Official 2010-2011 NCAA Football Thread

[LittleHurt05]

People overrate this James Madison loss. They lost 5 days after a huge emotional loss against Boise. We all know that if they played tomorrow VT would win big. VT got better as the season went on, Iowa played worse as the season progressed.

 

How do you overrate a home loss to a 6-5 division II school?? Thats awful. Period. I dont care how "emotional" the Boise game was. The difference in talent alone should have given VT a win in that game.

[ZoomSlowik]

You are out of your mind. Iowa lost to Minnesota, Northwestern, and an Arizona team that has beaten absolutely no one. Boise would not lose to any of those teams this year.

 

But they lost to Nevada, didn't they? How do we know Nevada is any good? The only BCS team they played all year was a 5-6 Cal team, and they lost to a 9-3 WAC team (Hawaii). You just don't know because there are far too many teams like New Mexico State and Idaho on their roster that BCS schools schedule when they want a guaranteed rout.

 

I'll put it this way: since 2002 (as far back as ESPN goes), Boise State is 8-7 against BCS teams. They're 96-5 against everyone else over that span.

[kjshoe04]

But they lost to Nevada, didn't they? How do we know Nevada is any good? The only BCS team they played all year was a 5-6 Cal team, and they lost to a 9-3 WAC team (Hawaii). You just don't know because there are far too many teams like New Mexico State and Idaho on their roster that BCS schools schedule when they want a guaranteed rout.

 

I'll put it this way: since 2002 (as far back as ESPN goes), Boise State is 8-7 against BCS teams. They're 96-5 against everyone else over that span.

Ok, so I know that a BCS team is obviously going to usually be better. I just feel that this Boise team is real solid and can compete in a BCS schedule. It's unfortunate that neither of us will ever know how they would fare in a BCS conference with this team.

[iamshack]

But they lost to Nevada, didn't they? How do we know Nevada is any good? The only BCS team they played all year was a 5-6 Cal team, and they lost to a 9-3 WAC team (Hawaii). You just don't know because there are far too many teams like New Mexico State and Idaho on their roster that BCS schools schedule when they want a guaranteed rout.

 

I'll put it this way: since 2002 (as far back as ESPN goes), Boise State is 8-7 against BCS teams. They're 96-5 against everyone else over that span.

 

Nevada has the # 4 offense in the nation. I'd say they're pretty good.

 

Secondly, you are absolutely right about New Mexico State and Idaho on their schedule, and Boise pays for this by basically having to go undefeated to have any chance at a BCS bowl. No one is arguing that Boise deserves to be there with the one loss. Only that had they gone undefeated, they would have an argument. You do have to recognize that Boise tries to put together the strongest non-conference schedule possible, but most BCS schools will not schedule them.

 

Third, what is Boise's record against BCS teams since 2005?

Edited November 30, 2010 by iamshack

[kjshoe04]

Nevada has the # 4 offense in the nation. I'd say they're pretty good.

 

Secondly, you are absolutely right about New Mexico State and Idaho on their schedule, and Boise pays for this by basically having to go undefeated to have any chance at a BCS bowl. No one is arguing that Boise deserves to be there with the one loss. Only that had they gone undefeated, they would have an argument. You do have to recognize that Boise tries to put together the strongest non-conference schedule possible, but most BCS schools will not schedule them.

 

Third, what is Boise's record against BCS teams since 2005?

They went 0-3 in the 2005 season and have been 6-1 since then.

[Soxbadger]

Nevada has the # 4 offense in the nation. I'd say their pretty good.

 

Stats can be misleading.

 

The QB and RB out rushed the Pony Express. One of the guys was named Eric Dickerson. So because those 2 guys at Nevada out rushed the 2 guys on SMU, they are better?

 

Some all time college stats are hilarious due to the competition disparity.

 

Secondly, you are absolutely right about New Mexico State and Idaho on their roster, and Boise pays for this by basically having to go undefeated to have any chance at a BCS bowl. No one is arguing that Boise deserves to be there with the one loss. Only that had they gone undefeated, they would have an argument.

 

If a Division II school goes undefeated should they have an argument that they should be allowed to play in the BCS Championship game?

 

You have to look at the totality of the circumstances. This year you are looking at multiple undefeated and 1 loss teams, many of them having only 1 loss to another top 10 team. Why should those teams be penalized because some one has to lose?

 

Boise has to beat relevant teams through out the season and they have to get rid of the blue field turf. You dont want me to think of you as a gimmick, get rid of that field and the innate home field advantage. If they played on green grass Id respect them far more.

[kjshoe04]

Who has Oregon beaten? They beat Stanford and Stanford has beaten no one relevant.

[Soxbadger]

I agree the Pac-10 is overrated.

 

Id like to see a SEC-Big 10 championship game, but thats just my bias.

[zenryan]

Who has Oregon beaten? They beat Stanford and Stanford has beaten no one relevant.

 

 

 

 

They beat teams with players that will be in the NFL.

