Boise State picked No. 16 in USA Today Coaches' Poll
by Kevan Lee on Aug 7, 2009 7:04 AM PDT
in Boise State football
50 comments
The Broncos are the highest ranked non-BCS team in the USA Today Coaches' Poll released today.
At No. 16, Boise State is one spot ahead of TCU and two spots in front of Utah. The Oregon Ducks came in at No. 14. Full poll and analysis after the jump.
|
Rank
|
Team (first-place votes) |
2008 record
|
Points
|
Final 2008 rank
|
|
|
1.
|
Florida (53)
|
13-1
|
1,466
|
1
|
|
|
2.
|
Texas (4)
|
12-1
|
1,386
|
3
|
|
|
3.
|
Oklahoma (1)
|
12-2
|
1,358
|
5
|
|
|
4.
|
Southern California (1)
|
12-1
|
1,321
|
2
|
|
|
5.
|
Alabama
|
12-2
|
1,134
|
6
|
|
|
6.
|
Ohio State
|
10-3
|
1,126
|
11
|
|
|
7.
|
Virginia Tech
|
10-4
|
1,020
|
14
|
|
|
8.
|
Penn State
|
11-2
|
988
|
8
|
|
|
9.
|
LSU
|
8-5
|
917
|
NR
|
|
|
10.
|
Mississippi
|
9-4
|
889
|
15
|
|
|
11.
|
Oklahoma State
|
9-4
|
861
|
18
|
|
|
12.
|
California
|
9-4
|
711
|
25
|
|
|
13.
|
Georgia
|
10-3
|
707
|
10
|
|
|
14.
|
Oregon |
10-3
|
694
|
9
|
|
|
15.
|
Georgia Tech
|
9-4
|
559
|
22
|
|
|
16.
|
Boise State |
12-1
|
542
|
13
|
|
|
17.
|
TCU
|
11-2
|
461
|
7
|
|
|
18.
|
Utah
|
13-0
|
404
|
4
|
|
|
19.
|
Florida State
|
9-4
|
371
|
23
|
|
|
20.
|
North Carolina |
8-5
|
293
|
NR
|
|
|
21.
|
Iowa
|
9-4
|
257
|
20
|
|
|
22.
|
Nebraska
|
9-4
|
236
|
NR
|
|
|
23.
|
Notre Dame |
7-6
|
194
|
NR
|
|
|
24.
|
Brigham Young
|
10-3
|
178
|
21
|
|
|
25.
|
Oregon State |
9-4
|
165
|
19
|
|
| Others receiving votes (with 2008 records) | |||||
| Kansas (8-5) 138; Michigan State (9-4) 136; Texas Tech (11-2) 114; Cincinnati (11-3) 90; Pittsburgh (9-4) 64; West Virginia (9-4) 55; Rutgers (8-5) 51; Miami (Fla.) (7-6) 46; Missouri (10-4) 44; Illinois (5-7) 38; Clemson (7-6) 30; South Carolina (7-6) 18; UCLA (4-8) 14; Auburn (5-7) 12; Nevada (7-6) 11; South Florida (8-5) 11; Kentucky (7-6) 9; North Carolina State (6-7) 7; Arkansas (5-7) 6; Wisconsin (7-6) 6; Northwestern (9-4) 5; Southern Mississippi (7-6) 4; Wake Forest (8-5) 4; Arizona (8-5) 3; Boston College (9-5) 3; Central Michigan (8-5) 3; East Carolina (9-5) 3; Colorado (5-7) 2; Maryland (8-5) 2; Navy (8-5) 2; Tennessee (5-7) 2; Houston (8-5) 1; Michigan (3-9) 1; Minnesota (7-6) 1; Troy (8-5) 1. | |||||
If you're looking for WAC schools, you better be okay with disappointment. Despite a smattering of preseason hype for LaTech and Fresno State, the only other WAC team mentioned by the coaches was Nevada at No. 40 with 11 total votes.
The other thing to note is that Boise State was much closer to besting No. 15 Georgia Tech than they were getting caught by No. 17 TCU. The difference between the Yellow Jackets and the Broncos was 17 votes; the difference between the Horned Frogs and the Broncos, 81.
How should Bronco fans feel about the preseason ranking?
