T1B

Rack Baylor

OK State should be lower. Pokes lose by double digits on their home field. and I put Wisconsin above Oklahoma on the strength of their last two W's and OU's L at Mizzou. W's > L's.

Baylor? really. the team that lost to Tech in Dallas and needed a classic Dan Hawkins 4th Q choke job** to beat Colorado? meh.

**similar to the gagging his Buffs did this week....enter the 4th Q up 10 to Tech at Folsom. Lose the 4th Q 13-0.

Top 5, I'd go:

1 Auburn
2 Missouri
3 Oregon
4 TCU
5 Michigan State

Caught some of that ridiculous BCS show. Herbstreit admits Boise has played nobody, will play nobody, but they're great "just because."

Papa Willie wrote:I think Oregon is better than Auburn.

I don't, not even close. Oregon plays some frenetic, meth induced style offense that will get exposed as a fraud, probably next week at USC.

But I have a question for you 'spray. I've heard people saying that Cam Newton is the greatest Auburn player ever, greater than Bo Jackson. Your thoughts?

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:they're great "just because."

they're great because they returned 20 of 22 starters from a team that went undefeated, jack-hammered Oregon into the blue turf and beat TCU, who a lot of people considered one of the best teams in the country last year

trust me.....they are for reals

There we go. An actual argument. I'm not knocking Boise, just Herbstreit's lazy doofus act.

Cam > Pryor...Hey Terelle...fucking watch Cam you fucking pussy...

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:I'm not knocking Boise

really?

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:Top 5, I'd go:

1 Auburn
2 Missouri
3 Oregon
4 TCU
5 Michigan State

this says otherwise....

why is that nobody ever says "who've they played" when it comes to TCU? Look at their schedule to date and the only substanative team they've beaten is Oregon State

If somebody wants to rank Boise top 5, or top 3, I seriously have no gripe with that. I really do not know who the 5 best teams are, much less the 5 best teams in order. Just bring an actual argument to the table; that's all I ask, and that's the only point I'm making.

You make a fair point about TCU. I could swap TCU for Boise and wouldn't have much problem with that.

Papa Willie wrote:Yes - I think Oregon is better than Auburn. Yes, I am scared shitless about Ole Miss this coming weekend. My guess - now the Ducks might pound USC into the ground while Auburn squeaks by a pissed off Nutt team, and the Ducks hop over Auburn next week.

If that doesn't happen, Auburn will certainly be penalized for playing UT-Chattanegro the week after (unless they go Boise and beat them by at least 50).

As long as Auburn takes care of business, they're fine. It really doesn't matter if Oregon jumps them. Under the BCS system, there's really no functional difference between #1 and #2. There's a huge difference, OTOH, between #2 and #3.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:If somebody wants to rank Boise top 5, or top 3, I seriously have no gripe with that. I really do not know who the 5 best teams are, much less the 5 best teams in order. Just bring an actual argument to the table; that's all I ask, and that's the only point I'm making.

You make a fair point about TCU. I could swap TCU for Boise and wouldn't have much problem with that.

this wasn't directed at you so much as it was directed toward the Boise State detractors (s'up the majority of college "experts" at ESPN)....I understand the "they play in the WAC" thing, but listening to Craig James and the other douchebags on that show simply spouting that "who've they played" mantra is fucking annoying....Herbstreit (who seems to have become something of a BSU fan) is the guy that keeps pointing out exactly what I said about so many returning players from an undefeated team....he said "quit looking at who they play and look at the team itself" and the other three simply keep repeating "who've they played"....well, they played Virginia Tech (who seems to be hitting their stride after dropping that game to James Madison) and Oregon State, who while not as good as first thought is really the only quality team that TCU has played...yet not once did any of those asshats say "who've they played" when referring to TCU....I just don't get all of the seeming impugnity for Boise State

"who have they played" is a legitimate argument and objective means of ranking teams with identical records. If we're not going to go by resume/sos/actual games played...what is the point of playing the games?

all I know is for this coming weekend...

