College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

[bronconick]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Boise St. may be undefeated but their resume is hardly what one would call excellent.

The difference between Boise's resume and Texas' at this point is that Baylor is considered better than San Jose State.

Problem: They both suck.

 

[Kepler]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

The more important question is where will the be come August? If they have them 10th in the preseason poll, another undefeated year may still not be enough to propel them into the big game.

I'm sure you realize Notre Dame will be 10th in the preseason poll.

 

[True Blue Fan]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Their resume is excellent considering who was willing to play them, which is no one.

It seems morally backwards to accuse a team of having a poor resume when it is outside of its control and no one is willing to play them, even at home.

Provide some evidence on who they tried to schedule and who would not play them.

Unless you can name the schools who would not play them that they tried to schedule you are dealing in supposition.

Until they actually play some real ranked teams in the regular season, they will never crack the big game. Their big opponent this year was Oregon in week one, ranked 16 at the time, they won the game 19-8, at home. Not exactly earth shattering.

 

[bigblue_dl]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Boise got one big non-conference game this year, Oregon, who turned out to be a pretty **** good team. They beat them, there was nothing else they could have done. If USC, Ohio State or Texas wants to play Boise in NC, I'm sure Boise would be up for it, in a heartbeat.

 

[Terrierbyassociation]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Provide some evidence on who they tried to schedule and who would not play them.

Unless you can name the schools who would not play them that they tried to schedule you are dealing in supposition.

Boise State's AD has come out and said he has offered all of the top schools a game at the top school's stadium with no requirement for a game back. It's all over the internet, it should be easy for you to find. Sorry, its not my responsibility to educate you when it was ALL over in the internet and the media.

If no one will play Boise State, no one can blame Boise State.

 

[amherstblackbear]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

BSU has games against Oregon State (at home) and Virginia Tech (FedEx Field in DC). That's not bad.

eta

The bottom line is, no matter who BSU schedules, they need to hope other powers don't go undefeated. Or hope for a playoff.

 

[Terrierbyassociation]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-boise110709&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Done, I've educated you. No one will play Boise State for 2011.

 

[True Blue Fan]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-boise110709&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Done, I've educated you. No one will play Boise State for 2011.

Thanks TBA nice article. I don't honestly have time to scour the internet for articles. Today for example, work from 6-4, pick up oldest from school practice at 5, take him to his travel team practice at 5:30 and get home at around 7:30 to 8:00.

This still does not change the fact that their resume is not what one would consider worthy of a National Championship chance. Hell they barely beat TCU, what makes you think they could stay with Alabama, Texas, Florida etc. A resume is a compilation of what you have done, not what you could do if this happened or that happened.

I will give you that it is a tough situation for a school like Boise State, but just because no schools will schedule a game with them, does not mean that they would win those games. That may be the nail in the coffin for them in reality. Example, LSU agreed to play Boise State and they beat the tar out of Boise State, that would end the discussion forever for schools from smaller conferences deserving a shot at a national title.

 

[Terrierbyassociation]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

TCU was a better team than Texas. Boise beat them.

So yes, I believe Boise State could have hung with them. TCU could hang with anyone in the country. I've seen them play several times this season on tv and once in person. TCU was spectacular. And since Boise State beat them, I think Boise can play with anyone, even a one dimensional Bama offense, a FL defense that was unimpressive and a Texas team that was one dimensional offensively as well.

 

[alfablue]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

What's sad is that the optional schedules for some of the big teams is pathetic, and they try to hide that behind their conference- whether the B12 or SEC.

Texas played Louisiana Monroe and Central Florida.

Florida played Charleston Southern, Troy, Florida International.

You'd think they'd be able to find time to play teams like BSU and TCU....

(and UM played DSU... yeaaa)

While I know the small schools really want to play big teams to help their programs, the big schools SHOULD play the small schools even after they get good.

Not that this is a problem in college hockey.... (ducking under the table)

 

[True Blue Fan]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

TCU was a better team than Texas. Boise beat them.

So yes, I believe Boise State could have hung with them. TCU could hang with anyone in the country. I've seen them play several times this season on tv and once in person. TCU was spectacular. And since Boise State beat them, I think Boise can play with anyone, even a one dimensional Bama offense, a FL defense that was unimpressive and a Texas team that was one dimensional offensively as well.

Unless TCU played and beat Texas this year you are stating an opinion and not a fact. Opinions are very hard to debate and very few facts back up your assertion that TCU is better than Texas.

I honestly think this situation is the very reason why we need a playoff system in place. However that may not happen. I read an article in the Boston Herald today about the new BCS boss and his opinion that the current BCS format is in the best interests of the universities. He states college football has never been better and he believes the BCS is part of that. I will try to find and link the article.

Found it:

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/...bcs_chief_system_is_in_schools_best_interest/

 

[Kepler]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-boise110709&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Done, I've educated you. No one will play Boise State for 2011.

Very nice ***** slap of Nebraska there, too.

Why would every middle level BCS school turn down a visit from BSU? Implicit collusion to protect the BCS monopoly has to be at least in the back of the minds of members of those conferences. Maybe even some overt arm-twisting from the 4-5 schools who control each of those conferences.

