BCS Buster: Boise State vs. Virginia Tech

• enigmaax

  trep14;474346 wrote:Right. Its too bad the Rose Bowl didn't forbid Ohio State from playing in 2009-2010. After all, they lost 28-16 to Purdue, who lost to Northern Illinois 28-21, who lost to a WAC team, Idaho 34-31. It might as well have been a WAC team against Oregon. And we all know WAC teams can't beat BCS teams like Oregon, right Boise (cough they beat Oregon last year cough)?

  
  If I get time, I'll look up the WAC's record against BCS schools tomorrow sometime. Huge difference between the WAC and BCS conferences.
  
  Other than that, you are using an upset loss by Ohio State to validate that Fresno State's five losses demonstrate they are a top team in any BCS conference? Because that was the point I was disputing there.
• Mooney44Cards

  

  hangonsloopy;474330 wrote:I think because they actually have to play the games. You may be right about Boise and stuff, but at least they would have to play those teams and prove it on the field. Instead of it being handed to them because they were ranked so high in the pre-season polls.

  
  Ya but its not like its a round robin tournament. If it were, and every team played every other team, we could determine who was the best by who won the most games. But its not like that. If there were a playoff and we wanted to determine if Boise State or Ohio State were the superior team, theres a chance the two could be in separate brackets. One wins, one loses. Is say Ohio State better because they beat say, Pitt or Cincinnati, in their bracket and Boise State lost to USC or Oklahoma in theirs?
  
  I just fail to see how a playoff solves the problem or makes anything more exciting. Could you imagine if Texas or USC got upset by some bullshit team early in the 2005 playoffs and we didn't get to see the 2 best, most talented teams in the country square off in one for the ages?
• trep14

  enigmaax;474353 wrote:If I get time, I'll look up the WAC's record against BCS schools tomorrow sometime. Huge difference between the WAC and BCS conferences.
  
  Other than that, you are using an upset loss by Ohio State to validate that Fresno State's five losses demonstrate they are a top team in any BCS conference? Because that was the point I was disputing there.

  
  Where did I say Fresno State is a top team in any BCS conference? I just said I wouldn't pencil it in that any run of the mill BCS team (I believe Texas Tech was the example) would dance into the WAC and beat them.
• enigmaax

  trep14;474361 wrote:Where did I say Fresno State is a top team in any BCS conference? I just said I wouldn't pencil it in that any run of the mill BCS team (I believe Texas Tech was the example) would dance into the WAC and beat them.

  
  Except that run of the mill BCS teams pick up their gimme wins against teams exactly like Fresno State....and teams that Fresno State also loses to regularly.
• redfalcon

  

  enigmaax;474348 wrote:So, if a backup quarterback comes in and completes one pass for a long TD, he should be the starter? Because on that one play he HAD to look better than any starter who may have thrown an INT or some incomplete passes.
  
  You have to evaluate a lot of different circumstances. I know you keep going back to that "jumping", but take all the names out of it for a minute. If you guessed who was going to be best at the beginning of the season and you ended up being wrong. Should you change your mind or just let it ride because thats the way you thought it would go? Weekly polls account for that - things change, opinions change, impressions change. It doesn't have to be a loss that does this if you feel you were wrong last week.

  I really do see what you are saying, and to a point, I agree, but I just don't think that its fair to set up a system (the BCS) that holds the little guys down, but when they bust it up, we jump another team over them. If both teams wins and look good doing so, I can't see jumping one. If Florida beats Alabama by 50 points and in the same week Boise beats Wyoming by 3 points, then I can see the jump. I am going to leave it at that.
  

  Mooney44Cards;474355 wrote:Ya but its not like its a round robin tournament. If it were, and every team played every other team, we could determine who was the best by who won the most games. But its not like that. If there were a playoff and we wanted to determine if Boise State or Ohio State were the superior team, theres a chance the two could be in separate brackets. One wins, one loses. Is say Ohio State better because they beat say, Pitt or Cincinnati, in their bracket and Boise State lost to USC or Oklahoma in theirs?
  
  I just fail to see how a playoff solves the problem or makes anything more exciting. Could you imagine if Texas or USC got upset by some bullshit team early in the 2005 playoffs and we didn't get to see the 2 best, most talented teams in the country square off in one for the ages?

  
  Seriously, what they hell is the point of playoffs then? The best teams win, the others go home. If Texas loses to UTEP, well then they go how and that is just the way it is.
  
  A round robin tournament just isn't practical unless you want to take each conference winner and make them play another 8 games.
• Classyposter58

  

  trep14;474307 wrote:And to think, Butler and Memphis were able to do that without "the grind of playing in a tough conference"...

