The W
Views: 95650721
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
19.4.14 1235
The W - Football - 2010 week 1 (Page 2)
This thread has 3 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.11
Pages: Prev 1 2
(444 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (27 total)
TheBucsFan
TheChiefsFan








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 23 days
Last activity: 10 days
#21 Posted on | Instant Rating: 2.46
    Originally posted by wmatistic
      Originally posted by TheBucsFan
      In fact, and I am certain I am far from the first person to pose this possibility, my ideal title game would be TCU and Boise State (or any other two non-BCS conference schools). Only once the power conferences are left out will they start scheduling these teams. As it is, the "they don't play anybody" rhetoric is largely self-fulfilling.


    The big schools DO offer to play Boise. Home games only sure, but if you really think you belong with the big boys, take the offer and prove it. Fresno State does it that way(well, they've been trying), FSU did it that way, why should Boise be an exception?

    And not that it matters as much, but financially holding a game at Boise makes half what it does at the larger stadiums so why would a major team give up that much money AND risk a loss at Boise?

    Again, we'll see what happens at the end of the year but I really don't want teams rewarded for playing crap schedules. Instead of leaving the big schools out so they schedule Boise, how about we leave Boise out until they start accepting offers from the Big schools, regardless of if they get a return game?




I can't find it now, but I'm certain I read a story in the past year saying Boise State wanted to play anyone, anywhere, even if they are road games, but that they still couldn't get much bait. Boise State has its own finances to worry about, maintaining an elite team every year is not cheap - do you really expect them to give up all out of conference home games? That's ridiculous. And even if that WERE a reasonable expectation, it still doesn't mean the BCS conference teams are willing to schedule them even home-only on a regular basis.

Do you really think it's Boise State's preference to only play one or sometimes two BCS conference teams a year?



Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 11 hours
#22 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.34
    Originally posted by TheBucsFan


    I can't find it now, but I'm certain I read a story in the past year saying Boise State wanted to play anyone, anywhere, even if they are road games, but that they still couldn't get much bait.


I read that too on Yahoo or ESPN. They will play anyone even if the team won't play in Boise. They will take any road offer anywhere.

If major BCS teams refuse to play them with the best terms possible, it is totally unfair to throw it back in Boise's face that they only play "weak non-con games."

Again, the cartel works to exclude everyone else.



-- 2006 Time magazine Person of the Year --

-- July 2009 Ordained Reverend --
StingArmy
Andouille








Since: 3.5.03
From: Georgia bred, you can tell by my Hawk jersey

Since last post: 21 days
Last activity: 4 days
#23 Posted on | Instant Rating: 6.46
    Originally posted by Zeruel
      Originally posted by TheBucsFan


      I can't find it now, but I'm certain I read a story in the past year saying Boise State wanted to play anyone, anywhere, even if they are road games, but that they still couldn't get much bait.


    I read that too on Yahoo or ESPN. They will play anyone even if the team won't play in Boise. They will take any road offer anywhere.

I also remember the Boise State head coach saying that on ESPN last season, and after watching his team last night I have no reason to doubt he's telling the truth.

- StingArmy

p.s. - Can we PLEASE get rid of these sham "neutral site" games that take place 95% closer to one team than the other? They were practically in the same state as VT, and yet this is somehow supposed to be neutral?
wmatistic
Andouille








Since: 2.2.04
From: Austin, TX

Since last post: 41 days
Last activity: 2 days
AIM:  
#24 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.08
All I could find is this article, that certainly doesn't come across as Boise accepting any offers.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4642585

They want a home and home or a huge payday, and only against regional matchups. You can say you'll take on anyone, anywhere but the actions disagree. And as the article points out, the other small conference teams like TCU and BYU haven't had trouble getting more than one tough matchup.

They're being picky, and then bitching about it. Can't have it both ways.
Big Bad
Scrapple








Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 1 day
#25 Posted on | Instant Rating: 5.77
Why do people keep supposing that Boise State would get blown out against a top team from a BCS school? If the NCAA is so confident of this, they should get Boise in the title game and then if they're indeed blown out, that would shut up a lot of the noise about them playing for a national title.

It's not fair that the risk should be entirely on Boise State's side vis a vis the scheduling. So for BSU to prove they're "worthy" of playing in a national title game, they should schedule four tough non-conference road games and cost their school a big chunk of money? Nuts to that.
lotjx
Scrapple








Since: 5.9.08

Since last post: 16 hours
Last activity: 1 hour
#26 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.56
    Originally posted by Big Bad
    Why do people keep supposing that Boise State would get blown out against a top team from a BCS school? If the NCAA is so confident of this, they should get Boise in the title game and then if they're indeed blown out, that would shut up a lot of the noise about them playing for a national title.

    It's not fair that the risk should be entirely on Boise State's side vis a vis the scheduling. So for BSU to prove they're "worthy" of playing in a national title game, they should schedule four tough non-conference road games and cost their school a big chunk of money? Nuts to that.


