riseagainst Show full post »
wis.gator_old
JimmyQ wrote:


Why isn't it (atleast somewhat) their own fault if they don't make it in the top 2? Schedule better opponents. Play in a better conference. Get better players. They have at least some control - however small in some areas - over nearly everything.



You're right, schools like Boise don't have majority control over any of those things you mentioned.

They can pursue teams from the big 6 conferences, but those teams also have to agree to play. There was an article a little while back about Boise attempting to schedule games with these types of teams. Getting the response they wanted was hard to come by. Not many schools want to play them. Why, I don't know. There is a perception out there that this school is dangerous, especially for an early game. Most top programs play cupcakes early on to warm up. I don't know why schools are afraid to play them. Georgia played Boise a few seasons ago (2005) and whooped their ass.

In order for them to play in a better conference, that other conference must accept them. I would think the Pac10 likes their current system because they have a true round-robin conference season. I guess Boise could try and get in the Mountain West. Any other conference is geographically impractical.

To get better players, all Boise can do is go out and win games. Their university is in Idaho and they're a mid-major. Recruits are not flocking there, and they probably will never flock there unless some things change. Getting better recruits is contingent upon Boise maybe upgrading to a better conference, but even that doesn't guarantee them anything.


PSN: wisgator
Quote 0 0
thefreak
wis.gator wrote:


JimmyQ wrote:


Why isn't it (atleast somewhat) their own fault if they don't make it in the top 2? Schedule better opponents. Play in a better conference. Get better players. They have at least some control - however small in some areas - over nearly everything.



Not many schools want to play them. Why, I don't know. There is a perception out there that this school is dangerous, especially for an early game. Most top programs play cupcakes early on to warm up. I don't know why schools are afraid to play them. Georgia played Boise a few seasons ago (2005) and whooped their ass.



Georgia played Boise before they were the team everyone fears. No one wants to face them NOW. Before they won the Fiesta against Oklahoma, they weren't as good or as popular.


Quote 0 0
wis.gator_old
the_freak wrote:


wis.gator wrote:


JimmyQ wrote:


Why isn't it (atleast somewhat) their own fault if they don't make it in the top 2? Schedule better opponents. Play in a better conference. Get better players. They have at least some control - however small in some areas - over nearly everything.



Not many schools want to play them. Why, I don't know. There is a perception out there that this school is dangerous, especially for an early game. Most top programs play cupcakes early on to warm up. I don't know why schools are afraid to play them. Georgia played Boise a few seasons ago (2005) and whooped their ass.



Georgia played Boise before they were the team everyone fears. No one wants to face them NOW. Before they won the Fiesta against Oklahoma, they weren't as good or as popular.



Boise was becoming a trendy team before that Georgia game. They had some great seasons before that game in Athens.

[link=http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/wac/boise_state/yearly_results.php?year=2000]http://www.cfbdatawarehouse.com/data/div_ia/wac/boise_state/yearly_results.php?year=2000[/link]

------------

I have to get in the way back machine to remember some of that. Boise gain some popularity for that 2004 season when they were unbeaten going into the bowl against Louisville. That same year Louisville was a monster too. They blew that lead down in Miami otherwise they would have been undefeated.
PSN: wisgator
Quote 0 0
mrmike527
JimmyQ wrote:


What about teams barely missing out on that tourney? There will surely be complaining, arguments for 32 teams, and then for even more.

I wouldn't mind seeing where the top team from each conference gets a bid and there is a playoff from there. No at larges, no ND-like automatic bids. Each conference sends one representative.

Still, no system is perfect, and I'm not sure the BCS is the evil it is made out to be.


I don't understand any argument for the BCS that a playoff could not improve upon. If you can't make it into a 16 team field, obviously people are going to whine about snubs--but at least you can actually say the regular season means something. It means nothing right now for a massive number of teams in College Football.
Quote 0 0
jimmyq1
Mr_mike527 wrote:


JimmyQ wrote:


What about teams barely missing out on that tourney? There will surely be complaining, arguments for 32 teams, and then for even more.

I wouldn't mind seeing where the top team from each conference gets a bid and there is a playoff from there. No at larges, no ND-like automatic bids. Each conference sends one representative.

Still, no system is perfect, and I'm not sure the BCS is the evil it is made out to be.


I don't understand any argument for the BCS that a playoff could not improve upon. If you can't make it into a 16 team field, obviously people are going to whine about snubs--but at least you can actually say the regular season means something. It means nothing right now for a massive number of teams in College Football.