Well, I feel great. Starting the season in the Top 20 and higher than any other non-BCS team is all that any Bronco fan can ask for. Since the USA Today poll makes up one third of the BCS formula and since it is traditionally one of the least coherent polls around, you have to be pleased that the Broncos landed where they did.
(Note: The only fear I have is that there are already MWC teams breathing down BSU's neck, and with three MWC teams in the Top 25 and a perceived soft schedule for the Broncos, the possibility exists of BSU getting jumped in the polls before season's end. [/knockingonwood])
Other notes:
- Boise State's two nonconference opponents for 2010 made the list: Oregon State at No. 25 and VaTech at No. 7
- Diet Shastas all around at the Watson household. Notre Dame squeaked in at No. 23.
- Things could be worse if you're a WAC fan. You could be a Sun Belt fan. The total points received by Sun Belt teams is Troy's one.
0 recs |
50 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Not bad.
But I expected them to be in the 13-15 range. So I won’t complain…about that.
Question. How does Ohio State get a #6 ranking? And Notre Dame at #23? Are they kidding?
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.)
Agree
Every preseason mag has Boise in top 15 at worst, and Rivals has them at 9. I believe the coaches do not want o vote them that high per usual with their allegiances to their league and not knowing how good teams can be.
I really strongly disagree with Utah being so high. New QB, questions on the o-line, lost both corners, questions on special teams, new receiving corps… it an awful lot for a mid major to lose and still be in the top 25.
The only team I’m worried about getting leapfrogged by is TCU. Like I said earlier, Utah should go back to being the Utah we are used to. TCU has a very winnable game at perennially overrated Clemson, they will probably be favored in every game on the schedule. Might come down to the BYU game for them.
by MooreWalksOnWater on Aug 7, 2009 7:13 AM PDT reply actions
TCU's schedule sets up nicely
I agree. TCU is the only other team I see that can make a BCS run. They have managable road games against Virginia and Clemson that gives them a chance to shoot up the polls. The question mark is the BYU game on the road.
BYU could be the TCU of last year. If they have a good showing against Oklahoma, their next three toughest games they get at home against Florida St, Utah and TCU.
The coaches’ love for Utah must be soley based on last year – I see them with at least 3 losses by the end of the year.
"...he could have run for 500 yards if only the end zone hadn't kept getting in the way"
Utah
Being a Utah fan I am surprised they were that high, I was thinking the Utes would be 20 at the best. 18 is a bit high in my opinion with the QB and WR needs to be replaced.
TCU? Maybe.
But if Boise State rolls Oregon on the 3rd I’d expect them to crack the top 10 by the Fresno State game. Where the Broncos will have a lull is mid-season. It always happens when they steamroll the WAC schedule. 52-0 here, 49-14 there, and nobody bats an eye because its supposed to happen. That’s where TCU may have the ability to gain ground. Boise State has always had to rely on teams ahead of them losing to move up. This year may not be any different.
Ohio State won’t get past USC early. I expect Ole Miss, Va. Tech, and Ok State to lose by mid-season as well. Really the only top 15 teams that may be undefeated by the end of October are Florida, USC, Texas or Oklahoma (until they play), maybe Penn State, and the Broncos. So if it all pans out they could be ranked 7-8 before the end of the season. I don’t see them getting into the top 5 though.
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.)
Not Bad
I also wish the Broncos were ranked higher to start off so the ducks could move up more once the beating goes down. But I guess they did get it right by putting the ducks ahead by a few spots. So lets do a quick run down: Ducks face 5 ranked teams this year, Boise 1 ranked team, hmm…. And you little smurfs think a championship is possible, ha! Oh, and that schedule next year looks fierce, those mighty beavs..give me a break. But look at it this way, by the end of the year you can say your only loss came to a top 10 team in the nation.
I can get you a toe by three o'clock this afternoon.
uhhmm...
Except for they won’t be a top 10 team when they play in Boise (see above you ‘tard). 7,8,9,13,10?
You don’t get credit for how the team that beat you finishes, do you?
Also these are pre-season rankings. Which means there is little, if any, real accuracy to them. Because you have opponents ranked pre-season doesn’t mean you play 5 ranked opponents. Cal, Oregon State, and Utah could all be unranked by the time you play…remember, there’s no credit for how they begin either.