Everybody outside the BCS conferences should pull out of the NC$$, create a playoff system, and have their champion challenge the BCS champion.

 

[Terrierbyassociation]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Unless TCU played and beat Texas this year you are stating an opinion and not a fact. Opinions are very hard to debate and very few facts back up your assertion that TCU is better than Texas.

I honestly think this situation is the very reason why we need a playoff system in place. However that may not happen. I read an article in the Boston Herald today about the new BCS boss and his opinion that the current BCS format is in the best interests of the universities. He states college football has never been better and he believes the BCS is part of that. I will try to find and link the article.

Found it:

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/...bcs_chief_system_is_in_schools_best_interest/

You made an opinion, I made an opinion as well. Except mine is probably based more in actual observation than yours (not saying mine is better, just more fleshed out in all likelihood) . You asked what made me think Boise State could hang with those other schools. I gave you my answer.

 

[Terrierbyassociation]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Looks like Pete Carroll is going to Seattle to become the Seahawks coach, he wants to take Jeremy Bates with him.

For some reason he's going to be given full personnel control.

Basically everyone loses but Pete Carroll's wallet.

 

[Red Cloud]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Provide some evidence on who they tried to schedule and who would not play them.

It's pretty well documented that they are willing to play ANYONE from BCS conferences, anywhere, with no return date in Boise required (as is usually the norm with scheduling deals). No takers. It's the BCS shell game. If you're in a BCS conference and you withdraw into your shell, you boost the likelihood of playing in a BCS bowl or the national championship game with an undefeated record. It's not clairvoyant.

 

[Red Cloud]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

I read an article in the Boston Herald today about the new BCS boss and his opinion that the current BCS format is in the best interests of the universities. He states college football has never been better and he believes the BCS is part of that. I will try to find and link the article.

Found it:

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/...bcs_chief_system_is_in_schools_best_interest/

In other words - screw the fans.

 

[CollegeHockeyAddict]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Until there is a playoff there is really no benefit for top teams from BCS conferences to play Boise State. Why invite them to the party when you can keep the party for yourself? I don't like it but I understand it.

 

[LynahFan]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

I stated early that given the circumstances Alabama deserved to win. I just said that if McCoy didn't get hurt the game would have been drastically different, and personally not only do I feel cheated for seeing the matchup I was promised, but I also think Texas with McCoy has a exponentially better chance of beating Alabama for then Texas without McCoy. This is a opinion that I have justified, and really I don't even see why I have to.

Of course the game would have been different if McCoy hadn't been hurt, and I would have enjoyed watching it a whole lot more, too - I posted that I wasn't enjoying the game (even though I was rooting for Alabama) midway through the 2nd quarter. That all goes without saying.

The issue is whether the win should be considered "tainted" or "asterisked." It should not. Every single team makes the choices that they do in order to give themselves what they believe to be the highest probability of winning - from what coaches they hire, to whom they recruit, to what type of plays go in the playbook, etc. Texas believed that their highest probability of winning this year was to run 95% of their offense through McCoy and hope that he didn't get hurt. They were probably right - that probably DID give them the best chance of winning. Unfortunately for them, they lost the gamble, pure and simple. But that is part of the game and not outside of it, so the results of those decisions, while disappointing and frustrating for us fans, are not tainted or asterisked.

In my mind, asterisks are reserved for situations where extremely unusual circumstances outside of the game are allowed to affect the play of the game. For example, teams intentionally blowing chances at a victory in order to pad an individual's statistics or allowing their opponents to win in order to get the opposing coach a milestone career victory before retirement. As long as both teams are trying their hardest to win the game with their available players (as both teams were last night), then the victory is legit - period, not asterisk.

 

[BoomGoestheDynamite]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Unless TCU played and beat Texas this year you are stating an opinion and not a fact. Opinions are very hard to debate and very few facts back up your assertion that TCU is better than Texas.

I honestly think this situation is the very reason why we need a playoff system in place. However that may not happen. I read an article in the Boston Herald today about the new BCS boss and his opinion that the current BCS format is in the best interests of the universities. He states college football has never been better and he believes the BCS is part of that. I will try to find and link the article.

Found it:

http://www.bostonherald.com/sports/...bcs_chief_system_is_in_schools_best_interest/

The Mountain West sure thinks the BCS is in their best interest

Texas was selected for the national title game based solely on the name on the front of the jersey. Boise State's resume will never be good enough barring an undefeated season and 2006 esque chaos.

 

[Red Cloud]

Re: College Football 2009: Where Championships are won by a majority vote

Until there is a playoff there is really no benefit for top teams from BCS conferences to play Boise State. Why invite them to the party when you can keep the party for yourself? I don't like it but I understand it.

No one is saying that we don't get it, we get it perfectly, it's just stupid. I'm no USC fan but I respect the hell out of them for playing a challenging NC schedule every season. Same with Notre Dame.

Florida plays the Meek Sisters of the Blind twice a year. That is worthy of ridicule.