BSU as a Model

[knapplc]

Boise's SOS for the past ten years:

 

2000 - 107

2001 - 98

2002 - 112

2003 - 103

2004 - 78

2005 - 98

2006 - 90

2007 - 113

2008 - 94

2009 - 96

 

 

You are fooling yourself if you think these weak schedules have no impact on Boise's success.

[trouble]

Boises weak schedule had a huge impact on their success early on, but with who they are recruiting and coaching anymore, they can compete with anybody I believe.

[knapplc]

Boises weak schedule had a huge impact on their success early on, but with who they are recruiting and coaching anymore, they can compete with anybody I believe.

Absolutely they can. They've proven that on a regular basis since arriving in the big leagues. All anyone is saying is that it's far easier to get MNC game when you play one tough opponent all year, then cruise through what amounts to a Div.II schedule.

 

Give Missouri that schedule and they're going to look like world-beaters, too. Pinkel can game-plan for one or two tough games per year, and he has all season to work on trickeration when he has no worries that he's going to be challenged by his week three opponent. Or his week four opponent. Or his week five opponent. Or his week six opponent. Or his week seven opponent. Lather, rinse, repeat.

 

Sure, the reason he's not worried about those opponents is he knows his team is that good, but being good doesn't mean BSU doesn't have a decided advantage when it comes to the schedule.

[mmmtodd]

Boise's SOS for the past ten years:

 

2000 - 107

2001 - 98

2002 - 112

2003 - 103

2004 - 78

2005 - 98

2006 - 90

2007 - 113

2008 - 94

2009 - 96

 

 

You are fooling yourself if you think these weak schedules have no impact on Boise's success.

 

that is eye opening.

[Enhance]

Boises weak schedule had a huge impact on their success early on, but with who they are recruiting and coaching anymore, they can compete with anybody I believe.

Boise's success is solely attributed to coaching and scheduling, imho. They are getting better recruits now than they were before, but they didn't sign one recruit ranked higher than three stars in 2009, and signed only one four star for the 2010 class.

[Guy Chamberlin]

The logic of "because Nebraska is bad we cannot discuss the legitimacy of Boise State" makes no sense. Nebraska's record has nothing to do with whether BSU is a good or bad team.

 

I dunno. Is Nebraska a legitimate contender? No one seems to question that. But some want to make a premptive case against Boise State in case Boise State runs the table. At least that's how I'm reading this thread.

 

Boise State had a better decade than the Huskers. They're legitimate, even if Boise State still doesn't trip off the tongue like Penn State or Florida State. If we're questioning BCS worthiness based on padded wins and big game history, you gotta ask yourself if Nebraska meets the standard you want to apply to Boise State.

 

Or to put it another way, if the Huskers shook off the rust and jitters by opening against Virginia Tech, while other contenders warmed up on the likes of Western Kentucky, I think we'd be demanding due credit.

[Joe_5700]

Have them play a full season in the Big 12 and then face them at the end of the year and we beat them. They would be physically and mentally drained from competing week in and week out, except maybe against Kansas.

 

That is exactly what many Big 10 fans said about Nebraska's schedule in 1997.... You can't hate Boise for being in a weaker conference when they add a big dog to their non con. All they do is keep winning.

[I am I]

I'll give BSU some props. They win their games...hard to do no matter who you're playing.

 

they are 84-4 against non BCS automatic qualifying teams. they are 7-7 against BCS teams including the win last nite...what does that tell you? If they can win 84 of 88 games, and they really are THAT good, then they should be like 12-2 or 11-3 against quality opponents. straight up fellas, their schedule is so freaking soft it proves everyones point about the .500 record against BCS schools.

[knapplc]

The logic of "because Nebraska is bad we cannot discuss the legitimacy of Boise State" makes no sense. Nebraska's record has nothing to do with whether BSU is a good or bad team.

 

I dunno. Is Nebraska a legitimate contender? No one seems to question that. But some want to make a premptive case against Boise State in case Boise State runs the table. At least that's how I'm reading this thread.

 

Boise State had a better decade than the Huskers. They're legitimate, even if Boise State still doesn't trip off the tongue like Penn State or Florida State. If we're questioning BCS worthiness based on padded wins and big game history, you gotta ask yourself if Nebraska meets the standard you want to apply to Boise State.

 

Or to put it another way, if the Huskers shook off the rust and jitters by opening against Virginia Tech, while other contenders warmed up on the likes of Western Kentucky, I think we'd be demanding due credit.

I don't see it the way you see it, I guess. Maybe I'm the one off kilter, but I see a lot of people questioning our ranking, pointing out (legitimately) that we have an untested QB, an as-yet unproven line on both sides of the ball, and boneheads at a few other positions. Those of us saying Nebraska belongs in the top ten are basically saying that there aren't ten teams that looked better than us in the first week, and I think that's pretty fair to say.

 

I don't think I've ever heard the argument that Boise State belongs/doesn't belong based on how Nebraska has done over the past decade. Certainly I've never heard this from any national pundit or prognosticator, so if you've heard the Huskers used as a litmus test for BSU, point me out a link so I can read up.

