The Bronco fans' guide to the BSU-Oregon ranking debate
The issue we least thought to haunt us this season has reared its ugly head. We beat a team, surely that should settle that debate. Well, it hasn't.
People are getting themselves worked up into a tizzy over the supposed superiority of Oregon over Boise State. Somehow playing out hypothetical rematches in their heads now trumps what was settled on the field two months ago. Luckily, Boise State has remained ahead of Oregon in the human polls. Unfortunately, every single computer poll has Oregon ranked higher. This has worked itself out into Boise State receiving a computer poll average ranking of 8 while Oregon is at 7. If this were flopped, Boise State would be much closer to TCU in the BCS rankings.
Join me after the jump for a list of the most common reasons Oregon lost to Boise State and why they should be ranked higher at this point in the season.
1a. The game was Boise State's season
1b. The game meant more to Boise State
Now, I haven't seen this excuse from most media members, definitely not like last year's Joe Giansante "Super Bowll" debacle, but I have seen it implied by some Oregon fans.
Now, I'll agree that this game meant more in the fact that if Boise State loses that game, their BCS chances are through. Oregon can still win the PAC 10 and make a BCS game. The risk/reward was definitely skewed more for Boise State.
However, the implication I seem to be seeing is that Boise State put everything into this game and pulled out all the stops. Last year we had to deal with the excuses of Oregon being down to their 5th string QB. This year both teams entered the game fully healthy, both teams had the entire offseason to prepare and the motivation was there for both teams after the trash talking in the media.
This game might have meant more to Boise State's BCS chances, but the motivation was definitely there for Oregon to win this game. It was not just another non conference game for the Ducks.
2a. It was the first game of the season
2b. Oregon's timing was off
Another favorite excuse I've been seeing is that Oregon just hadn't gelled yet. They run a very complicated spread offense that is predicated on timing and Oregon just was not in sync yet.
This seems silly to me. Oregon was rolling by the end of last year. Masoli was healthy. The spread offense was clicking. All we heard was how Boise State was going to have issues containing it. I'm no expert in the spread offense but Oregon returned Masoli at QB, Blount at RB and Ed Dickson at TE. That's a pretty good trio at the skill positions. Not sure how this timing was magically lost in the offseason.
On the other hand, Boise State was surely not in midseason form that first game (unless you count the botched snaps). Brotzman missed two field goals. Boise State's red zone offense stalled. They easily left 10 points on the field. The final score should have been a lot more than what it was.
But Boise State's offense wasn't the story of this game. It was their defense. Oregon didn't have a single first down in the first half. Oregon only converted one third down the whole game. Oregon had 31 rushing yards and Blount contributed -5. Boise State's defense dominated this game. Everyone who wrote about the game and could overlook the punch noted this. It wasn't close. But that was two months ago.
3a. Oregon has improved
3b. Oregon is a different team now
September 3rd was a long time ago. Oregon has come a long way. I commend Chip Kelly for keeping his team focused and salvaging a terrible situation. They squeaked out a close game against Purdue and then took down Utah and dismantled Cal.
There is no doubt that Oregon is playing better now than they did that opening night on the blue. However, I do not think we can just throw out that performance. Oregon was healthy that night. They have not added any new players or implemented a new offense. They have seen the emergence of LaMichael James over the course of the year, but they are also without a very talented Blount.
Oregon may be executing better, but Boise State still had the plan to stop their spread offense and there's nothing to say that the same plan wouldn't work if they played again today.
On the other hand, Boise State is not the same team as they were opening day. They have continued to play solid defense. Yes, they have had some slow starts and closer than comfortable games but that can be expected when they're highlighted on everyone else's schedule. They have a bullseye on their back; everyone is gunning for them. Consequently, it's tough to stay motivated when you're playing sub par competition every week.
By this logic, how many weeks do we have to wait for USC to claim they should be ranked higher than Oregon? Is there a statute of limitations on head to head results?
4. Strength of Schedule
My favorite argument/excuse that I have seen of late. College football is maddening. There are roughly 120 teams in the FBS and due to college football's refusal to implement a playoff, we're forced to play hypothetical matchups in our heads. The best way that we've found to compare two different teams in two different conferences has been, for better or worse, strength of schedule.
As a fan of Boise State, it's not a favorite of mine. I would prefer that Boise State be judged by things within their control. Last I checked, the PAC 10 wasn't handing out invites. Eight games are set in stone each year. However, I can sympathize with an SEC team making its way through a tough conference schedule. That should count for something.
But here's the thing, strength of schedule should be used as a measuring stick when nothing else is available. Since when has it turned into a sense of entitlement? Have rankings turned into the top 25 most deserving teams or the top 25 best teams in college football?
It seems like I'm seeing a lot of "deserving" arguments these days. I may not agree with it, but I can stomach that TCU deserves to be ranked higher than Boise State based on their schedule. It comes down to what each person values more. It's a subjective argument.
I have a much harder time with the argument that Oregon deserves to be ranked higher than Boise State based on their schedule. To throw out the most objective measure between two teams, on-field results, seems like an egregious misstep to me. Brian Murphy said it best yesterday in a tweet:
Seems like in a sport with so much subjectivity and opinion, we would give weight to on-field results whenever possible.
5. Inferior teams beat other teams all the time and are ranked lower
Another favorite of mine. Should Washington be ranked ahead of USC? Should Purdue be ranked ahead of Ohio State? We do this all the time, right?
Well the thing no one seems to want to acknowledge in this argument is that Boise State is undefeated. If they do acknowledge it, they just say Boise State hasn't played anyone since. As long as Boise State remains undefeated, they should be ranked higher. Shouldn't wins and losses count for something?
My final thoughts
There are few things that a team like Boise State can control. The most they can do is play the schedule that is in front of them. Even then, they may still get shafted if another non AQ team's schedule is deemed more deserving.
But when Boise State takes care of what they can control and beats the teams they play, it's frustrating to hear people want to so flippantly write off those results. That first game might as well be labeled an exhibition if we aren't going to count the outcome. Why not just say that Boise State played better than Oregon on that day? Why do we even award one team a win or a loss?
To reiterate, the most objective measure we have to compare two teams is when they play each other. If we are so willing to dismiss these results based on timing, location or anything else, we have essentially given into the very worst that college football has to offer.
The sports is so wary of giving the opportunity for teams to prove it on the field. It's a shame when a team actually does prove it and the result gets discredited.
3 recs |
135 comments
|
Comments
Your arguments are irrelevant because they were made earlier today and it is now later today and so much has changed.
Well done, Nick. I’m a fan of No. 3. What team IS the same from Week One? I mean, besides NMSU.
