Exposing the Boise State myth

[bayoutider]

As far as the Mountain West goes, I have heard it from both sides. TCU and Utah fans pointing figures at Boise State and vice versa. The bottom line is if those teams want to be taken seriously, then get over what ever it is and get it done!

Great question.

 

[firstdownBSU]

It may not equal talent, but it is indicative of how a team will perform in a NC game. It is not just talent that has the SEC 6-0 in BCSCGs. The schedule tempers the teams, honing them, preparing them for any challenge...

I agree, however that has nothing to do with the discussion, which is BSU/TCU and Utah not getting a chance at the MNC because of SoS, which is still an arbitrary number

 

[vigilant4BSU]

AD Tom Osborne from Nebraska is on the radio right now locally. He indicated that their schedule is too much to schedule BSU for 2011 with them playing Washington and Fresno State and some other Non-AQ this year. He indicated that they are discussing a 2 for 1 starting in 2015 against Boise State. 2 games in Nebraska and 1 game in Boise.

 

[NYBamaFan]

Some people quested the validity of my 2000-2005 numbers. I did it to show a clear change in Boise State's scheduling and how that change affected their record. To some this wasn't apparent though, so I'll try to make it simpler.

From 2000-2005 here is what Boise State scheduled against automatic qualifying BCS conference teams (happy BSU fans?):
7 on the road
2 @ home

From 2006-2009 this is what they scheduled:
2 on the road
2 @ home


Do we really think it was the other teams that got scared/tired of hosting Boise State? Or did Boise State change the way they scheduled their games? Seems to me they stopped playing one game series against teams on the road. Good for them... now Boise State should acting like teams are afraid to play them. Teams are not willing to meet Boise State's demands and clearly, since 2005 Boise State has been unwilling to go into a BCS team's field and play them without getting more than they deserve in return.

This all goes back to my original post and my intent. If Boise State wants to be taken seriously go back to scheduling games like they did in 2000-2005 and once you start beating those types of teams on the road the respect will come and be deserved. What Boise State should have done, was look at how they did things in 2000-2005 and ramp it up. Take more challenges, schedule more games like that... instead they chose to schedule less.

Very interesting, as it shows that BSU's rise to "power" coincides with its elimination of these extra AQ team games...

 

[firstdownBSU]

Some people quested the validity of my 2000-2005 numbers. I did it to show a clear change in Boise State's scheduling and how that change affected their record. To some this wasn't apparent though, so I'll try to make it simpler.

The part you're not understanding is that those numbers are in a time period that BSU still had players on the team from D1-AA.

They are irrelevant to todays BSU program.

And even from your standpoint, you're talking about going from 1.5 AQing teams a year to 1. Not much of a difference.

 

[NYBamaFan]

I agree, however that has nothing to do with the discussion, which is BSU/TCU and Utah not getting a chance at the MNC because of SoS, which is still an arbitrary number

LOL - you brought it up - I shot it down. Next...

 

[NYBamaFan]

AD Tom Osborne from Nebraska is on the radio right now locally. He indicated that their schedule is too much to schedule BSU for 2011 with them playing Washington and Fresno State and some other Non-AQ this year. He indicated that they are discussing a 2 for 1 starting in 2015 against Boise State. 2 games in Nebraska and 1 game in Boise.

A neutral field game in Dallas will draw someone...

 

[RespectTheBlue]

Boooo.

AD Tom Osborne from Nebraska is on the radio right now locally. He indicated that their schedule is too much to schedule BSU for 2011 with them playing Washington and Fresno State and some other Non-AQ this year. He indicated that they are discussing a 2 for 1 starting in 2015 against Boise State. 2 games in Nebraska and 1 game in Boise.

 

[firstdownBSU]

LOL - you brought it up - I shot it down. Next...

I brought up an entirely different topic, you shot down your own opinion, which has nothing to do with what I was discussing. Read it again, and try again

 

[KrAzY3]

The part you're not understanding is that those numbers are in a time period that BSU still had players on the team from D1-AA.

