Exposing the Boise State myth

[KrAzY3]

In that case, why discuss it here instead of on their board? :conf3: :wink:

Not signed up there and last time I checked this was the Football forum. This is the only college football forum I've ever used. Has anyone counted the UT topics we have? I suppose they belong elsewhere as well...

Not sure who the "they" is here, since BSU is not asking to be recognized as national champions this year.

You know what's odd? I didn't even make this about a national championship. That's not even worth a discussion. The only lip service I gave it was mentioning what Hatch said. This isn't about this at all, it's about what Boise State's scheduling is. They (Boise State) have made claims that BCS schools wouldn't schedule them. They made these claims this season, apparently to deflect criticism of their schedule. Yet, magically they have two BCS teams playing them next year, yet it's at home and neutral. Given my analysis of previous scheduling it's obvious BCS schools would schedule Boise State, they just might not want to do it on smurf turf. Even then they somehow got a Pac-10 team to come play them, for the second year in a row on smurf turf. When Boise State goes out there and acts like they can't find BCS opponents, it is a lie.

What I don't understand is why you cut off your analysis in 2005, four seasons ago.

I said it repeatedly, 2005 was when Boise State stopped scheduling SEC teams. They had good records then, they won a lot of games. They just never beat a SEC team and low and behold they stopped scheduling them. I actually made part of that as a reply to someone inferring the SEC didn't want to schedule Boise State.

You know what would be awesome? If we had a playoff and this sort of thing could be decided on the field instead of on a message board.

I think it is decided on the field. You don't do anything in the regular season, you don't get the hardware at the end of the season.

 

[NYBamaFan]

I think I need to hear your thoughts about why Chris Petersen is the "coach of the year" and Nick Saban is not. And...please don't say because there were more votes for Petersen...I'm looking for a substantive argument/comparison that substantiates awarding it to Petersen instead of Saban.
Posted via Mobile Device

I posted that is another thread. That was a typical media decision. Those clowns are the same ones that we trust to crown national champions, though. Food for thought...

Like I said in that thread, I look forward to seeing how Saban uses that slap in the face, because he will turn it into something positive. He always does...

 

[NYBamaFan]

KrAzY3,

I get it - I just don't care enough about BSU to tear them apart for it while celebrating our championship (and I am still in full "celebration" mode). They seem to have gotten under your skin somehow.

 

[Tide1986]

I posted that is another thread. That was a typical media decision. Those clowns are the same ones that we trust to crown national champions, though. Food for thought...

Like I said in that thread, I look forward to seeing how Saban uses that slap in the face, because he will turn it into something positive. He always does...

I'll go back and revisit that thread sometime soon -- I got so hot about it last night that I have not returned to it in hopes of managing my blood pressure. And yes...I'm sure something deep down inside Saban will eat away at him for being so close to maxing out his contract. But who know's? He may feel that the NC is recognition enough for what he did to build Alabama back into a competitive, championship program.
Posted via Mobile Device

 

[Nick4Bama]

I agree BSU should have strengthened their schedule a few years ago if they want to be considered for the BCS championship game. It seems the AD has been trying to raise some money by having a weak schedule and making it to a BSC bowl game. At least that was my theory, and the BSU posters agreed.

Here is a thread from their site. I got in a discussion with them about it the other day. I was trying to keep it civil, and it stayed civil till I mentioned the SEC. Then fireworks went off!


http://mbd.scout.com/mb.aspx?s=336&f=2246&t=5438287

 

[Harmost]

I used data based solely on the period in which they played the SEC. Looking at those schedules clearly they still had easy schedules, however, they were willing to play BCS schools on the road and it cost them. The main point now is that they, after 2005 changed their criteria. It isn't that they can't ever beat good teams, it's that they're gaming the system. Get a PAC-10 team to play them on smurf turf. Only play other foes on a neutral field. If you go a entire season (like last year) without playing a single BCS school on the road? You've got a schedule that's set up for you to look good.

They actually beat Oregon at Oregon last year. They also had a home-and-home matchup with Oregon State a few years ago.