 

Boise plays 8 games a season that produce little to no NFL players.

[ZoomSlowik]

Nevada has the # 4 offense in the nation. I'd say their pretty good.

 

Secondly, you are absolutely right about New Mexico State and Idaho on their roster, and Boise pays for this by basically having to go undefeated to have any chance at a BCS bowl. No one is arguing that Boise deserves to be there with the one loss. Only that had they gone undefeated, they would have an argument.

 

Third, what is Boise's record against BCS teams since 2005?

 

1) You can't just ignore the schedule they play when you say they have the #4 offense in the country. A lot of BCS teams could put up huge numbers against suspect competition, just look at what someone like Indiana did before they ran into some decent teams.

 

2) Why would you pick 2006 as a starting point? 15 games is already a small sample size, that's barely an entire season worth of data, and it's not like their performance against everyone else changed at all (they lost 3 games from 2002-2004, went 9-4 in 2005 with 3 of their losses coming against BCS teams).

 

If you want to cherry pick the data, they're 6-1 against them since 2006. That hardly seems relevant though since their entire season hinges on their performance in those few games against legitimate opponents, and if they lose one game out of 8 against BCS competition they're probably out of the national title hunt (2 they're out for sure barring a fluke year like when LSU won).

Edited November 30, 2010 by ZoomSlowik

[iamshack]

They went 0-3 in the 2005 season and have been 6-1 since then.

6-1 since, which is about when their program began to flourish.

 

And most of those wins are probably against solid BCS teams, not just any BCS teams.

 

 

[iamshack]

1) You can't just ignore the schedule they play when you say they have the #4 offense in the country. A lot of BCS teams could put up huge numbers against suspect competition, just look at what someone like Indiana did before they ran into some decent teams.

 

2) Why would you pick 2006 as a starting point? 15 games is already a small sample size, that's barely an entire season worth of data, and it's not like their performance against everyone else changed at all (they lost 3 games from 2002-2004, went 9-4 in 2005 with 3 of their losses coming against BCS teams).

 

If you want to cherry pick the data, they're 6-1 against them since 2006. That hardly seems relevant though since their entire season hinges on their performance in those few games against legitimate opponents.

 

So now their record against BCS teams is irrelevant too, because those are the only games in which they care about.

 

Give me a f***ing break, guys.

[zenryan]

Nevada has the # 4 offense in the nation. I'd say they're pretty good.

 

Secondly, you are absolutely right about New Mexico State and Idaho on their schedule, and Boise pays for this by basically having to go undefeated to have any chance at a BCS bowl. No one is arguing that Boise deserves to be there with the one loss. Only that had they gone undefeated, they would have an argument. You do have to recognize that Boise tries to put together the strongest non-conference schedule possible, but most BCS schools will not schedule them.

 

Third, what is Boise's record against BCS teams since 2005?

 

 

 

Yeah it's a pretty good number. But that stat is so misleading since they play nobody worth a crap.

 

Boise is suppose to be one of the best run defenses in the country and Nevada went right through them.

 

 

 

And dont start with how BCS schools wont schedule them. Boise tries to bend over BCS schools with stupid crap and when the BCS schools tell Boise to take a hike, Boise plays the victim card. I found it funny when the Alabama's AD called out Boise earlier this year when he said Boise never called him for a game.

 

 

[Rex Hudler]

I gotta disagree with this.

 

The difference between BCS conference and non-BCS is staggering.

I am a Wisconsin fan, so I will use them as an example.

 

Since 2002 ( as far as ESPN goes back), Wisconsin has lost 1 game to a non-bcs team (2003 UNLV). I believe they are 23-1 in that span. Wisconsin is on average a solid Big 10 team, but by no means the best. Basically Wisconsin matched Boise's streak, over a 9 year span, with 2 different classes and no one cares because those are games a big program should NEVER lose.

 

I really have no doubt that most top SEC or Big 10 schools, would win 20+ out of 24 games. In fact most of the teams that Boise State beats, are considered teams that the BCS teams MUST beat. If they dont beat them its an upset.

 

Id say that if Iowa and Boise State played 100 times, I would expect Iowa to win 60% of the games.

 

Better be ready to back that up, because it looks like your Badgers are going to get TCU in the Rose Bowl!

[ZoomSlowik]

So now their record against BCS teams is irrelevant too, because those are the only games in which they care about.

 

Give me a f***ing break, guys.

 

When you conveniently ignore it when they lose games, yes, it is. They went 42-7 from 2002-2005, but those losses against the BCS schools in that stretch somehow aren't relevant in this discussion apparently.

 

And my point was not that it doesn't matter. My point is that if they go even 6-2 in a major conference they're nowhere near the national championship game and probably out at 7-1 too.

[iamshack]

Yeah it's a pretty good number. But that stat is so misleading since they play nobody worth a crap.

 

Boise is suppose to be one of the best run defenses in the country and Nevada went right through them.