 

If you're saying that Nebraska's lack of success this decade precludes Nebraska fans from debating the worthiness of any other team... I don't get that, either. Whether Nebraska sucks or was good is irrelevant to Boise's worthiness, and it has no affect on whether Nebraska fans can intellectually discuss Boise State's worthiness.

 

I think Boise would beat the Huskers if we lined up a game right now, but then again, I don't think Boise would have beaten last year's VA Tech team. VT just graduated seven of eleven starters on defense and started a bunch of young kids. Put those guys in uniform and Boise doesn't win this game, easy. I think Nebraska 2010 would beat VA Tech 2010 based on what I just saw this weekend. Unfortunately the schedule worked out that the Hokies had better talent on defense when we played them than when Boise played them.

[knapplc]

Have them play a full season in the Big 12 and then face them at the end of the year and we beat them. They would be physically and mentally drained from competing week in and week out, except maybe against Kansas.

 

That is exactly what many Big 10 fans said about Nebraska's schedule in 1997.... You can't hate Boise for being in a weaker conference when they add a big dog to their non con. All they do is keep winning.

 

Really? Our SOS was nearly identical to Michigan's in 1997:

 

Michigan - 75.96

Nebraska - 74.37

 

Michigan's "better" SOS was negligible at best. That's an argument that has zero credibility.

[Lil' Red]

I think Boise State is a legit good team and deserving of their ranking. If they were in a better conference they wouldn't have as many wins but they would still be a really good team. If they were in the Big 12 I would bet money on them winning the conference this year.

[bshirt]

Have them play a full season in the Big 12 and then face them at the end of the year and we beat them. They would be physically and mentally drained from competing week in and week out, except maybe against Kansas.

 

That is exactly what many Big 10 fans said about Nebraska's schedule in 1997.... You can't hate Boise for being in a weaker conference when they add a big dog to their non con. All they do is keep winning.

 

Really? Our SOS was nearly identical to Michigan's in 1997:

 

Michigan - 75.96

Nebraska - 74.37

 

Michigan's "better" SOS was negligible at best. That's an argument that has zero credibility.

 

In addition, we even played more games.

[sd'sker]

Not only did they play Virginia Tech the first game of the season, they BEAT Virginia Tech the first game of the season. Where are the other Top 23 teams SPINES? They have won absolutely every game I have counted them out in, excluding TCU- and even then, they were in it to the end.

 

I wouldn't mind watching them in the National title over 2 loss BCS champions.

we show our spines when we play k-state, texas, oklahoma jr., mizzou all in a row and then later play aTm.

 

BAMA and tOSU shows its spine the first day of conference play until the last day, which for BAMA will probably be a conference championship.

 

bsu does it backwards, they get the work out of the way in the beginning of the year, take the season off and then get to show up to a bcs game. they have plenty of time to prepare for their only two big games, and then they do show up an compete. but for me, they need to earn a spot in the championship game by putting together a complete season.

[bowersbd]

Boise St Schedule

Virginia Tech(13) W33-30

@Wyoming(92)

Oregon State(27)

@New Mexico State(117)

Toledo(96)

@San Jose State(115)

Louisiana Tech(77)

Hawai'i(86)

@Idaho(89)

Fresno State(60)

@Nevada(50)

Utah State(83)

CCG-NONE

 

Alabama Schedule

San Jose State(115) W48-3

Penn State(14)

@Duke(72)

@Arkansas(15)

Florida(6)

@South Carolina(25)

Mississippi(48)

@Tennessee(41)

@LSU(16)

Mississippi State(47)

Georgia State(NR)

Auburn(20)

CCG-Probably Florida Again(6)

 

Florida Schedule

Miami-Ohio(102) W34-12

South Florida(38)

@Tennessee(41)

Kentucky(58)

@Alabama(1)

LSU(16)

Mississippi State(47)

Georgia(neutral site)(19)

@Vanderbilt(65)

South Carolina(25)

Appalachian State(NR)

@Florida State(18)

CCG-Probably Alabama Again(1)

 

 

 

Here is Boise St schedule compared to Alabama and Florida's schedules...I took Florida and Alabama cause they play in the toughest conference...The number beside each team is where they currently rank...I used the current Coaches Poll for any teams ranked in the top 25 after week 1...The other rankings are College Football News 1-120 rankings after week 1..Now I'm not saying Boise St isn't good team, cause they are but lets face it there schedule is horrible...how many games would Boise St win if they traded schedules with Alabama or Florida?

[mnhusker]

So they beat a team that would be the 4th or 3rd best team in the Big 12 this year and will be the toughest team they play all year.

 

The question is at what point does the strength of schedule difference between two teams allow one loss to surpass undefeated? Undefeated should be a gold standard so going undefeated should carry a lot of weight. (A play off would solve this issue but that is for another thread) Perhaps this year Boise should get the Nod (schools in the BCS only need one undefeated season) if Boise is still undefeated at the end of the year (and 2 BCS teams are not) they should play for the NC not based on this year and last (even though last year should not matter) They should get go up against Ohio, Florida, or the Undefeated Huskers. (Of course I would change my tune if they bump a one loss big 12 champ Nebraska).