Nevada and Tulsa could easily be ranked when the Broncos come to town too. Don’t forget the National Championship game. I’m pretty sure whoever we play in that game will be ranked No. 2.
Nobody on this board is seriously talking a about a national title (except me I guess)* note:sarcasm * . Not that we shouldn’t be. But given the landscape of college football today, all us poor little smurfs can do is dream…* sigh * …we’re not invited to your party… * sigh, holding back the tears *. So we’ll just have to TP your house while you’re sleeping. * all smiles *
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.)
Lets be real
No other team you play will be ranked when you play them. I guess Nevada might have a chance since they play the same weak azz teams you do, but they would have to be undefeated and I don’t really know much about UN, so i will leave it at that. Cal and Utah will be ranked because each will likely be undefeated when we play them in weeks 3 and 4. My point was we play tough teams all year, you play them once a year. And I think you get a little credit for how teams finish that beat you. Everyone that lost to Flordia says they lost to the national champion, not whatever they were ranked when they played them, tard!
I can get you a toe by three o'clock this afternoon.
Mikrino
I can guarantee you that we’ll play more top 25 teams…there are taxes, death and a soft SOS for Boise State.
You can guarantee you think you’ll play more top 25 teams. I can guarantee you won’t play any. It doesn’t really mean anything does it? Oregon may not be ranked when they play those teams.
soft SOS for Boise State
I’m assuming you’ve included Oregon in that soft SOS?
I know I would.
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.)
Yes, Mikrino,
we are part of that soft SOS. If you think you’re going to roll us than we’ll be out of top 25 and have real tough time in Pac-10 play.
uhmm..
SO Boise State must have a win against a No. 1 ranked team in 2006 then right?
Because they whooped Oregon State 42-14 in September that year and Oregon State went on to beat USC who was ranked No. 1 at the time.
This guy explains how Boise State was the national champ that year and according to your logic, he’s right.
http://the7thangel.blogspot.com/2007/01/bcs-championship-breakdown.html
And I think you get a little credit for how teams finish that beat you.
Credit for the teams that beat you? Serious? How come no WAC teams get credit for being rolled over every year by the Broncos? Why don’t PAC10 teams get credit for laying down when USC comes calling every year?
I don’t hear any applause for Boise State’s loss to Georgia in 2005. Ridiculous.
You can’t KNOW who will or won’t be ranked when you play them. Anything can happen.
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.)
One more time
So you are telling me that if a team loses one game all year to, lets say a USC that goes undefeated, that doesn’t strenghten their rankings in the BCS? You are in the wrong here buddy. If we beat you and go undefeated the rest of the year, and that is your only loss, your rankings will be higher than if we were to fall off after that and lose the remaining of our games, fact. Kinda like how USC loses to the Beavs every other year and that keeps them from the title game because OSU is a crap team that finishes with a 7-8 win season. But if the Beavs were ranked when they beat them, and then only lost one or two more games, USC would be in much better standing. Want me to lay out any more examples for you? And you don’t get any credit for losing to Georgia in 2005 because you lost to the beavs also that year, that voids all claims to any type of applause.
I can get you a toe by three o'clock this afternoon.
USC never loses in the OOC
but always loses in the Pac-10…hmmm!
Oregon State as started the last 3 years 2-3 to finish strong. You want to play the Beavers early in the season – it’s like night and day.
TULSA and Nevada in the top 25…LOL!
Why are we arguing with each other?
When we could be joining forces to complain about ohio st and notre dame’s year in and year out overrankedness? (That is a new word I made up)
Yes we will
not just them...
Utah is far too overrated for what they lost. USC too.
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.)
Why USC...?
because they’re replacing a quarterback and their linebacking unit. Have you seen the the quarterback unit with Corp, Barkley, Mustain et al. Mustain, who started for Arkansas, can’t even crack to the two deep. Have you looked at who is replacing their linebackers? USC having quality linebackers is a given like rain in November in the Willamette Valley.
You're front 7 if you include the nickleback
in your spartan package is pretty green, buddy. You’re replacing 3 out of your 4 most productive wide receivers. Ian Johnson is gone. Can Avery be the featured back at a 171 pounds? What happens if you lose a DT to injury even for just game with Atkinson suspended? Everybody is replacing something…it’s called college football.