"I eat success for breakfast - with skim milk!" - Tony Perkis
by Kevan Lee on Nov 4, 2009 12:37 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I hope Oregon jumps us...
Since we have no reason to need to be ranked higher than Oregon, I hope they jump Boise State and climb as high as possible. The best chance for Boise State to be national champions is for teams to lose and Oregon move up to the top 2 teams, WIN the NC game and have the AP voters vote BSU #1 after they win their BCS game. Even if that doesn’t happen, it would prove the system is broken and all hell would break loose. You thought there was controversy after Utah’s Sugar Bowl win? Try Oregon winning the NC game and BSU being undefeated winning a BCS bowl having beaten Oregon. It would have been like Florida’s 1 loss coming to Utah instead of Ole Miss last year and then Florida going on to win the NC and Utah the Sugar Bowl. Holy crap, I can just picture BCS officials kissing their own butts goodbye and saying “we had a good run”
by Finloopio on Nov 4, 2009 12:41 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Except
Boise State might totally be shut out of a BCS game.
by Nick Kroes on Nov 4, 2009 1:18 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope
I am very convinced that Boise State will make a BCS if Oregon wins out as long as freakish things don’t happen with the Big 10 and Notre Dame. The reason we got shut out last season was the perception that we wouldn’t make it because of Utah finishing ahead. THIS year, we started out as the favorite BCS buster and the trendy pick is to include us… Media pressure is huge and its on our side this year for inclusion… other than Mike Prater’s view.
by Finloopio on Nov 4, 2009 1:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You're a better person than I
Wish I had the faith you do. Seems my faith in college football started with Boise State’s descent down the polls without losing a game.
I hope you’re right.
by Nick Kroes on Nov 4, 2009 1:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Rec'd this post
Loved your post!
"I'd rather be a smartass than a dumbass."
by Belexes on Nov 4, 2009 1:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Why play a BCS team if you can't get credit for beating them?
Why is it that every time Boise State beats a BCS team there is a “reason” that the BCS team lost? “They were having a down year”… “The star players were injured”…blah blah blah. Why can’t they just say “Boise State is the better team”?
There is really no incentive right now to play those teams, so why even schedule them? I’m sure that next year when BSU beats Va Tech and Oregon State that all we will hear is excuses and no respect. Even if 4 or 5 BCS teams were on their schedule they would probably be ridiculed for finding the BCS bottom dwellers. Simply insane!
Catch me on the BroncoNation Podcast!
by OBNUG Intern on Nov 4, 2009 1:04 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Actually...
Thats why you play 2 BCS teams …
Then they can’t both be flukes.
BCS Evolution -- Punctuating the Equilibrium - twitter
by utesfan100 on Nov 4, 2009 2:10 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Play 2
then people would say play 3…
Catch me on the BroncoNation Podcast!
by OBNUG Intern on Nov 4, 2009 2:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Play in the PAC-10
I love seeing that on the ESPN boards. As if we’re somehow skipping BCS conference invites so we can keep beating up the WAC.
by graybandit on Nov 4, 2009 4:21 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not really.
Utah, TCU and BYU have been playing two for years and winning them. This is how they have built a reputation as strong as Boise State’s with more losses. It also helps that they also each get two respectable games in conference.
Your AD is correct in the need to increase your SOS, and this will be done. Adding future games against Utah and BYU was an excellent start.
BCS Evolution -- Punctuating the Equilibrium - twitter
by utesfan100 on Nov 4, 2009 8:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Couldnt' add a word
perfect-you nailed it.
tvmunson
by tmunson on Nov 4, 2009 1:19 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Oregon Injuries
Here’s another tid-bid I havent heard anybody talking about. We played Oregon’s defense when their best players were healthy and on the depth chart (TJ Ward & Walter Thurmond III). Other teams have been fortunate enough to play the Ducks with out TJ Ward (injured in the 3rd or 4th qtr of our game and subsequently missed 4-5 weeks (I think)) and/or Walter Thurmond III ( their best corner who blew his knee returning a kick against Cal (I believe)). For as good as their defense has been playing (since the Cal game anyway), we faced their most talented & experienced defense they had this year. Something none of Oregon’s other 7 opponents can say.
by Drofdarb23 on Nov 4, 2009 1:43 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
But they somehow became more talented as the season went on
Or at least that’s how an Oregon fan would spin it I guess.
by Nick Kroes on Nov 4, 2009 1:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I see what you're saying..
but you’d be hard pressed to find an Oregon fan out there that would trade their current defense for a defense with TJ Ward & Walter Thurmond III. A fan could MAYBE argue that the ‘no-name’ defense plays better collectively than w/ Thurmond & Ward but guarantee Chip Kelly & Nick Aliotti would prefer having those two out there. I think Kelly was even quoted as saying that Walter Thurmond was the best football player on their roster..
by Drofdarb23 on Nov 4, 2009 2:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
John Boyett is a better free safety than TJ Ward. There was a reason why TJ Ward was not rushed back into play.
However, Thurmond cannot be easily replaced.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Nov 5, 2009 8:01 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
TJ Ward
So TJ Ward really lives up to the hype/criticism of only being a big hitter?
by Drofdarb23 on Nov 5, 2009 10:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
He can read the run and get good angles. But his big hits are his biggest game. He should be a strong safety, not a free safety.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-U-N-S-U-R-E-O-F-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Nov 5, 2009 10:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oregon
did not get a 1st down until more than 8 minutes hahd elapsed in the 3rd quarter. either Caves or Prater said something about Oreogn forcing turnovers; only “forced” trunover was Brokel’s fumble-rest were Bronco giveups. Even Oregon fans conceded game should have been 40-8. By the way how many goose-egg quarters has the Bronco D registered? 3 more last weekend.
tvmunson
by tmunson on Nov 4, 2009 2:43 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Well, aside from the Fresno game
no other team has scored more than 21 points on the Broncos. Out of 32 quarters played, opposing teams have not scored in 20 of the quarters. BSU has outscored opponents 328-109 for an average score of 41-14.
I hate everyone equally...especially Vandals!
by BSUFlyboy on Nov 4, 2009 2:57 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Excellent and tip of the hat Flyboy
tvmunson
by tmunson on Nov 4, 2009 3:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I've been wating for a post that would get AtQers here!
"You know where i'm from, a little suspicion about one's true identity and motives is considered good manners."
-- Nale
by Loque on Nov 4, 2009 2:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Well Loque here's another
We had 9 months of if woulda-coulda-shoulda-willa-killa from Oregon on this very blogsite and over at ATQ. We hashed over prospectively every nitpicking detail. Game played; how much more of a comprehensive stomp out could one witness? And now we’re back to this. It’s like the Indians having to argue over who won the Battle of the Little Bighorn.
tvmunson
by tmunson on Nov 4, 2009 2:52 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Thank you!
