What would you rather have??? [Archive]

JALMOND

January 2nd, 2007, 02:54 PM

bobbythekidd

January 2nd, 2007, 02:56 PM

What do you mean "at your level of competition"? Does anyone not think that North Dakota State, App State, or UMASS could give both of these teams all they could handle?
To ask this is like asking if NC State could give Ohio or Boise all they could handle? App lost 28-10 against NC State. I think it would be fun to watch, but I doubt they could give them "all they could handle."

ucdtim17

January 2nd, 2007, 02:57 PM

Mike Johnson

January 2nd, 2007, 02:59 PM

There are millions of reasons why the second is better than the first.

ucdtim17

January 2nd, 2007, 03:00 PM

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 03:04 PM

I'd rather have even one I-AA/FCS national title. That's partially because I don't really care about the publicity angle. I want my school to have a national championship.

I think lost in the hoopla of what happened last night with Boise State is that, if you go by power ratings, BCS rankings, etc., it wasn't an upset. Oklahoma was the 10th rated team in the BCS rankings while Boise State was 8th. In the Sagarin Ratings, Oklahoma was 14th while Boise State was 9th.

In the human polls, which I think are more subjective and biased, Oklahoma was rated 7th (AP), 8th (USA Today), and 8th (Harris). Boise State was ranked 9th in all three.

It got a lot of pub because of the "David and Goliath" angle associated with the histories of the programs. But in the grand scheme of things it was a very close game in which two teams from the lower strata of the top 10 played and one of them pulled out a one point win when it looked like all was lost by employing some very entertaining trick plays. That's a good thing, but it's not a national championship of any kind.

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 03:09 PM

I'm sure today they're probably all saying "Boy I sure wish we stayed in I-AA. Instead of playing Oklahoma on Fox for $17 million, we could have played App State in Chattanooga in front of 20,000 people on a friday night on espn2 - what were we thinking?"

They don't get the whole $17 million, I think that gets split up by the conference. But I can see where if what you care about most is that your school get more money and publicity you'd prefer the Boise State experience of last night.

ucdtim17

January 2nd, 2007, 03:16 PM

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 03:23 PM

ha i know what id rather have..............I dream of a day when Appalachian could win the Fiesta Bowl like my new boys, Boise State, which by that point would be a semifinal game, and they would then play for the National Championship...........but since that wont happen anytime soon, i suppose ill have to stick with the back 2 backs!:)

I think it is very, very unlikely that that Boise State team could get through a I-A/BS 16 team playoff tournament or even get to the semifinals. Oklahoma would not have been one of the better teams in a 2006 I-A/BS 16 team tournament. They'd have been kind of middle of the field at best. And Boise State wouldn't have been able to spend a month focusing on, getting prepared for, and getting fired up for one team in a situation where the game meant a lot more to them than it did to the other side. If they did win the first game they'd have to turn right around in a week and play another team that would probably be better than the first.

Cleets

January 2nd, 2007, 03:25 PM

What do you mean "at your level of competition"? Does anyone not think that North Dakota State, App State, or UMASS could give both of these teams all they could handle?

Ummmm....
It's clear that our level of competition including our four finalists in our playoff system are good teams and embody excellence and all that stuff (blah blah blah)

But the 1-A teams playing last weekend are at a different level...

True "Any given Saturday" and all that, but if App. State or Umass or Montana played 1-A teams all year long they would win a few games, not 11 or 12 ... like they do now...

I can't remember but what was the 1-aa vs. 1-a record this year?
17-2 something like that...

(That said, I would not trade being a fan of our game for anything at 1-a)

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 03:27 PM

I care about my school playing one of the classic games of all time against one of college football's most successful programs on prime time network TV with the whole country watching as opposed to an obscure friday night game in an obscure place in front of a small crowd in a game only a tiny niche audience cares about. The big check doesn't hurt either. An FCS championship is something to be proud of, but this question would get laughed at by 99.9998% of the population. This board is insane sometimes

You feel that way because the publicity is important to you. That's fine. I'm also sure you're correct about what the majority of the people would want.

But the publicity isn't important to me as a fan and you may have noticed that I'm not one who necessarily follows the crowd.

Mike Johnson

January 2nd, 2007, 03:31 PM

BSU and OU both have less than impressive SOS this year. I'd put any of the eight semi-final teams from this year or last year up against one of these two teams.

Boise State's unimpressive SOS included five teams that later went bowls, four of them winning their bowls. The only one to lose a bowl was Nevada, losing by a point to Miami. BSU defeated those five by a combined score of 180 to 78.

Boise State did play Sacramento State (winning 45-0) and four conference teams were pitiful and Boise State defeated them by a combined score of 186 to 78. These four pitiful teams likely each would have gone roughly 5-3 against the 8 I-AA semifinal teams. The resources available at the FBS level are so much greater than that at the FCS level.

That said, winning a championship in a tournament is great. Appalachian State should be proud of its accomplishment, doubly proud that is. But, it would likely not be very close against either Boise State or Oklahoma.

Given that there are now 10 slots in BCS games, with four at-large bids, I wonder what would happen if the FCS champion were given an at-large bid to a BCS game. Two non-BCS teams have "busted" the BCS and both won their games. Perhaps its time for the FCS champion to get a chance at the big money and respect.

The split in Division I in 1978 was over whether or not the NCAA should organize a tournament for a national championship. For the most part, those conferences and schools with bowl ties went one way and those that had had difficulty getting bowl ties went the other way. That split in preference in Division I still exists as afirmed by the recent name change for each sub division. Now, if the FBS were to go to a playoff system to crown a national champion, would there be any reason to maintain the separate subdivisions? If the FBS were to conduct a 16-team playoff and were to invite a FCS team to it, would that team play in the FBS playoff or decide it would rather play in the FCS playoff. I think if the FBS were to decide on a playoff system, it would mean the end of the subdivision of Division I.

BigApp

January 2nd, 2007, 03:32 PM

Not even close - the Boise game was watched by millions and will be remembered as a classic of all time. Maybe you should ask the Boise fans who have actually experienced both (I don't think they won back to back though)

I think all of us know the answer to your question, Tim. Now, whether some are honest about about publicly...that's a different story.

BigApp

January 2nd, 2007, 03:34 PM

I wonder what would happen if the FCS champion were given an at-large bid to a BCS game. Two non-BCS teams have "busted" the BCS and both won their games. Perhaps its time for the FCS champion to get a chance at the big money and respect.

In all likelyhood, the FCS team would get smoked in front of probably the lowest rated BCS bowl.

goasu984Life

January 2nd, 2007, 03:36 PM

Gimme me the titles. Sure, Boise State played well last night, but they will never have a chance at a national championship. I'll take the titles all day long. Just my opinion.

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 03:36 PM

Ummmm....
It's clear that our level of competition including our four finalists in our playoff system are good teams and embody excellence and all that stuff (blah blah blah)

But the 1-A teams playing last weekend are at a different level...

True "Any given Saturday" and all that, but if App. State or Umass or Montana played 1-A teams all year long they would win a few games, not 11 or 12 ... like they do now...

I can't remember but what was the 1-aa vs. 1-a record this year?
17-2 something like that...

(That said, I would not trade being a fan of our game for anything at 1-a)

I-A is on a different level in terms of the overall distribution of calibers. There's overlap. But I agree with the basic point.

Gotta say, though, I don't think Boise State would've won 11 or 12 games either if it had been playing SEC, Big 10, PAC 10, or even teams from this year's down Big 12 all year (or most of the year as teams from those conferences do). There's a big difference between spending a month getting ready to play one team that you care a whole lot more about than it cares about you and doing something like going week after week with five days each time preparing for the next BCS league opponent.

blueballs

January 2nd, 2007, 03:41 PM

There is an interesting thread over at tscsports.com about this very thing and the sample is the GSU folks, who have 6 NC's w/3 sets of back to backs.

Personally, I think Boise did more for its program with the 13-0 season and the BCS bowl win than either App or GSU has with any set of 1-AA/FCS consecutive titles.

The NC's in the lower subclassification are gratifying and absolutely hard earned but they pale in comparison to what Boise did last night in terms of financial gain and publicity/exposure- which are the key to long term success/growth- for their program.

lizrdgizrd

January 2nd, 2007, 03:41 PM

I'd rather have the back-to-backs. One great game is nice but the 2 NCs will last forever & set us up for a chance at 3-in-a-row.

blueballs

January 2nd, 2007, 03:43 PM

I-A is on a different level in terms of the overall distribution of calibers. There's overlap. But I agree with the basic point.

Gotta say, though, I don't think Boise State would've won 11 or 12 games either if it had been playing SEC, Big 10, PAC 10, or even teams from this year's down Big 12 all year (or most of the year as teams from those conferences do). There's a big difference between spending a month getting ready to play one team that you care a whole lot more about than it cares about you and doing something like going week after week with five days each time preparing for the next BCS league opponent.

Correct. For proof take a look at Florida's October gauntlet and tell me Boise would have even gone .500 against that.

Mike Johnson

January 2nd, 2007, 03:45 PM

Gotta say, though, I don't think Boise State would've won 11 or 12 games either if it had been playing SEC, Big 10, PAC 10, or even teams from this year's down Big 12 all year (or most of the year as teams from those conferences do).

Perhaps, true, but an awful lot of teams in these conferences win their conference and make it to a BCS bowl with 2 or even 3 losses, while a Boise State or Utah has to be perfect to make it.

BigApp

January 2nd, 2007, 03:45 PM

they will never have a chance at a national championship.

They keep winning, they will. BSU was at an inherent disadvantage because their preseason rankings were so low. If they keep winning, that shouldn't be a problem now and in the future.

BigApp

January 2nd, 2007, 03:46 PM

The NC's in the lower subclassification are gratifying and absolutely hard earned but they pale in comparison to what Boise did last night in terms of financial gain and publicity/exposure- which are the key to long term success/growth- for their program.

100% correct bb, how anyone can argue with this is beyond sane comprehension.

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 03:50 PM

Boise State's unimpressive SOS included five teams that later went bowls, four of them winning their bowls. The only one to lose a bowl was Nevada, losing by a point to Miami. BSU defeated those five by a combined score of 180 to 78.

When you talk about how many teams on a school's schedule go to bowls it's important to note that more than half (64 of 119) of the teams in the BS go to bowls. That's why you have things like Florida being able to say that 10 of its opponents went to Bowls (with 5 having won their bowl games so far and the other two...LSU and Southern Miss...as favorites in theirs).

89Hen

January 2nd, 2007, 03:51 PM

I went with the general consensious around Portland these days. After failing to even be chosen for the playoffs, we are wondering what it takes to make it. In order to contend, you need to be on the committee's good graces and be selected, or get the auto-bid. In other words, the committee can keep any team out it wants and create its own playoff system. We now realize that, playing in the Big Sky, one loss and you're done, unless you can beat the Griz.

Boise's win has a lot of people wondering how Portland State would do in the WAC, given our recent games against Hawaii and Fresno, and especially last year's game against Boise when we were ahead halfway through the fourth quarter (we still held them to their lowest point total during their current home winning streak). Another WAC team, Nevada, played Miami in a bowl this year (OK, Miami had a down year, but its still Miami. How many of you would refuse a chance to play them?). Small talk has started again on PSU going to the WAC possibly. My opinion, delusions of grandeur, yet some valid points.
:eyebrow: Wow, I'm not even sure where to start.

BSU was successful in I-AA prior to moving. They had a great team and lots of support. PSU can't claim either.

The media (or whomever) complaining about not being selected for the playoffs obviously ignore the position in which the PSU AD put the team. Money is more important than playoffs. Not one, not two, but THREE I-A games. SHAME on ANYONE who points a finger at the Committee instead of the PSU AD. :nono:

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 03:57 PM

They keep winning, they will. BSU was at an inherent disadvantage because their preseason rankings were so low. If they keep winning, that shouldn't be a problem now and in the future.

Under the current system they will have no chance to win a national title unless and until they can get into a BCS league. The reason is that without doing that there is no way they can develop a strong enough overall schedule to end up in the top 2 in the BCS rankings.

89Hen

January 2nd, 2007, 04:02 PM

Gotta say, though, I don't think Boise State would've won 11 or 12 games either if it had been playing SEC, Big 10, PAC 10, or even teams from this year's down Big 12 all year (or most of the year as teams from those conferences do).
:nod: Great win last night, but they've lost too many lopsided games to big name teams in the recent past to have this one win make you forget

1999: a 38-7 loss to UCLA (lone BCS opponent)
2002: lone loss to their lone regular season BSC opponent (41-14 to Arkansas, beat a 7-6 ISU in their own bowl)
2003: lone loss to their lone BCS opponent (OregonSt)
2005: a 48-13 loss to Georgia (0-2 vs BSC teams)

I-AA Fan

January 2nd, 2007, 04:09 PM

I do not understand the question, Are you saying would I rather be IA and win a quality bowl game, or be I-AA and win a couple of titles? Or am I missing something ...like a few hundred thousand to a mil for your program? Or are you asking bowl vs play-off for IA? Also, anyone with a knowledge of college ball would have chosen BSU. The only thing OK had over Boise was middle secondary and a better head coach. Anyway that is just conjecture.

The one issue this thread has brought to light, is the enormous lack of respect for teams that do not win the I-AA play-off ...especially on this board. That is a serious problem & one of the main reasons people oppose a play-off in IA. With 30+ bowls you have 15+ winners, in a play-off there can be only one (sorry for the 'Highlander' quote). You need to look at our play-off in the same context as the NCAA men's basketball ...making the field is a tremendous accomplishment, & certainly should be enough (in itself) to validate your team's season. Any further wins are gravy & do more to demonstrate conference strength than individual accomplishment.

HiHiYikas

January 2nd, 2007, 04:11 PM

Too close for me to vote, especially after reading the few good points brought out in support of either choice.

Publicity and money are nice, that is when you're managing a college football program. It's hard to choose against them (unless you just like the football).

Then again, to end the season undefeated with no hope to win the National Championship is what makes the Bowl series such a fouled-up system.

So, in terms of pure football, there's no way I'd take the bowl win, and become the poster child for the parody that is Bowl-subdivision football. I'd much rather know that I was a genuine, playoff-tested, back-to-back champion.

In terms of those things that are extra-curricular to football, i.e. exposure and money, I'd much rather win in front of millions on Fox than in front of thousands on ESPN2.

BlueHen86

January 2nd, 2007, 04:15 PM

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 04:20 PM

I think all of us know the answer to your question, Tim. Now, whether some are honest about about publicly...that's a different story.

I think everybody would expect that the overwhelming majority of Boise State fans would say they'd prefer what happened last night. In fact, even if what happened last night hadn't happened and Boise State was consistently having medicore season...even bad seasons...most would say they wouldn't want to go "back" to I-AA/FCS.

But the question wasn't what we thought Boise State fans would want. It's was what we'd rather have as fans of our schools. And I prefer that my school play at a level such that it has a reasonably realistic shot at being the best in its realm. In spite of what happened last night, Boise State is not in such a realm. In fact, I don't think Boise State can even reasonably expect to consistently...year to year...win more than it loses against teams from the mainstream of I-A/BS (i.e., the BCS league teams).

They Broncos were 2 - 0 against BCS league teams this year including last night's magical win. That makes them 4 - 11 against BCS league schools since the start of the BCS. If you go back two years it's 2 - 3. Three years it's 3 - 3. Four years it's 3 - 4. Five years it's 4 - 5, and so on.

Now, there's no question that they got a lot more publicity and money than they could've gotten from 100 I-AA/FCS national championships. But they are not a program that's likely to be able to develop to a point of being able to consistently win more than it loses against the mainstream of its subdivision. The only thing that might change that is if they can get into a BCS league.

I realize that kind of thing doesn't matter to most people. But the kind of situation Boise State is in is not my personal preference.

mistersykes

January 2nd, 2007, 04:26 PM

How the hell are there almost as many votes for the Fiesta Bowl? This is an FCS BOARD! The game will be talked about for years, sure. It was the best game I've ever seen, sure. But they didn't win a national championship. In a playoff, you could have this level of play and still have a dramatic game (which we have just as often as the FBS). The thing is, you could do it again too. All the way to a title. You know at the end of the season, the biggest story will be either Ohio State or Florida. I think that Boise will be the second course, the "look how exciting the BCS can be" thing. As a fan, I'll take the 2 championships any day.

ucdtim17

January 2nd, 2007, 04:40 PM

Under the current system they will have no chance to win a national title unless and until they can get into a BCS league. The reason is that without doing that there is no way they can develop a strong enough overall schedule to end up in the top 2 in the BCS rankings.