Only real loss in the WR corps is Jeremy Childs. Titus Young hardly played last year due to suspension…he’s the fastest on the team and a home-run threat. Pettis catches anything that’s thrown to him and we have some youngsters with wheels.
DT is a legitimate concern with depth, but the starters are solid.
by Drew Roberts on Aug 7, 2009 12:58 PM PDT up reply actions
I know how everyone spins their questions...
I took into account that Young and Pettis are very good receivers but after that the depth is paper thin. Even your coach said that you need a true freshman to step up numbers wise, which is something that no one wants ideally. We got a kid coming in by the name of Diante Jackson that was 4* by all accounts and a top 3 NoCal recruit and there is no way I want him on the field this year. Likewise, our greyshirt freshman Blake Cantu, a highly recruited Texas wr, is very promising but I want him to come along nicely under the upperclassmen.
In all honesty, WR depth is more important to your offense, especially if the oline can’t run block against premier competition. I would hate to be featuring a 170 pound back. Our small back in LaMichael is 190 currently and that is a little small imo.
All this speculation makes me antsy.
I can’t wait for September 3rd to roll around.
I think we’ll all found out soon enough.
But I have to say, BClif is a dork.
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.)
Watch out Mikrino...
comments like this,
But I have to say, BClif is a dork.
can get you suspended. Unless OBNUG is protecting their own.
I know...
but we all agree to the same terms.
Btw, I love the analysis…
Nevada and Tulsa could easily be ranked when the Broncos come to town too.
Nevada is getting tons of love, right? They open at Notre Dame (ripped Hawaii a new cornhole at Hawaii), go to Colorado State (beat Fresno State last year), and host Missouri. They could easily be 0-3 and not ranked in the top 25. Tulsa has a shot but very slim with their attrition.
Utah is far too overrated for what they lost. USC too.
USC is overrated why? Because of a new linebacking corp and quarterback. If there is any team in this country that can replace those two units, it is ’SC. Corp beat out Barkley, Mustain – both the top quarterbacks (#1) in their respective recruiting cycles. Sanchez was a first year starter last year. They will reload and should be considered a top 5 school easily. They have the best offensive line in the country, a returning corp of wide receivers that is second to none, and a eye-popping stable of runningbacks.
Please don’t protect, you’re enabling.
suspended? Uhhh..ok. suspend me I guess.
BClif gets on here and posts the same thing over and over. That isn’t dorky?
Its a joke they are even ranked though. Who do you guys even play???? we all remember those late hits fomr last year you dirt balls. And I can tellyou one thing, TJ Ward is not happy about it. He will be head hunting
from another post…
we all know oregon will show up and dominate both sides of the ball. and you know they remember those late hits from last year. be afraid boise. be very afraid
He posted a fanpost on here with similar rants telling us about TJ Ward being a headhunter and we remember those dirty hits, get the lube ready, bend over, blah blah blah…apparently it got booted otherwise I’d quote his sputtering sentence fragments. What’s he 14?
Ignorance aside, all I said above was in reference to MooreWalksonWater’s thought that TCU may be able jump Boise State in the polls during the season. It was the ignorant post of KyleC that I responded to. From there, it pretty much spiraled out of control when 3 Oregon fans put there heads together.
Bison, you have some fairly good analysis from time to time. But the Strength, Speed, Size thing gets old. Last year thats all I saw on any board. Oregon’s bigger, faster, stronger. THEY GOT BEAT.
2006- Oklahoma’s bigger, faster, stronger. THEY GOT BEAT.
Size, Speed, and Strength are great attributes in football. But you talk about it as if Boise State’s players will just stand still on game day. That approach earned your team a loss last year. Now they may not be as pre-occupied with it as their fans. Perhaps because last year it did no good.
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.)
Where is your rebuttle?
So you are telling me that if a team loses one game all year to, lets say a USC that goes undefeated, that doesn’t strenghten their rankings in the BCS? You are in the wrong here buddy. If we beat you and go undefeated the rest of the year, and that is your only loss, your rankings will be higher than if we were to fall off after that and lose the remaining of our games, fact.
I can get you a toe by three o'clock this afternoon.
