Again, if you move them to the Big East, or any other BCS conference, you also have to give them a whole lot more money to go build facilities, recruit nationally, and the cache to tell their recruits that they're actually allowed to play for a national championship. I find it shocking that people can't comprehend the money and recruiting advantages the BCS affords its cartel of teams at the top. In response, I would say that if you took most of the BCS teams, outside of the true bluebloods, and made them spend the amount of money that Boise State, Utah or Hawai'i does each year, those teams would easily do far worse than .500.
put boise state in big 10, they are a .500 team, maybe better. Penn St, Ohio St, Iowa, all better than them IMO. put TCU in big 12, they would be the third for the fourth, behind Tex, OKH, and maybe Nebraska. TCU is impressing me this year, but boise state, c'mon. they did beat oregon though, very impressive win.
Your argument that teams should play 13 games to accomodate Boise State is a nice attempt to move on from your argument that everbody's schedule is not full. Does anybody here think Boise State would go undefeated if they played not in the Big 12 or SEC, but the Conference USA, the Mountain West, or the Big East? I sure don't. They should just let them into the Mountain West and then the incessant whining from the blueturf pan-flashers will end.
I like how all of you guys come in here and try to thrash Boise State for whatever reasons you have. I've seen people say they got a lucky couple of plays in the Oklahoma game. The truth is, using your thinking, is that BSU should have never been that close to Oklahoma to begin with yet they were. They hung around and then beat them no matter and no matter which way you try to slice it or complain it was trick plays or whatever excuse you come up with, the fact is that they won. Teams currently vying for the national championship play the likes of Charleston Southern, Louisiana-Monroe, and Tennessee-Chattanooga. This isn't a shot at these teams either because every team in the FBS level does this crap. Why? So they can become bowl eligible and make some kind of money in a bowl game. Arkansas can beat Troy this weekend, lose to MSU and LSU and still be bowl eligible and probably get a bowl bid with a 6-6 record and 2-6 conference record. Does anybody else not see the big problem here? Sure you have match-ups like Alabama-Virginia Tech earlier this year and Texas-Ohio State a season or two ago but is that the norm? No and it will never be with this piece of crap system they currently have in place and no amount of tweaking this system is going to change the fact that the majority of the FBS isn't playing for a national title they're playing for that paycheck in the Sweet Potato Bowl or whatever they're calling it this year.
Yay, they beat the #8 team in the nation on a neutral site 3 years ago. Who cares? That year's oklahoma team lost 3 games and only even made it to the BCS because Texas had a meltdown in their final 2 games after McCoy was injured, IIRC
Obviously somebody cares because it was brought up earlier in the thread and that's what I was responding to. Thanks though.....
Yeah I don't get all of the Boise State hate. It seems to me like all they want is to get a shot at some better teams. If they get their asses handed to them then so be it and all of those criticizing them can say "I told you so" without better competition though we don't really know how good or bad they are. Boise State is a good team that plays entertaining football I personally would be happy to see them playing some BCS conference schools.
the same Tulsa team that lost to UTEP who got blown out by Texas? the thing with the whole Boise State thing, and any underdog in general, is that it is MUCH MUCH easier to get up (mentally) for one or two games per season and win those games, then to play against a high level of competition week in and week out. sports are mental as much as they are physical, and that is why you see unfathomable upsets (like Michigan/App State) for teams that don't and/or can't bring it every game. Boise State can talk noise all they want while playing 1-2 legit programs maximum at any given year, but put them through Texas's schedule last year, when they played OU, Mizzou, OK ST, and TTech in 4 straight weeks, and they won't be bowl eligible. and that's fact. now i may sound like i'm hating on BSU, but i want them to win. it's still my ultimate wish that NCAA may one day implement a playoff bracket. just think about all the potential bowl matchups that currently requires all the stars to align to happen (think SEC champ vs USC, people been wanting that for years). and if the underdogs continues to show their worthiness with the current BCS system and still gets left out, there will be alot of unhappy people. i have been rooting for Iowa to win out, because it would be disasterous if iowa, an undefeated major BCS conference champ (no big10 jokes please), doesn't get a shot at the BCS title. and the irony is that it was the Big 10 commish that was opposed to any type of playoff format. the more undefeated teams we have at the end of the season, the better it is for college football in the long term.
seriously...i'm not a boise state fan...but the knock is they don't play tough teams... they're trying to but no one will schedule them.... i don't get the criticism. by the way, they beat a pretty good oregon team this year. i don't think they're national championship caliber, but anything can happen from week to week in any one game.
And they are playing two BCS opponents next year, and have one scheduled for 2012. So people are "afraid" of them in 2011 but not afraid of them in 2010 or 2012. Right. They can't find a game for a certain date in 2011. Big deal, it happens. Texas had to play SHSU a few years ago because they couldn't find anybody else to fill in the open date. This whole story is part of the WAC's stupid PR agency campaign to try to ratchet them past TCU. Maybe if they'd beaten the crappy WAC teams more convincingly rather than struggle with them they wouldn't have to hire a PR Agency. Or maybe they could schedule credible MWC/CUSA teams who also are looking for good opponents (which is actually what they did to their credit as they have series with BYU and Utah coming up in future years).
I'm sure this is part of their publicity campaign and good for the BCS schools playing them next year, and 2012. That said from what I have seen in this thread it certainly seems like there are open schedule dates that a BCS conference school could play them in 2011. Anyway I don't see why this is a reason to bash Boise State. Its not like other schools, coaches and AD's don't have publicity campaigns.
yeah i'm aware they were playing with fire for far too long to not get burned eventually. at least there's still cincy...
the BCS makes me long for the days of the SWC and the traditional new years day bowls. the powers that be have turned college football into boxing, ie. they've ruined it.
thats great, but i wasn't trying to get into the technicalities of moving them to these conferences nor was I trying to present a case for it. JUST trying to convey an instant hypothetical "what if" in relation to their win loss record... more power to Boise state if they want to play osu, lsu, ut, usc, uf, ect..that'll do 99% of us a favor and shut these guys up for good.
I sure think they could go undefeated against the Mountain West/Big East/CUSA. I'd really like to see them in the MWC. The MWC would be on par with the Big East.
Agreed. It seems that people have made circular opinions about Boise State. They aren't good, so they couldn't win in those conferences. When they do beat top tier teams, it's must be a fluke, because they aren't good. There's nothing Boise could do to convince those people otherwise, no matter how consistently they beat those bigger name teams.