Boise
Oregon
Utah
MSU

are getting pounded by me...Boise, Oregon and Utah are fucking covering machines and MSU is getting 6.5...FUCKING A

Papa Willie wrote:As much as MSU struggled with NW, I really don't see them beating a damned good Iowa team. Iowa HAS to be pissed about the Badgers, too.

I fully expected it to be a struggle.

And if it was some guarantee that a team's going to play like they did the previous week, then Vegas wouldn't be making money hand over fist on people. You've been watching enough football to know teams are different week to week.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:"who have they played" is a legitimate argument and objective means of ranking teams with identical records.

sure it is...all I'm trying to figure out is why that argument doesn't seem to apply to TCU.....I remember last year when lots of people were saying things like "Texas Christian has one of the toughest defenses in the country", but when you look at it, during the regular season really other than Utah who in the fuck did they play? Clemson? Virginia? Not exactly a powerhouse schedule, yet not once did I ever remember anybody asking "who've they played"...just seems like kind of a double standard between TCU and Boise...and given the fact they play Utah, if they win there's no doubt they'll be jumped over Boise State

I can't remember the number of times I've seen a school, that allegedly had a difficult schedule (multiple teams that were ranked in the top 25 at the start of a season) and by the seasons end, none of the "ranked" opponents were anywhere near the top 25.....but "strength of schedule" didn't seem to be significantly affected

like teams playing Texas....I knew coming into the season those fuking knobs were given way too much respect, yet it doesn't seem to adversely affect anybody when a team like the horns are discovered to be a fraud

Felix wrote:

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:"who have they played" is a legitimate argument and objective means of ranking teams with identical records.

sure it is...all I'm trying to figure out is why that argument doesn't seem to apply to TCU....

No -- all you're trying to do is fucking troll... or leave everyone's jaw hanging loose in disbelief.

Dude -- do BSU fans get together and predetermine what they're going to whine about each week?

Usually with you guys, it's one form of YHKYOA or another...


"WHAAAAA!!! We're not a traditional blueblood big name powerhouse program, so we don't get the respect we deserve because the pollsters base too much on what happened IN PREVIOUS YEARS"...

Which is invariably followed up with "Well, sure we really haven't palyed anyone, b-b-b-b-b-but...

WE BEAT OREGON AND TCU LAST YEAR!"


So, BSU fan -- which side of your mouth is it you want the rest of the country to listen to? Or do you propose we listen to whichever side of your mouth you feel like having us listen to... in which case, wouldn't every team in the country have a #1 next to its name?


And now we've got "B-b-b-b-but... TCU hasn't played anyone either!"

Sorry -- you've got the OS thing in common. After that, you've got VaTech, who a good Pop Warner team could have beaten that day. Beyond that, there's no comparison between a WAC schedule and a MWC schedule, which you'll be finding out firsthand soon.

Dinsdale wrote: No -- all you're trying to do is fucking troll... or leave everyone's jaw hanging loose in disbelief.

Dude -- do BSU fans get together and predetermine what they're going to whine about each week?

now who's trolling?

WE BEAT OREGON AND TCU LAST YEAR!"

we did, and the reason it's applicable in this instance is because we have virtually the same team back, minus one very very good defensive back

Sorry -- you've got the OS thing in common. After that, you've got VaTech, who a good Pop Warner team could have beaten that day. Beyond that, there's no comparison between a WAC schedule and a MWC schedule, which you'll be finding out firsthand soon.

yeah, San Diego State is a fucking AWESOME team, right up there with New Mexico and Wyoming...

you are aware of the fact that over the last few years, the WAC has pretty much had their way with the Mountain West right?

I have no problems with Boise State playing for a national title if there aren't 2 BCS conference teams unbeaten.

I actually do think Boise State can hang with any team in the country. They have great team speed, are physical, and have a talented and experienced QB. They're also very well coached. It's probably about the most experienced team in the country.

But the way the system is currently set up, I just can't make an argument for how they should be able to play for a national title if there are 2 unbeaten BCS conference schools. And in some cases, I could make a better argument for a 1 loss BCS conference team.

