Friday Night NCAA Football?

Submitted by jabberwock on

Is there some other thread I've missed?

Boise State is prison raping Idaho.

MGoBoard

yostlovesme

November 12th, 2010 at 9:40 PM ^

I think having to get up for every game save maybe 2-3 would take its toll on them and finish middle of the pack.  They have to get up for Nevada, Hawaii, Lousiana Tech, and we thought VT which really doesn't show much.  Replace those with Michigan State, Iowa, Ohio State, Wisconsin I bet they lose 3-4 games easy.  Im not saying Big Ten is best conference ever, but its easy to be geeked up for a game or two a season, but week in week out with tough competition is a lot different story.  You could even argue Michigan would beat with them w/ our offense alone or at least make it close shootout (I know imagine that).  I just have a hard time buying into the TCU BSU hype.

Joined: 01/13/2010

MGoPoints: 6846

Ann Arbor Cardinal

November 13th, 2010 at 12:36 AM ^

BSU has not had any close games when the opponent is inferior. The only close games are against quality teams. I don't really understand the whole "getting up" argument - I think it's peoples' way of trying to find a catchy cause for inconsistent performance. Whether it really is a factor or cause, it's pretty clear BSU has "gotten up" for all its games this year.

Some of the teams at the top of the Big Ten can't claim that. Look at Wisconsin, barely beating Arizona St; or Iowa, one dropped pass from a loss to Indiana. They play inconsistently - whether because they didn't "get up" or perhaps some other reason - yet they're at the top of the Big Ten.

I will gladly take your bet that BSU loses "3-4 games easy" in the Big Ten this year. After so many years of consistently dominating inferior opponents and beating quality teams (Oregon, Oklahoma, TCU, VT. . .), I think calling BSU's reputation "hype" is inaccurate. And arguing that this year's UM team has any chance at beating a team with probably the 2nd best defense in the country and a Heisman contender at QB is just wishful thinking.

Joined: 07/28/2008

MGoPoints: 217

Ann Arbor Cardinal

November 13th, 2010 at 11:43 AM ^

BSU does nothing but win. The only time they lose "3-4 games" is when someone is guessing. BSU beats everyone it plays: weak teams in conference, strong teams in and out of conference, winners of AQ conferences (Oregon in a previous year, probably VT this year). BSU has proven it's the most consistent team the last couple years by winning on the field, where it should count. But where it really counts - people's opinions - they always end up losing a couple games.

Joined: 07/28/2008

MGoPoints: 217

SFBlue

November 13th, 2010 at 12:53 AM ^

I think they'd have a hard time beating Ohio State, and maybe Iowa.  Boise hasn't played defenses as tough as those two, hasn't played a team as good in all aspects. 

They'd be in those games, for sure, however.  I also think the grind of playing very good competition weekly would take its toll.  Boise now has two or three tough games during the regular season, and then a bunch of bodybag games. 

Joined: 11/02/2009

MGoPoints: 15699

Don

November 13th, 2010 at 9:01 AM ^

So by your standard, a team that plays just two or three tough games in a season shouldn't merit consideration for the NC game, right?

This is the number of ranked teams that another program played during regular seasons in:

1970: 1

1971: 1

1972: 3

1973: 1

1974: 1

1975: 3

1976: 1

1977: 3

1978: 3

1979: 4

I guess it's fortunate that this program never played in a NC game, given its easy schedule filled with body bag games. This team's coach was some guy named Bo Schembechler, but I'm sure he wouldn't have complained, nor would the fans attending the games in Ann Arbor. After all, the conference was famously called the Big Two and the Little Eight, so how could anybody complain?

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 148288

bronxblue

November 12th, 2010 at 10:10 PM ^

I think it all comes down to depth.  BSU would suffer some injuries like everyone else, but unlike now when they are still far more talented than every team they play, in the B10 they would likely be lined up against another talented (or close in talent) team in a week or two.  That equates to 2-3 losses in my book.  This year they would probably be in the top-3, but most years they would top 4-5 with the random runs to the title thrown in.  Think Iowa.

Joined: 11/22/2008

MGoPoints: 171412

Captain Obvious

November 12th, 2010 at 9:41 PM ^

as to why BSU shouldn't get a title shot - watch this game.  My fourth grade football team would have shut out Idaho.  They are God awful.  Just really, REALLY bad.

