OT: Boise Loses

Submitted by Vasav on

36-35 @home against TCU. Missed a FG as time expired, TCU went for two with a minute left to take the lead. Patterson talks about how he feels bad considering how much Boise has done for mid-majors, but clearly is overwhelmed with joy. Does Boise drop froom the BCS at large race as well? I think so

Look Up_See Blue

November 12th, 2011 at 8:38 PM ^

yeah that's actually a bad hold.  The laces have to be out.  That's something that is practiced every day and shouldn't be messed up in the game.  No excuses for that type of error.

Logan88

November 12th, 2011 at 9:13 PM ^

The refs gave BSU their chance by making a TERRIBLE pass interference call on 4th and 10 against TCU. The ball was not even close to being catchable but the refs bailed BSU out. I'm glad they missed that FG because they did not even deserve the opportunity to try it.

JClay

November 12th, 2011 at 7:11 PM ^

Houston is now sitting pretty for a BCS autobid. They simply have to finish higher than the Big East champion in the final standings. Boise will not get a BCS at large bid. They won't even win the MWC.

RickH

November 12th, 2011 at 7:12 PM ^

Feel bad for Boise but I do think they were overrated this season (opposed to other seasons where I thought they had top 5 teams).  Now for the typical mid major hate even though they continuously beat 'better, BCS teams'.

MichiganExile

November 12th, 2011 at 8:31 PM ^

Ease up a bit there killer. Most people that complain about BSU are complaining because overall their schedule is soft. That doesn't mean they are a bad team but it's kind of a legitimate gripe. It's cool to see BSU knock off the name programs but until they run through a big boy conference week-in-week-out they probably don't belong in national title talk.

A playoff would obviously solve all this but that's for another discussion.

Cope

November 12th, 2011 at 8:14 PM ^

Georgia and V tech are both over-rated, not that good. Georgia especially is only a the beneficiary of a really weak division. They are still getting back on their feet as a program. Oklahoma is good.

joshfull931

November 12th, 2011 at 7:13 PM ^

Thank goodness Boise St. lost. I absolutely hate seeing them in the conversation for BCS bowls every year. Or, in this year's case, the national championship.

They play absolutely nobody save about 1 decent opponent (Georgia, Va. Tech, etc.) each year and get lucky and win. If they played stacked competition like real teams in real conferences they'd be lucky to get 7 or 8 wins.

It's a disgrace that Kellen Moore is even in the Heisman conversation and that he will leave CFB as the winningest QB of all time. He plays against teams with no NFL talent and racks up tons of yards each game.

Go TCU.

RickH

November 12th, 2011 at 7:17 PM ^

I absolutely agree about getting lucky.  I mean beating Georgia, Virginia Tech, Oregon State (twice), Oregon (twice), TCU (though they suck too because they are a mid major), and Oklahoma is a joke.  Talk about plain ole' luck, right!

bronxblue

November 12th, 2011 at 7:25 PM ^

Not to totally dump on your parade here, but that was over about a 4-year span.  I mean, LSU will have beaten a more impressive group of teams this season alone.  

I like Boise St., but they are not a consistent top-10 team if they played in a power conference week in/week out.  Nobody is.  Look at Florida - title contenders two years ago, getting whooped now.  Talent levels rise and fall, and teams struggle.  Boise basically being a top-10 team for nearly a decade has more to do with competition than some secret elixir/magic that Peterson wields.  

RickH

November 12th, 2011 at 7:37 PM ^

It doesn't matter if the span is 4 years.  I'm sure there are players that are were on all those teams that won those games but mostly the players are different.  The coaching staff IS the small though and so is the winning.  They don't deserve a championship game but to say they play nobody is ridiculous.  They are trying to schedule better OOC teams and move into a better conference.  Unfortunately, football is pretty much their only good sport and it's hard to convince conferences to let you in with bad academics and only football.  They moved to the MWC and then all the better teams left, not their fault.  In the end, they ARE a good team and it's just plain stupid to think otherwise.

Jasper

November 12th, 2011 at 7:59 PM ^

I'm not sure about the 1% part, but I have always pictured him (as an older person, which he may not be yet) at an expensive Victor's Club tailgate wearing a sweater, a maize 'n blue scarf, and plaid pants. He might be saying "Plastics, son, plastics" to a recent graduate. He is quite proud of his corner office.