It's improbable, not impossible. They need to ratchet up their non-conference schedule to include 3 or 4 BCS teams and they need to beat them all. They need to go undefeated and look good, blowing everyone out. They need there to be no more than one undefeated BCS team. It's difficult, as it should be coming from the WAC, but it's not impossible

89Hen

January 2nd, 2007, 04:56 PM

How the hell are there almost as many votes for the Fiesta Bowl? This is an FCS BOARD!
There are a lot of AppSt fans here. :D

BigApp

January 2nd, 2007, 04:57 PM

They Broncos were 2 - 0 against BCS league teams this year including last night's magical win. That makes them 4 - 11 against BCS league schools since the start of the BCS. If you go back two years it's 2 - 3. Three years it's 3 - 3. Four years it's 3 - 4. Five years it's 4 - 5, and so on.

I would venture to guess that Michigan's OOC record against BCS teams isn't that much better.

ucdtim17

January 2nd, 2007, 05:00 PM

Michigan dominated Directional Michigan however, as they do 2 or 3 times every season. They should get a state championship trophy

WUTNDITWAA

January 2nd, 2007, 05:05 PM

Give me the Fiesta Bowl. I can think of 17 million reasons why.

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 05:11 PM

It's improbable, not impossible. They need to ratchet up their non-conference schedule to include 3 or 4 BCS teams and they need to beat them all. They need to go undefeated and look good, blowing everyone out. They need there to be no more than one undefeated BCS team. It's difficult, as it should be coming from the WAC, but it's not impossible

You're right. Nothing is absolutely impossible. Another thing that could happen is that maybe there'd be a year where all the BCS league teams beat each other up within their leagues so that none had fewer than two or three losses.

But, as you say, it's very unlikely. Pretty close to impossible, I think.

Lionsrking

January 2nd, 2007, 05:12 PM

This question is like asking would you rather quit while you're ahead at the blackjack table or would you rather keep playing and win a million dollars. Of course the choice would be win a million dollars but the overwhelming odds say you should quit while you're ahead. Boise State is a unique situation and the move to I-A was the right choice for them. But for every Boise, there's a UL-Monroe, North Texas, Arkansas State etc. who are chasing fool's gold. While I would love for my school to play in a BCS Bowl on primetime national TV for 14-17 million dollars, I realize the odds of it happening are zero in whatever number you wanna come up with, and I would be quite happy to compete for and win back to back FCS national championships.

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 05:14 PM

I would venture to guess that Michigan's OOC record against BCS teams isn't that much better.

You may be right because most of their out of conference games have probably been in bowl games against better than average BCS league teams. Why would you not count all of their BCS league games...including against Big 10 schools? I would if I were making a comparision because what I'm talking about is the ability to win against the mainstream of the subdivision...and the Big 10 is part of that mainstream.

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 05:48 PM

What we're talking about here is personal preference. I personally like small college football. I personally find it more interesting than I find big time college football...though I like that too.

If the BCS stuff was what I was most interested in, I'd be primarily an LSU fan. I went to both LSU and McNeese and I live in the Baton Rouge metro area. I've been to LSU games. I like going to McNeese games better. I like watching I-AA/FCS playoff games more than I like watching Bowl games...with the possible exception of the BCS championship game itself. I also much prefer to go to I-AA playoff games in person than I do bowl games. To me there's just a certain something...a certain intensity involved that isn't there in any bowl game but one.

Last night, for instance, was a very entertaining game. But my perception was that, to the extent that there was real intensity at the start, it was on one side. One team didn't really have anything positive to play for. Only thing it really had to play for was avoiding embarassment.

It's not a "sour grapes" thing with me. I can honestly say that if someone told me right now that I could either be guaranteed that McNeese could go BS and win a BCS bowl game other than the BCS championship game a few years down the line or stay where it is and win a CS national championship, I'd want the experience as a fan of going through the four playoff games to win the national championship (except that maybe knowing ahead of time that they'd win would ruin it).

I realize that most people don't have that preference but it's my preference in terms of what I like as a fan. Now, if you asked what I'd say if you were talking about playing in and winning THE BCS championship game my answer might be different. But that's not a reasonably realistic scenario for Boise State...much less a school like McNeese. Right now there are two former I-AAs...Connecticut and South Florida...for which that might be a reasonably realistic scenario because they've gotten into a BCS league. And of the two it's probably most realistic for South Florida.

patssle

January 2nd, 2007, 05:51 PM

Championships are possible every year.

A Boise State-style Fiesta Bowl is a once in a life time.

BigApp

January 2nd, 2007, 06:02 PM

Why would you not count all of their BCS league games...including against Big 10 schools?

b/c if you did that, it would be unfair to Boise. As in Michigan plays an additional 9 BCS teams than Boise could even schedule.

The only fair comparison is looking at OOC BCS games.

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 06:03 PM

How the hell are there almost as many votes for the Fiesta Bowl? This is an FCS BOARD! The game will be talked about for years, sure. It was the best game I've ever seen, sure.

I think the BCS championship game between Texas and USC last year was a better game. I guess part of it was the meaning involved though.

As far as why people voted for the Fiesta Bowl...I think it's just preference. I know that over the years I've seen that many college football fans see having their program make money and being better known as more important than being at a level at which the school can reasonably aspire to a national championship.

FCS_pwns_FBS

January 2nd, 2007, 06:20 PM

Ummmm....
It's clear that our level of competition including our four finalists in our playoff system are good teams and embody excellence and all that stuff (blah blah blah)

But the 1-A teams playing last weekend are at a different level...

True "Any given Saturday" and all that, but if App. State or Umass or Montana played 1-A teams all year long they would win a few games, not 11 or 12 ... like they do now...

I can't remember but what was the 1-aa vs. 1-a record this year?
17-2 something like that...

(That said, I would not trade being a fan of our game for anything at 1-a)

You are right that no FCS team compares to a team like Florida, Ohio State, and USC. But both of these teams do not compare to those teams. And while it was a very good game, in a few years, almost no one will remember the game or know who BSU is.

I'd rather win the BCS NC than win back to back FCS titles, but the FCS title is still better than getting a BS cinderella ticket to a big-name bowl. Do you really think there are at least a dozen FCS teams that could go undefeated with BSU's schedule?

Cleets

January 2nd, 2007, 06:21 PM

Personally, I think Boise did more for its program with the 13-0 season and the BCS bowl win than either App or GSU has with any set of 1-AA/FCS consecutive titles.

The NC's in the lower subclassification are gratifying and absolutely hard earned but they pale in comparison to what Boise did last night in terms of financial gain and publicity/exposure- which are the key to long term success/growth- for their program.

Excellent points!
I think we love our system and it's benefits (playoffs & Local flavor & being able to get into a game at a reasonable price)

and

they love their system... (Big dollar bowl pay-offs & High profile coverage & tons of guys get to go pro)

There are cool aspects to being a fan of either the 1-A game or ours...

What would be sad is if the cream leaves and moves up, like App. State or Umass or Montana or Delaware or Georgia Southern

WE NEED YOU GUYS TO STICK AROUND!!!!

chiapet9

January 2nd, 2007, 06:21 PM

:nod: Great win last night, but they've lost too many lopsided games to big name teams in the recent past to have this one win make you forget

1999: a 38-7 loss to UCLA (lone BCS opponent)
2002: lone loss to their lone regular season BSC opponent (41-14 to Arkansas, beat a 7-6 ISU in their own bowl)
2003: lone loss to their lone BCS opponent (OregonSt)
2005: a 48-13 loss to Georgia (0-2 vs BSC teams)

saying that is like saying JMU didn't deserve to be in the playoffs in 2004 because they went 2-9 in 2001. you can compare year to year - one year you might suck....the next year you might go undefeated. another example is last year's Penn State team - *thisclose* to going undefeated (Michigan steals a win with 2 secs on the clock) - however the year before they weren't even in a bowl game. your argument is irrelevant.

Cleets

January 2nd, 2007, 06:26 PM

You are right that no FCS team compares to a team like Florida, Ohio State, and USC. But both of these teams do not compare to those teams. And while it was a very good game, in a few years, almost no one will remember the game or know who BSU is.

I'd rather win the BCS NC than win back to back FCS titles, but the FCS title is still better than getting a BS cinderella ticket to a big-name bowl. Do you really think there are at least a dozen FCS teams that could go undefeated with BSU's schedule?

Not sure:
But I believe Boise State would win every game at our level by about a 40 points... all year long!

Like I said: I love our system, they like the big bowl payoff...we all win!

BigApp

January 2nd, 2007, 06:35 PM

I would venture to guess that Michigan's OOC record against BCS teams isn't that much better.

I looked it up. Since 2000, big Blue is 8-10 against out-of-conference BCS foes (including a stuh-ruggle against Vanderbilt this year).

ucdtim17

January 2nd, 2007, 06:51 PM

It should also be noted that Michigan is almost SEC-esque in their scheduling - anyone know the last time they played a game in the south?

I know they played at Oregon in '03 or so, but that's the only non-ND OOC away game I can think of in recent years

DFW HOYA

January 2nd, 2007, 07:03 PM

But both of these teams do not compare to those teams. And while it was a very good game, in a few years, almost no one will remember the game or know who BSU is.

And even fewer will remember who won the FCS title, if it's even called that in a few years.

This poll shouldn't even be close. I'd take the Fiesta Bowl ten times out of 10, because memories like those last generations. Georgetown was in the Orange Bowl 66 years ago and there are still articles that cite it and the 11 Hoyas from that team that went on to the NFL.

PantherRob82

January 2nd, 2007, 07:06 PM

FCS championship. If the other option was FBS championship, that might change things.

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 07:24 PM

b/c if you did that, it would be unfair to Boise. As in Michigan plays an additional 9 BCS teams than Boise could even schedule.

The only fair comparison is looking at OOC BCS games.

Well, we may just have to agree to disagree. What I'm looking at is percent wins against BCS league teams to get an idea of how they stack up to that level of competition. If anything, playing more BCS teams (as of course Michigan did) makes it more difficult because of having to prepare week in and week out to play against that kind of level when YOU are usually the "hunted" like Michigan is (everybody gets fired up to play you) instead of you BEING the "hunter" getting all fired up to prove yourself (which is the role Boise State is in when it's playing a BCS league team).

If there was a big difference in the overall quality of opponents based on counting Big 10 games that might be a problem but I don't think there is. Over the last 5 years, for instance, Boise State's played 9 BCS league teams with a combined record of 76 - 41 (0.649). All of Michigan's 54 BCS league opponents have a combined record of 408 - 262 (0.609). So Boise State's BCS league opponents have a slightly better winning rate. But Boise State is 4 - 5 (0.444) over the period while Michigan is 38 - 16 (0.704) against those sets of BCS league teams. Even given the discrepancy in numbers of games, I think it's clear that Michigan has had by far the superior performance against that level of competition.

I don't see why Michigan shouldn't get "credit," for instance, for having played 13 -1 Wisconsin, 12 - 0 Ohio State, and 9 -4 Penn State as BCS league opponents in 2006 just because they're in the same conference. Which brings me back to the statement about playing fewer games possibly being an advantage.

I think most would agree that Michigan played at least three teams (Ohio State, USC, Wisconsin), and possibly four teams (Notre Dame), in 2006 that are better than anybody Boise State played. For sure three are going to finish more highly ranked in polls and power ratings than Oklahoma is. Whether the fourth does depends in part on whether or not Notre Dame upsets LSU but may be the case even if Notre Dame loses to the Tigers but puts up a good fight. Anyway, I don't see why two of them shouldn't "count" because they're fellow Big 10 schools. I don't know about others but I seriously doubt Boise State would be finishing undefeated and/or in the top 10 if it had played all of the BCS league teams...in and out of the Big 10...that Michigan played this year.

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 07:43 PM

And even fewer will remember who won the FCS title, if it's even called that in a few years.

This poll shouldn't even be close. I'd take the Fiesta Bowl ten times out of 10, because memories like those last generations.

If you were taking this poll in the general population of college football fans, it wouldn't be close. But it's being taken in a "world" populated by an unusually high percentage of people who really like the I-AA/FCS system and get into it.

As for the "memories" part...I really don't care about what future generations remember about a game. The question is about what I would prefer. Part of it may be because I've been through Bowl games as a McNeese fan and as an LSU (which is, of course, my favorite BS team) fan. Now, the McNeese bowl games were not BCS bowls. But, nevertheless, the contrast in the feeling of intensity made an impression on me. It's just not the same. To me there's something about starting at game 1, feeling that "win or out" pressure, moving on to game 2, same pressure, and so on. There's no way I personally would prefer winning in an exhibition game where the other team isn't even really playing for anything and the only thing my team is playing for is to prove it can play with the other team. And my own enjoyment of a game (or series of games...as in what it would take to get a FCS national title) doesn't depend on how many other people know about what happened or how much publicity it generates.

Now, I did really get into the LSU/OU BCS championship game in 2004 but that's different. Heck, I really got into the Ohio State/Miami and Texas/USC BCS championship games too because those were really good football games with something huge on the line for both teams.

Don't get me wrong. If McNeese were in the BS I would be thrilled if something like what happened with Boise State happened. That would be beyond what the wildest reasonable expectations for a school like McNeese trying to make it in the BS would be. But, if given the option and as long as the FCS system is basically as it is, I would not want McNeese to move to the BS even if I thought that the Cowboys ending up in and winning a BCS bowl was a reasonable possibility.

Mike Johnson

January 2nd, 2007, 08:22 PM

Do you really think there are at least a dozen FCS teams that could go undefeated with BSU's schedule?

I doubt any FCS teams could have had a winning record against BSU's schedule. I am judging that mostly by Montana, which in my opinion, is one of the better FCS teams and I think they win 3-4 games on BSU's schedule. Even the poor FBS teams have a resources advantage, but I think Montana beats 2 or 3 of them. Montana would be very hard press to beat Oregon State, Nevada, Utah, Hawaii, or even San Jose State this year. In fact, Montana probably loses each of those games by an average of 15-20 points.

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 08:44 PM

I looked it up. Since 2000, big Blue is 8-10 against out-of-conference BCS foes (including a stuh-ruggle against Vanderbilt this year).

I still son't see why, if the question is one of how a school fares against BCS league competition, why you think BCS league competition that's in Michigan's conference should be excluded. In my opinion you're excluding most of the relevant information on Michigan for no good reason.

And the Big question: Are you seriously entertaining the idea that Boise State would have anything close to the record Michigan had 2000 - 2006 if Boise State, with the teams it had, had played Michigan's schedules?

I sure don't. Frankly, I think Boise State would've been along the lines of 8 wins if it had played week in and week out against Michigan's 2005 -2006 schedule. Maybe even 7.

BigApp

January 2nd, 2007, 08:58 PM

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 09:06 PM

I doubt any FCS teams could have had a winning record against BSU's schedule. I am judging that mostly by Montana, which in my opinion, is one of the better FCS teams and I think they win 3-4 games on BSU's schedule. Even the poor FBS teams have a resources advantage, but I think Montana beats 2 or 3 of them. Montana would be very hard press to beat Oregon State, Nevada, Utah, Hawaii, or even San Jose State this year. In fact, Montana probably loses each of those games by an average of 15-20 points.

Just for fun:

By Sagarin's ratings considering games through 12/22, the estimated record of Montana against BSU's schedule if all games were played on neutral fields would be 8 - 5. App State's estimated record is 9 - 4.

By the way, that set of ratings predicted that Boise State would beat Oklahoma by 1 point on a neutral field.

I want to make it clear that that's kind of unlikely...that the Sagarin projection would be dead on like that. And there's a difference between playing one game against a higher level of competition and playing week in, week out against it. Nevertheless, I do not think Montana or App State (or UMass) having a winning record against Boise State's schedule...which was extremely weak by BS standards...are unreasonable scenarios.

Now, against Michigan's schedule or Florida's schedule? No way.

Hammerhead

January 2nd, 2007, 09:16 PM

Two of the most exciting games I ever watched in person were in the D-II playoffs between NDSU and Pittsburgh (Kan.) State. Both had a few lead changes with NDSU winning the first battle and then losing a heartbreaker 2 years later when a 2-pt conversion to win the game in the closing moments was tantalizingly close, yet so far away.

Games like those make me yearn for the chance when my team will be playoff eligible again. :-)

JohnStOnge

January 2nd, 2007, 09:33 PM

I was using Michigan only as an example. Lemme try to use this as an example:

2 teams are vying for an FCS playoff berth. One plays in a large autobid conference (let's say UMass), one doesn't (ex: San Diego).

Whom do you think will have the tougher overall schedule? McNeese will because they ALREADY play playoff eligible teams.

That's why it's only fair for Boise to use OOC competition when comparing their schedule to anyone else. BSU can ONLY schedule 3-4 games per year. All of them ain't gonna be BCS schools, those big boys just don't wanna play 'em, especially up there.

Yeah, but I still don't see what that has to do with assessing what happens when they do play them.

And I'll tell ya something, Boise State could schedule more games with BCS schools if it wanted to. WAC mate Louisiana Tech, for example, has played 23 BCS league teams 2000 - 2006 as compared to Boise State's 11. Fresno State has played 19. And it's not like Louisiana Tech and Fresno State haven't shown themselves to be potentially dangerous. In 1999 Tech beat eventual SEC champion Alabama and we know what Fresno State has done at times.