I would like to see them play for a national title just because it would be nice to finally give them that shot and let them prove their worth. If there are less than 2 unbeaten BCS conference teams, then Boise deserves to play for the title. Their program has earned their shot. Let's settle the debate on the field. Let's see if Boise can hang with the big boys in a championship game. They sure as hell deserve it more than TCU. Has TCU ever beaten any decent major college teams? Seems like ALL of their wins are either against BCS conference bottom feeders or mid-majors. Boise State has beaten Oklahoma, Virginia Tech- oh, and TCU.

That said, we shouldn't even be having this debate because college football should have a system that doesn't require much debate. But they're dumb, so they don't.

TheJON wrote: Has TCU ever beaten any decent major college teams? Seems like ALL of their wins are either against BCS conference bottom feeders or mid-majors. Boise State has beaten Oklahoma, Virginia Tech- oh, and TCU.

TCU beat Oklahoma in Norman in 05. Also, if you mean "ever" as in ever....I'm sure TCU has wins over former SWC teams like UT, ATM, SMU etc. at at some point.

Iowa beat Arizona and Wisconsin last year, so shouldn't they be getting a little more love from the BCS?

TheJON wrote:I could make a better argument for a 1 loss BCS conference team.

so could I....I think that if Alabama goes the rest of the way undefeated, they should probably be one half of the MNC game

King Crimson wrote: TCU beat Oklahoma in Norman in 05.

hell that's only 5 years ago so it's within the "10-year" time frame which makes it totally relevant to the 2010 BCS standings

Mace wrote:Iowa beat Arizona and Wisconsin last year, so shouldn't they be getting a little more love from the BCS?

if they haven't lost and are essentially the same team, then yes, they should be getting more consideration

Mace wrote:Iowa beat Arizona and Wisconsin last year, so shouldn't they be getting a little more love from the BCS?

Felix's qualifier was that BSU pretty much returned everybody. You guys lost major players on your o-line, lb corps, Spievey, Moeaki, etc. Not the same team.

Felix wrote:San Diego State is a fucking AWESOME team....

I don't know about that, but they damn sure put a scare in Mizzou in Week 3. I thought we wuz beat. They had us by the short curlies and only a fluke of a last minute play saved our bacon.

MgoBlue-LightSpecial wrote:

Mace wrote:Iowa beat Arizona and Wisconsin last year, so shouldn't they be getting a little more love from the BCS?

Felix's qualifier was that BSU pretty much returned everybody. You guys lost major players on your o-line, lb corps, Spievey, Moeaki, etc. Not the same team.

I know. I was joking.

Papa Willie wrote: Nope - I think Dins would go along with me in saying that Oregon is definitely better this year.

you get no argument from me on that point....Oregon is a better football team than they were last year...that's why personally rank them #1 with Auburn second for right now....some people may be getting the wrong impression here...I don't think Boise is the best team in the country...but in a one game winner take all scenario, they can hang with anyone

No offense, but I think if Oregon turned their lights on for the whole game, they would probably beat BSU by at least 3 TD's...

they might win, but they certainly wouldn't beat them by 3 touchdowns....to me, Oregon's defense is still suspect and stopping Boise's offense is not an easy task...hell Kellen Moore probably has more football smarts than 3/4 of the defensive coordinators in FBS football.....

felix equals jake33?

What's it gonna take for Boise St to get in then? This is supposed to be the year, right? It's still a possibility they don't get in if TCU beats Utah AND Baylor somehow sniffs out a couple more wins. Not only that, but SMU could win the rest of their games as well.

Bottom line, TCU's SOS is going to get stronger while Boise's will continue to weaken, especially if Nevada loses a couple more games. Should 3 of the 4 undefeated BCS schools lose, then you're looking at having to choose between TCU or Boise St playing for the crystal ball.

Should two BCS schools are still standing then it's Boise and TCU once again playing second fiddle in the Fiesta Bowl.

What about next year though? What if the Mountain West sends out two more invites to Tulsa and Houston or SMU? The Mountain West would become a BCS conference. What if Boise goes undefeated against a conference schedule with Air Force, TCU, Houston, Fresno St., and Nevada in the mix. Does that get them in over an undefeated BCS school who is playing in a conference having a mediocre year overall? Or do they ride the pine again while the BigTen plays the SEC for all the marbles?