Its rebuttAL
Here’s your original post;
I also wish the Broncos were ranked higher to start off so the ducks could move up more once the beating goes down. But I guess they did get it right by putting the ducks ahead by a few spots. So lets do a quick run down: Ducks face 5 ranked teams this year, Boise 1 ranked team, hmm…. And you little smurfs think a championship is possible, ha! Oh, and that schedule next year looks fierce, those mighty beavs..give me a break. But look at it this way, by the end of the year you can say your only loss came to a top 10 team in the nation.
Here was my rebuttal. To which you had no real re-direct;
And I think you get a little credit for how teams finish that beat you.
Credit for the teams that beat you? Serious? How come no WAC teams get credit for being rolled over every year by the Broncos? Why don’t PAC10 teams get credit for laying down when USC comes calling every year?
Here’s your example;
So you are telling me that if a team loses one game all year to, lets say a USC that goes undefeated, that doesn’t strenghten their rankings in the BCS?
Here’s my next rebuttal;
I’m telling you that losing, period, doesn’t help any ranking anywhere. I’ve yet to see a team lose and move up in rank. I’ve yet to see a team lose to a top 10 opponent and have it benefit them later on in the season. They, personally, might believe the adage “If you have to lose, lose to the best.” But does it directly benefit them? NO. The only time SOS is accurate is on January 10th. After all games are finished. By then its of no use. Boise State started 2008 with a SOS around 113th. On January 9th, 2009 it was 59th.
Case in point: TCU. TCU lost to Oklahoma 35-10 last season. Oklahoma went to the title game. Did it help TCU? Not really. They didn’t drop out of the rankings with the loss. That was largely due to how they performed against the Sooners, much more so, than how the Sooners finished the season. If Boise State loses to Oregon on the 3rd I don’t think they will fall out of the top 25 either. Why? Because I have a crystal ball and I know Oregon goes undefeated? No. Because the only way they drop 10 spots after one game is if they let Idaho play the game for them.
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.)
loosing to idaho does not equal loosing to florida
either mathematically or symbolically.
your confidence in your point is strange.
sos directly, mathematically, figures into the bcs computer rankings that determine whether or not a team gets into a bcs bowl and/or the ncg. the computers have over-ridden the human polls in several instances for bcs placements. one example: in 2001, the human polls have Oregon at #2, but Nebraska and Colorado both have higher SOS, so Nebraska is BCS #2 and to the NCG while Oregon is #4 and to the Fiesta. the records of your opponents and their opponents do matter.
sos also certainly figures into the human voters choices. in 2007, michigan was AP #5 when they lost to appalachian st and the next week they were unranked. they didn’t get killed, it was a last second win – they just lost to the wrong team. last year, AP #1 oklahoma lost to AP #5 texas and the next week Oklahoma was #4, a drop of 3 spots and a unquestionable hand remaining in the NCG race. big advantage, much easier to climb from #4 to #2 than from #10 or even #6 to #2. the same is true for the other edge of the bcs positions, or just being ranked in general.
the tcu example has little merit. they were AP 24th when they lost to #2 Oklahoma… of course they dropped out, they only had 2 spots to fall. They remained in the “other’s retaining votes” category, proving they got respect for who they had played.
so of course, wining is better than loosing, i think we all know that.
but loosing to a contender is flatly less damaging than loosing to a bottom feeder.
by Bill Musgrave on Aug 9, 2009 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions
What's funny...
…is that the rubba duckies keep hootin’ and hollerin’ about dirty hits and how they’re gonna pay us back, yet they totally disregard the fact that the ducks were out-coached, out-played and out-everything-else for the better part of 3 quarters. Damn prevent-D almost did us in. Does someone wanna give this record player a kick because the record keeps skipping and repeating the same-ol’, same-ol’. LOL
I hate everyone equally...especially Vandals!
The old stand by
What’s funny to me is how many times “The late hits come up”.
I know I’m not the only Bronco fan who saw Hout get his face mask grabbed on his way to the end zone against TCU. I haven.t heard a thing about it. One could say that face mask cost us the game. Although nobody has made that claim. It’s never come up.
Excuses.
That’s all they are. Boise State just doesn’t use them.
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.)
I haven't made an excuse for the loss...
I just think the game in September will be different. I diminish the importance of last year’s game, if you will, because we had Chris Haper has our quarterback for nearly 3 quarters.
As echris said below, Oregon got beat. We got beat fair and square. We gave up 386 yards passing.