Boise State does not "overload" itself during the regular season. It's very similar to what Marshall did to establish itself in I-A. The Broncos play weak regular season schedules, I think, by design. They're not going to do something like Louisiana Tech did in 2002 by scheduling Oklahoma State, Penn State, Clemson, and Texas A&M on four of their first five playing dates of the regular season. And the reason they don't do it is they know they wouldn't have their glittering records if they did that kind of thing. At least that's what I think.

They're fortunate enough, like Marshall was, to have enough home field support to get by without having to schedule too many "payday" games. They're able to space the ones they do schedule out enough to see to it that they can really focus on and isolate them.

TxSt02

January 2nd, 2007, 10:04 PM

damn the race is tight at 43-40...

foghorn

January 2nd, 2007, 10:05 PM

No comparison. Although the Hens winning the NC in '03 was the highlight in my 3 decades of following them, to beat a team of Oklahoma's stature in front of a large national TV audience would definitely trump that.:nod:

BigApp

January 2nd, 2007, 10:42 PM

a certain someone is going to H-A-T-E this thread...xlolx

Eyes of Old Main

January 2nd, 2007, 11:54 PM

I'd rather have see "Two Flags over Spartanburg".

Lots of teams have won big bowl games and while many (including this Boise State/Oklahoma game) are classics, but nothing has the strength of a National Championship. Those two pennants will still be flying long after the $17 million has been spent.

TxSt02

January 3rd, 2007, 01:01 AM

*****

January 3rd, 2007, 01:56 AM

How the hell are there almost as many votes for the Fiesta Bowl? This is an FCS BOARD!
There are a lot of AppSt fans here.Yep, a lot of bandwagon BCS fans and notice the members... Bowl teams are champions of a game, same goes for BCS teams. There is no recognized BCS or bowl national championship. The FCS championship goes in the books as NCAA D-I NATIONAL CHAMPION. Great to see that clearer heads have prevailed here. To the rest, enjoy your bowl wishes and crystal ball dreams! :nod:

Eyes of Old Main

January 3rd, 2007, 02:21 AM

we have two of those right now but nobody on campus seems to know about them...

Then I guess you are saying that both are about the same because I can't remember who won the Fiesta Bowl in 10-15 years ago nor did I know Texas State had any championship banners.

Frankly, I doubt I'm different than the average college football fan, so I guess both questions are what keeps the Almanac people in business.

JALMOND

January 3rd, 2007, 05:05 AM

:eyebrow: Wow, I'm not even sure where to start.

BSU was successful in I-AA prior to moving. They had a great team and lots of support. PSU can't claim either.

The media (or whomever) complaining about not being selected for the playoffs obviously ignore the position in which the PSU AD put the team. Money is more important than playoffs. Not one, not two, but THREE I-A games. SHAME on ANYONE who points a finger at the Committee instead of the PSU AD. :nono:

Not really the point. You can holler sour grapes about scheduling as much as you want to (how did Delaware do against the FBS this year), but you still have to play them. Portland State went 1-2 against bowl bound FBS teams on its schedule this year. Maybe you'd rather see us roll over and die against them???!!!

Point is this. What people in Portland are saying is that the Vikings had a shot at ending this very same Boise team's home winning streak last year. Boise's showing last night has people wondering if PSU could do the same if we played in the WAC (if we could have beaten Boise last year with equal schollys). Talks may have cooled in recent years, but there always has been that talk of PSU joining the WAC ever since our move to I-AA. Our success in Boise last year, combined with the events of this season has once again brought the "what if"s to the forefront. As I stated, I do not agree with them as I, too, think we have some "unfinished" business in the FCS.

I must add here that we do get a lot of WAC games out here on the west coast and I do not see a big difference between the quality of football in the WAC as compared to the Big Sky. From what I see, with the exception of newcomer Northern Colorado and possibly Sacramento State, any of the other seven schools would be at least in the middle of the WAC in any given year. As I told some of my friends out here, Boise gave Oklahoma a lesson in old time Big Sky football (you can get three scores in a minute against any defense).

andy7171

January 3rd, 2007, 07:43 AM

Anyone who laughed at or smack talked the 'D2 Really Thinks They are Good' thread awhile back and voted for the back to back championship over the Fiesta Bowl should be ashamed of themselves.
Any one who thinks any of this years playoff teams could hang with any of the bowl teams is dillusional. The only way FCS teams stay close in FBS game is because the FBS teams don't take the game seriously or they flat out suck. But even then a crappy NC State team beats the FCS back to back champ.

bluehenbillk

January 3rd, 2007, 07:58 AM

I think this is a no-brainer, Boise won a BCS Bowl game against a storied program & did it in such a dramatic fashion with 2 plays nobody will soon forget. Like it or not, not that many people around the country even know ASU won the NC this year. I think it's Boise in a landslide.

NDSUFREAK

January 3rd, 2007, 08:20 AM

I have to say BCS Bowl in the way that Boise State did.

JohnStOnge

January 3rd, 2007, 09:46 AM

Any one who thinks any of this years playoff teams could hang with any of the bowl teams is dillusional.

Well, off the top of my head I can think of at least one instance in which one of this year's playoff teams did hang with one of this year's bowl teams. Massachusettes lost by 21 - 20 to Navy. Each team had 14 first downs. Total yards were Navy 289, UMass 296. Not a win, but that looks like "hang with" to me.

Another "hang with" was Illinois State losing to Kansas State by 24 -23. In that one Illinois State had 21 first downs to K State's 13 and outgained the Wildcats 329 to 202 in total yards. But K State scored two special teams TDs and stopped ISU when the Redbirds decided to go for two and the win in regulation after their last score.

A "hang with" by a team that certainly would have been in the playoffs had it been eligible was North Dakota State's 10 - 9 loss at Minnesota. The Bison had 23 first downs to Minnesota's 12 and a 380 to 249 edge in total yards. I'm guessing the deciding factor was NDSU's 3 turnovers to Minnesota's 1.

Also, Portland State beat New Mexico by 17 - 6. The Vikings didn't get into the playoffs, but I don't see any reason why some of the playoff teams wouldn't have had a shot to "hang with" New Mexico as well.

You've got to remember that "bowl teams" now means more than half of the Bowl Subdivision (64 of the 119 teams). History, at least in terms of things like power ratings in inter-subdivision play, has shown that top I-AA/CS teams are equivalent in caliber to mid level I-A/BS teams. I think that sometimes they are a little better than that and are equivalent to better than average I-A/BS teams (see Delaware in 2003, for example).

It's a little frustrating that none of the three playoff caliber teams who had one point losses to bowl teams got over the top...especially in the case of Illinois State and NDSU since they pretty much controlled the stats...but it's still pretty self-evident that they were able to "hang with" them.

And I think that App State would be a favorite to beat bowl teams like Troy, Ohio, and Middle Tennessee. So would UMass, I think.

But even then a crappy NC State team beats the FCS back to back champ.

In App's defense, they hadn't gone to Edwards at quarterback yet. He had no rushes and threw only two passes in the 23 - 10 loss at NC State.

Another thing to keep in mind is that, though NC State was a crappy BCS league team, it did have its moments. The Wolfpack beat both Boston College and Florida State. Go figure.

JohnStOnge

January 3rd, 2007, 09:46 AM

Any one who thinks any of this years playoff teams could hang with any of the bowl teams is dillusional.

Well, I can think of instances in which some of this year's playoff teams did hang with some of this year's bowl teams.

Massachusettes lost by 21 - 20 to Navy. Each team had 14 first downs. Total yards were Navy 289, UMass 296. Not a win, but that looks like "hang with" to me.

Another "hang with" was Illinois State losing to Kansas State by 24 -23. In that one Illinois State had 21 first downs to K State's 13 and outgained the Wildcats 329 to 202 in total yards. But K State scored two special teams TDs and stopped ISU when the Redbirds decided to go for two and the win in regulation after their last score.

A "hang with" by a team that certainly would have been in the playoffs had it been eligible was North Dakota State's 10 - 9 loss at Minnesota. The Bison had 23 first downs to Minnesota's 12 and a 380 to 249 edge in total yards. I'm guessing the deciding factor was NDSU's 3 turnovers to Minnesota's 1.

Also, Portland State beat New Mexico by 17 - 6. The Vikings didn't get into the playoffs, but I don't see any reason why some of the playoff teams wouldn't have had a shot to "hang with" New Mexico as well.

You've got to remember that "bowl teams" now means more than half of the Bowl Subdivision (64 of the 119 teams). History, at least in terms of things like power ratings and inter-subdivision play, has shown that top I-AA/CS teams are equivalent in caliber to mid level I-A/BS teams. I think that sometimes they are a little better than that and are equivalent to better than average I-A/BS teams (see Delaware in 2003, for example).

It's a little frustrating that none of the three playoff caliber teams mentioned above as having one point losses to bowl teams got over the top...especially in the case of Illinois State and NDSU since they pretty much controlled the stats...but it's still pretty evident that they were able to "hang with" them.

And I think that App State would be a favorite to beat bowl teams like Troy, Ohio, and Middle Tennessee. So would UMass, I think. I don't think the assumption that none of this year's playoff teams could hang with any of this year's bowl teams is correct.

But even then a crappy NC State team beats the FCS back to back champ.

In App's defense, they hadn't gone to Edwards at quarterback yet. He had no rushes and threw only two passes in the 23 - 10 loss at NC State.

Another thing to keep in mind is that, though NC State was a crappy BCS league team, it did have its moments. The Wolfpack beat both Boston College and Florida State. Go figure.

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 10:01 AM

saying that is like saying JMU didn't deserve to be in the playoffs in 2004 because they went 2-9 in 2001. you can compare year to year - one year you might suck....the next year you might go undefeated. another example is last year's Penn State team - *thisclose* to going undefeated (Michigan steals a win with 2 secs on the clock) - however the year before they weren't even in a bowl game. your argument is irrelevant.
:confused: Chia, you need to look at what I was responding to. Not that they weren't a good team or that they wouldn't have deserved to be in a I-A playoff, but that they wouldn't have won 10+ games in the B10, SEC, BXII... a close win over OU doesn't equal 9 more wins against BSC teams. BSU's record over the years shows that they can (and have) beat anyone in the WAC or other non-BCS I-A's but they've struggled mightily against BCS teams.

JDC325

January 3rd, 2007, 10:02 AM

I'm sure today they're probably all saying "Boy I sure wish we stayed in I-AA. Instead of playing Oklahoma on Fox for $17 million, we could have played App State in Chattanooga in front of 20,000 people on a friday night on espn2 - what were we thinking?"

Ditto. NC are nice but you can not put a dollar amount on the respect and exposure Boise State got nationally and internationally. Not to mention the millions that came with it. GSU has won six and we are no where near where Boise State is today.

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 10:04 AM

Don't get me wrong. If McNeese were in the BS I would be thrilled if something like what happened with Boise State happened. That would be beyond what the wildest reasonable expectations for a school like McNeese trying to make it in the BS would be. But, if given the option and as long as the FCS system is basically as it is, I would not want McNeese to move to the BS even if I thought that the Cowboys ending up in and winning a BCS bowl was a reasonable possibility.
I think that's what a lot of people are overlooking here. If the question were worded differently, I think we may have different results.

Which would you rather have...

- a chance to play for a national championship every year.

- a chance to play in the Fiesta Bowl once every 12 years.

SunCoastBlueHen

January 3rd, 2007, 10:09 AM

I think that's what a lot of people are overlooking here. If the question were worded differently, I think we may have different results.

Which would you rather have...

- a chance to play for a national championship every year.

- a chance to play in the Fiesta Bowl once every 12 years.

That's a bit slanted in the opposite direction.

This is a bit more even...

- a chance to play for a national championship every year.

- a chance to play in a high profile Bowl game every year.

UAalum72

January 3rd, 2007, 10:09 AM

There is no recognized BCS or bowl national championship.
Doesn't the 'C' in BCS stand for championship? It may not be recognized by you or the NCAA, but 98% of college football fans recognize it - the 'people's championship' as it were.

This is America - follow the money.

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 10:13 AM

Not really the point. You can holler sour grapes about scheduling as much as you want to (how did Delaware do against the FBS this year), but you still have to play them. Portland State went 1-2 against bowl bound FBS teams on its schedule this year. Maybe you'd rather see us roll over and die against them???!!!
:confused: It's the whole point, and UD has nothing to do with this. The Portland media and Vikings fans blame the committee for not selecting them after PSU puts together a money schedule. If PSU chooses to roll the dice and take three money games, THEY are the ones that pay the price. THEY are the ones that made the schedule.

Let's say that Coastal Carolina decides to play 7 I-A's next year and goes 4-0 in the Big South and actually beats two of the I-A's. Should they feel ripped off if they don't get an at-large bid at 6-5? You get paid, you lose, you pay the price.

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 10:17 AM

That's a bit slanted in the opposite direction.

This is a bit more even...

- a chance to play for a national championship every year.

- a chance to play in a high profile Bowl game every year.
We'll have to continue to tweak it. I just think the original question lets people forget the years that Boise was an afterthought. When they had to make up their own bowl to even get a chance to play in one. BSU is a rare duck. I don't think any but a very select few in I-AA could hope to actually do what they've done. Honestly, Montana is about it IMO.

JDC325

January 3rd, 2007, 10:44 AM

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 11:04 AM

I think that UMASS, UD, GSU, and UM could easily duplicate what Boise did.
Dunno. UMass would never get the kind of fan support they have in Boise. UD wouldn't have a home in I-A that would be acceptable to the administration. GSU would be stuck in SEC land. I think the remoteness of Boise (and UM) is a big part of it. No New England Patriots, Philly Eagles, Georgia Bulldogs... That's the big sporting event there.

bluehenbillk

January 3rd, 2007, 11:06 AM

There is no recognized BCS or bowl national championship.

Correct as far as the NCAA is concerned. Incorrect as to how 99% plus of the public perceives it. Not to say the _-_-_ is a good thing.

Pard4Life

January 3rd, 2007, 11:08 AM

Lafayette to the Fiesta Bowl to get retribution for not being allowed to play in the 1948 Sun Bowl thanks to racist Texans.

SunCoastBlueHen

January 3rd, 2007, 11:09 AM

We'll have to continue to tweak it. I just think the original question lets people forget the years that Boise was an afterthought. When they had to make up their own bowl to even get a chance to play in one. BSU is a rare duck. I don't think any but a very select few in I-AA could hope to actually do what they've done. Honestly, Montana is about it IMO.

Teams like Marshall and UConn have moved up and won bowl games. I agree, however, that success at the next level has been the exception rather than the rule.

On the other side of the equation, very few programs have had sustained success at the FCS (I-AA) level. Delaware went twenty some years between Championship game appearances. How long was ASU shut out before they finally broke through an won two?

The point is, that while most of the teams who moved up divisions do not realistically play toward a major bowl game every year, neither do most of the FCS teams realistically have a chance at a championship most years.

As such, I see

- a chance to play for a national championship every year

and

- a chance to play in a high profile Bowl game every year

as being an unslanted, even hypothetical.

The same handfull of teams that have a realistic shot at the FCS championship most years are the same teams that, given the right circumstances, would have a fair chance to mimic BSU's success.

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 11:29 AM

neither do most of the FCS teams realistically have a chance at a championship most years.

The same handfull of teams that have a realistic shot at the FCS championship most years are the same teams that, given the right circumstances, would have a fair chance to mimic BSU's success.
Tough to say. Semifinalists in the last five years...

Appalachian State
UMass
Youngstown State
Montana
Northern Iowa
Texas State
Furman
James Madison
William & Mary
Sam Houston State
Colgate
Florida Atlantic
Delaware
Wofford
McNeese State
Villanova
Western Kentucky
Georgia Southern

That's 18 different teams for 20 spots. How many different non-BCS teams have played in major bowls in those five years.

foghorn

January 3rd, 2007, 11:42 AM

Tough to say. Semifinalists in the last five years...

Appalachian State
UMass
Youngstown State
Montana
Northern Iowa
Texas State
Furman
James Madison
William & Mary
Sam Houston State
Colgate
Florida Atlantic
Delaware
Wofford
McNeese State
Villanova
Western Kentucky
Georgia Southern

That's 18 different teams for 20 spots. How many different non-BCS teams have played in major bowls in those five years.

I think we're straying from the original question. You're right, '89, Boise might be the only one that qualifies under your scenario. That's exactly what makes Boise's accomplishment much more distinguished than winning 2 consecutive FCS championships. :twocents:

JohnStOnge

January 3rd, 2007, 12:19 PM

That's 18 different teams for 20 spots. How many different non-BCS teams have played in major bowls in those five years.