I know don’t influence the outcome of the game, but no doubt the players were feeling the same effects about their ability to finish that game.
It makes me wonder what Oregon players have to say about the game.
"You know where i'm from, a little suspicion about one's true identity and motives is considered good manners."
-- Nale
by Loque on Nov 4, 2009 3:06 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm getting pissed off
Most of the time team matchup arguments are theoretical; this argument is so stupid it makes one sputter. 9 months Oregon had; you can get a new human in that time. 9 months of hearing abotu the wizardry of Kelly, the wonders of Masoli, Lagarrotte as the Second Coming. And then-the Broncos did everything but make them squeal “soooooiee” in their tighty-whiteys while bending over a log. In fact, Bobbie only got in one orifce; Ducks took it there and in the ear, nose and throat on national television and tossed in a bezerko meltdown that let everyone go all moral about sportsmanship for the better part of a month. That game nearly destroyed their program and NOW WE"RE HEARING THIS? AM I GOING NUTS!
tvmunson
by tmunson on Nov 4, 2009 3:02 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
There's a post over at ATQ about us-I cant read it
My son is in corvallis and if I read it and am over there I could go off
tvmunson
by tmunson on Nov 4, 2009 3:04 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I dare you.
Try to link to it!
"You know where i'm from, a little suspicion about one's true identity and motives is considered good manners."
-- Nale
by Loque on Nov 4, 2009 3:07 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
this is sort of like
having sex with a woman and then finding out she’s telling her friends she turned you down when you asked for a date. Ok I’ll quit and go get my Zanax IV hooked up
tvmunson
by tmunson on Nov 4, 2009 3:07 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
That's probably best
Wouldn’t want you to get too worked up. I’ve been there. Not fun.
by Nick Kroes on Nov 4, 2009 3:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
OBNUG READERS
This is Munson’s psychiatirst. He’s under sedation right now and is completely unconcscious. We thought it best to induce this. Apparently he reread a Sports Illustrated article where the Oreogn Duck players were talking about how they were going to show the Broncos where the bear s*** in the forest. The current debate over who is the better team has totally shortcircuited his already fairly demented mind. There is a very strong likelihood of recovery which is not necessarily a good thing.
tvmunson
by tmunson on Nov 4, 2009 3:20 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
First of all, Great post. It had all the facts and it was correct.
Second of all; I’d like to say congratulations for beating Oregon.
I think it would be awesome if you guys joined a conference that was tough in-and-out every week. But really, I look at your schedule; and I see you guys beating mediocre teams, and their total is 34 Loses 21 Wins.
Now I have a feeling you guys might say something like: Well what’s Oregon’s opponents combined record? It’s 27 Loses 26 Wins, and that gets screwed up by WSU, Which shouldn’t be playing in the Pac-10.
Of course the “excuse” is strength of schedule! It’s true.
"Q: What would you say the loudest stadiums are? Corso: I think Autzen Stadium. Per person, the Oregon stadium is the loudest stadium I’ve ever been in. The fact that it’s so low to the ground doesn’t allow the sound to escape." Lee Corso, ESPN GameDay.
by DuckFanAndy on Nov 4, 2009 3:25 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
We know our schedule sucks
I’m not going to defend it.
However, SOS should only be used if there’s no other way to compare 2 teams.
by Nick Kroes on Nov 4, 2009 3:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
mhm.
You guys are hella good at home.
"Q: What would you say the loudest stadiums are? Corso: I think Autzen Stadium. Per person, the Oregon stadium is the loudest stadium I’ve ever been in. The fact that it’s so low to the ground doesn’t allow the sound to escape." Lee Corso, ESPN GameDay.
by DuckFanAndy on Nov 4, 2009 3:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Last year has no reflection on this year. I HATE that it keeps getting brought up.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-U-N-S-U-R-E-O-F-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Nov 5, 2009 8:18 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Apparently this year has no reflection on this year either
by Nick Kroes on Nov 5, 2009 8:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But Oregon hasn’t jumped Boise…
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-U-N-S-U-R-E-O-F-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Nov 5, 2009 8:21 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
They have in the computers
Those dang computers that are keeping us below TCU
by Nick Kroes on Nov 5, 2009 8:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s funny though… if you lost to Oregon, or didn’t schedule Oregon this year, you’d be way lower in the computers.
Oregon has been shafted by the computers in the past. Many teams have.
It’s true though, in the BCS formula, Oregon is less than 1 point from Boise State – and Oregon still has tough teams to get through. We’re all looking and discussing something that is 5 weeks ahead, and there is a possibility that Oregon can jump Boise in the polls, but as of right now, Boise has more power in 2/3rds of the formula, and the majority of those polls are sticking to their guns and won’t rank Oregon ahead of Boise – unless Boise loses.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-U-N-S-U-R-E-O-F-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Nov 5, 2009 8:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We like to cry about the inevitable.
"You know where i'm from, a little suspicion about one's true identity and motives is considered good manners."
-- Nale
by Loque on Nov 5, 2009 8:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Boise State won; Twice. Nothing else need be said.
tvmunson
by tmunson on Nov 4, 2009 3:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Your guys got more than beaten
over here. They had their guts/hearts torn out. They got them back and I’m glad. But don’t delude yoruself into thinking that anything else that happens this season will affect in any way, shape or manner the dynamics concerning the Bronco/Ducks teams of 2009. That was settled, comprehensively,convincingly and finally, on Sept 3.
tvmunson
by tmunson on Nov 4, 2009 3:44 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
SIEG HEIL MEIN FUERHER!
Turns out we didnt win WWII after all. Please report to your nearst post office to pick up your German?English dictionaries, ration books and ID’s. For those of you who are Jewish, I have some especailly bad news.
tvmunson
by tmunson on Nov 4, 2009 3:27 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Munson
I swear – I login in just to see what you’ve come up with while I’ve been away. I laugh harder at some of your dry humor than I’ve laughed at anything before…
"After chasing sunsets, one of life's simple joys is playing with the boys." - Top Gun
by Crissie on Nov 4, 2009 7:30 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
The real debate is this...
No matter what Boise State has done, did, or will ever do will ever be good enough.
Hey Oregon fans, did you know what beating Virginia on the road is a much greater accomplishment than beating the Ducks for two straight years? That’s right, even William and Mary now considered a better football team than Oregon because of this unknown rule. So go ahead and keep telling the rest of the country how shitty of a team Boise State is. Everytime you do, you make yourself and the rest of the PAC-10 look even shittier.
by cexeko on Nov 4, 2009 4:11 PM PST via mobile reply actions 2 recs
This isn't a debate between OREGON/BSU...
it’s formulas and polls. Justice will never be served in the current format. I have to defend BSU at every turn. Every pac-10 foe comes on our blogs and laughs at our loss to BSU.