War Wagon wrote:

Felix wrote:San Diego State is a fucking AWESOME team....

I don't know about that, but they damn sure put a scare in Mizzou in Week 3. I thought we wuz beat. They had us by the short curlies and only a fluke of a last minute play saved our bacon.

welcome to Lincoln, Wags...sure...NU has yet to prove they can play as well at home as they play on the road (Wazzou, Stillwater, etc.) but, let's say they finally do play like a Husker team in Lincoln (it's going to happen Saturday) ... mizzou gets exposed....in a bad way. bet on it.

Bizzarofelice wrote:felix equals jake33?

I don't post enough in this forum to know what that means...

Go Coogs' wrote:What's it gonna take for Boise St to get in then?

Boise State can go undefeated for the next five years and they'll still never get to the MNC....power conferences simply wield too much influence to ever let a non-BCS team into the MNC...not Boise, not TCU.....you think any of the BCS conferences are going to let the huge payday from the MNC game go easily?

Sudden Sam wrote: For BSU to get to the championship game, they need to play in a conference that requires a little bit of effort to get thru 8 games. Playing pissants every week should not qualify a team to get that berth.

so you're saying Hawaii, Fresno State, and Nevada aren't worthy opponents?

shit, nevada is in the to 25 and Hawaii is knocking on the door of the top 25

that's right bud, look at the schedule and not the team, just like a typical ball sucking BCS conference honk should....

Sudden Sam wrote:Play a stretch of teams like LSU, Florida, Arkansas, Georgia (yeah, I said Georgia!), Auburn, Alabama or Michigan State, Iowa, Ohio State, Illinois (yeah, I said Illinois!) or Oklahoma, Texas (yeah, I said...you know), Missouri, Nebraska, Okie State...then get back to me.

just another way of saying "if they played in the SEC"

rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat

There is no doubt in my mind that Boise is a well-coached, talented football team. There's no doubt in my mind that they could beat Alabama, Ohio State, or Oklahoma. However...they don't deserve a shot as long as they're not playing a decent schedule.

so what you're saying here is that half of the teams that play FBS football are automatically excluded, no matter what they do? college football is the only sport where idiocy like this reigns...that would be equivalent to telling half the field in a PGA tour event "look, it doesn't matter what score you shoot, you can't win because your not worthy of winning"...how fucking crazy is that? but in reality, that's exactly what you're saying...

if I were you I wouldn't watch the game tonight because obviously Boise State isn't worthy of the time spent watching...they're obviously a much lower life form that people like you shouldn't waste your valuable time on....hell, you should probably be posting on the SEC message boards as to how great the SEC is....

If they played a real schedule, we wouldn't even be having this discussion. If BSU played an 8 game schedule in the SEC, Big Ten, or Big 12...they'd have 2, 3, 4 losses.

rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat

I could handle them being part of a 16 team playoff. Then they'd have to play at least 4 games against good teams to win the title. That I'd be fine with.

that's pretty magnanimous of you...of course it's meaningless, but magnanimous none the less

If the Broncos strung together 4 games against quality competition, fine. But playing the shit schools they do does not make them qualified (IMHO) to play for the BCS title.

rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat, rinse, repeat

if they played in the ACC or the Big East, we wouldn't be having this discussion either, they'd still be undefeated and would be ranked #1....I notice you always seem to leave out the other two auto qualifying confenences when you go on your little "if they played in the _______(insert conference)" binges...why is that

Papa Willie wrote: Dude - you're NOT playing a very good schedule when you're favored that much in every game. That's sick! :D

dude, I know its a suck ass schedule, but there's nothing Boise State can do about it...all they can do is play the teams scheduled

shit, if horrible schedules were an issue: there's a pretty good chance michigan state will finish undefeated. to do so they will have beaten 2.5 real teams (wisco, iowa, and michigan's offense) and then...?