I think most college football fans would rather watch bowl games. But I prefer the "meaning" associated with playoff games. I don't think it's just playing in the championship game. Every post season game in I-AA/FCS has a certain meaning and intensity that no bowl game but one each year has.

The chances of playing in a truely meaningful game at some point in the sense that it's a potential step toward a national championship...a chance to move on in a tournament...are pretty darned good. For a school like Marshall or Boise State in the BS, they're pretty darned close to zero.

I realize that most people would rather beat a "name" like Oklahoma in a bowl and get the publicity for their school such an event brings. But to me what Boise State did in terms of actual substance was beat a team that's probably going to end up ranked in the range of 10th to 15th in the BS in a game that was a whole lot more important to it than it was to the other team and that had no bearing on who wins the "national championship" . And, while the stage was different, it's not the first time a former I-AA has knocked off a team of that level in terms of "name" and quality. Louisiana Tech knocked off eventual SEC champion Alabama in 1999 on the Tide's home field (the Tide went on to finish ranked 10th). In fact that Louisiana Tech team may very well have had an undefeated regular season if it had played just one BCS league team. But, in addition to Alabama, it also played Florida State, Texas A&M, and USC so it finished 8-3 and didn't get invited to a Bowl.

Anyway, at the time I had numerous discussions with Tech fans about this same sort of thing. They would rather have had that win over the SEC champ than anything they could've won in I-AA. To each his own.

But I interpret what I see as a constant state of trying to prove the program is something it's not. Beating the SEC champ did not make Louisiana Tech a "major" college football program and beating Oklahoma did not make Boise State a "major" college football program. Both are still "mid major" or "minor" BS programs that, over time, are going to lose a lot more than they win against the mainstream of the subdivision. They're never going to be one of the "big dogs" as college football programs, but they're focused on proving that they are. So it'll continue to constantly be trying to be something they're not.

UNLESS they get into a BCS league like South Florida and Connecticut did.

JohnStOnge

January 3rd, 2007, 12:41 PM

How many different non-BCS teams have played in major bowls in those five years.

And how many non-BCS I-A/BS teams have played in a post season game that has any bearing on a "national championship?" In other words, how many non-BCS I-A/BS teams have played in any post season game that was anything other than an exhibition game?

To me it all comes down to ego. Bottom line is the schools and those associated with them want others to think they're "big dogs." An analogy I've used in the past is a guy who's a very good fighter but he's really a middleweight. No matter what he does, there's no way he can ever be a championship contender in the heavyweight division but he wants to be in it anyway because he sees that as the "big dogs." So he's a heavyweight and he does beat some heavyweights from time to time. In fact to really make the analogy work you need a scenario in which there are a bunch of other guys doing the same thing (i.e., fighting at heavyweights when they're really natural middleweights) so he can fashion a pretty good record beating them. And he even beats real heavyweights from time to time. But, overall over time, he loses a whole lot more than he wins when he steps into the ring with real heavyweights.

Meanwhile he might have a real shot at winning a world title if he fought as a middleweight. But that wouldn't suit his ego.

OhioHen

January 3rd, 2007, 12:44 PM

How about winning back-to-back championships in dramatic fashion?

:hurray: :hurray: :hurray:

With appropriate levels of coverage on the "major" media outlets.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup:

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 12:57 PM

But I interpret what I see as a constant state of trying to prove the program is something it's not. Beating the SEC champ did not make Louisiana Tech a "major" college football program and beating Oklahoma did not make Boise State a "major" college football program. Both are still "mid major" or "minor" BS programs that, over time, are going to lose a lot more than they win against the mainstream of the subdivision. They're never going to be one of the "big dogs" as college football programs, but they're focused on proving that they are. So it'll continue to constantly be trying to be something they're not.

UNLESS they get into a BCS league like South Florida and Connecticut did.
That's where I'm coming from. I love being in I-AA and would hate to have to suffer through a dozen seasons of feeling slighted and going to crappy bowls to have one major bowl win.

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 01:03 PM

Teams like Marshall and UConn have moved up and won bowl games.
Troy won theirs this year too, but I wouldn't trade spots. Marshall and UConn are rather unique too. Marshall is much like Boise in that they are in a small market where they are the sporting kings. Yes, there is WVU, but I actually see them as a help to Marshall's success because it has bred a natural rival. UConn obviously had something no other I-AA could have, an automatic invite to a BCS conference.

bluehenbillk

January 3rd, 2007, 01:11 PM

How can you compare what Troy & Marshall have done versus Boise State? They won a BCS bowl game, what some are already calling the greatest college football game ever, they'll end up in the top 5, people will talk about that game & those 2 plays & the proposal for years. Games like that never go away.

As a 1-AA diehard fan I honestly can't recount for you many of the 1-AA NC games. A couple I can tell you some things about, but the memories other than UD winning in '03 won't stick as long as the Fiesta Bowl & I don't even really care about the 2 schools that played in it, just a memorable, fantastic game.

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 01:19 PM

As a 1-AA diehard fan I honestly can't recount for you many of the 1-AA NC games. A couple I can tell you some things about, but the memories other than UD winning in '03 won't stick as long as the Fiesta Bowl & I don't even really care about the 2 schools that played in it, just a memorable, fantastic game.
Without looking, tell me about any of the previous three Fiesta Bowls.

griz8791

January 3rd, 2007, 01:21 PM

To me it all comes down to ego.

I agree. I think a good half of the FBS and all of the FCS schools who dream about moving up think that being FBS automatically entitles you to media respect. It didn't seem like the media had much respect for Boise before the game and even afterwards a lot of people are saying "yeah, but they didn't play anyone good." Not to put too fine a point on it but it seems to me if you are not BCS you can forget about media respect.

JohnStOnge

January 3rd, 2007, 01:24 PM

Without looking, tell me about any of the previous three Fiesta Bowls.

I think this one's a little different in that there were some memorable trick plays people will remember.

But notice the focus on other people talking about it as compared to not talking about/remembering great I-AA teams, runs, etc.

I think that's what it all comes down to. Depends on what's important to you as a fan. If what's important to you as a fan is having a large number of people aware of something your team accomplished then you're going to prefer something like what happened with Boise State.

andy7171

January 3rd, 2007, 01:32 PM

GaSouthern

January 3rd, 2007, 01:33 PM

easy one for me. Bowl games are dumb unless it's THE bowl game.

BUT, with that said, I would give anything to do what boise did to OU last night. I could only dream of doing that to UGA let alone in a BCS bowl game. Also both of thoes teams would beat any of the final four in the FCS playoffs by a two score margin at least.

JohnStOnge

January 3rd, 2007, 01:36 PM

They won a BCS bowl game, what some are already calling the greatest college football game ever, they'll end up in the top 5.

Not that they won't end up ranked pretty high and be happy about it but if I had to bet I'd bet they won't end up in the top 5. I think both Ohio State and Florida will remain above them unless Florida gets blown out. That probably won't happen. I also think USC and Louisville will end up ranked above them. If LSU wins LSU will certainly be ranked above them. Not sure but Michigan might be ranked above them too. Then there's Wisconsin, which was ranked ahead of Boise State going in and won its bowl game against an opponent comparable to Oklahoma (Arkansas was ranked 12th in the BCS power rating component, Oklahoma was ranked 16th).

Their chances...not that they care that much...of making it into the top 5, I think, will be better if Notre Dame upsets LSU. But either way they might not make it.

andy7171

January 3rd, 2007, 01:42 PM

JDC325

January 3rd, 2007, 01:42 PM

Dunno. UMass would never get the kind of fan support they have in Boise. UD wouldn't have a home in I-A that would be acceptable to the administration. GSU would be stuck in SEC land. I think the remoteness of Boise (and UM) is a big part of it. No New England Patriots, Philly Eagles, Georgia Bulldogs... That's the big sporting event there.

All that could have been said about FSU in the early 70's in respect to GSU.

We are not in SEC land we are in FOOTBALL land and UGA just happens to be the best school in GA. Plus 90K+ manage to go see a football game in Athens and sell out the Ga dome all in the same weekend so I have never seen or have it be proven that pro sports teams hurt college teams especially in the South. The remotness of Boise is a bad thing and something they have overcome not a good thing especially in recruiting. I guess you know UD better than I but you cant say UMASS would never get the fan support as Boise that is crazy they have more people on campus and in a 50 mile radius than the entire state of Idaho's pop. Their basketball team seems to do just fine even and is well supported.

We can debate the other schools but GSU has had alot more going for it than Boise the last ten years and the only difference has been one decision made in 1996.

JMU2K_DukeDawg

January 3rd, 2007, 01:51 PM

DEFINITELY voted for the Fiesta Bowl win. The choices were not between any given BCS Bowl and back-to-back FCS Championships. People will remember that game for a long time. People from all schools, big and small alike, just as we will all remember George Mason's run to the Final 4. Did GMU win the NCAA tourney. No. But the impact of that run is huge in terms of national attention. Similarly, the Broncos now will have a long line of supporters and cheerleaders for their team for years to come. That kind of national attention is priceless.

I love our playoff system, and the BCS should adopt it as well. But if you want to talk about getting national attention, there is no substitute for the BCS bowls in college football. To me, that national attention is worth more than championships at a "lower" level ("lower" not in my mind, but in the minds of the greater general public).

How much national attention do Delaware or JMU get 3-4 years removed from a National title? Some YSU posters this year still considered us as a basketball school, although we fallen FAR from where we were in the 1980's and early 1990's. Is Georgia Southern's or YSU's dominance in the 1990's well-remembered? Not outside of the people on this board I think.

I'll take the dramatic win over a storied program like Oklahoma on the national stage any day. My Dukes got their NC Title, I'd be grateful to see us continue to climb to greater national attention through wins over storied programs. Beating UNC on opening day next year would be a nice start.

That game, by the way, might have been the most entertaining football game I've EVER seen on TV. Wow! :hurray:

JohnStOnge

January 3rd, 2007, 01:54 PM

There is a difference between the level of play and quality of athlete between the divisions and subdivisions. Heck, you could even see it between Boise and Oklahoma.
Boise won. It was the Super Bowl to them. Everything they had dreamed of. Other factors played a part as well. Sooner players were not playing in their Super Bowl, they were not psyched out of their minds, mentally they were not as focused. Boise beat Oklahoma through trickery not over powering them. Boise brought their A++ game, Oklahoma brought their B game.
Until you can get a FBS team to take a lesser FCS school seriously in a game, you'll never be able to see where FCS schools stand.
It's the same reason West Chester hangs with Delaware. Or Bloomsburg hangs with JMU.
To one team its everything, to the other its a joke scrimmage. If for some reason the lesser team wins one once in awhile, don't fool yourself into thinking your equals.

I agree pretty much agree with the principle you're stating. But, still, it's clear that there are circumstances in which I-AA/FCS teams can "hang with" bowl teams. We know because it's happened.

Also, I do think Appalachian State is actually better than some of the lower level bowl teams. I watched Troy on TV twice this year and think that about them for sure. Middle Tennessee too. I personally think they're actually better than Ohio too (who I also saw on TV) and should be favored to beat the Bobcats if both played their best games (course we'll never know).

I think that, just as is the case with caliber, there is no distinct separation in talent level between the two subdivisions. Yes, the average level is substantially higher in the higher subdivision. But there's overlap.

A few years ago I tried to actually get some idea of that by looking at numbers of players on NFL rosters from various schools. I don't remember the specifics, but there was overlap. There were I-AA schools that had more players on NFL rosters than some I-A schools. The top of I-AA (Western Illinois, I think) was about where Southern Mississippi was in terms of numbers of players on NFL rosters.

Another thing I remember: There was a much bigger difference between the average number of NFL players for BCS schools and that for non BCS I-As than there was between non BCS I-As and I-AAs. Can't remember the specifics though.

Anyway, numbers of players on NFL rosters doesn't tell the whole story for reasons you and I could both elaborate on. But it does give some indications. I do not think there is a distinct gap such that all BS schools have more talent among the players that get significant playing time than all CS schools do. There's overlap. I think App State and UMass may have had more talent in their two deeps than most if not all of the teams in the Sun Belt this past season and also some of the teams in the other non BCS BS leagues.

I did all that stuff a few years ago because I was in a thing where I was looking at DI college football as really three different levels: BCS I-A, non BCS I-A, and I-AA (not counting non scholarship leagues other than the auto bid Patriot). I looked at finances, attendance, intra-group games, and players on NFL rosters. By all measures I found that the differences between non BCS I-A and BCS I-A as groups were about as great as or even greater than they were between I-AA and non BCS I-A. In fact, if I remember correctly, the difference between BCS I-A and non BCS I-A was arguabley greater than that between non BCS I-A and I-AA. Especially in finances. Back then, at least according to ODES gender equity reports, the average net financial bottom line for I-AAs was better than that of non BCS I-As. Both groups, on average, lost money but I-AAs, on average, lost less. And of course there was a MUCH bigger difference in attendance between BCS I-As and non BCS I-As than between I-AAs and non BCS I-As. I also think the I-AAs had a better record against non BCS I-As than non BCS I-As had against BCS I-As...but I couldn't swear to that. I know it was close one way or another. Pretty much equivalent.

Ronbo

January 3rd, 2007, 01:55 PM

No matter what any of you think Boise State got more national exposure in one night than a FCS team could get by winning 10 NC's in a row.

JMU2K_DukeDawg

January 3rd, 2007, 01:59 PM

No matter what any of you think Boise State got more national exposure in one night than a FCS team could get by winning 10 NC's in a row.

Yup! :nod:

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 02:07 PM

I have never seen or have it be proven that pro sports teams hurt college teams especially in the South.
That's why I mention UGA instead of the Falcons. Football in the south is king. In Georgia, UGA football is king, no?

Here's my point, rank the following in order of : Falcons, Braves, Hawks, Thrashers, UGA football, UGA basketball, GT football, GT basketball, GSU football, any other sport I'm missing...

Now rank the following, Boise State football, Idaho football, Idaho State football...

Being the king in your state is a good thing. As a Hen fan, I know that. Ask Montana fans too. IMO Boise football has an advantage being the biggest sport in the state.

penguin8797

January 3rd, 2007, 02:08 PM

It sounded like a great finish, but I had to be out the door at 6:15 AM to work the next day so I went to bed when the score was 28-10. I voted for the BCS bowl win as opposed to the two FCS championships. That is big time!

The FCS will never have the quality of play or get real media attention because of its very nature, but that is fine with me. I love the uniqueness of FCS playoffs and being in smaller less commercialized venues. Maybe I'm talking myself into preferring the two FCS championships to the BCS bowl win.

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 02:11 PM

No matter what any of you think Boise State got more national exposure in one night than a FCS team could get by winning 10 NC's in a row.
Has anyone argued differently?

Ronbo

January 3rd, 2007, 02:20 PM

Has anyone argued differently?

I only read two pages before posting, didn't want to read through all 11 pages. My bad.

Utah did a study after they went to the BCS bowl a few years ago and found they had almost a fifty percent increase in freshmen applications the two years following that season and applications are still up compared to before that season. Students want to go where the football is quality. That's millions more for the University. Boise State will see a windfall in increased freshmen enrollment.

patssle

January 3rd, 2007, 02:23 PM

Same applied to George Mason after its basketball run last March. Sports has a huge impact on schools. I'm surprised they don't take more advantage of this.

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 02:43 PM

That's millions more for the University. Boise State will see a windfall in increased freshmen enrollment.
Not really. That will mean they have more to say "no" to. Schools don't increase enrollment by big numbers year to year.

JohnStOnge

January 3rd, 2007, 02:56 PM

I only read two pages before posting, didn't want to read through all 11 pages. My bad.

Utah did a study after they went to the BCS bowl a few years ago and found they had almost a fifty percent increase in freshmen applications the two years following that season and applications are still up compared to before that season. Students want to go where the football is quality. That's millions more for the University. Boise State will see a windfall in increased freshmen enrollment.

Not a surprise but it raises some interesting questions. Just in terms of finances, does a school get a better financial bottom line by increasing enrollment? Fees increase but so do expenses.

Kind of off the subject but this is something I've wondered about in general. There's no question that many schools...most public universities in particular...try to increase enrollment. But why is that? How does increasing enrollment make a school better?

I personally have been to both a large enrollment university and a small enrollment one and like the small enrollment environment better both socially and academically (lots more access to and attention from teachers and advisors).

Now, if its a selective school and enrollment stays the same but applications go up I can see a potential benefit. Maybe the overall "quality" of the student population would go up due to more competition for spots.

But the idea of increasing enrollment as some kind of objective I'm just not clear on. Has Utah, for instance, been demonstrated to now provide a better education or more of a service to the State than it did before it had that great football season?

