Good article about Boise State

[roberb7]

By Dan Wetzel on Yahoo Sports: Boise BCS blocked (http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-boise110709&prov=yhoo&type=lgns). Makes a lot of good points.

[JohnStOnge]

Yeah I heard something about the alleged avoidance of Boise State last night when I was watching them struggle to get by Louisiana Tech. I really doubt that it's BCS league teams being afraid to play Boise State. There are all sorts of things that are considered. LSU, for instance, has decided to start playing in state FCS schools more because they think non BCS I-As are asking for too much money. I think a missing piece of information in that article is how much Boise State is asking for in terms of compensation.

Like I said in another thread: If you took this year's Boise State team as it's constituted and put it against a SEC schedule the Broncos would probably lose at least 4 to 5 games. I wish there were playoffs so they could show what they can really do but I think the Boise State hype is totally out of hand.

[Big Al]

Bullsnot. Substitute Boise State with Utah. Or TCU. Or pretty much any other team. Don't look now but your SEC bias is showing -- remember how you tried to argue how Utah's pummeling of Alabama last year was an illusion because Utah didn't have to go through the same "punishing" schedule as the Tide?

Also, the argument that Boise State is asking too much money is asinine, at best. A Boise State game would practically guarantee a large amount of interest from any home team's fanbase and be a sellout. Yeah, I'm sure it would be hard to come up with the guarantee money. Also, the reason non-BCS I-As are asking so much money is because BCS teams can't seem to find a map out of thier home stadiums for OOC games. It's throwing off the supply demand curve and shifting prices up. Classic economics. I'm sure there's at least one Econ major on one of the SEC teams who can explain how supply and demand works to the rest of the conference.

[813Jag]

Bullsnot. Substitute Boise State with Utah. Or TCU. Or pretty much any other team. Don't look now but your SEC bias is showing -- remember how you tried to argue how Utah's pummeling of Alabama last year was an illusion because Utah didn't have to go through the same "punishing" schedule as the Tide?

Also, the argument that Boise State is asking too much money is asinine, at best. A Boise State game would practically guarantee a large amount of interest from any home team's fanbase and be a sellout. Yeah, I'm sure it would be hard to come up with the guarantee money. Also, the reason non-BCS I-As are asking so much money is because BCS teams can't seem to find a map out of thier home stadiums for OOC games. It's throwing off the supply demand curve and shifting prices up. Classic economics. I'm sure there's at least one Econ major on one of the SEC teams who can explain how supply and demand works to the rest of the conference.
TCU doesn't seem to have problems getting games, neither does BYU. I guess the other schools like them better?

[JohnStOnge]

Bullsnot. Substitute Boise State with Utah. Or TCU. Or pretty much any other team. Don't look now but your SEC bias is showing -- remember how you tried to argue how Utah's pummeling of Alabama last year was an illusion because Utah didn't have to go through the same "punishing" schedule as the Tide?.

Actually, my arguments as to why Alabama looked so bad in that game is 1) they had three offensive line starters out and 2) they were disappointed to be in that game because they went into the previous game wanting to get into the BCS championship game while it was the game of the year...and maybe the game of program history...for Utah.

Look, as I said in another thread: Boise State's record against the SEC is 0-4. They came closer than 19 points only once in those games and that was against a 6-6 Arkansas team that went 3-5 in SEC play. The last time they played an SEC team (2005) they got smoked 48-13 by Georgia. Their conference, the WAC, has gone 2 - 31 vs. SEC opponents since the BCS started. One win was in 2008 by Louisiana Tech by 22-14 over a Mississippi State team that went 2-6 in SEC play. The other was way back in 1998 by TCU, a program no longer in the WAC, by 19-16 over a Vanderbilt team that went 1-7 in the SEC.

The last time a top WAC team played against an SEC opponent was 2007-2008. You remember that one. Hawaii went 12 - 0 against a WAC schedule and one BCS league opponent. Georgia brutalized the Rainbow Warriors 41-10 in the Sugar Bowl and it wasn't really that close. It was men against boys.