  
  Haha you're right but they also proved their caliber by beating big time teams in the regular season. Maybe they didn't have the grind of a tough conference but when is the grind the measure of how great a team really is? I mean those teams came up in the big games and proved their worth and Boise State came up right here in a big game...shut down a Heisman hopeful in Ryan Williams and took down the Hokies. Maybe they aren't playing 5-6 ranked teams a year but that doesn't take away from how good they are. And they look #2 good
• ytownfootball

  

  Classyposter58;474371 wrote:Haha you're right but they also proved their caliber by beating big time teams in the regular season. Maybe they didn't have the grind of a tough conference but when is the grind the measure of how great a team really is? I mean those teams came up in the big games and proved their worth and Boise State came up right here in a big game...shut down a Heisman hopeful in Ryan Williams and took down the Hokies. Maybe they aren't playing 5-6 ranked teams a year but that doesn't take away from how good they are. And they look #2 good

  
  When injuries mount and you still find ways to win.
  
  You don't have near the injuries playing cupcakes and your starters are on the bench.
• 2quik4u

  

  fact is fresno beat the defending big east champs cincy already
• enigmaax

  redfalcon;474370 wrote: I really do see what you are saying, and to a point, I agree, but I just don't think that its fair to set up a system (the BCS) that holds the little guys down, but when they bust it up, we jump another team over them. If both teams wins and look good doing so, I can't see jumping one. If Florida beats Alabama by 50 points and in the same week Boise beats Wyoming by 3 points, then I can see the jump. I am going to leave it at that.

  See, I say the little guys are lucky to be at the big boys table to begin with. Boise State is like the 18 year old you let into the party who then throws a fit because he can't drink. You shouldn't be there, but someone was nice and let you in, then you go and ruin it by acting like the world is being unfair to you.
  
  
  

  redfalcon;474370 wrote:Seriously, what they hell is the point of playoffs then? The best teams win, the others go home. If Texas loses to UTEP, well then they go how and that is just the way it is.
  
  A round robin tournament just isn't practical unless you want to take each conference winner and make them play another 8 games.

  
  Completely different argument that I won't have time to get into tonight, but the only thing a playoff does is determine who got hot for the three weeks or so that you play it.
• trep14

  enigmaax;474368 wrote:Except that run of the mill BCS teams pick up their gimme wins against teams exactly like Fresno State....and teams that Fresno State also loses to regularly.

  
  Actually Fresno State pretty routinely beats run of the mill and bad BCS teams.
  
  Vs. BCS opponents:
  
  2010:
  Cincy 28-14 Win
  
  2009:
  @ Cincy 28-20 Loss
  @ Wisky 34-31 OT Loss
  @ Illinois 53-52 Win
  
  2008:
  @ Rutgers 24-7 Win
  Vs. Wisky 13-10 Loss
  @ UCLA 36-30 Win
  
  2007:
  @Texas A&M 47-45 OT Loss
  @ Oregon 52-21 Loss
  Vs. Kansas State 45-29 Win
  Vs. George Tech 40-28 Win
  
  I wouldn't necessarily consider Fresno State to be a gimme win. 2007 Oregon is their only really bad loss to a BCS team lately (and that was Oregon with Dennis Dixon, before he got hurt and Oregon fell off the map...they were beating a lot of teams badly). You really don't think that Fresno State can play on the same field as mediocre BCS teams?
• enigmaax

  2quik4u;474378 wrote:fact is fresno beat the defending big east champs cincy already

  
  Maybe that will turn out to be a good win. Cincy isn't the Big East champ this season (yet) and Fresno has had some nice wins before but tanked against shitty teams. There is a perspective that people lose when they want to ride some fun story. Upsets are upsets for a reason. You have to take more than a handful of games and sometimes (like during the CFB regular season) you have to look at the entire season and evaluate the whole body of work.
• Classyposter58

  

  ytownfootball;474376 wrote:When injuries mount and you still find ways to win.
  
  You don't have near the injuries playing cupcakes and your starters are on the bench.

  
  That's impressive. You know what else is impressive? When you play a completely healthy Virginia Tech team at Virginia Tech essentially and they're QB plays the game of his life and you still win. Shoot Boise had no clue if they were gonna have any really reliable receivers other than Young and they had a lot of question marks in the secondary
• ytownfootball

  

  Does that have anything to do with what you were discussing ? If so sorry I missed it.
• enigmaax

  trep14;474388 wrote:Actually Fresno State pretty routinely beats run of the mill and bad BCS teams.
  