I'm sure Utah's alumni contributions spiked too and I'd think that would be a direct benefit. Same will happen with Boise State I'm sure. Not getting the "more students" as necessarily good thing though.

ucdtim17

January 3rd, 2007, 03:08 PM

They get a higher median GPA and SAT and rise up in USN&WR rankings, which means everything these days

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 03:13 PM

They get a higher median GPA and SAT
Again, not necessarily. More applications does not always mean higher scores or better students. It just may mean more "NO" letters to average students. More applicants because of football success may just mean more of these guys.

http://uuhsc.utah.edu/dfpm/residency/applicants/pics/University_of_Utah_Fans.jpg

mistersykes

January 3rd, 2007, 03:28 PM

Again, not necessarily. More applications does not always mean higher scores or better students. It just may mean more "NO" letters to average students. More applicants because of football success may just mean more of these guys.

http://uuhsc.utah.edu/dfpm/residency/applicants/pics/University_of_Utah_Fans.jpg

It means more of those guys who have 3.8's. At App, freshman applications have gone through the roof since last year. It went from being slightly above average selectivity to very selective. And to tell you the truth, I'm not sure I like that. I think App also wants to get quite a bit larger. If I was a senior in high school trying to get into App now, not only would I probably not get in, but I don't know that I'd want to the way the university is growing. But that's just personal preference for a smaller school. I hope App's size stays the same, but that's 100% wishful thinking.

Fordham

January 3rd, 2007, 03:32 PM

Again, not necessarily. More applications does not always mean higher scores or better students. It just may mean more "NO" letters to average students. More applicants because of football success may just mean more of these guys.

http://uuhsc.utah.edu/dfpm/residency/applicants/pics/University_of_Utah_Fans.jpg

That's certainly a possibility but an increase in total applications like what happened at George Mason or a post-Flutie TD BC is probably going to allow the school to be more selective as well.

I think one of the most interesting things is that if this occurred in 1984 it would be much less well publicized overall imo. However, in today's 'youtube' environment we were all able to see the last minutes the very next morning. It really increased the publicity surrounding this event. Imagine if 'youtube' was around following that Flutie pass.

PS - that "U" might be pre-med. stop with your stereotyping already!

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 03:39 PM

Prove me wrong then guys. Show me some figures of how Utah or BC's SAT scores went up more than a school that didn't win a big football game.

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 03:40 PM

PS - that "U" might be pre-med. stop with your stereotyping already!
Uh-oh, methinks I found a body painter. :smiley_wi :p

bluehenbillk

January 3rd, 2007, 04:22 PM

Without looking, tell me about any of the previous three Fiesta Bowls.

The only one I can tell you about was last year, OSU beating up on the Irish, they hot like 2 or 3 big plays. My point however was the magnitude of this year's game. No doubt most of America's sports fans will still vividly remember where they were when they saw those plays live or on highlights. On the other hand, most of America's sports fans never saw AppState win either NC.

Fordham

January 3rd, 2007, 04:52 PM

Uh-oh, methinks I found a body painter. :smiley_wi :p

http://www.interstate80.info/grounded/facepainter4.jpg

Gotta support the team

JDC325

January 3rd, 2007, 04:58 PM

That's why I mention UGA instead of the Falcons. Football in the south is king. In Georgia, UGA football is king, no?

Here's my point, rank the following in order of : Falcons, Braves, Hawks, Thrashers, UGA football, UGA basketball, GT football, GT basketball, GSU football, any other sport I'm missing...

Now rank the following, Boise State football, Idaho football, Idaho State football...

Being the king in your state is a good thing. As a Hen fan, I know that. Ask Montana fans too. IMO Boise football has an advantage being the biggest sport in the state.

The king can be dethroned given the opportunity. No doubt UGA is the big kid on the block but mainly by default. You lack of knowledge of the mindset of Georgians is very appprarent. GT is considered that Atlanta school while the rest of GA has no other choice but to cheer for UGA because that is the only other choice. 1-A College football is king regardless of any pro sports so if GSU goes 1-A it will give a legite choice to UGA for even some of our own alumni who do not care about 1-aa/fcs football.

Georgia as well as GSU has blown up the last ten years and can easily support another 1-A school. Our population has grown 10+% just since 2001. So who is the KING of florida and how in the heck was FSU able to survive and strive and become a national powerhouse with no real history with endless pro teams, and UF being the King. There are way to many states with good 1-A teams with tons of pro teams for your theory to be even close to be true. You have a small state mindset for sure.

The main thing is being 1-A. Trust me if Boise was still 1-AA/FCS they probably would still be only drawing 10-15K per game.

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 05:02 PM

The king can be dethroned given the opportunity. No doubt UGA is the big kid on the block but mainly by default. You lack of knowledge of the mindset of Georgians is very appprarent. GT is considered that Atlanta school while the rest of GA has no other choice but to cheer for UGA because that is the only other choice. 1-A College football is king regardless of any pro sports so if GSU goes 1-A it will give a legite choice to UGA for even some of our own alumni who do not care about 1-aa/fcs football.

Georgia as well as GSU has blown up the last ten years and can easily support another 1-A school. Our population has grown 10+% just since 2001. So who is the KING of florida and how in the heck was FSU able to survive and strive and become a national powerhouse with no real history with endless pro teams, and UF being the King. There are way to many states with good 1-A teams with tons of pro teams for your theory to be even close to be true. You have a small state mindset for sure.

The main thing is being 1-A. Trust me if Boise was still 1-AA/FCS they probably would still be only drawing 10-15K per game.
You completely whiffed on the whole point. Small state mindset? xlolx xlolx xlolx

JDC325

January 3rd, 2007, 05:13 PM

You completely whiffed on the whole point. Small state mindset? xlolx xlolx xlolx

The point being you know jack about GSU or Georgia and come from a state that cant even support one 1-A team much less multiple ones. That would be very depressing for any college football fan. I mean understand your glass half empty mindset given Delaware cant even produce a consistent 1-AA team much less dream of having a successfull 1-A team. Dont be jealous and project your dim outlook of your own school on others that want to move up. :nono: If you knew how much the state of Georgia or GSU has grown the last ten years you might have a clue about what your talking about. Oh yeah and in 25 years starting from playing from a highschool stadium till know we have done just fine progressing up the ladder all that with competing with the Braves, GT, UGA, Falcons and Hawks. xlolx

Model Citizen

January 3rd, 2007, 05:15 PM

Being the king in your state is a good thing.... IMO Boise football has an advantage being the biggest sport in the state.

Sure. But it's Idaho.

Boise State's biggest advantage is being I-A. They get a lot of top level California talent...talent that used to go elsewhere. It's the same story with Nevada.

Not so true of Idaho, because of that gawd awful dome.

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 05:16 PM

Take your smack to the smack board. :nonono2:

And BTW, if you want to move up, please do so.

JDC325

January 3rd, 2007, 05:17 PM

Sure. But it's Idaho.

Boise State's biggest advantage is being I-A. They get a lot of top level California talent...talent that used to go elsewhere. It's the same story with Nevada.

Not so true of Idaho, because of that gawd awful dome.

You mean Nevada has done well with not even being the King of the state?xlolx

Killtoppers90

January 3rd, 2007, 05:20 PM

Without looking, tell me about any of the previous three Fiesta Bowls.
Ask any football fan (other than those present) to name 2 or more 1-AA champions? Your question would get more correct repsonses than mine.

JDC325

January 3rd, 2007, 05:21 PM

Take your smack to the smack board. :nonono2:

And BTW, if you want to move up, please do so.

Then keep your sarcastic responses to yourself and dont get mad if someone calls you out on something you know nothing about. It is kind of obvious you have no clue about Georgia or GSU and a little bit of sour grapes syndrome when it comes to the 1-A issue.

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 05:21 PM

Ask any football fan (other than those present) to name 2 or more 1-AA champions? Your question would get more correct repsonses than mine.
They'd be about the same. That was my point.

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 05:24 PM

Then keep your sarcastic responses to yourself and dont get mad if someone calls you out on something you know nothing about.
What sarcastic responses? I was giving my theory on being the big team in the state. I asked you to rank the sports teams in Georgia, instead of ranking them, you start with the smack. I'll point out that my first post you questioned was in direct response to you saying GSU, UMass, UM and UD would easily be able to move up. What makes you an expert on UMass, UM and UD? :nono:

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 05:28 PM

and a little bit of sour grapes syndrome when it comes to the 1-A issue.
BTW, I can't let that slide. I've been a UD fan since birth and I've NEVER wanted the Hens to go I-A. I love it right where they are. :nod:

JDC325

January 3rd, 2007, 05:29 PM

What sarcastic responses? I was giving my theory on being the big team in the state. I asked you to rank the sports teams in Georgia, instead of ranking them, you start with the smack. I'll point out that my first post you questioned was in direct response to you saying GSU, UMass, UM and UD would easily be able to move up. What makes you an expert on UMass, UM and UD? :nono:

Your wanting me to rank TEAMS especially pro to college is why you know nothing about Georgia. I also think those teams would have the BEST CHANCE due to many factors. If you cant see why GSU or UM has a better chance than Elon well I dont have that long to explain it to you.

JDC325

January 3rd, 2007, 05:30 PM

BTW, I can't let that slide. I've been a UD fan since birth and I've NEVER wanted the Hens to go I-A. I love it right where they are. :nod:

Ok.....:D

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 05:31 PM

Your wanting me to rank TEAMS especially pro to college is why you know nothing about Georgia. I also think those teams would have the BEST CHANCE due to many factors. If you cant see why GSU or UM has a better chance than Elon well I dont have that long to explain it to you.
WTF are you talking about?? Elon?? How did they enter this discussion?

The reason I ask you to rank is that you would know better. Would you go out on a limb and rank the DC area teams for me?

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 05:36 PM

JDC325

January 3rd, 2007, 05:47 PM

WTF are you talking about?? Elon?? How did they enter this discussion?

The reason I ask you to rank is that you would know better. Would you go out on a limb and rank the DC area teams for me?

Why should I your the KING right? Plus I did not try to ignorantly try to argue with a UD person about their school. Like I said in my post YOU probably no more than me about UD, we can debate about the other schools but dont try to debate me about GSU or how the Georgia sports scene works. The fact that you dont get that it is not the TEAMS it is the sport that matters in Georgia must be a regional difference.

Football is king no matter what level. The majority of sports fans in GA are football fans first therefore football fans are not even going to miss a highschool football game to see the Hawks, Thrashers, or even the Braves game unless they are in World Series then maybe but it is all relative and different levels of football will garner the appropriate level of attendance. That is why I think GSU would do just find in 1-A/BCS whether it takes only 11 like Boise or little longer. But until GSU goes 1-A/BCS and gives people and alternative to UGA we will continue to get 1-AA/FCS support no matter how many more NC's we get.

Model Citizen

January 3rd, 2007, 05:55 PM

Also, do you think WKU will be successful in I-A?

Yes. For WKU, success will be measured in terms of increased visibility and attendance; better recruiting; bowl appearances; and competition with the same schools they already play in every other sport except football.

JDC325

January 3rd, 2007, 06:06 PM

I've got to go battle traffic in my small state, but one request before I leave. Tell me how you would move GSU to I-A if you were the AD. What conference? What size stadium? What opponents? etc... not smart ass, serious. Also, do you think WKU will be successful in I-A?

First of all I think WKU has a hard road in front of it due to being from a small state that is not growing significantly and I really dont know if there is room for another good 1-A/BCS team.

As far as GSU, if you look on our school website we just had a campaign called the Campaign For National Distinction that raised 53 Million when the goal was only 40 Million. It was mainly focused on academics. I think the same exact model should be followed. Our president came up with a plan with very defined goals and then presented in to our alumni, students, faculty and to local, state and regional businesses and it worked and worked well. I am confident given our President and the right AD could conduct similar campaign could work for a push to 1-A/BCS. For me it is not so much how it is why we are close to being ready. I started attending GSU in 1998 and when I go back and actually walk the campus it is hardly recognizable. Same could be said for many commuties around GA in the last ten years.

PS
Dont ever ever whine to someone about traffic that lives in Metro Atlanta, you will get zero sympathy.: smh :

JDC325

January 3rd, 2007, 06:17 PM

Yes. For WKU, success will be measured in terms of increased visibility and attendance; better recruiting; bowl appearances; and competition with the same schools they already play in every other sport except football.

True in those terms. Marshall is not competiting or will be for a long time for a BCS championship but I seriously doubt the vast majortiy of their students, fans or alumni wish they were still in 1-AA/FCS. So the increased visibililty of there school, higher attendance and donations than they ever were in 1-AA is definately an improvement and a sucess.

JohnStOnge

January 3rd, 2007, 06:50 PM

By the way...this is as good a place as any to put this. I think it was mentioned as part of the "event." Anyway I just saw some mention of it on AOL.

I am not a fan of doing a public proposal like that player did. I also saw a thing where Fox News had a soldier in Iraq ask a woman to marry him on national TV.

Do you not think doing that kind of thing puts the woman on the spot? There she is being asked a question like that...to consent to a significant life event...in front of a national TV audience. What if she isn't sure? What if she actually wants to say, "no?" Is it really fair to her to ask her with millions of people watching?

People seem to think it's cute but I think it's not the most appropriate thing to do. I really think it's better to do something like that in private.

patssle

January 3rd, 2007, 06:53 PM

How come women never ask the men to marry them?

sorry, random thought.

If I was asked on TV and wanted to say no...I would just say yes for TV then talk to her afterwards. Saying no would put you on every newscast in the country...no thanks.

youwouldno

January 3rd, 2007, 06:55 PM

Boise St will never win a BCS title. End of story. Unless they get into the Pac-10, which isn't going to happen either.

BrevardMountaineer03

January 3rd, 2007, 06:58 PM

Either way you look at it it's postseason honors. But I would prefer the Back-2-Back Championships. Excellent question!!

Saint3333

January 3rd, 2007, 07:35 PM

There are a lot of AppSt fans here. :D

Based on responses you seem right as 4 out of every 5 ASU posters appear to support the BCS bowl win.

One thought though, would their opinions have changed pre-back-to-back championships after 20 long years of just hoping to win one NC?

crunifan

January 3rd, 2007, 07:39 PM

It's easy for me, I would go for the Boise State style win in a BCS game.

I love I-AA football, but I hope that one day UNI moves up. I think UNI has the potential to be known as a great althetic school.

In my perfect scenario, I would love to see UNI and Missouri State, Illinois State, Indiana State, and Southern Illinois all move up together to have MVC football (with Wichita State). I think the I-AA name is holding UNI's recognition in other sports, most specifically basketball.

youwouldno

January 3rd, 2007, 08:03 PM

Is UNI ever going to overtake Iowa? No. And that's the basic problem for FCS fans that are eager to 'move up.' Boise St is essentially the only success story among former I-AA programs and that's because they faced less competition geographically. No I-AA team has moved up in an area with lots of existing I-A programs and had real success.

WKU will not have much success at the BS level and neither would other FCS programs in the east or midwest. The real question is whether a FCS team would rather have a good chance at success at their level, or a miniscule chance of a success at a higher level.

VT Wildcat Fan53

January 3rd, 2007, 08:06 PM

I opted for the Boise win. I think that game will be talked about for years. It will rank up there with the "Flutie Game" and "Stanford-Cal".
I would normally take one NC, let alone two, over any bowl win but that game was special. I think it was the greatest game I have ever seen.

I can't disagree with your opinion about the Boise win two nights ago. The game was just incredible. However, imagine if Boise pulled off those great plays in the midst of a national championship run? I remember UNH over Georgia Southern in 2004 executing out a similar game plan in their 1st round win that year (fake punt, statue of liberty, .....).:hurray:

I agree with you that the BSU might be the best game I've ever seen, but I will tell you that the UNH heart-stopper over the Blue Hens earlier this year down in Newark might be in my Top 5 ever! As a UNH fan, I was fortunate enough to be in attendance at the game -- only thing more memorable than the victory was the realization of just HOW GREAT the game day atmosphere at UD really is -- just a fantastic setting, scenario, and environment. All of Blue Hen nation should be very proud. :thumbsup: Montana must really be something if it is supposedly even better.....

Back to the thread, I would rather win 2 NC's in a row any day! :D

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 08:57 PM

Why should I your the KING right? Plus I did not try to ignorantly try to argue with a UD person about their school. Like I said in my post YOU probably no more than me about UD, we can debate about the other schools but dont try to debate me about GSU or how the Georgia sports scene works. The fact that you dont get that it is not the TEAMS it is the sport that matters in Georgia must be a regional difference.

Football is king no matter what level. The majority of sports fans in GA are football fans first therefore football fans are not even going to miss a highschool football game to see the Hawks, Thrashers, or even the Braves game unless they are in World Series then maybe but it is all relative and different levels of football will garner the appropriate level of attendance.
If you want to call me the king, I'm OK with that, but I've certainly never made such a claim. But I'm glad to know that any football in Georgia is awesome. When Georgia State decides to join the ranks of DI football, I expect they will be one of the top programs in the CAA. :rolleyes:

BTW, that was a sarcastic post. :p

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 08:58 PM

89Hen

January 3rd, 2007, 09:01 PM

As far as GSU, if you look on our school website we just had a campaign called the Campaign For National Distinction that raised 53 Million when the goal was only 40 Million. It was mainly focused on academics. I think the same exact model should be followed. Our president came up with a plan with very defined goals and then presented in to our alumni, students, faculty and to local, state and regional businesses and it worked and worked well. I am confident given our President and the right AD could conduct similar campaign could work for a push to 1-A/BCS. For me it is not so much how it is why we are close to being ready. I started attending GSU in 1998 and when I go back and actually walk the campus it is hardly recognizable. Same could be said for many commuties around GA in the last ten years.
Excellent, but you didn't address a single question.