Allows the worst punt return TD ever.  Senior QB throws the 2 worst picks I have ever seen in my life.  Allowing about 2 sacks every 3 downs.  BSU going for an onside kick up 14-0 (lol).  Getting a punt blocked.  Did I mention this Idaho team has 4 wins?

Joined: 03/17/2009

MGoPoints: -465

MGoTarHeel

November 12th, 2010 at 10:14 PM ^

My question is this:

As the season begins to wind down, and the WAC sees Boise St cruising its way to another title, BCS game, and big payday (presumably shared among the conference members), what do you think is the mentality of the opposing ADs/coaches?

Clearly it is beyond me to presume that someone would "throw" a game, but as I look at the games Boise has to finish out the season, I wonder what ends up more important to Idaho and Utah St. An upset win would be great, but would a half-million dollars for a struggling and underfunded athletic department better? I'm not a tin-foil hat-ist, but I really do wonder sometimes whether it is really in any of these schools' best interest to beat Boise.

I'm just asking questions here.

Joined: 09/03/2009

MGoPoints: 5556

bronxblue

November 12th, 2010 at 10:15 PM ^

At this point, I'd rather Boise just play a 4-5 game schedule with all 5 "big" games in a compressed timeframe.  Because with these 3-week "byes" against gawd-awful teams, we learn nothing about BSU.  I want to see them beat good teams week after week before I would even consider them in an MNC game.  I do think they receive a short shrift by the media at times, but at some point it is impossible to overlook their incredibly weak schedule. 

Joined: 11/22/2008

MGoPoints: 171412

ihartbraylon

November 12th, 2010 at 10:36 PM ^

It seems like this blog has the Boise argument three times a week. It's true, nobody knows how good Boise is, but at this point I almost want them in the title game so we can stop having the same back and forths over and over.

Joined: 01/03/2009

MGoPoints: 698

bighouseinmate

November 13th, 2010 at 9:57 AM ^

Both are very good teams this year, as they both were last year as well. I hate the arguments by fans of the AQ conference teams in that the mid-majors don't have to play the tough teams and win, week-in and week-out. Neither do most of those teams. The SEC teams, for instance, usually play one or two OOC games against Sun-belt teams mid to late in their seasons. They also usually have an in-conference loss as well by the end of the season. Both of those make their "week-in, week-out" argument not applicable. The other big conferences have those patsies as well, although they are usually in the beginning of their seasons.

And then there is this. LSU, who no one thinks is all that good, won a hard fought game against Alabama, and Alabama, who was in the top ten, barely loses spots to just outside the top ten. TCU, who obliterated a good Utah team, caused Utah to drop from top five to around 15 or so. People still want to place cautions on a TCU team that is destroying opponents, simply for beating another highly ranked mid-major, while teams from the SEC continue to get passes, simply because the perception is that their conference is the best. Really? UF, who is in the top 25 now, has struggled most of the season against OOC competition, is 6-3, with several of those wins against SEC opponents in blowout games. We, as fans of AQ schools, discount the past victories of the mid-majors against top competition in bowls(think Utah vs. Alabama, BoiseSt. vs. Ok, etc.), but then rely on past performances of the big conferences for bolstering our perceptions of those conferences. Simply put, I don't think the SEC is anywhere near the best conference this year, and yet they get a pass for a loss in an ugly game, while TCU and Utah both get dumped on for a resounding victory by TCU.

The question is, is TCU really that good, or was Utah that overrated to begin with? The answer is probably somewhere in the middle, IMO. And that makes me believe that TCU can play with anyone in the country, as well as BoiseSt. Remember, BoiseSt. beat VaTech, who, despite losing to an FCS school, is rolling through the ACC, and even though the ACC isn't the best conference, they are still a pretty tough league. And if VaTech goes unbeaten in league play, that would be quite an accomplishment, IMO.

All the arguments by people that diss the mid-major upstarts are groundless when considering their record as a whole in the BCS bowls they have made, and particularly, the games against the good teams from the AQ conferences. Holding them back in the rankings simply because they don't belong to an AQ league is crap, IMO.

Joined: 12/19/2008

MGoPoints: 4962