 

 

 

And dont start with how BCS schools wont schedule them. Boise tries to bend over BCS schools with stupid crap and when the BCS schools tell Boise to take a hike, Boise plays the victim card. I found it funny when the Alabama's AD called out Boise earlier this year when he said Boise never called him for a game.

Ok, this is no longer worth arguing over, because every piece of data that I present you guys find some bogus excuse not to count as relevant. And if I have no data that is relevant, there is no point in continuing this discussion.

[Soxbadger]

TCU is in the Big East.

 

They dont qualify anymore.

 

(haha that will be my excuse)

 

I think its going to be a great game and I actually would have argued for TCU over Boise St. I think that TCU joining the Big East is just in case Auburn or Oregon goes down, they basically ensured that they are next in line for the Championship game.

[zenryan]

Better be ready to back that up, because it looks like your Badgers are going to get TCU in the Rose Bowl!

 

 

 

Should be an easy win for Wisconsin then since Colin Cowherd pointed out that TCU has lost 26 games in a row vs BCS teams that have finished in the top 50 of the RPI.

[Soxbadger]

Because its not about data, its about what you see with your eyes.

 

When you see Boise State, do you really believe that they are the best team in the nation?

[iamshack]

When you conveniently ignore it when they lose games, yes, it is. They went 42-7 from 2002-2005, but those losses against the BCS schools in that stretch somehow aren't relevant in this discussion apparently.

 

And my point was not that it doesn't matter. My point is that if they go even 6-2 in a major conference they're nowhere near the national championship game and probably out at 7-1 too.

No, the point is that Boise built a program over time, just as Gonzaga did in basketball, that is producing better players, that is attracting top-tier recruits, that is proving itself more and more on a national stage. Since the win over Oklahoma several years ago, they have really taken big steps to improve their program.

[iamshack]

Because its not about data, its about what you see with your eyes.

 

When you see Boise State, do you really believe that they are the best team in the nation?

I'm not arguing that they are the best team in the nation. I'm arguing that they are amongst the best, and prior to the loss to Nevada, I believed they deserved to be in the conversation.

 

They certainly have shown as much as anyone else this year.

[ZoomSlowik]

No, the point is that Boise built a program over time, just as Gonzaga did in basketball, that is producing better players, that is attracting top-tier recruits, that is proving itself more and more on a national stage. Since the win over Oklahoma several years ago, they have really taken big steps to improve their program.

 

And when was the last time Gonzaga made the Final Four?

 

I hate it when people try to compare football to basketball because it's not the same thing. 65 (soon to be 68) teams make the tournament every year and get their shot to win it all. Some of the non-power conference teams win a game or two, but they rarely make the Final Four and it's exceedingly rare for them to win it all (UNLV in 1990 being the exception in recent history when they had multiple NBA players). Only two teams have a shot to win a title in college football, so the benchmark for getting that shot is an awful lot higher.

 

Football is also a completely different sport, there are far more players involved in the equation. One or two great player that slipped through the cracks can make a huge difference in the result (ie Gordon Hayward and Shelvin Mack at Butler last year). The same is not true in football.

 

If there were a playoff, I'd have no problem giving them a shot to win it all. It's an entirely different story to pick them over multiple 11-1 teams that faced an entirely different schedule in a one-game playoff for the national championship.

Edited November 30, 2010 by ZoomSlowik

[Rex Hudler]

TCU is in the Big East.

 

They dont qualify anymore.

 

(haha that will be my excuse)

 

I think its going to be a great game and I actually would have argued for TCU over Boise St. I think that TCU joining the Big East is just in case Auburn or Oregon goes down, they basically ensured that they are next in line for the Championship game.

 

I'll give you that if the Big East allows TCU to be their representative this year!

[iamshack]

And when was the last time Gonzaga made the Final Four?

 

I hate it when people try to compare football to basketball because it's not the same thing. 65 (soon to be 68) teams make the tournament every year and get their shot to win it all. Some of the non-power conference teams win a game or two, but they rarely make the Final Four and it's exceedingly rare for them to win it all (UNLV in 1990 being the exception in recent history when they had multiple NBA players). Only two teams have a shot to win a title in college football, so the benchmark for getting that shot is an awful lot higher.

 

Football is also a completely different sport, there are far more players involved in the equation. One or two great player that slipped through the cracks can make a huge difference in the result (ie Gordon Hayward and Shelvin Mack at Butler last year). The same is not true in football.

 

If there were a playoff, I'd have no problem giving them a shot to win it all. It's an entirely different story to pick them over multiple 11-1 teams that faced an entirely different schedule in a one-game playoff for the national championship.

Then why should there even be any teams outside of the BCS conferences? Why not just have 1 division with just BCS conferences and another with the rest of the teams?

 

 

[ZoomSlowik]

Then why should there even be any teams outside of the BCS conferences? Why not just have 1 division with just BCS conferences and another with the rest of the teams?

 

Wait 10 years and we might be there.