"What conference? What size stadium? What opponents? etc..."

Again, this isn't smart-ass, I'm just curious what plan you could implement that would prove successful for GSU that would make the fan base happy in I-A. I'd ask the same of AppSt fans since they are probably the most vocal about moving up.

crunifan

January 3rd, 2007, 09:59 PM

ChooChoo

January 3rd, 2007, 10:24 PM

If you want to call me the king, I'm OK with that, but I've certainly never made such a claim. But I'm glad to know that any football in Georgia is awesome. When Georgia State decides to join the ranks of DI football, I expect they will be one of the top programs in the CAA. :rolleyes:

BTW, that was a sarcastic post. :p

Yes. Yes we would. :eyebrow:

As for an earlier post stating Boise St. will never win a BCS title, 90% of the football world said the same thing about Louisville 5 years ago. As of last night they are referred to as "perennial favorites" by the talking heads. Some even said they should be playing Ohio State for the NC. Now who among would have predicted that about a team in C-USA 3 years ago? I'm just saying, winning consistantly and against OOC teams can change perceptions and minds. If Boise St. can keep it up I believe they'll get their shot at a title.

youwouldno

January 4th, 2007, 12:14 AM

No, UNI won't ever overtake Iowa. Iowa just has too much fan support for us to ever threaten them.

BUT, we can overtake Iowa State. We are better than them in many sports, and if we are on a level playing field, we could be much better than the Cyclones. Which would be a success in my book.

Except they already play in a big conference. That's the point. There isn't a level playing field and moving to the BCS won't change that. If you think schools like Indiana State can move to the BCS, you obviously have no clue about the realities of college football.

andy7171

January 4th, 2007, 07:50 AM

WTF are you talking about?? Elon?? How did they enter this discussion?

The reason I ask you to rank is that you would know better. Would you go out on a limb and rank the DC area teams for me?
That's easy...
1-Redskins
2-Redskins
3-Redskins
4-Maryland Basketball
5-Wizards
6-Georgetown Basketball
7-Maryland Football
8-Nationals
9-High school sports
10-Navy Football

Oh wait, you were being sarcastic.:rolleyes:

Fordham

January 4th, 2007, 10:28 AM

Prove me wrong then guys. Show me some figures of how Utah or BC's SAT scores went up more than a school that didn't win a big football game.

I missed this post from yesterday, 89. First off, I think that almost every study that has been done <I think I've seen one that argued otherwise> has shown that there is no connection between increased athletic spending/focus and improved academics or higher quality of students accepted, so that reinforces what I believe is the point you're making which I do agree with.

The only outlier to me is the "lightning in a bottle" moments that are, by definition, few and far between. Flutie's pass is the most recognized example of it. Other than that I've seen arguments for Ewing's matriculation to G-town, 'Nova's NCAA hoops championship, George Mason's final 4 run <jury still out as it's still too close to the event to see the impact> ... and it's possible that Boise St.'s win will enter this category as well. The point being that until those moments occurred, the schools were lower rated academically and/or more regional in nature versus the more national profiles they enjoy now. This has been discussed ad nauseum at the Fordham board since there are many pre-80's grads who remember Fordham being on par or better rated than BC, 'Nova and G-town back then but they've leapt into a different category than us. Is it all due to those seminal moments? I understand it's tough to say but it's also tough to not admit that the rise they all saw coincided very closely with these big events. The 3 I mentioned above were all very good schools to begin with, so perhaps all they needed was the increased exposure that these events gave them since a great foundation was already there? As such, I'm not sure what Boise St.'s academic profile is now but if it's average or low I don't expect that it'll make them the next Harvard of the West but if they have a proper plan, perhaps it can help them nudge into the next category up from where they are.

I guess my point is that it is possible and even probable to increase your academics on the back of athletics if a) you have one of these incredibly high profile monumental events take place and b) the school capitalizes on what is basically just a great marketing tool in the exposure that the event gave the school. It just leads back to what are the chances that you'll have one of these moments take place regardless of how much you increase spending on athletics. To me, it's like building your personal financial plan on winning the lottery. Sure, maybe it'll pay off but you're likely better off spending that lottery ticket money elsewhere since the chances of having an event that captures the nation's attention is so unlikely.

89Hen

January 4th, 2007, 10:52 AM

I guess my point is that it is possible and even probable to increase your academics on the back of athletics if a) you have one of these incredibly high profile monumental events take place and b) the school capitalizes on what is basically just a great marketing tool in the exposure that the event gave the school. It just leads back to what are the chances that you'll have one of these moments take place regardless of how much you increase spending on athletics. To me, it's like building your personal financial plan on winning the lottery. Sure, maybe it'll pay off but you're likely better off spending that lottery ticket money elsewhere since the chances of having an event that captures the nation's attention is so unlikely.
Possible, sure... probable, doubtful. Like you said, the school can use the recognition to boost it's academic standing because of the increased exposure, but the posters here are trying to say that because a team had the athletic success and applications went up dramatically, that the school would somehow benefit academically. I just don't think that's true. Can they be more picky? In a way, but more applications from more of the same people means more "NO"s, not better incoming freshman as was stated.

It's not like you've got a bunch of 4.0, 1500 SAT HS students saying, you know, if only AppSt would win a football championship I'd consider going there instead of Duke.

JDC325

January 4th, 2007, 10:54 AM

Yes. Yes we would. :eyebrow:

As for an earlier post stating Boise St. will never win a BCS title, 90% of the football world said the same thing about Louisville 5 years ago. As of last night they are referred to as "perennial favorites" by the talking heads. Some even said they should be playing Ohio State for the NC. Now who among would have predicted that about a team in C-USA 3 years ago? I'm just saying, winning consistantly and against OOC teams can change perceptions and minds. If Boise St. can keep it up I believe they'll get their shot at a title.

Dont let 89 hen hear you saying that.:nono:

89Hen

January 4th, 2007, 11:00 AM

Dont let 89 hen hear you saying that.:nono:
:confused: Not part of my discussion. xidiotx

Fordham

January 4th, 2007, 11:10 AM

Possible, sure... probable, doubtful. Like you said, the school can use the recognition to boost it's academic standing because of the increased exposure, but the posters here are trying to say that because a team had the athletic success and applications went up dramatically, that the school would somehow benefit academically. I just don't think that's true. Can they be more picky? In a way, but more applications from more of the same people means more "NO"s, not better incoming freshman as was stated.

It's not like you've got a bunch of 4.0, 1500 SAT HS students saying, you know, if only AppSt would win a football championship I'd consider going there instead of Duke.

Agreed overall. Like I said earlier, the NCAA and other org's have done these studies already have been pretty definitive that even though applications go up there is no evidence to support any lasting change in academics due to increased athletic 'awareness' and spending. The one thing that hasn't been studied, though, is the area I find pretty interesting on the heels of this Boise St. win and that is the impact of these "lightning in a bottle moments" ... of which the nat'l championships by Appy don't fit.

Oh, and your Appy St. example reinforces the opposite point - Duke spends more on athletics and has greater athletic success overall. Of course the kid still goes to Duke! :smiley_wi

Seriously, though, if I were to try to articulate the other side, is the 1500 SAT kid the one anyone thinks Appy is after? They're the 15th rated Regional University in the South. Do the increased applications help them get more kids with around 1200 SAT's who otherwise would have gone to top 10 regional competitors like Wheeling, Mercer or Samford and at the same time shed a few entrants who are at the bottom of the GPA/SAT bell curve?

JDC325

January 4th, 2007, 11:18 AM

Excellent, but you didn't address a single question.

"What conference? What size stadium? What opponents? etc..."

Again, this isn't smart-ass, I'm just curious what plan you could implement that would prove successful for GSU that would make the fan base happy in I-A. I'd ask the same of AppSt fans since they are probably the most vocal about moving up.

Like I said it is WHY is more important the HOW!! So I did answer your question but here is my none thought out and researched feelings.

The min req. for 1-A/BCS is a two or three year rolling average 15000K per home game so we are technically good there but to get any decent 1-A/BCS teams like MTSU is getting GT to come to their stadium I would atleast expand to 30K seats and of course we would still have the grass seating but that does not count.

Conference would probably depend on the conferences more than us. USF was at the right place at the right time. So if we could raise enough money and build facilities nice enough Big East would be number 1 but I know that is just wishfull thinking but the same could have been said about USF when we spanked them in Paulson in the playoffs a couple of years back. Conference USA would be a more of a shot but still would depend on how our leadership wanted to move up and how well the could raise money. SunBelt would obviously be the last choice and have some teams that have yet to prove they should even be in 1-A/BCS but I dont see FIU and FAU staying down long with the talent FLA has and MTSU and Troy are coming off decent years. WKU makes a nice addition as well and if both GSU and App were to join I think you would have four or five former 1-AA NC winners, not to bad.

Opponents well the conference would take most of that up and like every school does schedule a "weak" for either a warm up or homecoming. Then of course take a shot at a "big dog" for exposure and in the begining ONLY for some extra cash.

Listen I dont think GSU is even close to jumping in the next five years especially with our AD but if you dont think there is not enough room for another nationally sucessfull 1-A school in GA you are just nuts and of course it would take years to even come close to rivaling UGA in football only since we are just as good in most other sports allready but the same could have been said about Miami, or FSU in respect to FLA at one point. Ga is in the top 5 states for top 100-150 highschool recruits with only CAL, FLA, and TX and ahead of us and how many BCS schools are in those states and GA only has 2? I doubt there is any state that could match our growth rate the last ten years or any school that could match GSU growth rate the last ten years and there is NO signs of us slowing down.

You got to be one of the most glass half empty posters on here and BTW your conference really does not want Ga State to start a football program.

spelunker64

January 4th, 2007, 11:22 AM

Win the Fiesta Bowl in dramatic Boise State style

now with a one point lead

TxSt02

January 4th, 2007, 11:29 AM

Win the Fiesta Bowl in dramatic Boise State style

now with a one point lead

this board has wised up...

89Hen

January 4th, 2007, 12:11 PM

You got to be one of the most glass half empty posters on here and BTW your conference really does not want Ga State to start a football program.
I'd say you're a pie in the sky poster while I'm a realist. Odds are stacked severly against anyone outside of the BCS making it in I-A, let alone a I-AA move-up. Are there success stories? Sure, but there are far more stories of teams moving up to find out they can't compete and are losing more money than they ever dreamed possible.

As for Georgia State, I don't think anyone is scared of them. Their team is one of the only ones UD may have a shot against in Men's bball.

CAA standings for GSU:
Men's bball - 10th
Women's bball - 8th
Volleyball - 8th
Men's Soccer - 12th
Women's Soccer - 10th
Baseball - 6th
Softball - 1st!

But since football is king in Georgia I fully expect that the hardest sport in which to compete in DI, they will be great. :cool:

wkuhillhound

January 4th, 2007, 12:22 PM

It is really tough to choose. Considering that WKU has won a national championship that only ONE team can claim is so enormous to the prestige of an university. The question you have to ask is: Is Boise State really that much a David? Most informed people would probably say no, because of the fact that Boise State has been on the edge of greatness for years now and has had a successful transition from I-AA. If it was a MAC or Sun Belt school, then the answer would be very obvious. If WKU someday could go all the way to a BCS national championship that would be a distinction that most institutions could not even begin to claim. That would be a big time feather in the cap for Western Kentucky. It would be a toss up from my point of view.

youwouldno

January 4th, 2007, 02:56 PM

Like I said it is WHY is more important the HOW!! So I did answer your question but here is my none thought out and researched feelings.

The min req. for 1-A/BCS is a two or three year rolling average 15000K per home game so we are technically good there but to get any decent 1-A/BCS teams like MTSU is getting GT to come to their stadium I would atleast expand to 30K seats and of course we would still have the grass seating but that does not count.

Conference would probably depend on the conferences more than us. USF was at the right place at the right time. So if we could raise enough money and build facilities nice enough Big East would be number 1 but I know that is just wishfull thinking but the same could have been said about USF when we spanked them in Paulson in the playoffs a couple of years back. Conference USA would be a more of a shot but still would depend on how our leadership wanted to move up and how well the could raise money. SunBelt would obviously be the last choice and have some teams that have yet to prove they should even be in 1-A/BCS but I dont see FIU and FAU staying down long with the talent FLA has and MTSU and Troy are coming off decent years. WKU makes a nice addition as well and if both GSU and App were to join I think you would have four or five former 1-AA NC winners, not to bad.

Opponents well the conference would take most of that up and like every school does schedule a "weak" for either a warm up or homecoming. Then of course take a shot at a "big dog" for exposure and in the begining ONLY for some extra cash.

Listen I dont think GSU is even close to jumping in the next five years especially with our AD but if you dont think there is not enough room for another nationally sucessfull 1-A school in GA you are just nuts and of course it would take years to even come close to rivaling UGA in football only since we are just as good in most other sports allready but the same could have been said about Miami, or FSU in respect to FLA at one point. Ga is in the top 5 states for top 100-150 highschool recruits with only CAL, FLA, and TX and ahead of us and how many BCS schools are in those states and GA only has 2? I doubt there is any state that could match our growth rate the last ten years or any school that could match GSU growth rate the last ten years and there is NO signs of us slowing down.

You got to be one of the most glass half empty posters on here and BTW your conference really does not want Ga State to start a football program.

Another good example of totally irrational thinking. The Big East? LoL.

GSU will never be on par with Georgia. Get over it.

mcveyrl

January 4th, 2007, 04:38 PM

I haven't read this whole thread, but I've gotta say that any other bowl game I would've gone with the back to back, but the Fiesta Bowl was special. It was a great game with a great outcome.

However, the whole time I was thinking "What if this were for a spot in the National Championship game?" or "What if this was a win or go home situation?" That, would've made it unquestionably the greatest of all time.

JDC325

January 4th, 2007, 04:48 PM

Another good example of totally irrational thinking. The Big East? LoL.

GSU will never be on par with Georgia. Get over it.

Like I said wishfull thinking for the Big East. I guess when FSU was battling out with Stetson people like you were saying the same thing back then. USF went from exiting the FCS playoffs in the first round at Paulson to being in the Big East in less than 10 years but if anyone would have suggested that they would just been irrational thinkers.xidiotx

JDC325

January 4th, 2007, 04:53 PM

I'd say you're a pie in the sky poster while I'm a realist. Odds are stacked severly against anyone outside of the BCS making it in I-A, let alone a I-AA move-up. Are there success stories? Sure, but there are far more stories of teams moving up to find out they can't compete and are losing more money than they ever dreamed possible.

As for Georgia State, I don't think anyone is scared of them. Their team is one of the only ones UD may have a shot against in Men's bball.

CAA standings for GSU:
Men's bball - 10th
Women's bball - 8th
Volleyball - 8th
Men's Soccer - 12th
Women's Soccer - 10th
Baseball - 6th
Softball - 1st!

But since football is king in Georgia I fully expect that the hardest sport in which to compete in DI, they will be great. :cool:

Since GA is fourth in the nation in producing top highschool recruits EVERY year I think GA state would not have a problem competing and the people at Boise, Marshall, Troy, USF, and MTSU can thank their lucky stars the majority of their booster, leadership and alumni for not having your attitude in moving up.

AggiePride

January 4th, 2007, 05:15 PM

Easy question. That Fiesta bowl game by a HUGE margin.

I will not go any further in order to not ruffle any FCS loyalist feathers.

AppMan

January 4th, 2007, 08:30 PM

Hummmmm..... Friday night, on a secondary network, 22,000 people in stands, with five local TV stations and a dozen or so newspapers covering the game VS the entire college football world watching my team beat one of the most storied programs in the history of college football, on New Years Day, in Prime Time, on a major network, in front of a sold out 70,000+ seat stadium, with every media outlet known to man on hand covering the game. Decisions, Decisions.....

89Hen

January 4th, 2007, 08:51 PM

Since GA is fourth in the nation in producing top highschool recruits EVERY year I think GA state would not have a problem competing and the people at Boise, Marshall, Troy, USF, and MTSU can thank their lucky stars the majority of their booster, leadership and alumni for not having your attitude in moving up.
Then GT should run away with the ACC every year, not just once every 12 years. Troy, USF and MTSU???? What have they done noteworthy? :cool:

blackfordpu

January 4th, 2007, 09:02 PM

I know what I would want...:thumbsup:

Once again, what are you doing?

youwouldno

January 5th, 2007, 12:30 AM

Like I said wishfull thinking for the Big East. I guess when FSU was battling out with Stetson people like you were saying the same thing back then. USF went from exiting the FCS playoffs in the first round at Paulson to being in the Big East in less than 10 years but if anyone would have suggested that they would just been irrational thinkers.xidiotx

USF did get lucky. But then again, I doubt the Big East-- or any major conference-- is anxious to tap the Statesboro media market.