I tell them the following: we lost to a very good BSU football team. They scoff. Of course, I have no idea why UW and UCLA have anything to brag about but they do.
BSU is BCS worthy. However, the problem is that you have no ability to prove it. This year the national perception is that we layed a big fat egg in Boise.
The fact of the matter is that OREGON has more respect for BSU than anyone else in the nation. The problem: most of the country doesn’t see it our way.
by BisonDucks on Nov 4, 2009 4:37 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
True
Too many unwritten rule in college football.
This doesn’t make the BCS great. It makes it maddening when your team can do nothing to control its own destiny. The crap about the regular season being a playoff is getting blown out of the water. Maybe this will be the straw that breaks the camel’s back. But then again, the camel’s back is reinforced with too many BCS boosters’ pocketbooks.
by Nick Kroes on Nov 4, 2009 4:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But we wouldn't have these debates...
over on addictedtoquack jlight has scripted our path to the NC game. There is a plausible scenario that puts us there. How do you like them apples: Oregon in the NC game and BSU in the Poinsetta??? Of course, our path includes a loss for TCU, so you get in the but just saying.
by BisonDucks on Nov 4, 2009 4:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I would be curious..
to hear what Oregon players and coaches would have to say about Boise State. It seemed like last year they (the players & Belotti (to some extent)) chalked up the loss to cheap-shots (which from an Oregon stand point would seem legitimate). Would they have respect for Boise State after the game this year?
by Drofdarb23 on Nov 4, 2009 5:14 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
95.5 the fan...
is discussing Oregon’s ability to jump BSU in the BCS and how we could get in the NC game…
by BisonDucks on Nov 4, 2009 4:53 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
So help me...
I’d be joining Munson for the Zanex cocktail and the shrink’s couch. I swear to all things holy, if Oregon plays in the NC, I will drive all 5 of my kids over to ESPN’s headquarters and let them thrash the place. It wouldn’t be pretty.
"After chasing sunsets, one of life's simple joys is playing with the boys." - Top Gun
by Crissie on Nov 4, 2009 7:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What Debate?
The Broncos by all accounts have throttled the Ducks 2 years in a row. Neither game was in doubt for more than 5 mins. At the end of the day the fact the Broncos have beaten Oregon this year will never change. Oregon supporters will live with that fact the rest of this season and seasons to come. As a Bronco Fan that fact brings a big smile to my face.
The Bronco Nation Podcast: A Podcast By Bronco Fans, For Bronco Fans
follow me on twitter at http://twitter.com/TheBNPodcast
by Bronco Nation Podcast on Nov 4, 2009 7:22 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
i think oregon is going to make a big mistake in letting l. blount back in to play
if it ain’t broke don’t fix it. i think he might make oregon’s offense lose it’s chemistry. stanford has had two weeks to prepare for this game. their coach is probably going to run toby g. as many times as possible. the line has stayed steady at 6 points. should be interesting game.
by wolfmanshowlforever on Nov 4, 2009 10:40 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Good article
These points are all valid and well thought out. And frankly I really hope for the health of tmunson, you NEVER write one again! :)
As I said in another post of Kevan’s, I really have to feel for you. I can’t begin to know how this feels to all of the BSU fan base. You beat Oregon, twice and have nothing to show for it. It is sad that you are having great success (channelling my inner Borat there…) and cannot sit back and enjoy it without the whole rankings issue raining on your parade. You could argue all of these points again until you were as blue in the face as the field you play on, and it wouldn’t change a thing. And as I said…for the quality of your health, you might just let it be.
The system is flawed and it will be until BSU is in a BCS conference (where they belong) or there is a playoff system. It is unfortunate, but with the schedule you face in the WAC, you are at a steep uphill battle until anything changes. Sad as it is, it is the truth.
The system is based on money. The little guys (in a manner of fanbases/alumni/enrollment, not football) will always get the shaft over money. As a CFB fan, I would much rather watch a team such as BSU play the likes of Texas, Florida, Alabama, ect. I think BSU has earned the chance, but its not about what the fans want. Its all about the Benjamins.
Cexeko – As an Oregon fan, I have not heard one person say anything about how “shitty” BSU is. I can only assume that you are talking to other Oregon fans, but by all accounts, Oregon fans who say that have NO idea what they are talking about.
May we hand you your taints on a silver platter...
by 071903 on Nov 4, 2009 11:59 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
All this arguing makes me sad!
Guys, Oregon is not going to the NC game. Boise State is also not going to the NC game. Neither of them will deserve it if any two of Florida/Alabama, Texas, TCU, Iowa or Cincy win out. I’m truly sorry about that in Boise’s case, but it’s the harsh reality of the teams you’ve got to face. I’m perfectly fine with my Ducks not going to the championship.
I can’t take it when my favorite and second-favorite teams fight. Can’t we put down the animosity and agree to unite as one fanbase against the SEC? Seriously. Those guys are jackholes.
To paraphrase Jon Stewart: "The amount by which we beat USC would have crushed USC."
by ProbablyMonty on Nov 5, 2009 12:07 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I don’t think this is or was intended to be a fight with the Oregon fanbase. Nor do I think that anyone is harboring any ill will toward the Ducks. It is more about venting our frustrations with the corrupt and biased system that is in place in college football. This is a post about venting frustrations for a system that would potentially allow a team that you not only beat, but beat soundly and thoroughly, to pass you in the polls without having lost nary a game.
So, Oregon fans, don’t take this personnaly but I feel that we all, as BSU Bronco football fans, have every right to the array of emotions that we are experiencing with this ridiculous, pathetic excuse for a ranking system that is used in NCAA D-1 football. It is the only place that would even attempt to utilize such a pathetic and arbitrary system to establish the rank and file in a team oriented athletic organization.
by Mountngrown on Nov 5, 2009 4:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Hey, I completely agree. The system sucks. S-U-C-K-S. Year in and year out, you guys get the business end of a system that’s dominated by tradition and pre-season hype. You totally have a right to vent about this, especially on your own blog, for God’s sake.
I just don’t agree that there’s no animosity between the fanbases, unfortunately. There is, and it’s easy to find within this very thread as well as any AtQ thread discussing the same thing. Both sides are culpable, and it makes the baby Jesus cry.
To paraphrase Jon Stewart: "The amount by which we beat USC would have crushed USC."
by ProbablyMonty on Nov 5, 2009 11:22 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't totally agree.
I’m a Duck fan, so please take anything I say with that grain of salt -
First of all, I am horrified that the Ducks are potentially the team to be front and center of what is going to end up being the annual BSU ranking debate. Outside of Oregon, I don’t think I’ve wanted to see a program succeed more than the Broncos. That being said, you can’t honestly say that the Ducks were playing ANYWHERE near the kind of football they are right now.
