But it's not like they didn't try. Last year, they played Alabama. In 2005, they had USC & Michigan State. In 2004, they had Michigan State. In 2003, they had USC and Alabama. The problem is that Michigan State backed out this year and Washington sucked. We've heard the same stories from Gonzaga in basketball when they were just getting on the national stage. There was no benefit for the big schools to play Gonzaga at the time, because they were considered just-another-mid-major but actually won some of those games. Now that they are a perennial top 25 team, they can schedule because it doesn't hurt to have a loss to Gonzaga on the resume. I'm not arguing Hawaii doesn't share any blame for their schedule. I'm just saying that those kinds of schools face a lot of scheduling challenges that other teams don't.
True, but Fresno (from the same conference and played A&M, Oregon, Kstate), BYU, TCU, Tulsa (OU, BYU), & Troy manage to do it. In fact if Troy won all their games (who had at Arkansas, at Florida, at Georgia and Okie State as nonconference) you would have a team from a lower conference than Hawaii be in the NC game. I don't there there is any doubt Troy would have ended #1 or #2 in the BCS had they run the table--it can be done. Also had BYU or Utah, East Carolina (notable wins would be at Vtech and at WVU), C Florida (Texas, at S Florida) or Akron (at Ohio State, at Ucon, at Ind) won all their nonconference and conference games this year they probably make it to the NC this year. I am strongly in favor of a playoff, but don't like the argument you are doomed as a mid major. Do all you can to schedule roadies to LSU, SC, Texas, OU, Georgia, Florida, FSU, WV, Ohio State, Michigan, Tennessee, Auburn, Oregon, Vtech--more often then not you can get a top 25 road win doing this. Line 3-4 up against the majors just in case one of them is down. Also, I really don't see how Hawaii would have a harder time sheduling a road game to a national power than most of those schools. Central Florida even got Texas to go there place (which Texas barely escaped) and Okie State went to Troy (and lost). Looks to me Hawaii chose to have two non-D1 schools (N Colorado and Central Sourthern--who I have never heard about on any level) at home instead of roadies to even lower tier BCS conference teams. I assume Washington had the cash at hand so didn't mind sending their players to Hawaii for the closest thing to a Bowl they will get--but not many programs can do that.
I'm assuming that you mean the 2007 season schedule is 119th out of 119. The Warriors 2008 non conference schedule is substantially better than this years. Link 2008 Non-Conference Schedule: Aug. 30 at Florida Sept. 6 Weber State Sept. 13 at Oregon State Nov. 29 Washington State Dec. 6 Cincinnati Besides Weber State, I think that's a decent non conference schedule. As previously discussed, Michigan State forked over $250,000 to back out of a meeting that was scheduled well in advance. In recent years, both Michigan and Texas have declined to play Hawaii. I am not arguing that Hawaii should be in the NC game this year by any stretch. Their schedule was weak this year, and part of that is the team's fault. Hawaii got what they wanted, they have a chance to show that they belong on the big stage. What they do with it is up to them now.
Yes, but none of those teams were preseason top 25 teams. The big teams don't mind playing crappier WAC-type teams. They don't want to play a pre-season top 25 Hawaii that many people felt could go undefeated and had Heisman-contender QB. That's why Michigan State cancelled their game with Hawaii at the last minute (and they Texas did so several years ago). If Washington and Michigan State - Hawaii's original OOC opponents - were both decent this year, would anyone have complained?
Texas played TCU, who has been among the strongest midmajor over the last few year, top 25 all last year, and higher ranked preseason in both polls than Hawaii this year. Everybody knows Fresno is often good, and sometimes has embarrassed BCS schools, but they keep getting them lined up for road games. I really don't think USC or LSU or VTech or Texas or OU or Oregon would object to Hawaii coming to their place. Even BYU, who has a big Pac Island presence and I would think might even do a home and home, would be an improvement. Now I would not be surprised a down Washington program didn't cancel (though they didn't), nor a mediocre BCS program like MSU, but an elite program isn't going to avoid any of the better non BCS programs so long as it is home. In addition to Fresno and TCU, Utah & BYU often have good teams and they get BCS conference opponents regularly, and often good ones. Sure looks to me like Hawaii didn't try real hard and could have lined up better than 2 regularly below average teams from BCS conferences + non non D1 schools as a nonconference schedule.
the problem is that the big teams only want a 2 and 1 or in some cases a 2 and 0 game with teams from lower conferences...how is a mid major supposed to have a chance at winning versus the big boys when most of the times they can't even play at home!! and Div I or whatever it is called nowadays has 119 teams, why can't all teams be treated equally? the rich get richer and the mid majors get screwed ...money talks
Texas has a history of declining to play good non-conference teams. Miami had been wanting to play them for years but UT said no. Their reasoning: worries about losing recruits. I wouldn't dismiss the idea that UT is afraid to play opponents like a Hawai'i.
Ohio State was pretty weak the last couple of years when UT played them....as was UCLA in 97 and 98, upcoming series vs. UCLA, series in 95 and 96 vs. Notre Dame, previous and current dates with Arkansas, etc. Do they play a top 5 non-conference team each year? Nope. But few teams do, and I can't see the "Texas has a history of declining good non-conf. teams" line of logic. Maybe if we disagree on the criteria for "good."
Texas has refused to play Miami. That's straight from the athletic department at Miami, and that's proof (fine, just one example) that Texas won't schedule team they are worried about losing to. Not just Texas; Florida (and other schools) did the same when the 8-game conference schedules in the 80s limited the number of talented non-conference opponents.
They schedule these games years in advance. So if UCLA, Ohio State, Notre Dame, or any of those schools are having down years when it's time to play then that's just the way it played out, it wasn't intentional.