[JohnStOnge]

Another angle. Right now the site at http://espn.go.com/nfl/college/_/letter/v is showing Boise State with 9 players on NFL rosters. The median number of players on NFL rosters for SEC teams is 20.5. So a "middle of the pack" talent level in the SEC has been about twice Boise State's. 11 of the 12 SEC schools have more players on NFL rosters than Boise State does. At the top, LSU has 42, Georgia 38, Tennessee 24, and Florida 31.

There is just no way Boise State could play against that kind of talent level week in and week out and not lose games. We wouldn't be talking about them being considered for BCS berths if they played that kind of schedule with the talent level they have now.

I think an illustration of what I'm talking about involves the 2008 East Carolina team. The Pirates opened with two wins over Virginia Tech and West Virginia, two good BCS league squads that finished 10-4 and 9-4. But they played four BCS league squads that year in the first 6 weeks and ended up 2-2 against them. Plus I think they overtaxed themselves for the season and didn't do as well as they might have in CUSA as a result.

[Big Al]

Looking at NFL rosters to retroactively determine conference strength is a flawed analysis. By that measure, the SWAC is the strongest FCS conference. You aren't seriously suggesting that, are you? Here is the average number of NFL starters per conference:

SEC: 11.4 (137 starters divided by 12 SEC teams)
ACC: 10.1 (122/12)
Big Ten: 9.5 (105/11)
Pac-10: 7 (70/10)
Big 12: 6 (72/12)
Big East: 4.1 (33/8)

Are you really saying, then, that the ACC is the second-best big-6 conference and the Big 12 is one of the worst? Flawed analysis.

[Skjellyfetti]

Mountain West is a far better conference than the WAC. TCU and Utah play much more difficult schedules than Boise. Boise really only plays one game... the rest of the teams are crap.

[813Jag]

Mountain West is a far better conference than the WAC. TCU and Utah play much more difficult schedules than Boise. Boise really only plays one game... the rest of the teams are crap.
that can't be possible................xreadx (sarcasm intended)

[813Jag]

Boise State would beat the brakes off the Pittsburgh Steelers
xcoffeex

[Big Al]

Mountain West is a far better conference than the WAC. TCU and Utah play much more difficult schedules than Boise. Boise really only plays one game... the rest of the teams are crap.

I think everyone knows I'm the biggest Utah homer on this board, and while I think the top the MWC is better than the top of the WAC, the fact remains the bottom of the MWC (UNLV, New Mexico, SDSU, Colorado State, Wyoming) is still pretty bad. Of course, so is the bottom of the ACC, the Big Ten, Big 12, SEC... You get the point.

I wouldn't argue this year that Boise State deserves to play in the BCS trophy game but I don't see a single reason why they should get locked out of a big-money bowl. I don't see where they're worse than whoever the Big Ten or the ACC sends to the BCS.

[Skjellyfetti]

Yeah, I don't think Boise will get locked out of a BCS bowl game if they win out.

[JohnStOnge]

Looking at NFL rosters to retroactively determine conference strength is a flawed analysis. By that measure, the SWAC is the strongest FCS conference. You aren't seriously suggesting that, are you? Here is the average number of NFL starters per conference:

SEC: 11.4 (137 starters divided by 12 SEC teams)
ACC: 10.1 (122/12)
Big Ten: 9.5 (105/11)
Pac-10: 7 (70/10)
Big 12: 6 (72/12)
Big East: 4.1 (33/8)

Are you really saying, then, that the ACC is the second-best big-6 conference and the Big 12 is one of the worst? Flawed analysis.

There are limitations and it's not absolute proof in and of itself; though I think it'd go with total players on rosters and not just starters. I guarantee you though, there is a correlation between how many players there are per team on NFL rosters and how strong leagues are. It may not be a perfect correlation but it's strong or its there. And when you talk about the SEC vs. the WAC there is a huge difference.

There's no way a program that has only 9 players on NFL rosters right now would get above the middle of the pack in the SEC.