  Vs. BCS opponents:
  
  2010:
  Cincy 28-14 Win
  
  2009:
  @ Cincy 28-20 Loss
  @ Wisky 34-31 OT Loss
  @ Illinois 53-52 Win
  
  2008:
  @ Rutgers 24-7 Win
  Vs. Wisky 13-10 Loss
  @ UCLA 36-30 Win
  
  2007:
  @Texas A&M 47-45 OT Loss
  @ Oregon 52-21 Loss
  Vs. Kansas State 45-29 Win
  Vs. George Tech 40-28 Win
  
  I wouldn't necessarily consider Fresno State to be a gimme win. 2007 Oregon is their only really bad loss to a BCS team lately. You really don't think that Fresno State can play on the same field as mediocre BCS teams?

  
  2006: Losses to Oregon, Washington, LSU
  2005: Losses to Oregon, USC
  
  And no matter how you want to make moral victories out of some of those, you also still have these losses: Nevada, Wyoming, Louisiana Tech, Colorado State, Hawaii, Utah State, San Jose State, Tulsa. Multiple losses over several seasons that don't happen nearly as frequently to even lower-level BCS teams.
  
  Hey, Maryland lost 5 games by a TD or less last year. Are they underrated?
• redfalcon

  

  enigmaax;474379 wrote:See, I say the little guys are lucky to be at the big boys table to begin with. Boise State is like the 18 year old you let into the party who then throws a fit because he can't drink. You shouldn't be there, but someone was nice and let you in, then you go and ruin it by acting like the world is being unfair to you.
  
  
  
  
  
  Completely different argument that I won't have time to get into tonight, but the only thing a playoff does is determine who got hot for the three weeks or so that you play it.

  
  On the first point, I see your point of view, I just disagree and I am leaving it at that.
  
  As for the second point, I agree with you as well, and I like a round robin, but without dragging the college football season into March, its not practical. A round robin already decides who the conference champs are, or at least the division champs. A playoff would be the next best thing.
• enigmaax

  redfalcon;474406 wrote: As for the second point, I agree with you as well, and I like a round robin, but without dragging the college football season into March, its not practical. A round robin already decides who the conference champs are, or at least the division champs. A playoff would be the next best thing.

  
  I'm not against a playoff, but the more I think about, the more I feel we like it so much because we've become so conditioned to it. In actuality, the whole reason every sports league ever went to such expanded playoffs was for more money. I haven't seen a feasible model that would do that for college football yet, but people act like its the only sport who remains the same over money instead of competition.
  
  I know its tough because there isn't a round robin, but that also makes it critically important to be more selective with the two teams that play for the title. Meaning, you have to look at who beat who and not just who you think looked good five years ago in an upset.
  
  Eventually, the playoff argument will roll back around and how best to do it. Then it will become, who deserves automatic berths. You will probably say every conference champion and we will disagree again. Again because Troy doesn't deserve a shot for winning the Sun Belt (with five losses) over one loss losers of the following type games: Texas/Oklahoma, Florida/Alabama, Ohio State/Penn State.
  
  It is all the same, you just have a smaller pool and thus, a better chance of ensuring the best teams do actually play for/win the title.
• ptown_trojans_1

  

  Just got back from the game, couple notes.
  1. VT fans are awesome. What a great atmosphere. They gave me some shit for OSU, but were really cool.
  2. What a game, I nearly lost my voice and I would put it in my top 10 of all time games I've been to.
  3. Boise looked great. The noise didn't effect them, their lines looked awesome and their defense was pretty good most of the game. A legit top 10 in my book. Their offense was not flashy, just efficient. No spread most of the game, just 1 back sets. Boise did not look like a non-BCS team to me. Their speed, defense, and offense was a legit national title contender.
  4. The poor plays by VT. I did not get the going for 2 in the 3rd. It came back to bite them as a FG would have won if they would have kicked the Extra Point, and changed that last drive.
  But, the play where the RB went out of bounds and then the next where Taylor threw the 3rd down pass with less than 2 minutes and no timeouts for Boise, made no sense. I went nuts. I jumped up and down and said, ti was one of the worst calls in my life. And that Boise will just march down the field and win it. It was a horrible play call and I nearly got beat as VT fans said shut up. But, Boise went down and won the game no problem.
  
  If VT would have ran it, they would have left 40 seconds for Boise and that is a really different offense for them, It would have totally changed the game. Poor coaching by VT that second half really did them in.
  