Also, he seems to have an authoritarian streak. (Aside: I believe that's found in MMB members more than it is in the general population.)

Anyone else?

RickH

November 12th, 2011 at 7:23 PM ^

Guess you're head has been in the sand and you have watched the last couple of years.  Football is football.  How can you say 'real competition' when they've beat Georgia, TCU, Virginia Tech, Oregon State, and Oregon in the last three years alone.  Should they play a better schedule?  Of course, but they still are dominating good teams (besides VT).  How many teams have held Oregon to 8 points in the last three years?  Not many.

RickH

November 12th, 2011 at 7:32 PM ^

Who says?  They beat the team in the end and did it in a different way than the traditional approach of going through a rough schedule.  As a consequence, they don't get into the Championship game (rightfully so).  How is this any different than playing a bad Big East conference schedule?  If these teams are supposedly better, they should be beating Boise State.

ChuckWood

November 12th, 2011 at 10:00 PM ^

Who says what?  The point is not winning or losing.  Good team, decent team, or bad team.  They purposely schedule a team that's overrated and overall decent.  They get an early win while the team is still ranked high, skyrocketing them up in the rankingings and making them seem very good.  

The week in and week out pounding and phisicality by a good conference schedule is what proves a team to be good.  Not hiding behind weak wins and easy opponents.  

ChuckWood

November 12th, 2011 at 7:23 PM ^

Here's my theory on Boise and their strategy...

Every year they schedule a team that is highly ranked.  It's always a team that can not figure out if they are good or not.  They do this every single year to keep the argument going.  The medicre team they beat usually had a disapointing rest of their season.

2009 Oregon, this was a good W

2010 VT & Oregon St both Ws

2011 Georgia W

2012 MICHIGAN STATE

 

RickH

November 12th, 2011 at 7:29 PM ^

2009: Oregon went 10-3 on the season with additional loses to Stanford and Ohio State.  Obviously medicore season.

2010: Virginia Tech finished 11-3 with loses to JMU and Stanford.  Winning ACC = Definition of medicore.  Oregon State goes 5-7, an actual point for your cause.

2011: Gerogia is currently 8-2 as well as leading their divison in the SEC.  God damn, talk about some bad teams...

Your point is invalid.  Also, how do you not know whether BSU is good or bad if they keep beating 'good' teams and are top 10 in the BCS?  These coaches aren't underrating Boise State... Football is football.

bacon1431

November 12th, 2011 at 7:42 PM ^

They have beaten some good teams. But Boise has to get up for one game each regular season. And it's usually the first or second game of the season and anything can happen that early. If they win it, they're pretty much guaranteed to go undefeated the rest of the way. When they were in the WAC, the good conference teams were about as good as Indiana. The MWC is about on part with the Big East, probably a little worse. But that's not something to brag about.

They go through a Big Ten, SEC, ACC, or Pac 12 schedule and they probably lose at least 3 conference games every season. Boise lets their guard down in their conference and they can still win by 20 because the competition is terrible. BCS teams let their guard down against a bad conference opponent and they lose.

Killewis

November 12th, 2011 at 8:07 PM ^

Thank god they finally lost and will give up a BCS berth to a more deserving team. Boise State's previous wins mean little to me. They have a good coach who can get them well prepared, so they go up against good teams either the first or last (Bowl) game of the season. They have a good month of preperation and come out ready. BSU could not consistently beat good programs week in and week out. Play a few good teams in a row like LSU did, and things would be a lot different. Without a month to prepare, BSU is an above average non-big 6 team.

EDIT: jeeze, beaten to it twice

ChuckWood

November 12th, 2011 at 8:12 PM ^

I never once said "bad teams."  They are good teams.  Mediocre for good teams.  Teams that can not figure out if they are good or bad.  

I admit that Oregon was a good win.  Are you going to call VT and Georgia really good wins?  The ACC is usually overrated.  Teams always blow it.  Georgia is in the SEC east and one really good win which was today.  They have MSU on the schedule for next year.  and I feel the same way about MSU as I do about the other teams they've played these past few years.  Very beatable, high ranked, and NOT elite.

Let's settle this the same way the Cincy argument was settled back in 2010.  Match Boise up against Bama in a bowl game.  I would love to see that.