly.


If you hold everyone to the same scrutiny, you will find many schools in your "big" conferences who have only barely won against supposed "weak" competition.

And as I noted... many schools in the big conferences are only considered strong competition because of being in the conference, without any on-field performance to support it.

The blind-test works really well... Take random teams from any conference and compare their win/loss and other stats, and you find that once you remove the names of the schools, a lot of teams kind of look the same... and are only highly ranked because of familiarity.

As an ACC fan, for example... I was amazed when UNC basketball was pre-season top 10 this year... after a barely .500 record last season... and sure enough UNC is 1-2 this year and down to #25 somehow still ranked.

Football has the same problems... "familiar" schools get a benefit of the doubt, while others are told that they have to be exceptional.

When Auburn wins a close game against a team they should beat... the pundits say "That's what a good team does, win when they aren't playing their best"... but when TCU has a close win, the pundits say "See, it shows TCU isn't as good as we thought because they should have won by more"...

Then we see people complain about a team like Wisconsin running up the score for 83 points... but they tell Boise that they need to win every game by 50 to be considered good.

It's just crazy.


----------



## Game Fan (Sep 8, 2007)

Boise who? Fun to watch, just not in the BCS Championship game.


----------



## yosoyellobo (Nov 1, 2006)

Game Fan said:


> Boise who? Fun to watch, just not in the BCS Championship game.


After Auburn came back to beat Alabama I just knew that Boise would lost.


----------



## larry55 (Jun 3, 2010)

boise never play for the national championship.you can stick a fort in them they done.


----------



## vikefan (Jan 20, 2008)

Game Fan said:


> This is just another reason college football needs some type of playoff system. It's not going to happen, but it sure would be nice.


I second that along with most of the nation. College basketball has the best post season. Why can't football just add one extra playoff weekend? It's a win for everyone! It's 2010, change is ok sometimes. It's not a big change just one weekend. Come on just do it.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

*Sigh*

I knew this would be the tone.

Boise loses a tough game to a good Nevada team and people conclude "see we told you they were no good"...

But if Alabama had hung on to beat Auburn? People would still defend Auburn and say "see we told you the SEC was tough."

I had so hoped people would conclude that Nevada was also a good team... but instead people fall back to Boise not being worth it...

As much as I was rooting for Boise I also root against the non-playoff system and every year hope we get 4-5 good undefeated teams to screw up the system.

Oregon St could still beat Oregon next week... wouldn't be a shocker given the rivalry... and South Carolina game Auburn all they could handle once this season, so a loss for Auburn wouldn't be a shocker there either.

I so hope TCU is the only undefeated team left standing next week just to make people think.


----------



## yosoyellobo (Nov 1, 2006)

Even better then 4 or 5 undefeated teams would be 6 or 7 two loss teams with no undefeated teams. The poor computer might just blow a couple of fuses trying to figure out who is the best team.









ps The computers would not have any problems. It's the poor sport writers who would blow their fuses.


----------



## Stewart Vernon (Jan 7, 2005)

yosoyellobo said:


> Even better then 4 or 5 undefeated teams would be 6 or 7 two loss teams with no undefeated teams. The poor computer might just blow a couple of fuses trying to figure out who is the best team..


You are right... that would be a much better scenario. I have something new to root for next year


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

Well so much for the Boise State rollercoaster. 

I'm more interested in the Badgers going to the Rose Bowl, after a stellar 11-1 season and beating Ohio State, Michigan, and Iowa this year. Add in an 83-20 and 70-23 whooping of Indiana and Northwestern...and its been a great ride in 2010. WOO HOO.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Well so much for the Boise State rollercoaster.
> 
> I'm more interested in the Badgers going to the Rose Bowl, after a stellar 11-1 season and beating Ohio State, Michigan, and Iowa this year. Add in an 83-20 and 70-23 whooping of Indiana and Northwestern...and its been a great ride in 2010. WOO HOO.


No mention of the loss to MSU or fluke 1 point win (blocked extra point) against Arizona State? :lol: Looking at OSU, MSU, & Wisc schedules I realize how weak & lame the conference is. All 3 played a whopping 3 ranked (at the time of the game) teams.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

sigma1914 said:


> No mention of the loss to MSU or fluke 1 point win (blocked extra point) against Arizona State? :lol: Looking at OSU, MSU, & Wisc schedules I realize how weak & lame the conference is. All 3 played a whopping 3 ranked (at the time of the game) teams.


Uh...having three (3) 11-1 teams in the same conference...many against top 25 teams...is hardly "lame". Wisconsin beat Ohio State when they were #1 and Iowa when they were #10.

The Big Ten also had more top 25 teams on average than almost any other conference.

Michigan State also got their clock cleaned in their 1 loss, which is why UW will go to the Rose Bowl with a higher ranking.

In reality...many "experts" think the Big Ten was the cream of the crop in the NCAA this year, and UW the leader of that Conference.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> ...
> In reality...many "experts" think the Big Ten was the cream of the crop in the NCAA this year.


