AP Poll: BSU could play for BCS Title
Just saw the new AP poll today, which has the following numbers:
1. Florida
2. Texas
3. Bama
4. LSU
5. Boise
6. VaTech
7. USC
8. OU
9. OSU
10. Cincinnati
I know this is early, but If (big IF) things play out like it is supposed to (Texas or OU wins the Big 12, UF or Bama wins the SEC) then Boise State could be looking at a #3 ranking because they can easily go undefeated. This is the rest of their schedule:
Oct. 3 UC Davis 6:00pm
Oct. 14 at Tulsa 6:00pm
Oct. 24 at Hawaii 9:05pm
Oct. 31 San Jose St. 1:00pm
Nov. 6 at Louisiana Tech TBA
Nov. 14 Idaho 1:00pm
Nov. 20 at Utah State 7:30pm
Nov. 27 Nevada TBA
Dec. 5 New Mexico St. 1:00pm
I know most of us would take an one loss USC team over BSU in a heartbeat, but I don't see how the BCS can knock them down. In a year where there doesn't seem to be a definitive supreme team out there, BSU could climb to the 1 or 2 spot if Florida, Bama, or Texas has an off day or bad loss. For instance, Texas could lose to OU. Regardless, it should be an interesting season.
On a different note, Zach Greinke is awesome.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:24 PM ^
That Oregon win is looking better and better now. I just hope the pollsters keep in mind Oregon is a much better team now than where they were at against Boise.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:24 PM ^
They'll never be voted higher than #3.
September 27th, 2009 at 9:03 PM ^
I don't really care who we play in the MNC. Would be more fun to play USC or Florida but putting a beat down on BSU wouldn't be so bad.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:34 PM ^
years of non-BCS schools in the conversation, I haven't made up my mind if I think they totally belong yet.
September 28th, 2009 at 4:00 PM ^
They don't, at least in the championship game.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:30 PM ^
Boise would need to beat every team on that schedule by 30+ points before they'd be put in the MNC. Then it's a big if.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:50 PM ^
That, and have another season with a 2 loss NC team.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:30 PM ^
I was hoping Hawaii's crushing would have ended it all, but then Utah had to go and keep the whole BCS-buster thing alive. Dammit, Alabama.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:32 PM ^
I agree, unfortunately. Boise State could make it to the #3 spot but that is where they would stay all season. I think you'll see a couple teams jump them based on their merits.
As much as I love BSU and as much as I'd love to see them in a championship game, for shits and giggles, everyone and their mother knows it probably won't happen regardless of their record.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:34 PM ^
I must add... I really hate some of these non-BCS teams. I just don't like the idea of teams with blue fields who refuse to even join the best non-BCS conference being considered a national title contender.
I'm fine with the Big East. I'm fine with the MWC. But Boise needs to either get with it or go away.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:37 PM ^
What're the chances of them moving into a better conference? Then they would get more money, better recruits, and a legit shot at the title that no one would complain about. I'm wondering why more school's don't try this. They could easily take the place of a worthless PAC 10 team like Stanford or Arizona.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:39 PM ^
They've allegedly been invited to the MWC, which is a perfect fit and would make them a very legit conference. As for Pac-10 expansion... I don't think it's likely, and if it happened the Utah schools are in better positions.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:57 PM ^
don't knock Stanford.. in the grand scheme of things, Stanford has the best/most prestigious athletic department in the country.
September 27th, 2009 at 8:01 PM ^
really good at other sports. It's just happened that they suck at football. I think that they won Director Cup's like for 10000000th year in a row.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:43 PM ^
Once the MSM fixates on a particular team, strange things can happen.
Maybe it would be better if BSU made it and got blown out 56-0 by Texas or Alabama. That would result in a lot of "I told you so's" and a lot of comments about how they "couldn't hang with the big boys when it really counted." Most of all, neither them nor Utah would have a legitimate gripe for the next ten years or so, not that they really have one now.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:43 PM ^
I don't think a one-loss USC team will be necessarily above BSU. But then, I don't think USC will finish with only one loss.
Still, Brodie is right. A one-loss Big 12 and SEC team will be in the MNC game, barring a huge surprise from somewhere else (Cincy? VT?).
September 27th, 2009 at 8:07 PM ^
Cincinnati may be undefeated and they'd definitely jump BSU if they are.
September 27th, 2009 at 8:42 PM ^
If I was a betting man, I would throw down on Alabama vs. Cincinatti in the National Championship game, as weird as that sounds. I'm not sure if I agree with you about Boise not getting in, though. If a bunch of teams lay an egg, and they are the only unbeaten out there, it could very well happen.