And a 16 team playoff would really open it up to everyone? Voters play a huge roll already in the teams at the top of the BCS.

If you go to a setup where every conference winner gets a spot, then every conference will have a shot. If you do that, I think you'd need to say no at large bids otherwise you'd hear complaints about how smaller schools are getting shut out of the at large bids - one of the big problems now.

Quote 0 0
riseagainst
I just think the long lay-offs mess a lot of teams up come bowl time. I mean how stupid would it be if the NFC and AFC championships were played in mid to late january and then the super bowl was March 1. Don't you think at least 1 of the teams would come out looking a bit rusty?
University of Wisconsin Track and Field
Quote 0 0
mrmike527
JimmyQ wrote:


Mr_mike527 wrote:


JimmyQ wrote:


What about teams barely missing out on that tourney? There will surely be complaining, arguments for 32 teams, and then for even more.

I wouldn't mind seeing where the top team from each conference gets a bid and there is a playoff from there. No at larges, no ND-like automatic bids. Each conference sends one representative.

Still, no system is perfect, and I'm not sure the BCS is the evil it is made out to be.


I don't understand any argument for the BCS that a playoff could not improve upon. If you can't make it into a 16 team field, obviously people are going to whine about snubs--but at least you can actually say the regular season means something. It means nothing right now for a massive number of teams in College Football.


And a 16 team playoff would really open it up to everyone? Voters play a huge roll already in the teams at the top of the BCS.

If you go to a setup where every conference winner gets a spot, then every conference will have a shot. If you do that, I think you'd need to say no at large bids otherwise you'd hear complaints about how smaller schools are getting shut out of the at large bids - one of the big problems now.


Well with 11 Conferences, you're going to need either 1 or 5 at-large spots. And the spots are necessary for teams who play independent football to have a chance, anyways.

I don't understand the reasoning that too few small schools would get a chance--because under the current plan, no small schools get a chance.
Quote 0 0
docbirk
Here's a linky for those that were admiring the "atmosphere" of the game last night-
[link=http://www.showgirls.tcu.edu/roster.htm]http://www.showgirls.tcu.edu/roster.htm[/link]

And sorry, I have to disagree on the TCU uni's-Nike and their design dept have got to lay off whatever they're possibly on and get back to reality. Thankfully the Badgers are going (per many rumors) with UnderArmour instead of Nike.
Quote 0 0
tweb1216
Beyond Prime wrote:


tweb1216 wrote:

Beyond Prime wrote:

onpackerland wrote:

as much as i was dissapointed to see it "messed" (or should i say covered) up by whoever decides which at large teams play which, this was a good game (at the very least, it wasn't decided at half). very sad niether team gets a shot at a bcs conference team. too bad their wasnt another team with flordia's caliber (outside the national championship game) that they could have split bsu and tcu to play a definitive #3 (flordia) and #4(?). even if they would have each gotten blown out, they would have each lost and would know where they stood against the best competition outside of the championship game.

I agree that it is too bad that these two teams weren't matched up with other teams, rather than playing each other. There has been a lot of talk all season long about the caliper of team that they both are and none of that got answered by them playing each other. Now the talk will only continue through next year or until they play one of the old school power houses and see how they truly match up. In the mean time it will just be speculation. It may even take a couple of games because if the win one game it may be looked at as a "lucky" win.

Both Boise and Utah have that 'lucky' win.

That was kind of my point. A win against one of those teams in a bowl would have answered the questions. Now they will have to start over again next year.


I don't see how it would. Boise St beat Oklahoma, and Utah beat Alabama (they also beat Pitt, but on a year where the Big East was considered down (has that changed?)) I don't see how one more win would change it that much.


About the playoff/BCS debate, I just had a thought and haven't thought about it much, but what about something where if you are undefeated you get a chance to play for the championship.

If no teams/1 team/2 teams are undefeated you use the BCS.

Any more than that and every team that is undefeated gets a chance to play for the championship. Bowls still go as planned as long as teams are undefeated. Once a team gets knocked out of the playoffs they can fill a spot in other bowls. The higher BCS teams get byes if they are needed to balance out the undefeated tournament field.