You can't be serious? :lol: Big Ten had 3 teams and nothing else. The SEC West alone has 5 of their 6 teams ranked with 7 total...Big 12 has 5 ranked.


----------



## Gloria_Chavez (Aug 11, 2008)

TCU will probably cost Stanford a trip to the Rose Bowl. Stanford, which is arguably the 2nd best team in the country, won't even be going to the Rose Bowl. Frustrating.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Gloria_Chavez said:


> TCU will probably cost Stanford a trip to the Rose Bowl. Stanford, which is arguably the 2nd best team in the country, won't even be going to the Rose Bowl. Frustrating.


First off, second best? No, not quite...Oregon destroyed them & Auburn went undefeated in the SEC. I'd say 3rd best, but not 2nd. 

They should at least get a BCS bowl due to the "Rule of Four," which guarantees a team ranked in the top four of the final standings a berth in the BCS. #5 LSU & #4 Boise St. both lost, thus #6 Stanford will likely be #4 & get an automatic BCS bid.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

sigma1914 said:


> You can't be serious? :lol: *Big Ten had 3 teams *and nothing else. The SEC West alone has 5 of their 6 teams ranked with 7 total...Big 12 has 5 ranked.


That would be 3 teams *MORE* than most other Conferences.

Everyone knows the SEC has 1 or 2 teams every year...and a bunch of also rans...nothing more. Well....almost everyone... 

No soup for you. :grin:


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> That would be 3 teams *MORE* than most other Conferences.
> 
> Everyone knows the SEC has 1 or 2 teams every year...and a bunch of also rans...nothing more. Well....almost everyone...
> 
> No soup for you. :grin:


Are you saying the SEC is a 1 or 2 team conference & the Big 10 is better than the SEC & Big 12? :eek2:

New AP & Coaches Polls are out...
SEC - 6 teams
Big XII - 5 teams
WAC - 3 teams in AP, 2 in Coaches (no Hawaii)
Big 10- 3 teams


----------



## yosoyellobo (Nov 1, 2006)

If Boise finish in the top ten will their be any chance of them getting a BCS bid? I would hate for them to end up playing in the lost and found bowl.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

sigma1914 said:


> Are you saying the SEC is a 1 or 2 team conference & the Big 10 is better than the SEC & Big 12? :eek2:


Yup - for sure.

Polls lie. (Note how for 3 weeks in a row this year #1 fell out after 1 week)

Teams don't.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

yosoyellobo said:


> If Boise finish in the top ten will their be any chance of them getting a BCS bid? I would hate for them to end up playing in the lost and found bowl.


No, they're stuck going to a crap bowl.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

hdtvfan0001 said:


> Yup - for sure.
> 
> Polls lie. (Note how for 3 weeks in a row this year #1 fell out after 1 week)
> 
> Teams don't.


Polls are by people, including many experts. Yet, earlier you were noting "experts" saying the Big 10 was the cream of the crop. I guess those guys are right & the pollsters are wrong.  You Big 10 folks in Wisconsin, Michigan, & Ohio are the only ones who think your conference is the best...the rest of the country knows better. Big 10 is 3 teams, usually 2, and nothing more.


----------



## spartanstew (Nov 16, 2005)

yosoyellobo said:


> If Boise finish in the top ten will their be any chance of them getting a BCS bid? I would hate for them to end up playing in the lost and found bowl.


Probably the Humanitarian Bowl on December 18th in Boise


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

spartanstew said:


> Probably the Humanitarian Bowl on December 18th in Boise


!rolling

For those who have a lust for polls and buy into that theory....looks like the Big Ten rules that way too... *#4* Wisconsin, *#6* Ohio State, and *#7* Michigan State all in the top 10.

http://nbcsports.msnbc.com/id/40404994/ns/sports-college_football/

Too bad SEC - looks like to world is now fully aware of the"Ppretenter Conference" with only 2 left in the Top 10.

Boise State took a dive to #9.


----------



## yosoyellobo (Nov 1, 2006)

I heard some good news. BCS Bowl official have been saying that we will get a playoff system when hell freezes over. Looking forward to it.


----------



## hdtvfan0001 (Jul 28, 2004)

yosoyellobo said:


> I heard some good news. BCS Bowl official have been saying that we will get a playoff system when hell freezes over. Looking forward to it.


Brrrrrr...getting cold.... :lol:


----------



## Lee L (Aug 15, 2002)

Well, it will certainly be more easy for TCU to get once they complete the move to the Big East. They ought to be able to mop the floor with the rest of Big (L)East football year after year.


----------



## sigma1914 (Sep 5, 2006)

Lee L said:


> Well, it will certainly be more easy for TCU to get once they complete the move to the Big East. They ought to be able to mop the floor with the rest of Big (L)East football year after year.


:lol: Yup, they probably want into the crappiest BCS conference...that would be the Big Least. They figure they'll take a beating in hoops just so they might win the football conference title & say, "Hey look at us! We won the title in a BCS conference! Told you so!" Big whoop! lol


----------