In trying to refute the idea that the offense wasn’t gelling yet, you mention they were bringing back the most important pieces, but you totally omitted that the offensive line is brand new. The line is incredibly critical in any blocking scheme, and Oregon has had great O lines that struggled their first few games (the 2007 team is a perfect example).
It seems pretty obvious that Oregon got it together somewhere between Utah and Cal. If you look at the way they played at that point in the season, the line began clicking which allowed plays to develop in ways they had not all season. Masoli had time to pass and they were afforded the triple-threat that this offense can bring when people are in the right spots.
I also know that BSU didn’t play a solid game that night either, and I’m sure they look a hell of a lot better this week then they did during that game. I think I’d give an Oregon team that just took USC to the woodshed a slight edge, but I’m sure it would be close. I know I sound nuts saying that, considering the Broncos already beat them this season, but I think if you really break down this matchup given that the Ducks are no longer in disarray, you can make a good case for it.
It kind of sucks to even have this debate. At some point you have to understand that going through a weak conference schedule is a legitimate reason for not validating the Broncos as much as they probably warrant. Please find a way to swap spots with WSU!!
by netminder82 on Nov 5, 2009 4:56 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Thank you...
You just made me realize something. The season is 12 (13 for us) games long. If your team can’t get up at the start of the season, why should you be rewarded for “gelling” later. A lose is a lose. If UO would just win, like Boise, we wouldn’t have this conversation. Ok ranting over.
I do think if UO wins out, they should be ranked higher than Boise. Not because Boise is in the WAC (Boise has been trying to get out), but for UO’s OOC schedule. Purdue and Utah would beat Miami (OH), Tulsa, and Bowling Green (UC Davis doesn’t count, that was suppose to be a money game, but no one showed up).
I love the colors Orange and Blue. Go Broncos!!! Go Titans!!!
by TitanBronco on Nov 5, 2009 5:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Touché
the season is 12 games long, so beating one quality foe doesn’t land you in the BCS.
by BisonDucks on Nov 5, 2009 11:44 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Fair point about the line
But here’s the thing, as long as the BCS wants to bang the drum and repeat their mantra of “the whole season is a playoff”, every game should count.
The way the system is currently set up, it doesn’t reward teams for improving. That’s it’s downfall. However, to just throw this out now that Boise State is involved? It’s ludicrous. As long as people say the whole season is a playoff, treat it like one. All we’re asking is to play by the same unwritten rules of everyone else.
Secondly, by placing more importance on games later in the season than early ones, you are essentially saying that the way to a BCS game or NC game is through your conference slate. What BCS team is going to schedule Boise State, TCU, BYU, or Utah late in the season, in the middle of their conference slate? It’s not going to happen.
Now the non AQ teams are at a greater disadvantage cause the only games they can get are early season games and apparently those don’t count by the time the BCS teams get into their conference games, find themselves, and then start to win games.
by Nick Kroes on Nov 5, 2009 6:37 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ducks will lose to Stanford and AZ.
You Duck fans are the most flakey fans of all, one minute you are dumping your tickets on Craigs list and the next you are #1 in the country. USC was not that good a team, JM is going to be cocky and get hurt, Stanford will win and AZ will win. W/O JM you go to a real average offense.
This yip yap is a waste of time and thought.
by BSU Alumni stranded in Portland on Nov 5, 2009 7:04 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I, and 7 of my friends, bought tickets to the upcoming UO/Stanford game the week after Boise State. Obviously, it seemed at that time like we could easily lose to Stanford.
To paraphrase Jon Stewart: "The amount by which we beat USC would have crushed USC."
by ProbablyMonty on Nov 5, 2009 11:19 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We have a very loyal fan base that has sold out like 63 times in a row...
great analysis.
by BisonDucks on Nov 5, 2009 11:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Way to generalize.
Seriously? Why even bother trying to talk about something if you are just going to pull the “your school’s fans are…” line out? What you are saying at that point is “I don’t know what I’m talking about, but here’s a generalization.” Oregon sells out consistently and is considered to have an incredibly die-hard fan base, but nice try!
by netminder82 on Nov 5, 2009 1:37 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I seen a poll of AP voters on this question.
Based on that poll and the results at my poll at BCS evolution, the polls will slit 2:1 in Boise State’s favor if both continue to win.
The computers are less kind.
BCS Evolution -- Punctuating the Equilibrium - twitter
by utesfan100 on Nov 5, 2009 6:10 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Bronco fans. It's about what we want?
Do we want a National Championship? Or a BCS bowl?
I think that after week 9, it’s finally time to decide what you want and set your heart on that and nothing else.
If it’s a National Championship you want, then you will be wanting everyone ahead of us and a few behind us to lose.
If it’s a BCS bowl you want, you will want the current leader in the Big 6 conferences to win out, competitors for runners up in the Big 6 conferences and Notre Dame to lose their at-large bids, and for TCU to lose against their soft, but overly hyped, schedule. As ridiculous as it is to see Oregon ahead of Boise, in this scenario, they can be with ease.
Right now, I’m shooting for just a BCS bowl. I always thought it would be nice if the perfect storm happened. But with recent drops and only 5 weeks to go, I think it’s time to recognize reality.
"You know where i'm from, a little suspicion about one's true identity and motives is considered good manners."
-- Nale
by Loque on Nov 5, 2009 6:50 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
I'm cool with a BCS bowl
Unfortunately, Oregon being ranked above us in the computers makes it difficult to jump TCU without a TCU loss.
by Nick Kroes on Nov 5, 2009 7:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Ducks will lose at least two more games before season is over.
My fellow BSU fans calm down. The ducks are really not that good because USC was not that good. UW beat them remember they went 0-12 last year.
Stanford will win this weekend and Arizona will cream them in AZ.
All your fears are for not.
BSU vs. Penn State in the Fiesta Bowl.
by BSU Alumni stranded in Portland on Nov 5, 2009 7:01 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
PAC-10 team will be in the Rose Bowl unless the champ is in the NC game and no one else is eligible.
Only possible way for Boise State to get in Rose Bowl is for Penn State to lose to Ohio State this weekend and then Iowa to beat Ohio State and some other chips to fall in place that would land Iowa in the NC game.
Then, most likely, neither Penn State or Ohio State would be eligible to fill the vacant spot.
by Nick Kroes on Nov 5, 2009 7:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
One last blast.
Iowa will lose to Ohio State.
Utah may win over TCU.
Cincy will lose to Pitt.
Alabama is going down.