AZGrizFan

January 5th, 2007, 12:53 AM

BlueHen86

January 5th, 2007, 07:37 AM

What happened in the poll? It went from 89 - 88 Fiesta Bowl (or something like that) to 132 - 98 Back to Back Champs over night.
Did a bunch of people vote at the last minute?
Did someone figure out how to rig the vote?
Is Karl Rove behind this?xlolx

andy7171

January 5th, 2007, 07:47 AM

lizrdgizrd

January 5th, 2007, 09:43 AM

What's this? A sane voice? And from an AppSt helmet? Is the sky falling?

At least someone on this forum can think straight.
You mean think like you. It's a preference, some of us have different ones from you. :rolleyes:

andy7171

January 5th, 2007, 09:49 AM

You mean think like you. It's a preference, some of us have different ones from you. :rolleyes:
:( don't hate me because I'm in the majority.:(

I think that just be being on the forum makes me an FCS fan. I understand your side of the arguement. Really I do. But we are what we are. Fans of lesser quality football.

lizrdgizrd

January 5th, 2007, 09:52 AM

:( don't hate me because I'm in the majority.:(

I think that just be being on the forum makes me an FCS fan. I understand your side of the arguement. Really I do. But we are what we are. Fans of lesser quality football.
Check the poll again. xlolx

89Hen

January 5th, 2007, 09:54 AM

But we are what we are. Fans of lesser quality football.
: smh : I used to like you Andy.

andy7171

January 5th, 2007, 09:58 AM

Check the poll again. xlolx
:nod:
Sure. But read what I wrote. Just by being here at the forum links you to being a fan of I-AA football. Considering that, skews the results. Post this same question on the ESPN or Sportsline site and does back to back even get 10%? Doubtful. And by the way, if this question were on a major sports site, I'd vote for the "back to back" just to represent I-AA football. xcoffeex

lizrdgizrd

January 5th, 2007, 10:04 AM

:nod:
Sure. But read what I wrote. Just by being here at the forum links you to being a fan of I-AA football. Considering that, skews the results. Post this same question on the ESPN or Sportsline site and does back to back even get 10%? Doubtful. And by the way, if this question were on a major sports site, I'd vote for the "back to back" just to represent I-AA football. xcoffeex
We're not polling people who aren't on this board are we?

89Hen

January 5th, 2007, 10:07 AM

Just by being here at the forum links you to being a fan of I-AA football. Considering that, skews the results. Post this same question on the ESPN or Sportsline site and does back to back even get 10%? Doubtful.
Just as posting it here would skew it one way, posting it on ESPN would skew it the other. I wouldn't expect any I-A fan to pick the I-AA NC. :confused:

andy7171

January 5th, 2007, 10:18 AM

: smh : I used to like you Andy.
It is what it is. I played at this level. I know the difference in the quality of players. The plain fact is the quality of athletes on a I-A team is better than at ours. Sure, there are top quality athletes at I-AA. Sure they could succeed at the I-A level. Sure a top team in I-AA can jump up and win a game against a lesser I-A team, like UNH did Northwestern.
But, the fact is our champion, AppSt, got rolled by a crappy NC State. Does that diminish what ASU did this year and post season? No. It probably made them better.

I love I-AA football. It's how the game should be played.
With discipline.
With pride.
With love for the game itself.
Not for NFL aspirations and self promotion.
Yes, its annoying how ESPN contnuously referred to the I-A transfers and disresepcted the majority of players who were non-transfers, but exceeding in play on the field.
But I'm not going to be dillusional in thinking that there isn't a difference in the level of play, simply based on a Division numbering system.

If this wasn't the case, why is there a topic about Delaware getting a Notre Dame transfer? To me as a former player, someone transferring in couldn't cut it at their first choice school. And by moving down probably thinks it's going to be a cake walk.
That won't be the case.

Don't hate me guys. I am just playing devils advocate. I'm on your side.

andy7171

January 5th, 2007, 10:23 AM

Just as posting it here would skew it one way, posting it on ESPN would skew it the other. I wouldn't expect any I-A fan to pick the I-AA NC. :confused:
Are you saying no I-AA fans look at ESPN site? Are you saying that if you like I-A football, you don't like I-AA football. That makes no sense.
Football is football.

JDC325

January 5th, 2007, 11:00 AM

Then GT should run away with the ACC every year, not just once every 12 years. Troy, USF and MTSU???? What have they done noteworthy? :cool:

Uh lets see who else is in the ACC TWO FLA schools and UGA on their schedule every year. If it were not for FSU GT would have won the ACC many times. MTSU, USF and Troy Lets see all three in less than ten years have gone from being an unkown 1-aa team to all three going to bowl games this year. One is in a BCS conference and MTSU will be hosting the BCS ACC runner up in their stadium. Yeah all their alumni are really missing the days of 10K in attendance. USF could easily be the Big East champs very soon. To be honest I dont see Troy or MTSU making any national power noise soon but I garuntee you the vast majority of their alumni are not regreting the decision. As seen by their attendance dwarfing 99% of 1-aa teams and what they drew in 1-AA.

No doubt you are in the minority if on a FCS board there is only around a 10% difference and it looks like a ton of App state people who are coming off back to back championships seem to leaning towards rather wanting to be Boise. It is obvious with 14K+ you have way to much time on your hands and have been in many drawn out debates which leads me to beilieve your either pretty narrow minded or bored. Either way to each his own my friend but wanting to 1-A and getting where Boise is, is a good thing for every aspect of a university. Dont really understand why anyone would not want that for their alma mater.

89Hen

January 5th, 2007, 11:45 AM

Are you saying no I-AA fans look at ESPN site? Are you saying that if you like I-A football, you don't like I-AA football. That makes no sense.
I'm not saying either, but you know that a vast, vast majority of the million people that go to ESPN daily are I-A fans first and foremost when it comes to college football. Also, considering I like I-A football and I'm as diehard a I-AA fan as anyone, I'd never make that second comment.

89Hen

January 5th, 2007, 12:00 PM

Uh lets see who else is in the ACC TWO FLA schools and UGA on their schedule every year. If it were not for FSU GT would have won the ACC many times.

2005 5-3
2004 4-4
2003 4-4
2002 4-4
2001 4-4
2000 6-2
1999 5-3
1998 7-1
1997 5-3
1996 4-4

Yeah, that damn FSU beating GT 3 and 4 times a year sux. xlolx

89Hen

January 5th, 2007, 12:03 PM

and it looks like a ton of App state people who are coming off back to back championships seem to leaning towards rather wanting to be Boise. It is obvious with 14K+ you have way to much time on your hands and have been in many drawn out debates which leads me to beilieve your either pretty narrow minded or bored. Either way to each his own my friend but wanting to 1-A and getting where Boise is, is a good thing for every aspect of a university. Dont really understand why anyone would not want that for their alma mater.
Shoe fits JDC. And as far as ASU fans, many have wanted to go I-A for a long time, so it was no shocker. Like I said in reponse as to why the vote was so close... we have a lot of AppSt fans here.

youwouldno

January 5th, 2007, 12:10 PM

andy7171

January 5th, 2007, 12:23 PM

2005 5-3
2004 4-4
2003 4-4
2002 4-4
2001 4-4
2000 6-2
1999 5-3
1998 7-1
1997 5-3
1996 4-4

Yeah, that damn FSU beating GT 3 and 4 times a year sux. xlolx
Uh-oh. Hen did the research you didn't think he would do! Spin! Spin! Spin!

GT hasn't been good since Bobby Ross.

JDC325

January 5th, 2007, 12:28 PM

Fans of major college teams have no more respect for Troy than they would an FCS team. I don't know what small BS fans think but most bowls are a joke that lose money and garner little attention. Most I-AA teams that moved up have established absolutely no reputation for success at the higher level... Idaho, La Tech, Ark St, Troy, Nevada, MTSU... who cares if they get a good home game every so often. They still don't win anything.

What idiots like this GSU guy don't get is that you can't just wave a magic wand and turn into Boise. If Furman won enough titles maybe Paladin fans would hope to wave their magic wand and turn into Tulsa, but the reality is that Boise was in a unique situation and has had everything go right since. The more likely outcome is mediocrity and financial problems.

No the idiots are the ones that think the vast majority of college football fans could even begin to explain what or who plays 1-AA/FCS football and that any BCS or 1-A team get a ton more respect over any other level from the vast majority of football fans for merely being 1-A/BCS. That is the big dillusion most hard core 1-AA/FCS posters suffer from. There are benifits ESPECIALLY in the south for moving up far beyond the playing field. Right or not the football team is the front porch to a school in the south and is usually what most kids know about a school first. Thousands of highschool kids dont run around with UGA stickers and tags because of the high academic standards it is because of one thing only and is why a large majority of GSU alumni do the same due to having NO interest in this level of football. The only reason 99% of people that follow FCS/1-aa football is they get paid to or graduated from that school which is not true for the vast majority of 1-A teams. If GSU or any FCS school with one or two exceptions ever wants to get 40K+/- in the stands it is not going to happen in the FCS period and 40K+/- is only average in BCS.

89Hen

January 5th, 2007, 12:38 PM

No the idiots are the ones that think the vast majority of college football fans could even begin to explain what or who plays 1-AA/FCS football and that any BCS or 1-A team get a ton more respect over any other level from the vast majority of football fans for merely being 1-A/BCS. That is the big dillusion most hard core 1-AA/FCS posters suffer from....

If GSU or any FCS school with one or two exceptions ever wants to get 40K+/- in the stands it is not going to happen in the FCS period and 40K+/- is only average in BCS.
You are one confused soul. You make it sound like anyone here said I-A's should move to I-AA. AFAIK, nobody has come even close to saying that. What has been said is that for our teams already in I-AA, this is a good fit and that we'd rather see our teams play for a NC in I-AA than move up in the hopes to make it to the money losing, poorly attended, nobody watching New Orleans Bowl.

40K+/-?

Some of the I-AA teams that moved to I-A...
Marshall - 25,910
Troy - 20,810
MTSU - 19,347
ArkSt - 17,882
Nevada - 16,728
Buffalo - 16,417
FIU - 15,110
LaTech - 14,586
Idaho - 14,543
LA-Monroe - 14,036
FAU - 9,182

Boy, for somebody who tries to smack people for not knowing something, you've really been exposed today. :nono: :nonono2:

JDC325

January 5th, 2007, 12:54 PM

You are one confused soul. You make it sound like anyone here said I-A's should move to I-AA. AFAIK, nobody has come even close to saying that. What has been said is that for our teams already in I-AA, this is a good fit and that we'd rather see our teams play for a NC in I-AA than move up in the hopes to make it to the money losing, poorly attended, nobody watching New Orleans Bowl.

40K+/-?

Some of the I-AA teams that moved to I-A...
Marshall - 25,910
Troy - 20,810
MTSU - 19,347
ArkSt - 17,882
Nevada - 16,728
Buffalo - 16,417
FIU - 15,110
LaTech - 14,586
Idaho - 14,543
LA-Monroe - 14,036
FAU - 9,182

Boy, for somebody who tries to smack people for not knowing something, you've really been exposed today. :nono: :nonono2:

I said the AVERAGE FOR 1-A not a select few teams who ARE YOUNG 1-A teams. What is SO SAD is almost every 1-AA team would give there first born child to have FAU's numbers. You are a sad pecimistic soul....: smh : I give it to you can avoid the hard stuff and maximize the very little that is on your side when debating the 1-A issue. Why not put Boise's attendance numbers up there as well? FIU did not win a game this year I think and still out drew all but what 6 1-aa teams......yeah your exposing the heck out of me, yeah people definately dont like BCS more than FCS xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx Any numbers you put up just justify my point .... so funny. Yeah go ahead and put a dollar amount on the exposure Boise just got playing in a pointless bowl game as well.

Here I will save you the time in looking up the numbers

http://web1.ncaa.org/d1mfb/mainpage.jsp

youwouldno

January 5th, 2007, 01:02 PM

andy7171

January 5th, 2007, 01:04 PM

Calling JDC dumb isn't going to stop him from ranting.

He knows Georgia football and the rest of us are fools because we don't. Get over it already.

89Hen

January 5th, 2007, 01:04 PM

I said the AVERAGE FOR 1-A not a select few teams who ARE YOUNG 1-A teams. What is SO SAD is almost every 1-AA team would give there first born child to have FAU's numbers. You are a sad pecimistic soul....: smh : I give it to you can avoid the hard stuff and maximize the very little that is on your side when debating the 1-A issue. Why not put Boise's attendance numbers up there as well? FIU did not win a game this year I think and still out drew all but what 6 1-aa teams......yeah your exposing the heck out of me, yeah people definately dont like 1-A mor than FCS xlolx xlolx xlolx xlolx Any numbers you put up just justify my point .... so funny.
Holy crap, you really are dense. Do you have any idea who the teams on that list are???? :confused: :confused: :confused: xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx

THEY ARE THE I-AA TEAMS THAT HAVE MOVED TO I-A!!!! :bang:

You want Boise's number? 30,453 That 10,000 LESS then what you call the I-A average. It's also only 7,000 more than Montana averaged. That's your #1 I-AA move-up. The one we should aspire to be. xlolx

As for the genius statement "people definately dont like 1-A mor than FCS"... no S Sherlock. Again, has ANYONE here claimed that I-A is not much bigger and has tons more fans? That doesn't mean that if a I-AA moves to I-A THEY will become much bigger with tons more fans. The numbers I put up SHOW THIS but you are too friggin dense to get it. I'm done with you. :cool:

JDC325

January 5th, 2007, 01:05 PM

I thought college was supposed to be about education. I guess not. And according to JDC325, it's not even about winning in football, because it's better to lose and call yourself BS than win and be FCS, even though the big boys don't respect you either way.

There are a lot of dumb football fans, and JDC is one of them.

I guess all those people that attend BCS football on average 30-35K more on average are all dumb just like me....xlolx xlolx Maybe you should educate them as well since most dont even have a shot to play in a worthless bowl game I am sure they will listen. xlolx

andy7171

January 5th, 2007, 01:07 PM

Holy crap, you really are dense. Do you have any idea who the teams on that list are???? :confused: :confused: :confused: xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx

THEY ARE THE I-AA TEAMS THAT HAVE MOVED TO I-A!!!! :bang:

You want Boise's number? 30,453 That 10,000 LESS then what you call the I-A average. It's also only 7,000 more than Montana averaged. That's your #1 I-AA move-up. The one we should aspire to be. xlolx

As for the genius statement "people definately dont like 1-A mor than FCS"... no S Sherlock. Again, has ANYONE here claimed that I-A is not much bigger and has tons more fans? That doesn't mean that if a I-AA moves to I-A THEY will become much bigger with tons more fans. The numbers I put up SHOW THIS but you are too friggin dense to get it. I'm done with you. :cool:
Towson upgraded their stadium from 6,000 to 11,000 seats. But unless Delaware or MorganState come to play, we still only fill it half way. Maybe we should move the stadium to Georgia?

JDC325

January 5th, 2007, 01:10 PM

Holy crap, you really are dense. Do you have any idea who the teams on that list are???? :confused: :confused: :confused: xidiotx xidiotx xidiotx

THEY ARE THE I-AA TEAMS THAT HAVE MOVED TO I-A!!!! :bang:

You want Boise's number? 30,453 That 10,000 LESS then what you call the I-A average. It's also only 7,000 more than Montana averaged. That's your #1 I-AA move-up. The one we should aspire to be. xlolx

As for the genius statement "people definately dont like 1-A mor than FCS"... no S Sherlock. Again, has ANYONE here claimed that I-A is not much bigger and has tons more fans? That doesn't mean that if a I-AA moves to I-A THEY will become much bigger with tons more fans. The numbers I put up SHOW THIS but you are too friggin dense to get it. I'm done with you. :cool:

Do you even read my post before you start spouting your diatribes?
I said they were all young 1-A TEAMS please read the post before you respond. Sure not all even belong in 1-A but what was the attendance in 1-AA and if there numbers are trending up what is the problem?
Of course no one is going to be pulling 40K there first few years out of the gate. Did any one of those teams average what they do now in 1-aa .... did not think so nor would they ever have and the NUMBERS do show it.