BTW, I don't think the SWAC leads FCS in median or average number of players on NFL rosters. I think that's probably between the Missouri Valley and Colonial. But I'll have to look it up later because I don't have time right now.

Oh...on the ACC: I think it'd be better to look at medians because the ACC has two programs, Florida State and Miami, who have put a whole bunch of players in and even though those programs have slipped some there are still a whole bunch of them in the league. I think the median gives a better indication of central tendency.

[813Jag]

I think everyone knows I'm the biggest Utah homer on this board, and while I think the top the MWC is better than the top of the WAC, the fact remains the bottom of the MWC (UNLV, New Mexico, SDSU, Colorado State, Wyoming) is still pretty bad. Of course, so is the bottom of the ACC, the Big Ten, Big 12, SEC... You get the point.

I wouldn't argue this year that Boise State deserves to play in the BCS trophy game but I don't see a single reason why they should get locked out of a big-money bowl. I don't see where they're worse than whoever the Big Ten or the ACC sends to the BCS.
I don't think anybody is arguing this point.

[Big Al]

Yeah, but here's the other part of it:

There's really no good reason to lock any team out. Let's face it, while it's possible that TCU could play in the trophy game that's a pretty long shot. They'll more than likely have to be happy with a consolation bowl.

[TheValleyRaider]

Yeah, but here's the other part of it:

There's really no good reason to lock any team out. Let's face it, while it's possible that TCU could play in the trophy game that's a pretty long shot. They'll more than likely have to be happy with a consolation bowl.

Texas would have to lose the Big XII title game, and even then, the pollsters would have to have the guts to drop them behind TCU

If they lose to, say, A&M, but then win the Title anyway, they'll jump then-idle TCU

Doesn't even matter what happens in the SEC, as the Florida-Alabama winner will be in

Of course, it's all for naught if they don't (finally) beat the Utes on Saturday

[813Jag]

Texas would have to lose the Big XII title game, and even then, the pollsters would have to have the guts to drop them behind TCU

If they lose to, say, A&M, but then win the Title anyway, they'll jump then-idle TCU

Doesn't even matter what happens in the SEC, as the Florida-Alabama winner will be in

Of course, it's all for naught if they don't (finally) beat the Utes on Saturday
If a&m beats texas I don't see the horns making up that ground even winning the big xii. Losing to an unranked team will hurt badly.

[TheValleyRaider]

If a&m beats texas I don't see the horns making up that ground even winning the big xii. Losing to an unranked team will hurt badly.

Yeah, but TCU would be idle during the title game. Maybe it's just the minor paranoid skeptic in me, but I have a hard time seeing an idle TCU staying above Big XII champ Texas, even if it's a ho-hum route against an overmatched K-State xtwocentsx

But I sure hope you're right xsmiley_wix

[kardplayer]

Hard to argue the SEC teams aren't ducking Boise State when they have collectively played 9 FCS games and 21 non-BCS games (mostly against the Sun Belt, with some Conference USA) + a bunch of historically middle of the road to bad BCS squads (the one major exception is Kentucky playing Louisville who is down vs. historical performance plus an obvious in state rival so this is a "good" game).

As a league, they have one win over a ranked BCS opponent - Alabama at Virginia Tech - and one other win over a BCS team with a winning record in their conference - Auburn vs. West Virginia (who's 3-1).

On that basis, TCU's and Boise State's resumes are just as strong as Alabama's and stronger than Florida's...

[Big Al]

Yeah, but they need those games because their conference games are so hard!

xlolxxlolxxlolx

[JohnStOnge]

Hard to argue the SEC teams aren't ducking Boise State when they have collectively played 9 FCS games and 21 non-BCS games (mostly against the Sun Belt, with some Conference USA) + a bunch of historically middle of the road to bad BCS squads (the one major exception is Kentucky playing Louisville who is down vs. historical performance plus an obvious in state rival so this is a "good" game).

As a league, they have one win over a ranked BCS opponent - Alabama at Virginia Tech - and one other win over a BCS team with a winning record in their conference - Auburn vs. West Virginia (who's 3-1).