  I hope Boise wins out, and as a Buckeye fan, they are legit national title contenders.
• cats gone wild

  Ive watched Boise play in person also, and it was a pleasure to watch them. I hope they do well this year and I believe they are legit.
• Pick6

  

  here is an interesting fact...VT is 0-22 against AP top 5 teams.
  
  *away from home
• bases_loaded

  

  Beamer sucks.
  
  The refs missed an obvious block in the back on the punt and that late hit was weak. If a player is tip toeing down the line and continues to run as if he's in bounds that flag needs to stay in pocket.
  
  In the end 17 points off shitty football was the difference
• Pick6

  

  I agree I thought that the block in the back pick up was bad and the late hit was a bad call. However, I still think Boise would have scored.
• jordo212000

  

  A few things. The best team needs to play in the national championship. Not the team who plays the toughest schedule. It's been mentioned several times before that Boise State is doing everything in their power to schedule better opponents. They had a very respectable OOC schedule and they joined a stronger conference. It isn't their fault that they can't get a contender to play them year in and year out. Like it has been mentioned before, they face a catch 22. Because of their conference affiliation (non AQ) they must go undefeated and in the past they had to beef up their schedule. However when the other teams by and large refuse to play you, your schedule strength becomes a problem. The Alabamas of the world can make Boise State disappear by just ignoring their presence. By ensuring they play the WAC schedule + a west coast also ran, the big boys have a built in excuse for excluding Boise at the end. On top of that Alabama has nothing to gain by playing them. Just ask VA Tech what the benefit is.
  
  It is pretty obvious that Boise has some NFL caliber talent on their team. After all they had a 1st rounder this year, Ohio State did not. I realize Ohio State is among the leaders in the free world in sending guys to the league, but Boise has sent some guys as well. Let's not make them out to be Baylor. They're talented, which is evidenced by them beating VA Tech within 100 miles of Lane Stadium.
  
  At the end of the day though, this is a moot point. If they win out and either Ohio State or Alabama slip up, Boise State will be in the title game.
• ytownfootball

  

  I'm so tired of the whole poor little Boise State crap.
  

  It isn't their fault that they can't get a contender to play them year in and year out.

  Likewise, it isn't the rest of college footballs fault, the fans fault, the AD's who are BCS member qualifiers or coaches. This damn conspiracy theory that nobody will play them kinda smells like a turd. The Broncos have barely been a blip on the radar for 6-8 years. What big time program hasn't had all their games scheduled for ten years in advance since then? Then of course there's the obnoxious field they play on...smurf turf. Sorry, that shit screams loud and clear "second rate". I can hear the discussion of scheduling them and what the perception might be to your team appearing on that abomination. How do you expect the rest of the football Gods to take you seriously when you play on frickin' cartoon playing surface? Before you say I'm full of shit, think about the old, fat stuffed shirts that make the decisions regarding such matters and tell me I'm wrong...not a whole lot of "progressives" in the about to receive social security bunch.
  
  I don't care that they have a couple wins to add to their "storied" resume' over the last few years, the fact is they don't have enough wins in any ONE of those seasons to have gotten them into the ship. Thank God , the AP is out of the picture or you lemmings would have fallen right over the cliff with them.
• jordo212000

  

  ytown,
  
  I typed up a long post, but I've deleted it, it seems as if we keep using the same arguments again and again. For some reason you think that for a team to be "good" or deserving of a championship appearance... you think that they have to a storied history and black and white film of the good ol' days. I just looked at the BCS formula, the requirement that you must have been relevant in 1945 does not exist. It seems as if they are relevant enough for college students. They are sending more athletes to the league and the program continues to get stronger.
• ytownfootball

  

  jordo212000;475310 wrote:ytown,
  
  I typed up a long post, but I've deleted it, it seems as if we keep using the same arguments again and again. For some reason you think that for a team to be "good" or deserving of a championship appearance... you think that they have to a storied history and black and white film of the good ol' days. I just looked at the BCS formula, the requirement that you must have been relevant in 1945 does not exist. It seems as if they are relevant enough for college students. They are sending more athletes to the league and the program continues to get stronger.

  
  Uhh, no jordo...it is you and your ilk who believe they deserve a shot because of the recent bowl history spread over the last 5-6 years. The quotes around storied emphasized how silly that notion appears. It's what you do in ONE given season, not over the last few seasons. Sorry getting up for one game and being able to sit your starters for nearly half the season and still remain unbeaten won't cut it in my book.
  
  Style points mean something to AP voters, voters in the Harris and certainly the coaches poll won't be swayed into that nearly as much. Boise shouldn't even be at the kids table let alone requesting to carve the bird.