Sudden Sam wrote:Okay, Felix...first of all, you're a good dude...I'm not attacking you, so relax.

okay, relaxed

I watched what I could stand of your game last night. The 'what I could stand' is a reference to that godawful Hasbro field. Please talk some sense into the school administrators and get a real football field. That blue crap is horrible to watch a game on. I know it was a Tuesday, but I could see that 1/2 of Boise's fans agreed...lotsa empty seats.

the majority of empty seats were in the student section, for whatever reason...it was really cold and prior to the start of the game, it was raining...still, no reason for that many empty seats

Not impressed at all with BSU. They couldn't stay on the field throughout a full "real" conference season. They'd be run by midseason. .500 team at best in any BCS conference.

they didn't play very well last night....too many missed tackles but no team can play it's absolute best every time out....but seriously do you have anything other than simply carping the same non-sense about "playing in the _______ (insert conference)? You constantly bring this up, but trust me if they'd take a game against Alabama or Arkansas, or LSU in a heartbeat-start petitioning those teams to schedule Boise State.....I'm not arguing they'd have a tougher go of it in a stronger conference, so really, give it a rest.....I'm still convinced that were they playing in the ACC or the Big East, they'd be undefeated and ranked first All they can do is play the teams put in front of them....

That said, good luck the rest of the way. I've decided that I want y'all to win out, go to the championship game and win it. That really is the best hope for getting rid of the BCS as it stands now.

agreed

If that doesn't change things, you'll see Alabama, Ohio State, Oklahoma, etc. applying for membership in shit conferences, running the table every year, and laughing their way into the BCS title game.

really? do you think Alabama would give up their yearly revenue generated from playing in the SEC for the pittance that teams like Boise State receive? and do you honestly think LSU could recruit the same caliber talent if they were playing in a lesser conference? Auburn would never see another 5 star recruit if they were playing in the mid-atlantic conference.... there are obviously lots of concepts you don't seem to grasp when you make statements like that....

Seriously, does anyone really believe that beating up on junior college teams should get you into a title game at the top level?

which "junior college" teams are you referring to?

Take a look at the home teams who have sold out to ESPN and allowed Tuesday night games.

Some real Div I powerhouses on that list.

i love the boise state slippery slope. first it was they couldn't go undefeated in a bcs conference and gradually it's become they couldn't go .500. interesting considering they usually play what, the bcs dregs?

Felix wrote:that would be equivalent to telling half the field in a PGA tour event "look, it doesn't matter what score you shoot, you can't win because your not worthy of winning"...how fucking crazy is that?

That's a good analogy -- if a guy on the PGA Tour shoots 65,64,63,62 on the executive course while everyone else is playing a 7400 yard monster, should that guy get the big cardboard check on sunday afternoon?


If BSU tears up the MWC next season the way they have the WAC, then they deserve much love in the BCS. Still might take at least one really tough OOC game, but run through the MWC undefeated (either BSU or TCU is going to get a loss next year), and we'll start talking about championship games.

on the golf analogy....everyone in the PGA tournament plays the same golf course. Boise doesn't play the same schedule as everyone else.....it's a variable. the golf course is a constant.

King Crimson wrote:on the golf analogy....everyone in the PGA tournament plays the same golf course. Boise doesn't play the same schedule as everyone else.....it's a variable. the golf course is a constant.

Exactly, and you can't hang your hat on one round of the tournament either....you have to play four if you make the cut. Translation: play more than one or two decent teams, or mix in an actual quality opponent or two during the regular season, so everyone can make a more educated judgment on whether you belong in the top 10 or 25.

Mace wrote:

King Crimson wrote:on the golf analogy....everyone in the PGA tournament plays the same golf course. Boise doesn't play the same schedule as everyone else.....it's a variable. the golf course is a constant.

Exactly, and you can't hang your hat on one round of the tournament either....you have to play four if you make the cut. Translation: play more than one or two decent teams, or mix in an actual quality opponent or two during the regular season, so everyone can make a more educated judgment on whether you belong in the top 10 or 25.

let's say after beating FSU and Texas, OU plays the WAC schedule....they certainly don't lose to Missouri that way. not a lot of Missouris on the BSU schedule once October starts.

how many times do you turn on a golf major and the guy who shot 63 the first round on Sunday is putting out on 18 when the TV coverage comes on...and the leaders are still on the practice tee warming up.