On that basis, TCU's and Boise State's resumes are just as strong as Alabama's and stronger than Florida's...

Do you know anything about Boise State even trying to schedule SEC schools and any details about why it didn't happen from each school's perspective? I've heard this kind of stuff for years. When one of the "little guys" has a good run they start saying that the "big guys" are dodging them. Marshall's community used to say that. Nobody was dodging Marshall and nobody's dodging Boise State.

Florida has actually played one of the weaker SEC schedules. However, it's clearly stronger than the schedules Boise State and TCU have played. When they finish with the SEC championship game the gap will widen.

[813Jag]

Yeah, but they need those games because their conference games are so hard!

xlolxxlolxxlolx
i agree those leagues are hard at all, I'm sure most teams could run right through the. we all know the Boise would beat the breaks off of any team the stepped on the field with. xreadx

[Big Al]

You're missing my point. The argument goes something like this:

1. SEC teams are elite because they play a hard schedule.
2. Their schedule is hard because they play other SEC teams.

See the circular logic?

I'm not saying Boise State would run right through the SEC. I'm not even saying any SEC team couldn't steamroll the WAC. What I am saying is no team is unbeatable and, more importantly, no league is so far above the others that the game shouldn't be played. Yes, the SEC may be the best BCS league but considering how corrupt and broken the system for choosing FBS "champs" is, any claim to that end is debateable at best and laughable at worst.

[813Jag]

You're missing my point. The argument goes something like this:

1. SEC teams are elite because they play a hard schedule.
2. Their schedule is hard because they play other SEC teams.

See the circular logic?

I'm not saying Boise State would run right through the SEC. I'm not even saying any SEC team couldn't steamroll the WAC. What I am saying is no team is unbeatable and, more importantly, no league is so far above the others that the game shouldn't be played. Yes, the SEC may be the best BCS league but considering how corrupt and broken the system for choosing FBS "champs" is, any claim to that end is debateable at best and laughable at worst.
I totally get your point, but at this point until the system changes all this complaining about team x from non bcs conference y is unneccessary. My tone in my posts reflect how I feel about the issue.and since none of us can change anything complaining week after week is like pissing in the wind. I saw it here in 07 with Hawaii and last year with Utah. Besides my team was eliminated early in the year. xlolx
I don't like the sec never have never will. But until something changes right or wrong they are the big dogs. They figured out how to take advantage of the system, I can't knock them for that.

[JohnStOnge]

You're missing my point. The argument goes something like this:

1. SEC teams are elite because they play a hard schedule.
2. Their schedule is hard because they play other SEC teams.

See the circular logic?
.

There's a lot more to it than that. There's a lot more support for concluding that an SEC schedule is hard than just "it's the SEC." The league has the highest talent level among college football leagues. I'll have to look it up some time but it probably has a winning record against every other I-A/FBS league since the BCS started in 1998.

The last time I looked it up it had 2 if the top 3 (1 and 3) and 4 of the top 10 of the programs in terms of NFL talent production. No other league had more than 2. There is just no comparison between something like the Mountain West or WAC in terms of the level of physical talent a team is facing week in and week out in conference play. If you're playing in the SEC you're going to be playing against a much tougher schedule regardless of the non conference part of it than anybody in a conference like the WAC is ever going to play. And that's especially true if you add the conference championship game when you're talking about the SEC champion.

If you've got an SEC champion that finishes 10-3 after the SEC championship game that's almost always going to represent a more impressive performance than going 12-0 against the schedules Boise State plays.

[JohnStOnge]

II don't like the sec never have never will. But until something changes right or wrong they are the big dogs. .

They are also the toughest college football conference year in and year out. Yes, there are some years when other leagues are tougher and I do think SEC fans overstate the differences. But if you look at it over time it's clearly the league with the highest talent level and the best teams overall. During the BCS era, when their champions have been in big games against other conference champions to determine the top of the heap, they have generally dominated. The reality is that going through an SEC conference schedule then the championship game as an SEC champion has to do is way more grueling than anything any team from any non BCS conference is going to have to go through.

