Originally posted by pantstickle:
Originally posted by Crazy49er1313:
Originally posted by Juradon:
Have to agree with Boise State President Bob Kustra. The big schools regularly schedule smaller conferences and NON BCS schools to play, and they will have two or three on their schedules. Then if you consider that not all teams in the BCS and SEC are that great. Granted sometimes teams in the SEC will face 2 or 3 teams in a row that will be tough. But Kustra's point is that it is a lie, to act like they have a murders row each and every weak. Hey Alabama scheduled San Jose St to play in Alabama! Not Boise St.
I don't think anyone who knows football would think that Reno rated at #18 are the sisters of the poor. Actually in a funny way TCU and Boise St are helping to SPREAD the money around to smaller conferences everytime they get in the BCS bowl games. It's the money that the big schools want to go to them. They want the Boise St and TCU's with no budget, it only helps to keep them out.
Boise St will play it's 3rd ranked team of the season in Reno. They will be going for their 25th game in a row. So looking at the full body of work, Boise has the credentials to play in any bowl game. Any long winning streak SHOULD be considered in any poll. I know they don't do it but they should.
The worst culprit of hurting the non-AQ's aren't the BCS or Big 6 schools, it's the preseason rankings.
Every year, the SEC gets 5-6 teams, Big 10 & 12 get 4, Pac-10 gets 3-4, ACC gets 2-3, Big East gets 1-2, and maybe 1-2 non-AQ gets a #20 preseason ranking.
Those 6 SEC teams get the I-AA and lameduck bottom feeders for their first 3 games, so not only do they move up, but when they play against each other, their resume looks like they played 5 ranked opponents, which gives them the inside track to play in the NC.
At least the Big 10, Big 12, and Pac-10 try to play the upper tier teams of each conference not named the SEC. MWC played against some of the better Pac-10 and Big 10 teams and won, top 3 WAC teams played some of the better teams (USC, Oregon St, VaTech, Cal, Wisconsin, etc).
Need to get rid of the preseason poll and start ranking after the 2nd week, so to force the big schools to play better preseason games. Now, don't get me wrong, I don't mind if an OSU, LSU, or Michigan play a I-AA squad, but only play one, not 3 in a row before league play.
One of my favorite games is watching the Bill Walsh Classic (Stanford vs San Jose St.) b/c there's history, granted Stanford is waaaaaaaaaaaaay more talented, but then standford goes and starts playing teams like Wake Forest(when scheduled, Wake was a top 3 ACC team) and Notre Dame (Notre Dame is always a challenge due to rivalry).
Bama played #18 Penn State and beat them 24-3. The same Penn State that played the likes of Kent State and Youngstown State, barely beat Temple, and was embarrassed by Iowa, Illinois, and OSU? Or how about the dangerous squads of San Jose State, Georgia State, and Duke for Bama?
LSU played #18 UNC. I'll give you LSU b/c they also played WVU
Florida plays Florida State. Played Miami (OH) and South Florida to start, and Appalacian State the game before FSU...really?
Auburn didn't play a tough schedule out of conference, but they played South Carolina, Alabama, LSU, Arkansas, Mississippi State, etc. That's #6, 9, 12, 18 and 25.
^^^That proves my point, Mississippi State's key win was Florida 10-7, outside of that they beat a 1-10 memphis, Alcorn State, Houston, and UAB before beating the weaker teams in the SEC. Arkansas beat TA&M, but padded their rankings with wins over Tenn Tech and Louisiana Monroe in the beginning. South Carolina played Troy, Furman, and Southern Miss...really? Hell, even Auburn, the #2 team in the nation, played Chattanooga, Arkansas State, and Louisiana Monroe, though both Auburn and South Carolina play Clemson.
I'm just sick and tired of the SEC getting 6 top 20 teams before the season gets started, they play ONE team from a Big 6 conference, pad up their schedule, and play each other so they can get two or three teams in the top 5 every year
There's a reason the SEC keeps winning the national championship games. They're better. They play tougher teams.
Boise State has a cupcake schedule. Yes, that's because nobody will play against them. Why would a team with an already tough schedule play against Boise State, and risk losing? If the "elite" team wins, nobody cares, because they were supposed to. If Boise State wins, the "elite" team just validated them. It's a competition, so there's no reason for a team to help Boise State. There's no win for the elite team playing Boise State. not arguing Boise is the better squad, they DO have an easier conference, but they went over and beat the eventual ACC champions in Baltimore, beat an Oregon State team poised to challenge for the Pac-10 before injuries cost them games, and have played strong preseasons every year CONSISTENTLY!
Look, I know I'm bashing the "almighty" SEC, but other conferences do it too, such as the Pac 10 (Oregon played New mexico and portland state, but they did TRAVEL to Tennessee; Arizona State played portland State and Northern Arizona before playing AT Wisconsin; USC played @Hawaii, Virginia, and Minnesota), but at least everyone in the Pac-10 played at least two teams from a Big 6 conference/MWC/WAC, same with most of the Big 10, ACC, and Big 12.
I just want ppl to start ranking teams later in the season so schools are forced to play better non-conference games to earn their rankings. If we had a playoff, then wouldn't be any need for this conversation, but hey, that's for another convo
