Rave: College Football is Back Baby!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Even in reference to a playoff, I don't think there's really anyone saying that all the spots should have to go to BCS teams.

Heh, I think he was saying one of the arguments against a playoff system is tradition. Here's the two paragraphs:

And anyone who wants to trade the BCS system for a playoff should be jumping on the Broncos' bandwagon as well. If Boise State can run the table, it's the best argument yet for why the BCS is so flawed and unfair.

There are still a lot of detractors who say that, because of its WAC pedigree, Boise State doesn't deserve a shot. I don't buy that. College football lost its right to yammer about tradition when it spent the summer tearing itself up and putting itself back together again, sort of. The BCS allowed its conferences to strip each other for parts; it can't cry foul, then, when an upstart wants to crash its party.

I don't think it was very clearly written, but I took it as 'If you want a playoff root for Boise. One of the arguments against a playoff is tradition, but since Nebraska and Colorado jumped ship and other teams moved conferences as well the NCAA can't really use tradition as an argument against having a football playoff'. I may be reading it wrong though.

ust because it's not their fault doesn't mean they necessarily deserve a spot at year's end.

I guess this is a fair point, but I think they shouldn't be faulted for it either. When the Pac-10 or Big-10 has a down year, one team from the conference is still guaranteed a BCS spot and come sometimes sneak in to the Championship game (OSU did a few years ago). Boise can run the table and a 1 loss team could still likely make the Championship game before them.

I think it's a tough argument to claim that a one loss team, even in a down year for a power conference, doesn't deserve a BCS/Championship game appearance over Boise. It sucks for them, and they're working to change it, but this is half of their schedule this year:

New Mexico State
San Jose State
Idaho
Toledo
Utah State
Louisiana Tech

That's 6 games against teams that are unequivocally worse than any power conference team(save maybe Washington State). The rest of their schedule just isn't strong enough to account for that half anchoring them down. Hawaii, Wyoming, Nevada, Fresno State, those teams are probably on par with the mediocre BCS schools when they have a good year, and Virginia Tech and Oregon State aren't nearly top heavy enough to compensate.

[lukethedrifter]

I think you are wrong, TT. Why would you not take into account what they did in the Fiesta Bowl with the same players? That they began the season in the Top 5 shows that it does mean something and that they have established a reputation as a very very good football program year after year. Then they go on the road- yes, on the road- and beat another ranked team. If they take care of business and have a dominant season they will be a serious candidate for the BCS championship game.

[vinsanity]

I think it's a tough argument to claim that a one loss team, even in a down year for a power conference, doesn't deserve a BCS/Championship game appearance over Boise.

Well in a down year a 2 or 3 loss BCS Conference school could get a BCS bid, but in a down year I agree that a 1 loss team in a power conference (sometimes depending on the loss) is maybe a smidge more deserving.

I guess my thing is that voters don't punish BCS Conference schools for losing to a ranked opponent, they almost never slide when beating San Jose State, even if the teams behind them beat a Top 10 team. And they are almost never punished for being idle. If Bama was idle this week when Boise beat VT, Boise wouldn't move up. But if Boise was idle, and say Texas beat Nebraska, I think Texas would leap frog Boise.

If say Bama plays Florida for the SEC Championship (even possible?), and Bama is 1 and OSU is #2, Boise is 3 and Florida is 4, if OSU and Boise are idle, and Florida wins, there's a strong likelihood that Florida leaps Boise for the #2 spot, and Bama only falls to 5 or 6. But Boise shows up against a Top 10 opponent, Bama beats one of those cupcakes you mentioned and Bama stands still.

I just wish they'd use the same 'rules' for each team. If you're going to vote Boise to #3, they should get the same amount of deference for earning that ranking as any Power Conference Team IMO. If you think a 1 loss SEC team is unequivocally better, don't vote them that high.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

I think you are wrong, TT. Why would you not take into account what they did in the Fiesta Bowl with the same players? That they began the season in the Top 5 shows that it does mean something and that they have established a reputation as a very very good football program year after year. Then they go on the road- yes, on the road- and beat another ranked team. If they take care of business and have a dominant season they will be a serious candidate for the BCS championship game.