As I said I just thought of it, but it seems like it we can keep the bowl importance but while not limiting teams who win every game they play to play for the championship


"Son, what are you doing sleeping in my daughter's dormroom?"
-"Uhhhhh, i got to go, im late for class."
-"Its Saturday morning."
-"Then im really late for class. Where are my pants?"
Quote 0 0
pinetar
Beyond Prime wrote:


tweb1216 wrote:


Beyond Prime wrote:


tweb1216 wrote:

Beyond Prime wrote:

onpackerland wrote:

as much as i was dissapointed to see it "messed" (or should i say covered) up by whoever decides which at large teams play which, this was a good game (at the very least, it wasn't decided at half). very sad niether team gets a shot at a bcs conference team. too bad their wasnt another team with flordia's caliber (outside the national championship game) that they could have split bsu and tcu to play a definitive #3 (flordia) and #4(?). even if they would have each gotten blown out, they would have each lost and would know where they stood against the best competition outside of the championship game.

I agree that it is too bad that these two teams weren't matched up with other teams, rather than playing each other. There has been a lot of talk all season long about the caliper of team that they both are and none of that got answered by them playing each other. Now the talk will only continue through next year or until they play one of the old school power houses and see how they truly match up. In the mean time it will just be speculation. It may even take a couple of games because if the win one game it may be looked at as a "lucky" win.

Both Boise and Utah have that 'lucky' win.

That was kind of my point. A win against one of those teams in a bowl would have answered the questions. Now they will have to start over again next year.

I don't see how it would. Boise St beat Oklahoma, and Utah beat Alabama (they also beat Pitt, but on a year where the Big East was considered down (has that changed?)) I don't see how one more win would change it that much.

I don't think bringing up past years of one a big win helps them. Many people will treat them as one offs. As I said before, I think they need to be able to string at least a couple of big wins together in the same season. Besides, I thought we were talking about TCU and Boise State. How did Utah get brought into this?

Again, I believe if TCU and Boise State would have been given the oportunity of playing other contenders, rather than each other and winning, it would have given them more creedance. Especially for Boise State, if they had won, because of their win earlier in the year against Oregon (TCU lost to Oregon).


Utah got brought into this because they are in the same exact situation and unfortunately the BCS and some fans haven't learned from past screw jobs by the BCS in terms of a National Championship...and I love the "one offs" comment...I love how that can be used every year against these schools...because schedules are made what 4-5 years in advance and if BSU wants to schedule Oregon State when they are upsetting teams like USC and even now just this year were playing for the Pac-10 title...and if Boise beats them next year its because "Oregon State was down this year so it really doesn't prove anything"...and when they beat Virginia Tech it will be "The ACC is a weak conference so what does that win prove"...its the same shit every year...they beat Oregon this year...but I'm sure that win proved nothin because Oregon didn't play for the national championship this year...only the rose bowl...and that doesn't prove they are a good team...

How many years in a row does Boise have to beat good teams year in and year out before they get credit? People talk about how they will flop if they get in the BCS and it will set them back for years...yeah because the other BCS games they have played really showed how bad they are and set them back centuries...Boise State isn't Hawaii...they don't have a gimmick offense...this team is solid on both sides of the ball and has been for years...its really sad to know that a team like Duke could go undefeated in the same year as Boise State...and they would have a better shot at playing for the National Championship then Boise...

and lets not forget...a LOT of teams don't want to play boise...its not Boise not scheduling them...I can almost gurantee you that if Florida wanted to do a home and home with Boise they would do it in a hearbeat...but Florida probably wouldn't just for the fact that they might lose and the repercussions that would come from that game would be almost too drastic for the NCAA/BCS to handle
Quote 0 0
wis.gator_old
Pinetar wrote:


and lets not forget...a LOT of teams don't want to play boise...its not Boise not scheduling them...I can almost gurantee you that if Florida wanted to do a home and home with Boise they would do it in a hearbeat...but Florida probably wouldn't just for the fact that they might lose and the repercussions that would come from that game would be almost too drastic for the NCAA/BCS to handle


Florida would never do a home and home with Boise, ever.

1) Florida hasn't left the state of Florida for a non-conference game since 1991 when they lost to Syracuse in the Carrier Dome.
2) A common reason brought up by Gator fans is that the lost home game would hurt for revenue purposes because of their neutral site game played in Jax.
3) Like you said, the repercussions of losing. Most Gators would see it as a no-win situation. Either they were supposed to win so it's not a big deal, or they lose and get castrated for it.