Oregon will lose at least two more games this season, period. They are not the dominant team you think they are. One game against USC who should be #25 is not that great.
by BSU Alumni stranded in Portland on Nov 5, 2009 7:41 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
<3
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-U-N-S-U-R-E-O-F-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Nov 5, 2009 8:35 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It sounds like you would prefer that Oregon
lose 2 more games because it’s more important that we don’t jump you in the BCS than actually making a BCS game. The one thing helping you in the computers is Oregon winning…duh???
by BisonDucks on Nov 5, 2009 11:55 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
No, UO is just not that good. We can stand on our own.
Did you see the article today about your QB being a jailbird?
by BSU Alumni stranded in Portland on Nov 5, 2009 1:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
We are better than anyone on our schedule...
we could obviously lose but it won’t be because of our talent.
by BisonDucks on Nov 5, 2009 2:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Did you read the whole article about how he did his time? How he’s had his regrets? About how he’s changed? Besides that, I’m sure every BSU player ever has been Mr. Perfect too.
Why even throw out that straw man argument? Come on man, I know you’re better than that!
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-U-N-S-U-R-E-O-F-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Nov 5, 2009 5:30 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
And standing on your own… not likely…
If Oregon loses 2, your computer rankings could tear you down to a high-teens ranking. Possibly even ineligible for BCS. Unless you start pulling in some first place votes from the Coaches and the Harris poll.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-U-N-S-U-R-E-O-F-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Nov 5, 2009 5:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Well we wouldn’t pass TCU but we would definitely still be eligible.
by Nick Kroes on Nov 5, 2009 6:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
This is not the first year we have been in contention.
You Duck fans seem to think this BSU’s first into the BCS game. We have been there before, remember?
We stood on our own and will have to again. You could have had a rematch if you could win out the remainder of the season. You wont do that and will lose at least 2 more games.
by BSU Alumni stranded in Portland on Nov 5, 2009 9:29 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
When did I say that? When did I think that? When did ANY of us say that? We didn’t. Please don’t assume that we did. It only tarnishes your own points. Your comments have already been sensationalized.
I’m looking at the computers and just anticipating the ramifications of what could happen. Sagarin has BSU’s SOS at 81st right now. If Oregon loses two games, that SOS could drop 10, 20, 30 maybe even 40 places.
It could impact your computer rankings significantly. Your win against us is the biggest factor in the computers, and if that looks less impressive, Boise State won’t be 8th, 9th, or 10th in the computer polls… they’ll be around 15th. If you get 1st in the Harris and Coaches polls, you’ll still only be about 5th in the BCS.
Boise isn’t in control of their own destiny to a BCS bowl, and it’s the nature of the system. It’s pretty crappy system.
I’m not here saying Boise State sucks. I’m not here saying Boise doesn’t deserve a BCS game. I’m saying that the Oregon win is the best thing going for Boise State’s chance to get into the BCS, and without a win against an Oregon team that has had recent success would likely result in the same thing as it did last year. Nothing much.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-U-N-S-U-R-E-O-F-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Nov 5, 2009 10:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Did you see the article today about your QB being a jailbird?
Wow. Classy.
To paraphrase Jon Stewart: "The amount by which we beat USC would have crushed USC."
by ProbablyMonty on Nov 5, 2009 6:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
The head of Las Vegas Sports Consultants was on the radio here in Vegas on Tues. They set the lines for the casinos. He was making the case for Oregon to be ranked above Boise, even saying he would make Oregon a 3 pt favorite. I asked him what the statute of limitation is on head to head match-ups (because I had just got your Tweet earlier. Thanks, OBNUG!). His reply was “one week”. The hosts of the show and myself screamed at him in unison: “What’s the point of playing any regular season games then!?!” I told him to just make a poll that just ranks his 25 favorite teams before the season and put a bow on it. No point in playing a regular season when you have ZERO value for head to head match-ups.
by MooreWalksOnWater on Nov 5, 2009 8:36 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Pat Forde
is quoted on Scott Slant replying to soem Oregon guy who said the Oregon “needed to get up” fo r3 or 4 Pac-10 teams. Pat said whao were they getting up for on sept3-it was the season opener.Remember “the oldest saying” in football-“that’s why they play the game”. These assholes have turned that on its head.
tvmunson
by tmunson on Nov 5, 2009 9:16 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
You know how to squash all this pointless pandering?
PLAYOFF.
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.)
by Mikrino on Nov 5, 2009 9:42 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
/signed
To paraphrase Jon Stewart: "The amount by which we beat USC would have crushed USC."
by ProbablyMonty on Nov 5, 2009 11:23 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What?!?!
Playoffs? That’s crazy talk! Why, what would happen to all those bowl committees and their funny-jacket wearing members? Whose money would they spend? How would they pay for their airfare, hotels and tickets to watch potential bowl teams? How would they all play golf together? You’d just put them out of a job during the holiday season? Oh, for shame!
by marktgarten on Nov 5, 2009 2:17 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Oregon / Boise
As an Oregon fan, please let me say that I believe Oregon is MUCH improved from their opening game slaughter by a much better Boise team. The FUN part is the debate, but if I had a vote, what happened on the field would still compel me to vote Boise ahead of the Ducks. If I were a Boise fan, (and it is hard not to be) I would be pulling for Oregon to run the table and force the voters to deal with Boise. But at this point of the season, I am just hoping for a Rose Bowl berth and to heck with the National Championship debate. I just hope Boise is going somewhere better than they got last year and that they play like they did against Oklahoma. Good luck. Keep winning.
by BField on Nov 5, 2009 5:17 PM PST reply actions 1 recs
Nice post
I wish all Oregon fans were as real as you.
I believe all Viking fans must be masochistic!!
by BSUvikFAN on Nov 5, 2009 11:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
What does that mean?
Don’t you think that most college fan bases are about the same? I’ve never understood the “All (fill in a team here) fans are…”. Duck fans are probably the same as Bronco fans, who are probably both about the same as USC fans, who are all three probably about the same as Northern Illinois fans.
Every school has irrational, hyperbolic fans mixed in with a lot of tame, educated fans. Isn’t that the kind of thinking that led people to these blogs rather than other message boards?
by netminder82 on Nov 6, 2009 5:17 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
But another thing is that this is the general opinion of most Duck fans. Even on AtQ.
The chances of Oregon making it to the National Championship game are slim-to-none. With 4 weeks left of football, there needs to be a ton of other losses to too many good teams playing too many bad teams.
For some reason, some people almost take it personal when somebody says “Ducks would probably beat Boise if they were to play at the end of this season” or if they see a possibility of Oregon jumping Boise in the polls and cite their SOS. It isn’t an attack to Boise, their fans, or anything like that. It’s the a voter’s polling philosophy where head-to-head isn’t their most important factor.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-U-N-S-U-R-E-O-F-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Nov 6, 2009 6:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s seen as a slight because it’s a lack of respect. All this debate has done is further reveal the biases of the supposed experts in college football.