I'm not talking about if they're capable of winning, it's very clear they're a good team that can beat pretty much anyone. My point is that there are a lot of good teams, and when all you have to go on is a 12 game season, Boise doesn't really deserve a spot over someone who was similarly good against a significantly better schedule.

[AWvsCBsteeeerike3]

Just out of curiosity, who do you think is more deserving of a berth to the BCS Championship of these two teams:

An SEC team that loses one game, but wins the SEC Championship game. (Feel free to replace 'SEC' with 'Big XII' or in the future 'Big 10' 'Pac 10'). Or Boise State running the table while beating 1-2 good teams? Keep in mind, while winning 1-2 games against ranked opponents isn't nothing, a team in the SEC will likely face anywhere from 3-5 ranked teams throughout the season and then have to beat a top 5 team in the SEC Championship. I think there's a sizeable difference in having to play top tiered teams week in and week out. For instance, having to play Georgia and Alabama in consecutive weeks is extremely different than having to play VA Tech in week 1 and then week 4 having to play Oregon State.

To answer my own question, I don't know. I tend to think a team losing 1 game in a grinding schedule is more impressive than a team tiptoeing through a lighter schedule. But, it's impossible to know, imo, without playing the games. Hence, why I'd love to see a playoff. I'd like Boise to be given the opportunity to go out and beat a Texas one week then back it up with a win against Alabama the next. No 3 week preparation....just win one game, take sunday off, practice that week for your next opponent and beat them. That's really the only way they'll get respect. And, as has been stated, it's not their fault that they're not given that opportunity.

[lukethedrifter]

Well, if BSU gets their shot then the big boys will perhaps change their mind about not scheduling them.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Just out of curiosity, who do you think is more deserving of a berth to the BCS Championship of these two teams:

An SEC team that loses one game, but wins the SEC Championship game. (Feel free to replace 'SEC' with 'Big XII' or in the future 'Big 10' 'Pac 10'). Or Boise State running the table while beating 1-2 good teams? Keep in mind, while winning 1-2 games against ranked opponents isn't nothing, a team in the SEC will likely face anywhere from 3-5 ranked teams throughout the season and then have to beat a top 5 team in the SEC Championship. I think there's a sizeable difference in having to play top tiered teams week in and week out. For instance, having to play Georgia and Alabama in consecutive weeks is extremely different than having to play VA Tech in week 1 and then week 4 having to play Oregon State.

I think no question you take the SEC/whatever conference team there. Boise might beat that team head to head, but the other school did much, much more.

[vinsanity]

I think no question you take the SEC/whatever conference team there. Boise might beat that team head to head, but the other school did much, much more.

So Boise State will never deserve a shot at a National Title until they join the Pac-12 or Big XII?

[JL21]

I think no question you take the SEC/whatever conference team there. Boise might beat that team head to head, but the other school did much, much more.

So Boise State will never deserve a shot at a National Title until they join the Pac-12 or Big XII?

Or they could schedule four non-cons the quality of VT and Oregon St. If they made it all the way through that, it'd be hard to argue that they don't belong.

[vinsanity]

I think no question you take the SEC/whatever conference team there. Boise might beat that team head to head, but the other school did much, much more.

So Boise State will never deserve a shot at a National Title until they join the Pac-12 or Big XII?

Or they could schedule four non-cons the quality of VT and Oregon St. If they made it all the way through that, it'd be hard to argue that they don't belong.

The could if any other non-cons agreed to play them.

My big problem is just that if the coaches and AP polls rank them third, they must be getting ranked in the top 3 by a majority of voters. If the majority of voters don't think they are currently one of the top 3 teams in the country, stop voting them that high. I understand things change, but if Florida or PSU go undefeated, it's likely they'd end up ahead of an undefeated Boise in the rankings, right? So why is Boise ahead of them now?