3reppom wrote:
enigmaax wrote:
red skin - Here's all I need to say: "His team beat the one major opponent"
I don't care about sytle points in the WAC or any other conference for that matter. I do not buy the "nobody will play us", however. They get eight games scheduled for them by their choice of conference and those simply do not measure up to the competition that other teams have to face. I've said it several times...if you can't get into a major conference, go independent and put together the toughest schedule you can. Just because OSU, USC, Florida, etc. don't have room for them doesn't mean that no one would play them. Playing middle of the pack (or even lower level) BCS schools in more than one game a season would completely change things for them and how they are viewed. Junior varsity for 90% of your season doesn't earn you anything.
Almost no one can survive as an independent anymore. The three schools that do it now, Notre Dame, Navy and Army are just about the only schools that can pull it off today. Competing in big time college sports now requires TV money, and a lot of it. None of the mid majors could venture out on their own and hope to make it by negotiating their own independent TV deals, they just don't have the clout or the resources to pull it off.
Thank you.
Enigmaxx, the major conferences basically have a stanglehold on the system; it's a system that was adopted BY them to benefit them. The only independent school that can survive is Notre Dame because they have the prestige, tradition AND $$ (in large part thanks to private donors and NBC)...Navy and Army are happy to win 7-10 games a year and make a decent bowl game. They're not trying for what Boise State and Utah are trying for. The big conferences are forcing the smaller schools to play by their rules, because it's the only way to make enough money to compete in the college football landscape, but there's a glass ceiling...the schools like Boise State are only allowed to be competitive to a certain point. Yeah, we'll let you win some games and be ranked pretty high, beat some good teams in BCS games, but you're never going to be allowed to play for the REAL prize in college football.
I guarantee you that had Oregon beat Boise state last year, and Boise had went on to go 11-1 (or 12-1 after the bowl game), Oregon would be referencing that as their "big" non-conference win...and of course "they beat a whole conference of tougher teams"...who (outside of Oregon State) was their tough game?? Arizona, big powerhouse they are? The worst USC team in 8 years? Washington? Because I'm confused...you claim that Boise State doesn't deserve to play in the NC game because their conference is so weak...but I don't see the PAC10 champion's so-called "grueling" schedule...And while we're at it, where was Texas's tough conference last year? You can try to turn it into how the whole conference is SOOOOOOO powerful however you want, but everyone knows heading into the season that the Big12 is a 2 horse race. It's ALWAYS Texas and Oklahoma. When was the last time Texas/OU did NOT win the Big12. 2003 (Kansas State). Yeah, that's a balanced conference.
My point in all that is that in EVERY conference there is a team or 2 that is consistently obviously above the rest of the conference. USC for basically the whole decade in the Pac10, Texas and OU in the Big12, OSU in the Big10, and the SEC has 3. Just because Boise State is head and shoulders better than their conference doesn't mean they should be punished. They're way better than the teams in their conference...Texas and OU/USC/OSU are visibly better than most teams in their conference, but not TONS better. So it looks like this:
BOISE STATE = Texas/OU/OSU/USC/FLA/ALA/LSU
Rest of major conf. teams
REST OF WAC.
The recent Boise State is 4-1, as the article said, against major conference teams, including a win over one of the NCAA flagship programs in a major bowl game. If they win at Blacksburg and beat Oregon State yet again, and run the WAC like they usually do, it's going to be a huge stretch NOT to put them on par with the elite teams. They'd be 6-1 in the last 5 years against major conference opponents (7-1 if they play a big team in their bowl and win), including 4 undefeated seasons (including the upcoming year) with 3 top 5 finishes. I don't understand how you can keep ignoring a team with that kind of resume. At some point, it gets fairly obvious that they finish in the top 5 all the time but never get to the NC game. At some point, people are going to begin to see that there's a ceiling and SOMETHING/SOMEONE is only letting them go so high and cutting them off.