BlueHen86

January 5th, 2007, 01:11 PM

Towson upgraded their stadium from 6,000 to 11,000 seats. But unless Delaware or MorganState come to play, we still only fill it half way. Maybe we should move the stadium to Georgia?
Or increase your stadium size to 80,000 seats. That way one half full will be 40,000.:thumbsup:
If you build it they will come.;)

Mountaineer

January 5th, 2007, 01:13 PM

andy7171

January 5th, 2007, 01:14 PM

Or drop football altogether.. :thumbsup:
Sadly, most I-AA schools would rather do this than move to I-A.

None are in Georgia though.

JDC325

January 5th, 2007, 01:16 PM

Or drop football altogether.. :thumbsup:

I did not even know they had football. :D They are not in GA so what does it matter.....I keed Andy.

Mountaineer

January 5th, 2007, 01:17 PM

I did not even know they had football. :D They are not in GA so what does it matter.....I keed Andy.

Neither do most of their students and alumni..apparently.. :smiley_wi :p

JDC325

January 5th, 2007, 01:19 PM

Neither do most of their students and alumni..apparently.. :smiley_wi :p

Wow, I was not going to go there...Andy an the other 10 Townson fans are going to get you now.:nod:

andy7171

January 5th, 2007, 01:27 PM

Wow, I was not going to go there...Andy an the other 10 Townson fans are going to get you now.:nod:
10? You guys know nothing of Towson. I get this from fellow alumni of Towson. If you think I haven't developed a thick skin to this, you're crazy.
The only people who attend Towson games are former players, their families and current players families, and a handful of students.
Towson is a small fish in a very large pond, geographically speaking.
The opposite of Delaware.

89Hen

January 5th, 2007, 01:49 PM

Do you even read my post before you start spouting your diatribes?
I said they were all young 1-A TEAMS please read the post before you respond. Sure not all even belong in 1-A but what was the attendance in 1-AA and if there numbers are trending up what is the problem?
Of course no one is going to be pulling 40K there first few years out of the gate. Did any one of those teams average what they do now in 1-aa .... did not think so nor would they ever have and the NUMBERS do show it.

Marshall - 25,910 (1997)
Troy - 20,810 (2001)
MTSU - 19,347 (1999)
ArkSt - 17,882 (1990)
Nevada - 16,728 (1992)
Buffalo - 16,417 (1999)
FIU - 15,110 (2004)
LaTech - 14,586 (1988)
Idaho - 14,543 (1996)
LA-Monroe - 14,036 (1994)
FAU - 9,182 (2004)

Compared to Georgia, Penn State, etc... they will always be "young" teams. NEXT. xlolx

JDC325

January 5th, 2007, 04:08 PM

Marshall - 25,910 (1997)
Troy - 20,810 (2001)
MTSU - 19,347 (1999)
ArkSt - 17,882 (1990)
Nevada - 16,728 (1992)
Buffalo - 16,417 (1999)
FIU - 15,110 (2004)
LaTech - 14,586 (1988)
Idaho - 14,543 (1996)
LA-Monroe - 14,036 (1994)
FAU - 9,182 (2004)

Compared to Georgia, Penn State, etc... they will always be "young" teams. NEXT. xlolx

Brilliant observation....xlolx Arent most of those teams under 10 years in 1-A? I guess they should just give up!xidiotx

JDC325

January 5th, 2007, 04:10 PM

10? You guys know nothing of Towson. I get this from fellow alumni of Towson. If you think I haven't developed a thick skin to this, you're crazy.
The only people who attend Towson games are former players, their families and current players families, and a handful of students.
Towson is a small fish in a very large pond, geographically speaking.
The opposite of Delaware.

Just poking fun no malice I hope you guys get to grow as fast as GSU one day. I dont wish any ill will towards any school nor for taking on the challenge to compete with the elite of college football.

89Hen

January 5th, 2007, 06:01 PM

Brilliant observation....xlolx Arent most of those teams under 10 years in 1-A? I guess they should just give up!xidiotx
"Of course no one is going to be pulling 40K there first few years out of the gate."

How long should we give them? Half of them are 10+ years and nobody is threatening 40K. xcoffeex

JohnStOnge

January 5th, 2007, 08:40 PM

I think that, unless a former I-AA/FCS gets into a BCS league like South Florida and UConn did, I think it's likely that the best they can do is have a big moment from time to time. Over time they'll be on the outside looking in.

What happened with Boise State is unique because it was a BCS bowl game and the Broncos went undefeated. But big moments like that in terms of beating big name programs and/or good major conference teams are not unprecedented. Lousiana Tech has beaten Alabama twice since moving from I-AA; including once during a year in which the Tide went on to win the SEC championship. Southern Mississippi, a former Division II, once beat a Florida State team that finished #3 in both major polls.

I think Marshall's 1999 team was very similar to the 2006 Boise State team in terms of going undefeated during the regular season while playing one decent BCS league school (Clemson) but overall a very weak schedule by I-A standards. The difference there is that, back then, nobody had pressured the BCS leagues to allow one of the little guys at the party so Marshall played, and dominated, BYU in a minor Bowl game.

But Marshall, Louisiana Tech, and Southern Miss all...over time...are seen as what they are: Mid major or minor I-A (now BS) programs that are not really at the top level of college football. I think Boise State is in the same category. It's different in that the guy from Tulane forced a situation in which they were allowed to play in a BCS league Bowl and were fortunate enough to draw one of the weaker BCS league champions (I think the second weakest ahead of only Wake Forest). But, overall, Boise State does not have the resources to be a truely "major" college football program.

Lionsrking

January 5th, 2007, 11:08 PM

Southern Mississippi, a former Division II, once beat a Florida State team that finished #3 in both major polls.

Southern Miss has been D-I and I-A for a long time and have several marquee wins over the years. They tied Alabama in 1981 when they were ranked in the top five, and beat Florida State 58-14 that same year...beat Georgia, Tennessee, Nebraska, LSU (when they were bad), Illinois, Oklahoma State, Mississippi State and Ole Miss repeatedly and have hung close in a lot of other games against BCS conference opponents. I would say the Golden Eagles have been one of the upper tier non-BCS schools over the years and could easily fit into a BCS conference if politics weren't involved.

crunifan

January 5th, 2007, 11:39 PM

But Marshall, Louisiana Tech, and Southern Miss all...over time...are seen as what they are: Mid major or minor I-A (now BS) programs that are not really at the top level of college football. I think Boise State is in the same category. It's different in that the guy from Tulane forced a situation in which they were allowed to play in a BCS league Bowl and were fortunate enough to draw one of the weaker BCS league champions (I think the second weakest ahead of only Wake Forest). But, overall, Boise State does not have the resources to be a truely "major" college football program.

I don't agree. Boise State's win in the Fiesta bowl was bigger than most teams could ever wish. It was a BCS bowl so it automatically got lots of attention and viewers. But they also won...in AMAZING fashion. This is a game people will not forget. They will always say "remember that amazing game where Boise State did all those trick plays?"

Boise State jumped up a few notches in the football world instantly with that game.

JohnStOnge

January 6th, 2007, 10:34 AM

Southern Miss has been D-I and I-A for a long time and have several marquee wins over the years. They tied Alabama in 1981 when they were ranked in the top five, and beat Florida State 58-14 that same year...beat Georgia, Tennessee, Nebraska, LSU (when they were bad), Illinois, Oklahoma State, Mississippi State and Ole Miss repeatedly and have hung close in a lot of other games against BCS conference opponents. I would say the Golden Eagles have been one of the upper tier non-BCS schools over the years and could easily fit into a BCS conference if politics weren't involved.

Southern Miss also once beat Georgia when USM was still Division II. But I think people tend to remember the wins over big names and forget that losses against such teams are a lot more common. I've looked at it from time to time and the truth is that when you look at the whole picture the Golden Eagles had and have a horrible record against teams from what we now call the BCS leagues (or comparable leagues like the old Southwest Conference and Big 8). I do have their record against BCS league teams since the BCS started in 1998 and it's 6 - 20. The immediate excuse that normally comes up is "they play most of those games on the road" but there's no way that's enough to reasonablly account for being as far under 0.500 as they are in those games.

By the way, according to http://www.jhowell.net/cf/scores/SouthernMississippi.htm , Southern Miss' first Division I season was 1963 (no I-A/I-AA distinction back then) and the Golden Eagles got their first win over a big name when they beat Auburn in 1965.

BigApp

January 6th, 2007, 06:20 PM

What happened in the poll? It went from 89 - 88 Fiesta Bowl (or something like that) to 132 - 98 Back to Back Champs over night.

Did someone figure out how to rig the vote?

I think you know the answer BH...

JohnStOnge

January 6th, 2007, 08:54 PM

Originally Posted by BlueHen86
What happened in the poll? It went from 89 - 88 Fiesta Bowl (or something like that) to 132 - 98 Back to Back Champs over night.

Did someone figure out how to rig the vote?

It doesn't matter anyway. There's no "wrong" answer to a question like that. It's just a matter of what one prefers.

AppMan

January 7th, 2007, 05:54 PM

What's this? A sane voice? And from an AppSt helmet? Is the sky falling?

At least someone on this forum can think straight.

FYI, a lot more App fans are pro BCS (1-A or whatever it's called) than get credit for, esp on a FCS board. LIke has been mentioned before, one would expect the results to be extremely skewed towards the back 2 back side on a board that is devoted to FCS football. The fact the vote is even close at all tells me a lot!

BlueHen86

January 7th, 2007, 06:30 PM

It doesn't matter anyway. There's no "wrong" answer to a question like that. It's just a matter of what one prefers.
Thank you Captain Obvious!
You're right, polls don't matter so lets not have them.
You sure posted a lot on a thread where, by your own admission, there is no wrong answer.:confused:

I still find it interesting that the poll result totals spiked suddenly after several days of consistently edging up slowly.

BlueHen86

January 7th, 2007, 06:32 PM

I think you know the answer BH...
Yeah, I think I do too.:nod:

JohnStOnge

January 7th, 2007, 07:42 PM

Thank you Captain Obvious!
You're right, polls don't matter so lets not have them.
You sure posted a lot on a thread where, by your own admission, there is no wrong answer.:confused:

I still find it interesting that the poll result totals spiked suddenly after several days of consistently edging up slowly.

I think it's interesting to discuss but I already know most college football fans want to be in the top subdivision. As far as I can tell even fans of a place like Louisiana-Monroe...which won a national title in I-AA and was a frequent playoff participant that was often ranked highly in the I-AA polls...would rather be in I-A/FBS and dream about someday being in a bowl game even if it's something like the New Orleans Bowl. That's in spite of the fact that every one of the 13 seasons as a I-A have been a losing seasons for that school.

I'm not surprised that there would be a particularly high level of expression of that sentiment after something like what happened with Boise State happens. All I'm doing in discussing it is talking about why I personally prefer what I prefer.

74AppState

January 7th, 2007, 08:39 PM

The Louiseville-Wake Forest Orange Bowl (and all the others like it) won't be remembered next week. But a game like Boise State over OU with the drama and underdog winning WILL be remembered as an all-time great game. As fantastic as back-to-back National Champs is---AND IT IS---it's not like the Boise Fiesta Bowl win.

FCS_pwns_FBS

January 8th, 2007, 07:08 PM

But a game like Boise State over OU with the drama and underdog winning WILL be remembered as an all-time great game.

I doubt it

BigApp

January 8th, 2007, 07:11 PM

why do you doubt it? did you watch that game? It's definitely an all-timer

appfan2008

January 9th, 2007, 11:46 AM

Maroons

January 10th, 2007, 01:50 AM

The only value either of these things would have for me is as something to cherish as a fan. So I ask myself which I would cherish more and that is a very difficult question. It wouldn't matter to me that most people don't know the FCS from D-II or that a "secondary" BCS game might be forgotten. I wouldn't forget either and I'd cling to those memories and relive them over a few beers at tailgating with old college classmates over and over.

In the purest sense, I prefer national titles because there isn't any confusion about what a national championship is. That means the most to me in the confines of my own brain.

But when I watch Boise State, who beat EKU for the I-AA title in 1980, and I realize that a BCS victory means something to the average american while an FCS title does not, I start to feel a little jealous and it makes me want the BCS victory so I can feel like my school has asserted itself in the public eye.

In a world free of these influences, I would take titles anyday. But in our society that has come to judge institutions of higher learning almost exclusively by their athletics programs, it would be very difficult to resist that carrot.

I confess... I can't really decide. Perhaps I'm a horrible fan.

Mountaineer

January 10th, 2007, 02:03 AM

The only value either of these things would have for me is as something to cherish as a fan. ....
I confess... I can't really decide. Perhaps I'm a horrible fan.

Actually, I think you summed it up quite nicely. :nod: :nod:

It is a difficult choice as evident by the nearly even split in this poll.

89Hen

January 10th, 2007, 09:16 AM

The only value either of these things would have for me is as something to cherish as a fan...
Very good post Maroons, and I think it's something that was lost by a lot of posters on this string. Nobody argued that the I-AA NC would have been higher profile in Joe Public's eye, but many people answered this question that way IMO.

BTW, is that an old helmet or next year? I like it.

Ronbo

January 10th, 2007, 11:31 AM

The sports networks, especially Fox and ESPN are calling the Boise State Fiesta Bowl victory "The Game of the Century" and "The Greatest College Football Game Ever Played."

Enough said

89Hen

January 10th, 2007, 11:41 AM

The sports networks, especially Fox and ESPN are calling the Boise State Fiesta Bowl victory "The Game of the Century" and "The Greatest College Football Game Ever Played."

Enough said
In your opinion. I view the question as having to do with what else goes into even playing in that game in the first place. You have to be a I-A team.

Maroons

January 10th, 2007, 11:46 AM

BTW, is that an old helmet or next year? I like it.

An old helmet from the early 70s. Just happens to be my favorite. :)

Ronbo

January 10th, 2007, 11:51 AM

In your opinion. I view the question as having to do with what else goes into even playing in that game in the first place. You have to be a I-A team.
+

Boise State goes down in College Football History and their game will be played for 100 years on the Histories Greatest Football Games shows. App. State will be forgotten by next year and nobody will remember the two NC victories in 10 years unless they look it up. xlolx

lizrdgizrd

January 10th, 2007, 11:56 AM

+

Boise State goes down in College Football History and their game will be played for 100 years on the Histories Greatest Football Games shows. App. State will be forgotten by next year and nobody will remember the two NC victories in 10 years unless they look it up. xlolx
Yep, you guys have certainly forgotten your NCs. xcoffeex

89Hen

January 10th, 2007, 11:57 AM

Boise State goes down in College Football History and their game will be played for 100 years on the Histories Greatest Football Games shows. App. State will be forgotten by next year and nobody will remember the two NC victories in 10 years unless they look it up. xlolx
As Maroons pointed out, the AppSt fans sure will. Why would I give a rats arse if some hick in Nebraska remembers the 2003 Hens NC? :rolleyes:

Ronbo

January 10th, 2007, 11:58 AM

I didn't mean folks close to the programs or that are rabid FCS fans. I meant the casual college football fan. The guys and gals that are 99% of the public.

lizrdgizrd

January 10th, 2007, 11:59 AM

I didn't mean folks close to the programs or that are rabid FCS fans. I meant the casual college football fan. The guys and gals that are 99% of the public.
Why should we care about what they remember?

89Hen

January 10th, 2007, 12:01 PM

I didn't mean folks close to the programs or that are rabid FCS fans. I meant the casual college football fan. The guys and gals that are 99% of the public.
I guess if you need the recognition to enjoy your championship. That's a shame. : smh :

Ronbo

January 10th, 2007, 12:02 PM

Gosh guys isn't that what it's all about?

89Hen

January 10th, 2007, 12:07 PM

Gosh guys isn't that what's it all about?
Not for me.

http://www2.delawareonline.com/newsjournal/local/2003/12/images/henschamps1.jpg

proasu89

January 10th, 2007, 12:08 PM

Gosh guys isn't that what's it all about?
Maybe for those that are insecure about their team's accomplishments.
I personally voted for the Fiesta Bowl, but not because of how others would view it. But please don't interpret that as a slap towards the 2 trophies because I'm certainly enjoying those w/out giving a rat's arse what somebody else thinks:thumbsup:

jessesd

January 10th, 2007, 02:49 PM

Fiesta Bowl 2007 Projected Payout Per Conference: $14 to $17 million
assuming Boise State gets the 17 million and extra $$$ for the dramatic win... being underdog, beating a Big XII, donations, TV time, commercials and "semi-endorsements" for goin' bowlin'. etc...... I should label this under the Priceless category!!!!..

Winning the I-AA FCS championship back-to-back like APP State, will be remember by most of the current championship players (Mostly the ones from UMass), few students (easily forgotten by most geeks) and few (very few) alumni who still keep links to their alma matter, the rest of the world including me would not remember this by the time I complete this post. "of course" unless...... they make it to Chattanooga again next year and we are reminded by the media, or the few App posters here about their feat, otherwise we may never hear about their win or care much about it to spend time researching such info....

Therefore, I take the $17+ millions over the pride of back to back.
Just my 2 cents.