I've read your explanation, and am not getting the 2005 cutoff. It makes sense to say that they play Pac-10 teams more often than SEC teams because of geography. It makes sense to say they look better in recent years because they're becoming increasingly talented and are now under the direction of a better coach than before (Petersen's first season being 2006). It makes sense that they only play a BCS team or two a season because that's how out-of-conference scheduling works (we played on BCS team OOC as well) and I'm not sure many could claim a better regular season OOC win than Boise this past season.

What are you suggesting? That they need to travel to four SEC schools a year?

 

[Nate62]

Bobby Bowden played all the upper level schools when he started out at FSU. He built that program from the ground up and became a national powerhouse. They should do the same or stop crying. Bowden's record was stellar until the last few years.

 

[It's On A Slab]

Boise, Utah, TCU and the other pretenders should do what Florida State did in the 1980s. Schedule anyone, anywhere, go on the road to the powerhouse schools and prove their mettle.

Otherwise, a cursory search of their "big" wins over mid-major schools will always be dubious at best.

As much as the BCS stinks, it does somewhat avoid a situation like we had the year BYU won their "national" championship. In that year, they played a 6-5 Michigan team in the Holiday Bowl, barely beat the Wolverines 24-17, and somehow won the NC over more deserving teams.

 

[bamacpa70]

They stopped scheduling SEC schools and stopped playing as many games on the road and surprise they started faring a little better. Clearly though it wasn't the SEC that wimped out, Boise State just became afraid of scheduling legit teams on the road. 2-9 isn't impressive in the least and since then Boise State hasn't even pretended to put a legit schedule together.

Clearly? No. Nothing in your post backs that up. It's my understanding that they want home & home series with big time opponents and many schools don't want to go to Boise. They are simply demanding the respect they feel they have earned by winning more BCS bowl games than our beloved Crimson Tide, and 99.5% of any other Div I (I refuse to use FBS) schools regardless of conference. I'm not saying that is right or wrong, but I would probably feel the same way if I was in their shoes.

 

[GulfCoastTider]

What I don't understand is why you cut off your analysis in 2005, four seasons ago. Since then they've won 2 BCS bowls and are 3-1 in games against other BCS opponents. They won at Oregon, the PAC-10 champ. Next year they play Virginia Tech in DC.

I believe that was the last season that they intentionally scheduled an SEC team. Their other victories against BCS schools have come in bowls, which are practically the only games that program has to get "up" for.

What I think is that Boise State is trying to build a program. They're in a pretty weak conference so they play a lot of creampuffs, but it's not like they can change that overnight.

They aren't trying to build a program. At least not in the way that Florida State, Southern Miss, Memphis and Troy did. Those programs would travel anywhere and play anyone, and not demand a $1 million minimum guarantee and a return trip to the Smurf Turf. Eventually, those programs used the payouts from being perennial homecoming foes to build facilities and recruiting, to the point where they could tell the Alabamas and Missouris that if they wanted to continue the matchup, a home-and-home arrangement must be made.

BSU does not stand for Boise State University. BSU stands for BULL ____ University.

What Boise State is building is a political and public relations campaign. What they cannot do through years of work they are trying to do through the court of public opinion. Alabama could call BSU tomorrow to fill an open date on the 2012 schedule, and BSU would demand a cool million and that Bama come to Boise in 2013. Bama would politely decline that counter-offer, on the grounds that BSU hasn't earned it. And Bama would be right.

Then BSU's AD would whine to the media that no one will answer his calls. It's total BS.

If BSU played an SEC schedule, they'd be lucky to be a .500 team in conference play. That program is built on smoke, mirrors and a constant stream of BS from their administration and the media. They don't deserve to be within spitting distance of a BCS Bowl and until they and the other BS programs start playing real football teams, there ain't gonna be a playoff that includes their smarmy little program.

BSU = BULL ____ University.

