Boise State ranked #3 in AP poll

[VA Husker Fan]

You reward top seeds by giving them a bye or home field advantage, or at the very least they will play lower seeded teams. NFL teams rarely rest starters when they just make the playoffs, it's usually only when they've secured their exact spot and have nothing more to gain. With a lot more NCAA teams, I don't see how a team can have a specific spot secured, so by tanking a game they would lose home field advantage or face a tougher opponent. All you have to do is structure the playoffs to make the rewards of spots 1-4 better than 5-8, and those better than 9-12. Just because you can cut and paste your comments each time doesn't mean they are the end-all of the discussion.

[VA Husker Fan]

And one more thing. Last year we were out of the race for the championship game with the e early losses. Did our season become meaningless and dull to watch? And might it have been even better with a chance to make a playoff?

[GMoose]

Vtech will crush boises undersized players and it will actually be kinda pathetic to see....

That's a pretty bold statement. Boise has the most experience back out of any team in the country, and also happened to go 14-0 last year. Of course, that is in the WAC. We'll see

[VA Husker Fan]

Vtech will crush boises undersized players and it will actually be kinda pathetic to see....

That's a pretty bold statement. Boise has the most experience back out of any team in the country, and also happened to go 14-0 last year. Of course, that is in the WAC. We'll see

No kidding, especially since Boise's D-Line is bigger than VT's, by quite a bit actually. VT's O-line is just a bit bigger than Boise's.

[fro daddy]

You would have thought NU making it to the MNC in 2001 against Miami would have been enough to knock some sense into them...

 

 

I also have to admit that I did giggle when the OP posted "I think either way MAJOR questions are going to pick up speed about the BCS. What if they go and lose by 3 TD's? For one, that year's champion will always be remembered as a sham"

 

99- VT lost by 17

01- Nebraska lost by 23

04- OU lost by 36

06- OSU lost by 27

07- OSU lost by 14

09- UT lost by 16

 

DO we question those champions?? How about every title in CFB before the current system? I favor a playoff, but to downgrade a team like Boise, and thinking it proves anything if they lose, just because they are from a small conference is the same as giving NE a game they had no business in just because they have history and are from a big conference. Either way its stupid.

 

BTW, Boise has proven a hell of a lot more than a team like Nebraska has in recent history. If you wanted to debate the merits of those two teams and who deserves a top 10 ranking this preseason it wouldnt even be an arguement. Boise is not Appaliation state. They are not a one time wonder. They are for real, they are a good team and they do return nearly every major player from a 14-0 team that won a BCS game. They second BSC win for the school in the last 4 seasons. I think they have proven enough should they get to the title game.

[HuskerfaninOkieland]

BTW, Boise has proven a hell of a lot more than a team like Nebraska has in recent history.

Ouch...truth hurts...but ouch

[fro daddy]

BTW, Boise has proven a hell of a lot more than a team like Nebraska has in recent history.

Ouch...truth hurts...but ouch

 

Hell HFIOL my team is in there too. Infact...alot of the BCS schools are in that bag. Nothing personal or mean, just the truth.

[HuskerfaninOkieland]

BTW, Boise has proven a hell of a lot more than a team like Nebraska has in recent history.

Ouch...truth hurts...but ouch

 

Hell HFIOL my team is in there too. Infact...alot of the BCS schools are in that bag. Nothing personal or mean, just the truth.

Oh I know...just the fact that for the longest time NU wasn't ever in that situation but thanks to a certain un-named coach, we are/were.

[GMoose]

You would have thought NU making it to the MNC in 2001 against Miami would have been enough to knock some sense into them...

 

 

I also have to admit that I did giggle when the OP posted "I think either way MAJOR questions are going to pick up speed about the BCS. What if they go and lose by 3 TD's? For one, that year's champion will always be remembered as a sham"

 

99- VT lost by 17

01- Nebraska lost by 23

04- OU lost by 36

06- OSU lost by 27

07- OSU lost by 14

09- UT lost by 16

 

DO we question those champions?? How about every title in CFB before the current system? I favor a playoff, but to downgrade a team like Boise, and thinking it proves anything if they lose, just because they are from a small conference is the same as giving NE a game they had no business in just because they have history and are from a big conference. Either way its stupid.

 

BTW, Boise has proven a hell of a lot more than a team like Nebraska has in recent history. If you wanted to debate the merits of those two teams and who deserves a top 10 ranking this preseason it wouldnt even be an arguement. Boise is not Appaliation state. They are not a one time wonder. They are for real, they are a good team and they do return nearly every major player from a 14-0 team that won a BCS game. They second BSC win for the school in the last 4 seasons. I think they have proven enough should they get to the title game.

None of those teams are WAC schools though. What if Boise goes undefeated and faces Bama in the MNC and loses by 3 TDs, meanwhile 11-1 Ohio State shellacs Oregon in the Rose bowl, twice as bad as last year? You don't think they're would be major questions about the credibility of the system is that happened?

 

And I didn't say anything about the merits of those two teams in recent years, or Nebraska at all for that matter, but how could you possibly avoid taking a shot at NU?

[HuskerfaninOkieland]

Good article on some of the BCS blunders

 

ESPN

[husker B-rent]

Vtech will crush boises undersized players and it will actually be kinda pathetic to see....

That's a pretty bold statement. Boise has the most experience back out of any team in the country, and also happened to go 14-0 last year. Of course, that is in the WAC. We'll see

No kidding, especially since Boise's D-Line is bigger than VT's, by quite a bit actually. VT's O-line is just a bit bigger than Boise's.