[seantaylor]

That UCLA team sure had a tough time traveling across country and beating the ish out of Tennessee. UCLA is a bottom feeder Pac 10 team. But, yeah, no way Boise could have done that.

[813Jag]

That UCLA team sure had a tough time traveling across country and beating the ish out of Tennessee. UCLA is a bottom feeder Pac 10 team. But, yeah, no way Boise could have done that.
Didn't they win by like 6 points? With tennessee have a chance late. Perception I guess, kinda like you thinking you did a great job in bed but your woman/man didn't even know you had started. xlolx

[Big Al]

They are also the toughest college football conference year in and year out. Yes, there are some years when other leagues are tougher and I do think SEC fans overstate the differences. But if you look at it over time it's clearly the league with the highest talent level and the best teams overall. During the BCS era, when their champions have been in big games against other conference champions to determine the top of the heap, they have generally dominated. The reality is that going through an SEC conference schedule then the championship game as an SEC champion has to do is way more grueling than anything any team from any non BCS conference is going to have to go through.

I think you're guilty of doing that very thing in your comments.

1. Saying a 10-3 SEC team is superior to a 12-0 WAC team isn't always and may not often be true. Yes, Hawaii was a weak team when they played Georgia, but I predicted that outcome before the game -- they weren't a dominating 12-0 like Utah in 2004 or Boise State in 2006. Boise State may have been weak last year considering their loss to TCU but that may speak more to the strength of TCU than the weakness of Boise State. That said, this year's Boise State team, with a few exceptions, has been winning their games in a more convincing fashion than they did last year. I'm biased and think TCU is a more complete team and has more of the tools than Boise State but I'd like to think I'm intellectually honest to admit that up front.

2. Relying on BCS results to determine conference strength is sort of like looking at a thermometer to figure out wind speed -- it simply isn't designed for that purpose. It's designed to a)funnel money to the traditional power conferences, b) maximize interest in their specific bowl games (both onsite and on TV) and c) pit the "best 2" teams in the country against each other. I would even argue that is the order of priorities. The BCS is great at A, pretty good at B, and is questionable at C.

[89Hen]

I don't know if this is the case for everyone, but one reason I can't stand the SEC is their current flagship school refuses to play anyone OOC other than Miami or FSU.

Charleston Southern, Troy, FIU, Hawaii, The Citadel, WKU, Troy, FAU, SMU, UCF, Western Carolina, Wyoming, LaTech, Eastern Michigan, MTSU, San Jose St, FAMU, UAB, Ohio, Marshall, La Monroe, Ball State, MTSU...

That's the entire list since 2000. No BigXII, no Big 10, no Pac 10... IT'S GOD AWFUL. They are supposed to be the #1 team in the nation and yet they play that? xnonono2x

F UF

[GannonFan]

I don't know if this is the case for everyone, but one reason I can't stand the SEC is their current flagship school refuses to play anyone OOC other than Miami or FSU.

Charleston Southern, Troy, FIU, Hawaii, The Citadel, WKU, Troy, FAU, SMU, UCF, Western Carolina, Wyoming, LaTech, Eastern Michigan, MTSU, San Jose St, FAMU, UAB, Ohio, Marshall, La Monroe, Ball State, MTSU...

That's the entire list since 2000. No BigXII, no Big 10, no Pac 10... IT'S GOD AWFUL. They are supposed to be the #1 team in the nation and yet they play that? xnonono2x

F UF

Florida never, ever plays a good OOC schedule. The last time they left the region for an OOC game of note was in the early 90's when they played, and lost, at Syracuse. They are the poster child for bad OOC scheduling.

[813Jag]

I don't know if this is the case for everyone, but one reason I can't stand the SEC is their current flagship school refuses to play anyone OOC other than Miami or FSU.