 

[NYBamaFan]

Clearly? No. Nothing in your post backs that up. It's my understanding that they want home & home series with big time opponents and many schools don't want to go to Boise. They are simply demanding the respect they feel they have earned by winning more BCS bowl games than our beloved Crimson Tide, and 99.5% of any other Div I (I refuse to use FBS) schools regardless of conference. I'm not saying that is right or wrong, but I would probably feel the same way if I was in their shoes.

What a minute - since when do we only count BCS bowl wins? Bama has more bowl wins than any other program. Please don't sell Bama short with comments like that. It is the kind of thing that we hear from the media, as though football before the BCS or AP polls doesn't count.

If they demand a home/away, they will get few takers from big time programs. Why? How many fans from a BCS school east of the Mississippi would travel to Idaho to support their team in that tiny stadium? Big time programs don't schedule those types of games unless it benefits them, and BSU hasn't figured that out yet...

 

[BLAKE55]

Krazy,
I think I get where you are coming from and I agree.

From my perspective what happens with Boise State here lately is simply indicative of what is happening in more systemic ways in our culture.

That is to say, appearance seems to be much more important than substance. Obviously, all 14-0 seasons are not created equal. BSU having a SOS similar to a top quality high school team has to be factored in to any discussion about their success.

People today seem too willing to give to those who aren't quite up to the level of others, which by default detracts from the legitimate success of others. In this case, someone suggesting that the President should invite BSU to the White House as though they were BCS champions obviously detracts from the real champions.

BSU had a great year. They won all the games on their schedule. However, as CrimsonCat pointed out, they aren't even in a BCS conference and they aren't BCS champions. If they want to be treated as equals in the BCS world they should attempt to join a BCS conference and then win said conference. If they can't join a conference they should pack their schedule with quality teams. It's the same argument about Alabama's basketball team not getting into the NCAA Tourney several years ago...their W-L record wasn't worth as much as other teams with worse W-L records because of the strength of schedule.

 

[KrAzY3]

They actually beat Oregon at Oregon last year.

They played Oregon on blue turf in Boise. This is one of the reasons I started this topic. I don't think a lot of people even understand how pathetic their schedule is. In this topic I've seen someone say Boise State was in the MWC. It's this lack of information (which I had as well until I researched it) that allows Boise State to get away with the level of manipulation they currently have.

It makes sense to say they look better in recent years

They don't though! They just play on the road less.... their non-BCS winning % was .928 during that period I cited. It's not as though they weren't winning, they just changed their scheduling. If not for the SEC (for instance) they would have had another undefeated season in their record books. They stopped scheduling the SEC, they got a couple undefeated seasons...

Boise, Utah, TCU and the other pretenders should do what Florida State did in the 1980s. Schedule anyone, anywhere, go on the road to the powerhouse schools and prove their mettle.

That's all I ask. I fully believe that Boise State could get into the MWC if they want and raise the level of play for those three teams you mentioned... however even without that those teams can and should do more.

Boise State wants to schedule UC Davis and refuse to go on the road against BCS teams (without some sort of massive pay day) and yet they want to be taken seriously. My point is they can't have it both ways. Either they are exposed as a joke or they go and earn it. I just refuse to let it go without calling them on it. If they hadn't complained about the BCS (they went along with the MWC in filing suit, but didn't bother to join the conference itself) and hadn't complained about scheduling I might be willing to let it go... however when they manipulate the system, game it and then ask for more and want pity? Nope, not having that.

 

[bayoutider]

Personally I think no one wants to play on the blue field. It does give them a real home field advantage.

 

[crimsonaudio]

For the record (and I'm no BSU aologist - I just want facts discussed), according to the NCAA, BSU played the 81st toughest schedule in 2009. This ranks above Michigan, Stanford and aTm.

I agree that if they want inclusion with the 'bog dogs' they need to have an 'anytime, anywhere' attitude that doesn't include huge payouts, and while they didn't play what we would consider a 'tough' schedule, it is ranked higher than several BCS teams.

Carry on.

 

[venegoni]

Get rid of the blue field and they may lure a team or two up there. I would love to see Bama go beat them in Idaho but only on green grass or turf. I refuse to watch them play on that blue turf!