The main reason is money. If Boise St or TCU or anyone is not considered top tier travelers, the chances are slim of getting in. Boise State had a nice crowd for the VT game, but VT packed the rest of the stadium. Now, I don't know if VT got more tickets due to how close they were to the stadium or if it was even or what. Needless to say while Boise State had a good crowd, it wasn't as dominant as VT's side. Again, until we get a breakdown of how many tickets were given to each team, its hard to say. If there were even and this is all Boise State can muster to get to a very big game, its the chief evidence the BCS can point to why they won't be in that game. Granted, it was a cheaper all around ticket for VT fans since they can just drive down while Boise State fans had to fly in. Having said that, flying in never stops Notre Dame, Texas, Florida, Ohio State and a bunch of the larger schools from either evening out the crowd even in the most hostile of environments or taking over the crowd like most of them do for bowls.

Ratings ie another aspect of money is the other problem. While the underdog aspect might get some casual fans to come in to see Boise State play, it probably won't equal to the established fans of the SEC, Big Ten or other conferences who are cheering for or against the team from that conference. The real problem is pissing off fans of that conference that they would not watch which the BCS has tried to avoid. That is why you saw Boise State/TCU last year as opposed to one of those teams vs. Texas or Alabama. Even with the weird Big 12 three way one loss teams of two years ago, they threw one of those teams into the title game just so some Big 12 fans could have something to cheer for or against.

It would be a nice story for the press, but a month of hype especially in the underdog aspect sometimes leads to fans turning on the game. The other problem is a month of hype ruins everything, I don't understand why they don't either extend the season or have playoffs during that time. Please don't tell me due to finals and holidays since we have bowls on Christmas Eve and day as well as New Years and there are NCAA championship series going on during the spring and fall finales.

As for Boise State's claim to play anyone, anywhere. I am not so sure. BYU inked a six game deal with Notre Dame. So, I am not sure if its that hard to schedule those big teams. Plus, they will make the same if not more money traveling to those big teams due to incentives. As much as I want to see the BCS fall, I still don't like a team playing two big games a year and calling it a season especially if its the first game of the season where no one is really at their best and the other game is at home to team who may or may not be in the top 25 when they play. I still think they make it in due to the win last weekend as well as the pseud-demand for it, but if Bama, Ohio State and say Oregon go undefeated after beating the quality of teams they play, its going to be a tough argument to make for Boise State to get in. Now, if TCU beats Utah and BYU while going undefeated that might be a stronger argument to make since I can see Utah beating Notre Dame and they already beat Pitt who has a good chance of winning the Big East. Boise State's best bet is pray for everyone expect another team to have one loss.

(edited by lotjx on 8.9.10 0708)
JayJayDean
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02
From: Seattle, WA

Since last post: 7 days
Last activity: 21 min.
AIM:  
Y!:
#27 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.27
    Originally posted by wmatistic
    Again, we'll see what happens at the end of the year but I really don't want teams rewarded for playing crap schedules.


It's not like they can control their in-conference schedule, which always has a couple at least tough games in it. Boise played Virginia Tech at a "neutral" site, and they host Oregon State in a couple weeks. Those are pretty good games. They play at Wyoming next week, which isn't *great* but it IS a road game at a Mountain West school, and they host Toledo, which isn't an unreasonable 12th game.

Last year Boise beat the Pac-10 champs. That and a 12-0 regular season seems good enough for me to at least get them in the discussion of belonging in a title game IF no clearly superior teams also go undefeated.

In 2008, Boise went 12-0, but their non-conference sked was at Oregon (who ended up going 7-2 in the Pac-10), vs Bowling Green, vs. Idaho State (an FCS team), and at Southern Miss. For going unbeaten that season they went to the Poinsettia Bowl.

I guess what I'm saying is Boise hasn't been traditionally getting "rewarded for playing crap schedules."



Holy fuck shit motherfucker shit. Read comics. Fuck shit shit fuck shit I sold out when I did my job. Fuck fuck fuck shit fuck. Sorry had to do it....

*snip*

Revenge of the Sith = one thumb up from me. Fuck shit. I want to tittie fuck your ass.
-- The Guinness. to Cerebus
Pages: Prev 1 2
Thread rated: 4.11
Pages: Prev 1 2
Thread ahead: Survival Football
Next thread: Fantasy Football
Previous thread: Seahawks cut TJ Houshmandzadeh - already rumoured to replace Walker on Vikings
(444 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
As a Buckeye fan I would also be glad to see him go. But no talent? He had more rushing yards as a freshman than any Buckeye in history. Are Archie Griffin and Eddie George void of talent also?
- evilwaldo, Clarett sticks it to the man (2004)
Related threads: UNC season over? - Nevada, Fresno State move to MWC, BYU considers going Independent - USC to receive two-year postseason ban - More...
The W - Football - 2010 week 1 (Page 2)Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.109 seconds.