They are irrelevant to todays BSU program.

And even from your standpoint, you're talking about going from 1.5 AQing teams a year to 1. Not much of a difference.

The difference is that BSU was willing to go on the road and play a one and done. Now clearly they are not. They want to negotiate neutral territory (a big thing for a team to give up a home game if they seat 80K or more) or a home and home. The proof is in the pudding so to speak.

Here's the heart of my argument. Like you said, not much difference, 1.5 to 1. It should have gone to 2.5 though! They should have said ok, sure we'll keep this home and home thing with the Pac-10 going but let's insure we head out and play at least one other BCS team every year and it doesn't matter if it's all road games. Then, if they can fit in another BCS game on a neutral field or something good for them. Boise State certainly doesn't have much of a excuse to keep teams like UC Davis on their schedule. Come on, if you have something to prove you should do what ever it takes to fill all your out of conference games with FBS teams. If that means taking a financial hit so be it but that's something a team that wants to be taken seriously needs to be willing to do.

The thing that irks me is I see a clear path for Boise State and really the MWC as well to prove themselves on the field, during the regular season. It just takes a willingness to sacrifice to get it done. I'm not seeing that willingness from Boise State though. It's like a boxer that wants to be a champ, you might have to take a lot of tough and thankless fights. Eventually though you go from fairgrounds to bigger arenas. Boise State still spends most their time fighting at the fairgrounds though...

Same thing goes with the MWC/Boise State conference thing. We all know the obvious adds are Boise State and Fresno State then may be Nevada and Hawaii. You add a championship game, you up the SoS for everyone involved (arbitrary number or not) and heck you might even get a automatic BCS bid in the deal. If I am the interested parties that's priority #1, get that done, change the color of the field, do what ever it takes and get that done. I'm just not seeing the desire it takes to be a champion from those groups of teams. I'm seeing a lot of talk but not a lot of action.

 

[NYBamaFan]

At any rate, I like BSU. They have a chance of playing for all the marbles next year (if they can beat VT). They have played together for quite some time and, barring injury, will have a team to be reckoned with by the end of the season. Of course, if they play an SEC team in the BCSCG, they are toast... :biggrin2:

 

[crimsonaudio]

Ahhh, the bigger, stronger, faster fallacy.

That argument was true a decade ago, its not now. In the 2007 Fiesta, all we heard was how big, strong and fast Oklahoma was. BSU dominated both sides of the ball in the trenches.

For one game.

Please re-read the post you quoted. Depth typically has little to do in one game, after your team has had a month to rest/heal up.

 

[NYBamaFan]

I brought up an entirely different topic, you shot down your own opinion, which has nothing to do with what I was discussing. Read it again, and try again

We must be talking past one another... :conf3:

 

[TideEngineer08]

Ahhh, the bigger, stronger, faster fallacy.

That argument was true a decade ago, its not now. In the 2007 Fiesta, all we heard was how big, strong and fast Oklahoma was. BSU dominated both sides of the ball in the trenches.

The best left tackle in D1-A in 2007 was at Boise State. He's now regarded as the best O lineman in the NFL.

The talent and depth is here. Maybe not 100% up to SEC standards, however that would change almost overnight if BSU was actually in the SEC.

1 game situation, my friend, 1 game situation. Boise State has enough to keep up against anyone in one game. Over 8 games, the depth will have to be good enough to keep up and in my opinion, it is not for Boise State.

Check out the recruiting rankings every year. Boise State is nowhere to be found. And since you bring it up, check out the NFL rosters. There's not a lot of Boise State players there. Maybe the OL you speak of, but not many more.

And should Boise State get into the SEC, it would not change for them almost overnight. It would take years. And that is the whole point of the this thread, I think.

Anyway, you guys are certainly strong representatives for your team, I'll give you that. Perhaps Alabama and Boise State can meet on the field someday. Would be a fun game.

 

[firstdownBSU]

The difference is that BSU was willing to go on the road and play a one and done. Now clearly they are not.