Charleston Southern, Troy, FIU, Hawaii, The Citadel, WKU, Troy, FAU, SMU, UCF, Western Carolina, Wyoming, LaTech, Eastern Michigan, MTSU, San Jose St, FAMU, UAB, Ohio, Marshall, La Monroe, Ball State, MTSU...

That's the entire list since 2000. No BigXII, no Big 10, no Pac 10... IT'S GOD AWFUL. They are supposed to be the #1 team in the nation and yet they play that? xnonono2x

F UF
I hate uf just because they exist, I need no other reason. xlolx
And I hate lsu for the same reason, I was cursed to grow up in and live in second territory.

The only reason I don't bitch about the gates' schedule is because they show up in big games (except for the Nebraska game xlolx) if they flamed out like KState used to I'd ride them for it more.

And just for the record they don't really want to play Miami.

[JohnStOnge]

I think you're guilty of doing that very thing in your comments.

1. Saying a 10-3 SEC team is superior to a 12-0 WAC team isn't always and may not often be true. .

I believe I said that 10-3 in the SEC is more impressive than 12-0 in the WAC, and I stand by that. I won't look back at what I looked up earlier but...what was it that I said the WAC has gone against the SEC?...2-31? Something like that. You're talking about two totally different levels of play.

The Mountain West is substantially closer but still a long way from the SEC.

[seantaylor]

The SEC is a joke outside of Florida. Alabama is not a great team. They are undefeated, but they've played nobody on the road, and have only played one ranked team all season. A terrible offense. I see Auburn knocking them off, and Florida killing them in the SEC champ game. Then Alabama can make another excuse as to why they get hammered in a bowl game, even though Utah was the team with an excuse in that game about being looked over.

[TheValleyRaider]

The SEC is a joke outside of Florida. Alabama is not a great team. They are undefeated, but they've played nobody on the road, and have only played one ranked team all season. A terrible offense. I see Auburn knocking them off, and Florida killing them in the SEC champ game. Then Alabama can make another excuse as to why they get hammered in a bowl game, even though Utah was the team with an excuse in that game about being looked over.

xeyebrowx

Bama has wins over ranked VT and LSU, which is more than Florida has (just LSU), and has the better non-conference schedule, even if it's really just because of VT, but that's better than any of Florida's opponents

[seantaylor]

xeyebrowx

Bama has wins over ranked VT and LSU, which is more than Florida has (just LSU), and has the better non-conference schedule, even if it's really just because of VT, but that's better than any of Florida's opponents

Va Tech is not ranked.

[TheValleyRaider]

Va Tech is not ranked.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/rankings

BCS-#21
AP-#20
Coaches-#21

The Hokies aren't anything special, but there's definitely a number next to their name

[JohnStOnge]

The SEC is a joke outside of Florida.

LSU has not lost a non conference game since an Iowa team that finished 10-2 scored on an improbable long pass on the last play of the 2004/2005 Capital One Bowl. Yes, LSU plays a lot of cupcakes. But along the way the Tigers beat a 9-3 Miami team 40-3 in the 2005 Peach Bowl, a 10-3 Notre Dame team 41-14 in the 2006/2007 Sugar Bowl, an 11-2 Ohio State team 38-24 in the 2007/2008 BCS championship game, and a 9-4 Georgia Tech team 38-3 in the 2008/2009 Chick-Fil-A-Bowl. They also beat an 11-3 Virginia Tech team by 48-7 during the 2007 regular season.

How does that happen when the SEC is a "joke" outside of Florida?

[seantaylor]

LSU has not lost a non conference game since an Iowa team that finished 10-2 scored on an improbable long pass on the last play of the 2004/2005 Capital One Bowl. Yes, LSU plays a lot of cupcakes. But along the way the Tigers beat a 9-3 Miami team 40-3 in the 2005 Peach Bowl, a 10-3 Notre Dame team 41-14 in the 2006/2007 Sugar Bowl, an 11-2 Ohio State team 38-24 in the 2007/2008 BCS championship game, and a 9-4 Georgia Tech team 38-3 in the 2008/2009 Chick-Fil-A-Bowl. They also beat an 11-3 Virginia Tech team by 48-7 during the 2007 regular season.