But at the same time, it’s simply asinine to compare a facemask penalty to a late hit on a QB that causes the QB to miss the rest of the game.
The number one thing, is that in one case a player got knocked out of the game in a hit that could have been avoidable (by not leading with a helmet). The second is that it happened to a QB, who is the most important, and most protected player on the field. I mean, really, how apoplectic would BSU fans be if Kellen Moore got knocked out of a game on an illegal hit? There is simply no comparison between the two hits.
Now, granted a lot of Oregon fans are taking it too far, and saying we wouldn’t have lost blah blah blah. Oregon deserved to lose the game for many reasons. But that doesn’t mean that BSU fans should get belligerent about the hit or deny that it had an impact on the game.
--AddictedToQuack, SBNation's Oregon Ducks blog
Sure...
we lost last year. How much relevance do you put into last year’s game? Not a lot is my answer.
Youtube.
There’s a higlight video from last years Oregon game on youtube. In it there’s a frame you see an Oregon DB kicking Richie Brockel after he brings him down.
Not a word from any Bronco fans about retribution.
Here it is;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iHtrcI7Pco4
At the 2:20 mark Brockel is brought down. The Oregon DB wearing #2 does his best impression of my 5 year old son.
Stay Classy Eugene
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.)
Watch on until 2:35 to reminisce about Kyle Gingg..
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.)
It doesn't matter, but ...
Oregon got away with two personal fouls and Boise State got called for two personal fouls. The kick to Brockel’s head and the spear to Iloka’s back were obvious personal fouls. Nobody wants to see any of the kids get hurt, and it was scary for everyone when Masoli had to leave the game.
Oregon lost a player and Boise State lost a player, albeit because of JJ’s own actions. Both teams committed at least two personal fouls, but Boise State paid for their’s while Oregon didn’t get penalized for either of their’s.
You would think Oregon fans would be satisfied with that, or at least get over it, but they won’t take those green glasses off, to look at it.
OK, I’m ready for the onslaught from Duck fans, so let me have it, Ducks.
Agreed.
The point is though, you don’t hear or see Broncos fans on every forum complaining about those fouls that went uncalled. Maybe because the Broncos won, but personally speaking, I wouldn’t use that for an excuse when my team was down 37-13 going into the 4th quarter.
JTlight said it best, 386yds, 3TDs. Along with 3 INTs from the Broncos D.
I also agree that it means little now, except for its motivation for the Ducks, and inspiration for the Broncos.
Man, I can’t wait for September! Then finally all this debate will have meaning.
Boise State - The best in all the land (The "land" being Idaho, and large parts of California, Oregon, and Nevada.)
Mikrino...
in reality I am giving the Bronco’s the most props. I really don’t think it’s fair to believe we could beat a team of BSU’s caliber with a true freshman quarterback that can’t throw the ball. In so many words, those arguing that we should of stopped your offense when we were going 3 and out for the better part of 3 quarters are implying that we should of stopped a prolific offense because your from the WAC. Seriously, any team worth their mettle should of beat us on that day. It’s not to take anything away from you guys because you can only face the team that’s on the field. You guys deserved the win, injuries are a part of the game, and the product that will be on the field come Sept. 3 will be drastically different.
step 1: present yourself as if above complaining
step 2: present your complaints
by Bill Musgrave on Aug 9, 2009 3:39 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Let's settle this on the field...
between the mascots. Like it should be! The loser has to go to the Idaho game next year.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
Broncos Football Schedule
@
Virginia Tech
|
Mon 09/06 | 5:00 PM PDT |
|
@
Wyoming
|
Sat 09/18 | 5:00 PM PDT |
|
Oregon St.
|
Sat 09/25 | TBA |
| @ New Mexico St. | Sat 10/02 | 5:00 PM PDT |
| Toledo | Sat 10/09 | 5:00 PM PDT |
| @ San Jose St. | Sat 10/16 | 5:00 PM PDT |
| Louisiana Tech | Tue 10/26 | 5:00 PM PDT |
| Hawaii | Sat 11/06 | 11:00 AM PDT |
| @ Idaho | Fri 11/12 | 6:00 PM PST |
| Fresno St. | Fri 11/19 | 6:30 PM PST |
| @ Nevada | Fri 11/26 | 7:15 PM PST |
| Utah State | Sat 12/04 | 12:00 PM PST |
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