No matter what Boise State does, it’s never enough. They beat a top 10 team, but it’s too early in the season so it must be a fluke. Their SOS isn’t good enough, yet if you look around at the top teams in the nation, none of them are exactly jumping to schedule difficult non conference games, especially late in the season in the middle of their conference slate.
How are Boise State fans supposed to feel when rooting for a team that never has the opportunity to prove itself? How are the players supposed to feel when they’ve done all they can it’s still not enough?
It’s a natural reaction.
by Nick Kroes on Nov 6, 2009 8:02 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I will say this.
Out of the top 10, what teams have proved that they belong there?
I have… Boise State, Oregon, TCU
Yet none are in the top 5.
"You know where i'm from, a little suspicion about one's true identity and motives is considered good manners."
-- Nale
by Loque on Nov 6, 2009 8:26 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
TCU is ranked fourth
In coaches poll.
by MeanBobMean on Nov 6, 2009 11:24 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Really? Florida, Texas, and Alabama haven’t proven it?
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Nov 6, 2009 11:31 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
I think we have to look at those teams and ask “would Boise or TCU be looking as good as those are after a round in the SEC”?
I have my reservations saying either one would be undefeated at this point, especially when so many teams down there hate each other and beat each other to death each week. In the WAC the biggest rivalry game is not as difficult as the weakest one in the SEC.
Boise and the MWC teams have no idea what it is like to play that many games in a row being bludgeoned and pounded and smacked to hell. Even the winners come out black and blue.
by MeanBobMean on Nov 6, 2009 12:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
All speculation. Not saying if I was betting on it, I wouldn’t put my money on SEC teams but it’s all left to speculating how many games a team like TCU or Boise State would win if they play that slate. Well, there’s no way to know so it’s pointless speculating cause the non AQ teams have no opportunity to prove otherwise. What I do know is that a great Utah team manhandled Alabama last year.
The point that people really should be talking about is that if you’re an SEC team, you pretty much know that if you go undefeated you’ll be in the NC game. You’re conference is respected enough. So just load up on patsies like Florida did this year and let your conference slate handle your SOS. No reason to schedule a Boise State or TCU.
by Nick Kroes on Nov 6, 2009 12:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Why is that the point we should be talking about? You play a hard schedule and go undefeated, you’ll play in the title game. Doesn’t really seem like a controversial point to me.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Nov 6, 2009 12:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s controversial when you play in a crap conference and don’t have the opportunity to play a hard schedule.
When the Florida’s and Texas’ of the world don’t play hard OOC games, how are non AQ teams supposed to load up their schedules?
by Nick Kroes on Nov 6, 2009 12:52 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Follow the Fresno route and play anyone at anytime? I don’t know, it’s not going to be easy. Boise State will never get national title level respect as long as they are in a league as uncompetitive as the WAC.
College football isn’t built for parity, and it’s not built for the little guy. It never has been about that, and it never will be. The rich get richer and the poor get poorer.
This isn’t controversial, it’s just the way things are.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Nov 6, 2009 1:08 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Did you not see the report this week about Boise State’s 2011 scheduling? No one is agreeing to play us. It’s easy to schedule a body bag game. It’s not easy to schedule a game when you’re a good non AQ team.
After what happened to Oklahoma and Oregon this year, teams aren’t going to take risks out of conference.
The BCS is ruining the sanctity of the regular season, not the preserving it.
by Nick Kroes on Nov 6, 2009 1:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, I did see that. And yeah, that sucks. But there will still be plenty of solid teams looking for games. If Boise State wants to schedule tough games, it will get them eventually. They just haven’t shown a lot of desire to schedule a string of very tough games (like Fresno has been doing for years).
Also, I fail to see how the BCS is killing the regular season more than the previous bowl system would have. Boise State wouldn’t have sniffed any recognition in the old system.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Nov 6, 2009 1:28 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Dan Wetzel did a great job of profiling how the BCS is killing the regular season.
http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-bcs102009&prov=yhoo&type=lgns
There’s absolutely no incentive to schedule difficult non conference opponents if you’re a top team.
by Nick Kroes on Nov 6, 2009 1:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I actually think that’s a bad article. The BCS has nothing to do with bad scheduling. Some teams schedule well, some do not. The BCS doesn’t provide an incentive for tough OOC scheduling, but what system has? The old system didn’t.
Also, the comparison to the 80s was entirely offbase, as the college football landscape was entirely different, with many more independent teams, and before conference expansion had taken hold.
This argument just doesn’t make sense and lacks historical perspective.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Nov 6, 2009 2:47 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Absolutely
I always say “have to play the game to know.”
But Florida has a couple patsies on their OOC schedule (I was in Gainesville when they played Charleston Southern and asked some fans “What’s the matter, was Charleston North too tough this year?”—to their credit they all laughed), and one typically good team (FSU) sometimes two (FSU and Miami), and plays an SEC slate. Hey, Vandy and UK aren’t the worst teams in the nation anymore—they’re better than they used to be. Remember when South Carolina was a patsy? Not anymore.
BSU has just one good team on their entire schedule all year this year (maybe two next year unless the WAC improves vastly) and maybe one or two “decent” teams because the WAC appears weaker than it was the last couple years. I mean, Hawaii fell apart, Fresno is slipping annually. So, you have Two or three patsies or 8 to 9, which means more? Boise needs to be in a better conference.
Next year’s schedule looks a lot better, but Boise really should be in a tougher conference or they have to schedule 4 challenging OOC games.
Absent that, it is all just speculation.
by MeanBobMean on Nov 6, 2009 12:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
It would be nice if moving conferences was up to Boise State
by Nick Kroes on Nov 6, 2009 12:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly.
I don’t think they have. They’re letting their conference prove it for them. Yet we see lackadaisical play and we reward them for getting through a game.
Bama’s best win was vs. Va Tech… after their skid and last nights game, you really think that means a whole lot?
"You know where i'm from, a little suspicion about one's true identity and motives is considered good manners."
-- Nale
by Loque on Nov 6, 2009 2:23 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
While the VT win doesn’t mean as much now, they are still a solid football team, as Tennessee, South Carolina, Arkansas, Mississippi, Kentucky (all these teams are top 50). As much as you want to discount wins like this, the rest of the college football world does not. There is a massive difference in the competition level of those teams, and the majority of teams on BSU’s schedule.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
by jtlight on Nov 6, 2009 2:53 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
I think it’s an understandable reaction, but I’m a little surprised that you feel it’s a lack of respect. I have no problems admitting that Boise was the better team that night. They won.