How does that happen when the SEC is a "joke" outside of Florida?

LSU losing to La Tech at home at half. What now?

[JohnStOnge]

LSU losing to La Tech at home at half. What now?


Yes they did play poorly just as they played poorly against and almost lost to Troy after losing that season's heartbreaker to Alabama. But they still haven't lost a non conference game since that 2004/2005 last second loss to Iowa in the Capital One Bowl.

One thing that's clear for LSU is that they have no depth at quarterback and they need to get their starter back quickly. Not only did Jarret Lee go 7-22 throwing the ball, he was lucky he didn't throw at least two pick sixes. If LSU doesn't get its starter back for next week's game against Ole Miss and/or the Tigers don't play a whole lot better than they played against a weak WAC team, they are going to get killed.

[813Jag]

LSU losing to La Tech at home at half. What now?
Can't believe I'm gonna stick up for lsu but I guess that's why the game is four quarters instead of two. What now? I guess latech can put a .5 in the win section and they can add that .5 from their near miss against boise. xlolx

[JohnStOnge]

Can't believe I'm gonna stick up for lsu but I guess that's why the game is four quarters instead of two. What now? I guess latech can put a .5 in the win section and they can add that .5 from their near miss against boise. xlolx

Yeah but the Tigers were lucky Louisiana Tech's DBs don't have better hands. I can think of at least two really good pick 6 chances they had off Lee. I took up for Lee last year but it's getting to the point where you really DO have to say he has some kind of pick 6 problem. Tell you what, they need Jefferson healthy and fast.

Aside from that...it really doesn't matter to the basic point. There's variation in performance in football and upsets happen. Huge upsets happen. But over the large number of games it's clear that year in and year out the SEC is as tough as a conference gets in college football. I personally think the only conference one can make an argument for as being as tough or tougher top to bottom is the Pac 10. And it's a whole lot different having to go through a stretch where you play 8 games week in and week out without much of a break against that level of competition than it is to get one or maybe two games against that level so you can get all psyched up and prepared then play the rest of your games against WAC type competition. We'll never know but I don't think there's any way Boise State could, with a talent level like what it's typically had in recent years, get through the season with few enough losses to be talking about being in a BCS bowl if it played against that kind of grind. It'd be playing teams with more talent than it has 7 or 8 times a year instead of once or twice. I frankly think they'd have a tough time making the top 25 because they'd be losing 3 or 4 games at least per year.

[seantaylor]

So when Boise struggles on the road against La Tech it is a problem. When LSU gets the SEC calls at home it isn't. Weird.

And the Pac 10 is far superior to the SEC. Watch how bad Georgia Tech destroys thUGA.

[813Jag]

So when Boise struggles on the road against La Tech it is a problem. When LSU gets the SEC calls at home it isn't. Weird.

And the Pac 10 is far superior to the SEC. Watch how bad Georgia Tech destroys thUGA.
GaTech is the better team, why wouldn't they blow them out. You have some weird ass logic.

[JohnStOnge]

So when Boise struggles on the road against La Tech it is a problem. When LSU gets the SEC calls at home it isn't. Weird.

And the Pac 10 is far superior to the SEC. Watch how bad Georgia Tech destroys thUGA.

I think the Pac 10 is under rated and very close to the SEC. In fact I think that during the BCS era the PAC 10 has a slight lead over the SEC in head to head (I'd forgotten about that earlier). I think it's by one game. Not sure. I'll look it up when I have more time. In fact I've called radio talk shows around here a few times when they've been talking about the "weak" conference USC plays in and said that people need to look at the head to head if they believe that. It's another one of those things where it can't be written off by saying top Pac10 teams have been playing lower SEC teams.

But it's close either way. And either conference is a whole lot tougher than the WAC. I could just as easily say that getting all pumped up and beating one Pac 10 team in the season opener is a whole lot different than playing...what is it...eight PAC 10 teams over the season. I don't think there's any way we'd be talking about Boise State as its currently constituted in the coversation for a BCS bowl or the national title if it played a SEC schedule OR a Pac 10 schedule. They'd get beat a few times and I don't think it'd just be 1 or 2 either. I think it'd be more like 3 or 4 at least.