Yeah, why would Texas ever schedule a game against a team they may lose against? Luckily, they've only played teams like Ohio State and TCU during the non-conference schedule in the last three seasons. Cup. Cakes.
First of all, I couldn't be prouder for the Hawaii Warriors. Win or lose, they have accomplished more than I could have ever imagined. This is a team that in 9 years under June Jones has gone from 0-12 to 12-0. It has done it with a total recruiting budget of $50,000, less than most of the BCS conferences pay their top recruits. That being said, I'm not harboring any illusions about Hawaii being the best team in the nation. One first place vote, a symbolic gesture of good faith from Hal Mumme in the coaches poll is good enough for me (also, Dennis Franchione, don't let the door hit you on your way out; he ranked Hawaii #22). Concerning Hawaii's schedule; the majority of the blame in my opinion should rest on the AD at Hawaii, Herman Frazier. He did a terrible job of scheduling this year (he didn't have the Washington game contract signed well into the summer), and he should have realized that no team in their right mind would travel to Aloha Stadium, where the home field advantage gives the Warriors a better than fighting shot against anyone. As far as I know, Frazier intended to play 1 FCS team (like every other team in the nation), plus the MSU game, and try to get a game with either USC, Michigan or Mississippi State (All on the road). His problem was that he dallied, didn't sign firm agreements, and ended up scrambling and signing Northern Colorado when he couldn't get a single team to agree to play Hawaii, despite offering a $750,000 payment. Michigan State canceled their game against Hawaii because they feel like they got cheated the last time they came to the islands, when actually, their players just got tired and couldn't keep up. They're like Mavs fans who think they got cheated in the finals, probably worse, because for 3 years now they've been doing nothing but bad-mouthing the Warrior program. <object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/2jDfszTciy4&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/2jDfszTciy4&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object> Concerning Fresno State; it's pretty much a factor of three things; location, style and reputation. Fresno State's gained that reputation as a BCS buster, so a loss to them doesn't seem to hurt nearly as much in in the eyes of the public. Secondly, because of their location, they can adopt the "whoever, wherever, whenever" motto far easier than the underfunded Rainbows, who have a "whoever, wherever, whenever it fits into the budget". Hawaii, with its recent success, is getting there, but it's going to take a win over Florida or a win in the Sugar to really cement that reputation as an "acceptable loss". Finally, FSU plays a pretty conventional style of football that helps get teams ready to play their conference slate. No one does it quite like the Warriors (maybe Texas Tech). As for BYU, your guess is as good as mine. I'd love to have a 20+ year contract to play these guys every single year; I grew up hating the Cougs in every sport, as they were our natural rival in the WAC. As far as I can tell, BYU just doesn't want to play Hawaii; most of the rivalry emotion is concentrated in the Islands. Still, at the root of the problem is the BCS system itself. There is no possible way a non-BCS team with 1 loss will ever make it into a big game. Just a flat out fact. So realistically, you're going to see more and more teams schedule soft intentionally (ala Kansas, who I have far less sympathy for, since a BCS team has the money, resources and clout to get a good schedule every year without question). This will still happen until the system gets revised. GO Warriors!
Defend them as much as you like...I'm just saying that there is proof to the argument that they refuse to play teams they may lose to...or lose recruits to. That's their prerogative.
Why is Boise still ranked? I don't remember them having a decent win all year. As I remember their SOS was just ahead of Hawaii's.
Hard to believe that after all that has happened this season. All of the upsets and turmoil, #1's and 2's going down every week, that LSU and USC, the #1 and #2 preseason ranked teams, are the 2 best teams in the country and deserve to play for the title. That said, I am not writing off the Buckeyes at all. They're not going up against a spread offense like Florida, LSU is a normal offense and has really not been very explosive and has gotten a lot of luck and made tough plays, or they could have 3 or 4 losses. Last year's LSU would wipe the floor with the 07 version, and this is going to be a close game. Tressel is by far the best coach in the country and he is going to have the Buckeyes well prepared after last year's debacle.
Ohio State has been the better program than Miami for 5+ years running. If Texas avoided Miami it wasn't solely because they were afraid of losing to them because they had a tougher non-conference game than that one they did schedule. Maybe they just thought the risk-reward was better for OSU--they could clearly win or lose (and both teams split--losing at home), but figured they would get a lot more media/attention/recruiting milage with OSU than Miami. To have them ranked over TTech and the Oregon schools is plain BS. People are not doing their homework--they lost to a dreg of the Pac 10 in their only BCS school opponent and lost to their only decent conference opponent. I am guessing it is a halo effect from last year and voters just havn't done their job. I am not writing the Worthless Nuts off either. LSU is a bit szhitzo. When their defense was playing well they were the best in the land. But the defense IMO got warn down by a murderous schedule, and it left them vulnerable. The defense did look good last week though, and I would think with rest they will get close to former form. I also haven't seen anyone with a traditional offense--as good as Ohio State is in that--move it on LSU. More spread and unusual offenses like UK, Florida and Arkansas, did a lot better. Offensively, with a healthy Flynn, they are very good, never held less than 28PPG. At worst some bad quarters or bad halfs, never bad games. Tremendous skill players. As for being worse than last years team, might be true. Last years team was probably the best in the land over the last 2 years. Had either Meyer not outfoxed Miles in Gainesville or had LSU future NFL wrs not forgetten how to catch passess in the Auburn game, they are probably the ones who smoke OSU (or atleast LSU-UF title game--no worse than a toss-up) determines that). Overall if LSU takes care of the ball and plays fundamental (few drops, few penalities)--they will win. If the best LSU team shows up OSU has no chance. But who knows which LSU team will. I suspect enough goes right for them, but no sure thing, and with Wells between the tackles and Robinski as a receiving option, OSU can finnish a close game late.