 

there dline may be bigger, ie. fat, but their skill players etc. are smaller than vtechs. add to that the fact that vtech plays a smashmouth style of football that will often beat a finesse team any day of the week.

 

any of the top 3 teams from ANY of the BCS conferences could go undefeated yearly if they played in the WAC too. i know that i would love to only play 1 good team a year (from the pac10 no less).

[Lil' Red]

You say it likes it's fact. We do not need a playoff. I should just copy and paste my reasoning so I don't have to type it out everytime.

 

Would a playoff have advantages ...sure. But it will not always give us the clear-cut winner. No system will. Plus you still have to determine what teams get in and who plays who. That'll rarely ever work out just right. A playoff is a preferred method to college football by a lot of people. To pretend that it is a solution to "unfairness" is wishful thinking by those that want this system.

 

I just want to have two deserving teams in the Championship game. If you can beat several of the top teams in the country through a playoff system then I think you're more deserving of a title than getting a high rank in a poll. Of course it's far from perfect but it's better. Remember last year we were an extra second away from Cincy playing in the title game

Well what about the regular season? We may see teams that are already a secured one seed in the playoff then decide to rest their starters in the final regular season game. How would we have felt last year if Bo would've tossed the CU game to prepare for the Big12 CCG? A playoff diminishes the regular season. Do you always have a playoff? What about the year you have a team run the gauntlet in the SEC undefeated but end up having to play 2 more games to win the title (and they play 2 teams with a loss or 2). That's not fair to the team that already took care of business. You can forget about undefeated teams winning titles the more playoff games you add.

 

In some ways it actually increase the importance of the regular season because you have more teams fighting for seeding and playoff spots and due to seeding teams are highly unlikely to throw a game. I would prefer a smaller playoff so only the top teams get in but if the SEC team lost in an all or another game to another top team I really wouldn't feel sorry for them. That could happen in the championship of our current system. I really don't care how many losses the champion has as long as they prove they are worthy on the field. I think it is a much bigger sham to have undefeated teams not get a shot at a title than that. I definitely agree that a playoff system is far from perfect and if the BCS worked great I wouldn't have a problem with it but I find that the BCS provides more questions than answers unlike playoffs.

[fro daddy]

You would have thought NU making it to the MNC in 2001 against Miami would have been enough to knock some sense into them...

 

 

I also have to admit that I did giggle when the OP posted "I think either way MAJOR questions are going to pick up speed about the BCS. What if they go and lose by 3 TD's? For one, that year's champion will always be remembered as a sham"

 

99- VT lost by 17

01- Nebraska lost by 23

04- OU lost by 36

06- OSU lost by 27

07- OSU lost by 14

09- UT lost by 16

 

DO we question those champions?? How about every title in CFB before the current system? I favor a playoff, but to downgrade a team like Boise, and thinking it proves anything if they lose, just because they are from a small conference is the same as giving NE a game they had no business in just because they have history and are from a big conference. Either way its stupid.

 

BTW, Boise has proven a hell of a lot more than a team like Nebraska has in recent history. If you wanted to debate the merits of those two teams and who deserves a top 10 ranking this preseason it wouldnt even be an arguement. Boise is not Appaliation state. They are not a one time wonder. They are for real, they are a good team and they do return nearly every major player from a 14-0 team that won a BCS game. They second BSC win for the school in the last 4 seasons. I think they have proven enough should they get to the title game.

None of those teams are WAC schools though. What if Boise goes undefeated and faces Bama in the MNC and loses by 3 TDs, meanwhile 11-1 Ohio State shellacs Oregon in the Rose bowl, twice as bad as last year? You don't think they're would be major questions about the credibility of the system is that happened?

 

And I didn't say anything about the merits of those two teams in recent years, or Nebraska at all for that matter, but how could you possibly avoid taking a shot at NU?

 

Does it matter that they are not WAC schools?? Whats the difference between a WAC team getting beat by 21 points or the big 12 teams on that list getting beat by 16, 23 & 36?? Just because you have some perception that because a team plays in a weak confence and only has one or two tough games a year that they should not be included? Or that somehow that shames the champion? What if a past champion played teams with a combined sub .500 record? Would that team deserve that championship? Because there are a number of teams that have had that happen. Should Nebraska give back the 1970 title? They only played 2 teams that were above average or poor, and those teams were 7-4 and 9-3. The rest of their schedule was littered with 5-6 and 6-5 teams. CFB history is filled with teams like that. Its not like that BIG 8 was filled with world beaters. It was a weak confernce. NE had 1, maybe 2 tough games a year before their bowl.

 

Its not bashing NE. Its just this is a NE board and you are a NE fan. Plus it makes a good example because they played in a weak conference and played for MNC's. Truth is, IMO, Boise's schedule this year is pretty similar, maybe even more harder than Nebraska's. NE fans are worried about a non con road game against a team that was 5-7. Two toughest games are at home (MU and TX) and the rest of the schedule is filled with weaklings with the exception of ATM and nobody knows what they will do.

 

Boise plays at VT and hosts LSU & Oregon st. They then have maybe 1 conference game and the rest are cupcakes.

 

I guess to me its doesnt matter, if your a good team you are a good team no matter where you play.

[VA Husker Fan]

 

Boise plays at VT and hosts LSU & Oregon st. They then have maybe 1 conference game and the rest are cupcakes.

 

 

Say what? Boise hosts Louisiana Tech, not LSU.

[fro daddy]

 

Boise plays at VT and hosts LSU & Oregon st. They then have maybe 1 conference game and the rest are cupcakes.

 

 

Say what? Boise hosts Louisiana Tech, not LSU.

 

your right, my schedule had a typo. My bad and good catch VA.