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

[AWvsCBsteeeerike3]

Didn't they have something like that not too long ago in the Big 12 with Texas, Texas Tech and Oklahoma all finishing the year with 1 loss each all against one of the teams listed here?

TX beat OU, TT beat TX, OU beat TX. Of course, all those games were the Big 12 South and they had a tiebreaker or some sort set up to deal with it. OU came out ahead, went to the Big 12 title game and won. Then went on to the Natl Champ, iirc. Texas [expletive] and moaned, but it didn't change anything even though they had a point.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Didn't they have something like that not too long ago in the Big 12 with Texas, Texas Tech and Oklahoma all finishing the year with 1 loss each all against one of the teams listed here?

TX beat OU, TT beat TX, OU beat TX. Of course, all those games were the Big 12 South and they had a tiebreaker or some sort set up to deal with it. OU came out ahead, went to the Big 12 title game and won. Then went on to the Natl Champ, iirc. Texas [expletive] and moaned, but it didn't change anything even though they had a point.

http://didtexaswinthebig12in2008.com/

[JoeMcKim]

It's kind of hard to buy that you have equal records with a team and you won the head-to-head competition but the other team won the division.

[vinsanity]

It's kind of hard to buy that you have equal records with a team and you won the head-to-head competition but the other team won the division.

Were awarded the division because voters know best.

That's always been my issue with College Football. At least under the old system these kinds of things meant less, there were tie breakers like this in place and no question about who went to what bowls. Win the Big 10 go to Rose Bowl. Done. Big XII? Fiesta Amigo! Sure no 'true' National Championship, but I was ok with that. Correct me if I'm wrong, before the BCS didn't it go to a points Tie-Breaker for a 3-way tie? That year it was who was higher in the polls or more first place votes or something?

[AWvsCBsteeeerike3]

It's kind of hard to buy that you have equal records with a team and you won the head-to-head competition but the other team won the division.

So you think TX should have won even though TX Tech had the same record and TX Tech beat TX? Or should have TX Tech won even though they had the same record as OU and OU beat them head to head? No matter how you dice it, someone was going to have that exact scenario happen.

[Transmogrified Tiger]

It's kind of hard to buy that you have equal records with a team and you won the head-to-head competition but the other team won the division.

When 3 teams can make that statement, you have to have some sort of tiebreaker.

[JoeMcKim]

It's kind of hard to buy that you have equal records with a team and you won the head-to-head competition but the other team won the division.

When 3 teams can make that statement, you have to have some sort of tiebreaker.

Oh, I totally understand that. It doesn't make it suck any less for Texas though. But I guess they shouldn't have let TT beat them.

[cardsfansince82]

Boise State beat the #10 team in the preseason poll. A team that is anywhere from the 1st to 5th best team in the 3rd or 4th best conference. I'm not sure what kind of credit we're supposed to give Boise for the Fiesta Bowl last year since they played TCU, a team with a slightly better resume than theirs but still hadn't played any of the big boys.

As far as big teams being scared to schedule Boise, that is the biggest misconception. Just look at this weekend's schedule of games. Teams play tough non-conference games all the time. A loss is a loss and you basically have to run the table to make the championship and two losses or less to make the BCS. It comes down to money. Would you rather schedule a national powerhouse program with a huge fanbase or Boise, whose fanbase is the population of their town? If you're Alabama or OU or Ohio State you can play a home and home with Penn St/FSU/Miami and make a ton of money on both sides. Or you can play a home and home with Boise and not sell hardly any tickets to their fans at your place and have to travel to the middle of [expletive] nowhere to play on an awful field and none of your fans will want to go. I bet Boise would have no trouble finding games if they agreed to play once on the road and that's it. It's not really fair, but it's not scared either. It's smart.

[InvincibleCakeEater]

Well, that's pretty much what Boise is doing though isn't it? I think the truth of it is that programs are absolutely afraid to play Boise St. Lots of crappy nobody teams schedule home and homes and it's not a problem. The problem is that if you lose to Boise St. your season is likely shot, but if you beat them it's not going to benefit you a lot in the BCS. AD's know that Boise St is realistically capable of beating their teams, so they won't do home and homes. I understand why they do it, but I think it has a lot more to do with fear than money. Hell, Boise St-VT just gave ESPN their highest College Football rating since 1994.

[JoeMcKim]

If none of the big boys are willing to step up and play Boise State in non conference play then it's not their fault on the competition side. They can only play whoever is put in front of them. Too bad the Pac 10 didn't expand further and add them in addition to Colorado and Utah.