How many times do we need to repeat that you are wrong? The proof is on ESPN, and has been for ages now. It's been reported over and over and over.

This was the first year in a while that we had 2 AQing schools on the schedule. Oregon State backed out on us at the last minute and we had to replace them with UCDavis.

Next year, we again have 2, barring either team backing out.

In 2011, BSU and ESPN has been begging every team with an opening for a 1 and done, and over 10 teams have said no thanks. If we can find one, we'll again have 2 AQing teams on the schedule.

 

[vigilant4BSU]

And this right here is the problem that most college football fans have with BSU. You want everyone to give your team respect, but you just readily admitted that they don't want to travel to and/or have more than 2 big games against big opponents per year.

If your team truly wanted to earn respect, they'd take on the financial burden of travelling 3 or 4 times a year to play against big conference opponents. Again, the price of success is high, but so are the rewards.

And with the "lose one game and you're out" comment, what's the problem if your team is so good? If you're that confident and want respect that badly, then it's up to YOUR team to go out there and beat the brakes off whoever they're playing. Can't they handle that? They ARE a National Championship caliber team, right?

And just FYI, barring crazy years like '07, one loss quite often throws even AQ teams out of the NCG picture.

Heaven forbid your team actually have to play AT LEAST 3 or 4 challenging games in a season when SEC teams play 6+ EVERY YEAR. Boise should NEVER play 3 games in a year that they have a legitimate chance of LOSING

You can't have your cake and eat it too, hoss. That paragraph I quoted sums up our problem with Boise. Your team doesn't want to make the SACRIFICES necessary to become one of the big boys. Yes, that includes spending lots of money and travelling all over the place and playing lots of tough teams away from home. Unfortunately, that also presents the opportunity for a couple losses, and your school just can't risk that.

Wow. this is crazy aburd. A team that is one of the best in the country should play 2/3rds of their games on the road? Are you trying to ask them to earn it or are you trying to kill the program and the kids who play? It sounds like the later. You apparently are trying to set expectations that no one can achieve as requirements for someone who is there right now. We all know what travel fatigue is. You aren't looking to see a teams mettle, you are trying to break them. First they have to travel over 20,000 miles a season (which Alabama has ever had to do or ever done), but then they have to win every game. Perhaps if you had indicated that in the future National Champion was required to have no Div 2 teams on their schedule and they must travel to the opposite coast at least twice each season and must also be undefeated..... that would be nothing compared to what you are asking of BSU.

Your points are so far off track as to be absurd. Figure out another slant other than only playing against the SEC counts as a win.

 

[firstdownBSU]

For one game.

Please re-read the post you quoted. Depth typically has little to do in one game, after your team has had a month to rest/heal up.

I know what was posted, and I stand by my post.

 

[firstdownBSU]

We must be talking past one another... :conf3:

We are. I'm talking admittance to the MNC game, you're talking performance at the MNC game. Neither has anything to do with each other

BSU is kept out of the MNC game for one reason, SoS.

It has nothing to do with talent, it has to do with an arbitrary number that, in reality, has zero bearing on how good a team is.

Had Bama played BSU's schedule this year, they would not have been invited to play for the MNC. Yet they won it with a different schedule.

And thats my point, SoS is arbitrary.

 

[crimsonaudio]

I know what was posted, and I stand by my post.

Understood.

This thread has made it obvious that you guys aren't willing to face the truth - that is you must do what we've outlined if you want to be accepted with the big boys. You can whine and complain all you want, but until you accept the fact of how the world works, you'll be stuck at home watching the BCSCG.

Now, I'm going to to have dinner with my family that's in town visiting and enjoy talking about our National Championship - y'all have fun arguing in circles!

 

[firstdownBSU]

1 game situation, my friend, 1 game situation. Boise State has enough to keep up against anyone in one game. Over 8 games, the depth will have to be good enough to keep up and in my opinion, it is not for Boise State.

Care to share with the rest of us on how you came to that opinion?