September 27th, 2009 at 8:56 PM ^
A one-loss UF, USC, or Oklahoma would probably jump the Bearcats. There is a wild, rabid love affair with these teams that keeps them in a title hunt every year.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:45 PM ^
Glad to see I'm not the only one dreading this possibility.
September 27th, 2009 at 7:51 PM ^
There's been talk about the Pac-10 expanding before, but they don't seem to have any interest.
Utah or BYU would be the teams to join it if happened (they'd have to go to 12 so there could be a championship game to make it worthwhile financially), but I think they like being able to have every team play each other in football, and it's not like a Boise State or Utah would add much outside of football (for example, baseball is huge in the Pac-10).
September 27th, 2009 at 8:34 PM ^
First, the AP Poll has nothing to do with the BCS. The BCS uses the Coaches Poll, the Harris Poll (which also has some ex-coaches as voters) and computer rankings. If BSU struggles at all with any of the weak teams on their schedule, most coaches will not put them up to #1 or #2 (and, in fact, BSU might even slip a few spots from their current spot in the polls). BSU must easily defeat all the remaining teams on their schedule just to stay where they are in the polls. Additionally, the computer rankings, which make up one-third of the BCS formula, will penalize BSU for their schedule. So long as their is a one-loss SEC team (e.g. Alabama or Florida) and an undefeated or even a one-loss team from another BCS conference, it is unlikely the BCS will have BSU at #2 or higher. If Florida, Alabama, USC, LSU, Georgia, OSU, PSU, Texas, Oklahoma, etc. all have two losses, yeah BSU probably would move up to #1 or #2 in the BCS. But that is very unlikely.
September 27th, 2009 at 8:00 PM ^
I really hope this happens. Then all the naysayers for a playoff would suddenly change their opinions (no offense to BSU)
September 27th, 2009 at 8:00 PM ^
Why is Penn State ranked ahead of us? 3 wins against cupcakes, and a loss to an unranked team at home. What have they proven? Shouldn't 4-0, with one win coming against the then-ranked #18 team in the country be ranked higher than 3-1?
September 27th, 2009 at 8:05 PM ^
We are getting the right amount of love right now. If we keep winning and beat PSU, we will be ranked ahead of them.
September 27th, 2009 at 8:01 PM ^
I'm bothered by what seems to be a common assumption in poll discussions: namely, that a team gets to move up by default when teams above them lose. It's a central premise in the OP's post, but it's not the way the polls should (or usually do) work.
At the moment, there are few teams who have a better resume than Boise State. If the season ended right now, and the aim of the poll were to pick the team that had the best year, BSU should be right around the top.
But each week teams below BSU will be adding to their credentials with high-profile wins against difficult teams while BSU pads their record with mostly inferior teams. As a result, BSU could actually continue to move down the rankings with wins.
September 27th, 2009 at 8:01 PM ^
There are far fewer undefeated teams at this juncture in the season than last. And of those remaining, most have schedules that would suggest at least one loss. Could be another very interesting, and confusing BCS year.
September 27th, 2009 at 8:11 PM ^
I, for one, would love to see Boise State in the championship game. The thrashing that would come were they to meet Florida, Texas, SC, etc. would put to rest the idea that a non-BCS team belongs in the title game.
That said, if it ever happens and they pull the upset I'll look like the most pompous fool in the world. I'm willing to risk it though.
September 27th, 2009 at 8:42 PM ^
Two words:
Blue turf.
September 27th, 2009 at 8:45 PM ^
If Boise was in the MWC, I'd support the MWC for an autobid.
September 27th, 2009 at 8:46 PM ^
All I want is mass chaos at the top of the rankings at the end of the season. The more dramatic it is, the closer we get to a playoff. The worst case scenario, IMO, is that Texas and Florida are the only unbeatens left at the end of the year.
September 27th, 2009 at 9:41 PM ^
I second this completely. I'm hoping that every BCS team ends with 2 losses (well, not Michigan, of course) and that two of either BSU, TCU, or Houston go undefeated. This probably won't happen and would result in a potentially terrible set of bowl games, but it would push the BCS very close to a playoff system.
September 27th, 2009 at 11:25 PM ^
MWC teams but not WAC teams.... the hawaii team that got KILLED by georgia was funny as hell... the sugar bowl that year was just sad... MWC teams are actually good... the teams i wouldnt mind in the national championship game are (if undefeated) are: houston tcu utah byu... although byu lost once they still have a impressive win vs oklahoma bradford or not....
boise should really go to MWC or add a team in the pac 10 instead of replacing.... that would help all schools and conferences...
well... at least their not independant with a simple schedule *stares at notre dame*