PSN: wisgator
Quote 0 0
beyondprime
Pinetar, please re-read my post. My point is not if I think they are worthy, it is a matter of them being pitted against each other hurt them. I think they both should have been matched up with a"traditional school power house" team in different bowls. Then a win would have given them more credence in more people's eye's. Personally, I am on the fence about both teams.

As for the "one off" comment, what team or sport isn't held to that? When Wisconsin beat Duke and then lost to UW-Green Bay, the masses said it was just a fluke or "one off" that they beat Duke. People outside of Wisconsin don't realize how good the UW-XXXX teams can be. Wisconsin will continue to have to prove it wasn't a fluke through the year and ultimately during the NCAA tournament.

In general every team has to show their worth every year because teams are different every year. We know there are many examples of those teams, and Wisconsin has benefited from this too, that get a carry over from the year before or from their history. TCU, Boise State, and Utah are going to have to put together consecutive seasons to crack that barrier. One of the things that hurts them is the perceived strength of their conference(s). Wisconsin caught a break with Barry coming on board and turning the Wisconsin program around because we were in the Big Ten.

There are other teams that struggle to get people to play them for various reasons. Look at both Fresno State and Hawaii. The perception is their conference refs are homers. No one wants to play them and get pinched by a one sided reffed game. Wisconsin saw that a couple of years ago when they played out in Fresno. Another factor is how long have they been trying to get other games? Sometimes schedules are done so far in advance, that it takes a while for those to work out. Some schools might be worried about if they going to be a "good" program when they are able to get them on the schedule? At the same time all three teams are hot right now and it may scare some teams to put them on their schedule, which I believe is a very viable situation right now.

So in summary, I don't think the "system" did any favors by having TCU and Boise State play each other because it didn't help them to be viewed as viable programs. I believe they need to knock off more than one "traditional school power house" team in a season to get the mountain to move.
Quote 0 0
beyondprime
tweb1216 wrote:


Beyond Prime wrote:


tweb1216 wrote:

Beyond Prime wrote:

onpackerland wrote:

as much as i was dissapointed to see it "messed" (or should i say covered) up by whoever decides which at large teams play which, this was a good game (at the very least, it wasn't decided at half). very sad niether team gets a shot at a bcs conference team. too bad their wasnt another team with flordia's caliber (outside the national championship game) that they could have split bsu and tcu to play a definitive #3 (flordia) and #4(?). even if they would have each gotten blown out, they would have each lost and would know where they stood against the best competition outside of the championship game.

I agree that it is too bad that these two teams weren't matched up with other teams, rather than playing each other. There has been a lot of talk all season long about the caliper of team that they both are and none of that got answered by them playing each other. Now the talk will only continue through next year or until they play one of the old school power houses and see how they truly match up. In the mean time it will just be speculation. It may even take a couple of games because if the win one game it may be looked at as a "lucky" win.

Both Boise and Utah have that 'lucky' win.

That was kind of my point. A win against one of those teams in a bowl would have answered the questions. Now they will have to start over again next year.

I don't see how it would. Boise St beat Oklahoma, and Utah beat Alabama (they also beat Pitt, but on a year where the Big East was considered down (has that changed?)) I don't see how one more win would change it that much.

I don't think bringing up past years of one a big win helps them. Many people will treat them as one offs. As I said before, I think they need to be able to string at least a couple of big wins together in the same season. Besides, I thought we were talking about TCU and Boise State. How did Utah get brought into this?

Again, I believe if TCU and Boise State would have been given the oportunity of playing other contenders, rather than each other and winning, it would have given them more creedance. Especially for Boise State, if they had won, because of their win earlier in the year against Oregon (TCU lost to Oregon).
Quote 0 0
wissportsnet

Boys Basketball Alumni Round-up: February 21st, from @ColtonWilson23 #wisbb -- https://t.co/0K6CZzZWpf https://t.co/715tfpBGVS

wissportsnet

WSN15: Boys Basketball Top Teams #12 -- Two NCAA Division I players at one WIAA Division 4 school = state champions… https://t.co/1MThqzce9L

wissportsnet

Predicting winners of every state wrestling title plus a look By The Numbers, from @Nate_Woelfel -… https://t.co/HgU1bLP7d6

wissportsnet

Join the free Boys Basketball Playoff Pick 'Em Contest; Staff picks coming Tuesday #wisbb -- https://t.co/Y6yTA3OgP8 https://t.co/hA6Uyw9uje