The lack of respect isn’t Boise’s fault. It isn’t the fans’ fault. I really wouldn’t take it personally. Both programs are relatively new to having success in the national scene. We both have the same BCS bowl record. We both have been screwed out of a BCS game. Rules are frequently being made that make it easier and easier for a team like Boise to get into the BCS.
Boise is only a few years separated from the Big West. They’ve accomplished a LOT in that time frame. And it is unfortunate for the program and the fan base that they have a ceiling placed over them. Hopefully they’ll have the opportunity to expand and move on.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-U-N-S-U-R-E-O-F-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Nov 6, 2009 8:43 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It is all 1-A in FBS
The hell with all the SOS and conference crap, these kids are all in A-1 FBS.
If you go undefeated it means you are doing the best and should play others that are undefeated. A no brainer.
by BSU Alumni stranded in Portland on Nov 6, 2009 1:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
You enjoy this, don’t you?
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-U-N-S-U-R-E-O-F-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Nov 6, 2009 1:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Do you think some Oregon fans will despise Boise
… if voters keep them ranked behind Boise and the NC game is in reach?
"You know where i'm from, a little suspicion about one's true identity and motives is considered good manners."
-- Nale
by Loque on Nov 6, 2009 6:48 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Maybe SOME… But probably not most. If Oregon really wanted to be in the NC game, they should have beat Boise. The only people Oregon has to blame for not making it is themselves for not winning the game and playing some of their worst and undisciplined football.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-U-N-S-U-R-E-O-F-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Nov 6, 2009 6:52 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
True.
But with mediocrity abound in college football today (Forde’s so-called “Semi-great 8”), a 1-loss team has as much right to a NC game this year than any other year.
"You know where i'm from, a little suspicion about one's true identity and motives is considered good manners."
-- Nale
by Loque on Nov 6, 2009 8:27 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
UO fans hate everyone.
by BSU Alumni stranded in Portland on Nov 6, 2009 1:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s true.

It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-U-N-S-U-R-E-O-F-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Nov 6, 2009 1:41 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Broncs vs. Ducks
This is definitely a kick-ass post, with outstanding points, and should be required reading for all the wack-job commentators at ESPN (except Lou Holtz). No team in college football maintains the same level of play throughout an entire season. Good teams get better, bad teams go in the opposite direction. The Ducks AND the Broncos have both improved as the season has progressed. The most logical point of comparison is their head-to-head matchup in September. End of story.
by typhoonblue on Nov 6, 2009 11:14 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
More important to BSU?
That game was huge to Oregon; they were unprepared, outplayed, and were embarrased. When you beat someone, it has to count for something.
If they played again now? Who knows, have to play the game to know.
Historically, Oregon is a slow starter; but it was Boise’s first game too. All first game kinks, foibles, and issues apply to both teams equally.
Be interesting to see if BSU got and won a BCS bid how this would play out. Say both teams win out and get BCS bids, if both teams win, what would everyone say then?
Head to head has to count for something, and if they want to say they are the better team they have to show up for every game. One thing Boise always does: shows up prepared. Gotta respect that.
by MeanBobMean on Nov 6, 2009 11:17 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Great points.
As long as we count wins and losses for games in September, they should count the same as wins and losses in November.
by Nick Kroes on Nov 6, 2009 12:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah
But, this is all hypohetical since Boise is in fact ranked ahead of a very fine Oregon team.
On ething about strength of schedule, it does give you a small bit of wiggle room in margin of error—that is, you lose one game in the SEC and eveyrone says who cares, if Boise loses one game—it does not matter to whom it could be a close game to Florida—and everyone would say “told you so.”
by MeanBobMean on Nov 6, 2009 12:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Unprepared? You had a year to think about it after the loss at Autzen???????
by BSU Alumni stranded in Portland on Nov 6, 2009 1:34 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It’s hard to get motivated after all that pot smoking.
It's spelled "S-H-U-F-E-L-T-U-N-S-U-R-E-O-F-H-I-M-S-E-L-F"
by JShufelt on Nov 6, 2009 1:42 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Not "me"
But yes, they were unprepared. That was obvious, and as you note, shame on them, they had a year and really wanted payback for what many of their fans seemed to feel was a game that was an “if only.” Yet, they simply failed to show. I watched the game, their offense was terrible, misfiring constantly.
Look, that doesn’t take away form BSU’s defense, which is really terrific, and had Oregon moved the ball and scored more, Boise would have adjusted their plans to that. But they were pathetically prepared in my opinion.
By the way, that’s a condemnation of them, not an excuse for them. As I said in other places: BSU gets ready for their games, always—that’s a team strength and should count for how a team is perceivedand teh esteem in which you hold it. Getting mentally and physically prepared for every game is a challenge and a great testimony to BSU. Oregon’s fans wanted that game badly, yet the team simply could not get it together. Their D looked OK, that part of the game will gel earlier typically, but they played and called a simply awful game and that’s preparation and coaching.
by MeanBobMean on Nov 6, 2009 1:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Unprepared doesn't being to describe it.
Totally right. It was a shame the way the Ducks came out for that game. I know there is a brand new offensive line in place and, inevitably, a new coach will have growing pains, but that was inexcusable.
The first thing I said after that game was how much I liked Petersen and, even though the Broncos played a sloppy game as well, they seemed to just have a little something extra when they really needed it. When Oregon scored and then forced a turnover, I thought the Ducks were going to get back in it and roll to a win, but for whatever reason it just didn’t happen. They do have to get punished in some way for that. You can’t have a game on your schedule, blow it, and just expect to dash up the rankings like it never happened.
That being said, I just hope Bronco fans realize it’s not a disrespect thing at all. There are a lot of teams in a lot of sports that lose to a team that they end up being better than at the end of the year. If the BCS didn’t put so much on losing ONE GAME at the beginning of the season, we wouldn’t be getting so ridiculously worked up over this. It must be nice to be an NFL fan and know that your team can have a bad game or two like most sports teams do.
by netminder82 on Nov 6, 2009 2:30 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
You also have to admit that giving up 28 points in the second half to Louisiana Tech has to say something. Head to head cannot completely override the surrounding details like this. L. Tech lost to Auburn, Navy, Nevada, Utah State and Idaho.
by netminder82 on Nov 7, 2009 3:03 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
Matters Not Now
No one is ranking Oregon above Boise state after this loss to Stanford.
by MeanBobMean on Nov 7, 2009 8:08 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Ironic
Oregon may an excellent case for why head-to-head shouldn’t determine the ranking and they got their wish, USC passed them in the Polls! Nice.
by duc on Nov 9, 2009 1:48 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

by 