Now, the Pac 10 does NOT have the team by team athletic talent...at least as reflected by NFL players pre program...that the SEC does. But it's got a whole lot more than the WAC and Boise State would still be at a pure athletic talent disadvantage in the majority of its games against teams from that league.

[JohnStOnge]

So when Boise struggles on the road against La Tech it is a problem. When LSU gets the SEC calls at home it isn't. Weird.

And the Pac 10 is far superior to the SEC. Watch how bad Georgia Tech destroys thUGA.

Heck YEAH it's a problem when LSU struggles against Louisiana Tech. Louisiana Tech is a 3-7 WAC team with its only wins being over a 2-8 FCS (Nicholls State), a 4-6 Hawaii team that barely beat Central Arkansas, and an awful 3-7 New Mexico State team that was lucky to beat Prairie View. Auburn handled the Bulldogs pretty easily; outgaining them 556 to 245 in total yards. LSU struggling with that team is a HUGE concern for LSU just as the Tigers struggling with Troy last year was. Hopefully for LSU fans it won't be a portent of things to come like Troy was.

The only ray of hope comes from the fact that LSU's backup quarterback was awful and the starter will be back this week.

[JohnStOnge]

Let's talk about the Pac 10 some more. The author of the article that is subject of this thread stops at 4 years because that's what makes Boise State look best. But if you don't do that you can see the difference between the Boise State program playing Pac 10 and other BCS league teams and playing the level of competition it normally plays.

Over the past 5 years Boise State is 35-2 against the WAC, 3-2 vs. the Pac 10, and 4-4 against BCS league schools overall. Since joining the WAC in 2001 the Broncos are 65-4 against other WAC teams, 4-4 against Pac 10 teams, and 6-8 against BCS league teams overall.

That tells you two things: 1) They haven't played many games against teams from the true top level of competition in college football and 2) they have had medicore success overall when they have. You just can't in any way legitimately compare going undefeated against the schedules Boise State plays with coming anywhere close to going undefeated against a schedule like a Pac 10 or SEC team plays.

And I've got to say something about Florida. Florida plays Florida State every year. If you put Florida State in the WAC and somehow allowed it to keep its current talent level, the Seminoles would dominate. When Florida plays Florida State this season it will be playing a team that has a whole lot higher overall talent level than Boise State does. And if Florida State and Boise State played on a neutral field with something real at stake for both teams so that Florida State's players were focused on the game, I'd put my money on Florida State because they would just totally outgun Boise State in terms of athletes.

[AppAlum96]

Forgive me for not providing a link, but I read on Yahoo sports the other day that Boise was offering to TRAVEL to any BCS team and play them FOR FREE. Still no takers.

[JohnStOnge]

Forgive me for not providing a link, but I read on Yahoo sports the other day that Boise was offering to TRAVEL to any BCS team and play them FOR FREE. Still no takers.

I'm sure some people will think that's a true story. If BCS schools were really "scared" to play non BCS teams that are a threat, Utah would never be able to get BCS league games. If Utah isn't having problems, I find it difficult to believe that Boise State is. Note that 2001 - present (the same period Boise State has been in the WAC), Utah is 18-9 against BCS league teams. So Utah has been more of a threat to beat BCS leauge teams over the period (a 0.667 winning rate over the period vs. a 0.429 rate for Boise State) yet the Utes somehow manage to get way more games (27 vs. 14) against such teams.

[kperk014]

The SEC is a joke outside of Florida. Alabama is not a great team. They are undefeated, but they've played nobody on the road, and have only played one ranked team all season. A terrible offense. I see Auburn knocking them off, and Florida killing them in the SEC champ game. Then Alabama can make another excuse as to why they get hammered in a bowl game, even though Utah was the team with an excuse in that game about being looked over.


xlolxxrolleyesx