 

[BamaFlum]

Just for next year, I would love Alabama to get back to the BCS championship and have the feel good story of BSU making it as well. Proves the system works (after a bunch of whining, _itching, complaining, griping, etc. from BSU admins/fans) and puts them it the big dance. Then, have Alabama completely destroy them. Coach Saban uses stuff like the Bryant Award in positive motivational ways. I can see the fire in his eyes with Peterson on the sidelines as Alabama rushes for 300 yards, shuts down that "powerful" BSU offense, and mudholes the pretenders.

Is that too much to ask?

 

[Heavy D]

The greatest problem Boise St. has, as I see it, is that they will never get big time SEC, Big 12 or Big 10 schools to play on the Smurf Turf. They are trying to require a home and home which will never work for an SEC school to travel that far and play in front of maybe 35,000.

They have to have the FSU mentality of playing away games without worrying about home and homes. Then they have to win those games. Anytime they are brought up to me as legit I offer up the Georgia beat down that they gave to Boise.

To me until Boise plays serious competition, they are a non-issue.

I will say this, the only thing that is unfair for them is that they do not have the opportunity to join a legit BCS conference.

 

[firstdownBSU]

Morning Bama fans!

Saw a link on our forum to this thread, and just wanted to toss out a few bits of info, alot of misconception and outright malarkey posted in this thread about BSU

1. The WAC is a BCS conference. All FBS conferences are BCS conferences, and have been for a few years now (CFB - BCS Football - FOX Sports on MSN). The term you're looking for is "AQ" (Auto qualifier) vs non-AQ.

2. BSU is NOT demanding a home and home with a 1 million payout for 2011. BSU is looking for a 1 and done away game, ESPN is helping broker the deal (throwing in cash and prime time coverage). 10+ "elite" teams have said "no thanks". BSU has been attempting to upgrade the schedule for years, with little to no takers (specifically back East. Thanks goodness the PAC-10 has the stones to put us ont he schedule)

3. References to building up the school like Florida State in the 80's. Sorry folks, but Idaho isn't Florida, Boise State isn't in a conference with funds like Florida State was in, we don't have the local talent hotbed that Bowden had the luxury of drawing from and we are in a remote area that no one wants to travel to. You're comparing apples and Oranges.

4. Boise State has been lobbying the MWC for years to get an invite and upgrade our conference schedule. So far no invite.

Boise State is doing everything it can to build up the program. Our program is very young, starting in 1968.

Boise State Coaching Records

Since joining D1-A (FBS) in 1996, BSU has slowly built up their talent level over the years the only way they can. Win games. Lots of games. Boise's old scheduling philosophy was clearly designed to rack up wins and recognition, and it worked. 2 BCS bowls, 2 HUGE wins and a W/L record over the past decade that surpasses every team in D1-A. You just can't argue, or trivialize the results.

Flash forward to today. BSU is still looking for respect, and we know that it has to be earned. In comes ESPN to help broker games with elite teams for BSU to prove they belong. VaTech steps up to the plate in a game brokered by ESPN and the Redskins. Oregon State (who backed out on us this last season) also renewed a 4 game home and home series with us.

Then ESPN lets us know they have helped contact over 10 "elite" teams, and were told, 10 times, "No thanks". No thanks to ESPN kicking in cash. No thanks to ESPN offering prime time national coverage. No thanks to playing BSU.

Everyone expects BSU to step up to the plate and prove they deserve their rankings.

You want BSU to prove their mettle? Rail on your AD, get us on the schedule. Rumor has it Bama was one of the 10 schools who were afraid to play us.

 

[crimsonaudio]

3. References to building up the school like Florida State in the 80's. Sorry folks, but Idaho isn't Florida, Boise State isn't in a conference with funds like Florida State was in, we don't have the local talent hotbed that Bowden had the luxury of drawing from and we are in a remote area that no one wants to travel to. You're comparing apples and Oranges.

FSU was independent in the 80's (until they joined the ACC in 1992).