lhslep134;584859 wrote:Yes it is relevant, are you kidding me?

Miami, Iowa, MICHIGAN, Penn State etc. are all much much much more talented opponents than anyone Boise faced besides VT and Nevada, but it won't show up in SOS arguments because those teams had down years that are not representative of the talent on the team (except Michigan's defense).

You are going off of name recognition. Take the names away and replace with their wins-losses and that will tell you the whole story. The Big 10 was very top heavy this season. Ohio State, Michigan State, and Wisconsin can play with anybody, but the rest of the conference was garbage. Ohio State played one good team, and they beat us. End of story.

Could TCU/Boise put in their #2's and still compete like the Big 10's we're talking about?
No. End of story.

jordo212000;584964 wrote:You are going off of name recognition. Take the names away and replace with their wins-losses and that will tell you the whole story. The Big 10 was very top heavy this season. Ohio State, Michigan State, and Wisconsin can play with anybody, but the rest of the conference was garbage. Ohio State played one good team, and they beat us. End of story.

So take Boise, OSU, Michigan State, and Wisconsin out and think about this:

WAC vs. BCS schools = 2-9 this year (4-9 if you want to throw in Boise)
Big Ten vs. Non-BCS schools = 19-3 (28-3 if you want to count the top teams)
The Big Ten was 7-5 OOC against BCS teams.

That is the difference - the rest of the WAC is going to win about 1 out of every 8-10 games against "real" schools year in and year out. You don't see a difference between one group of teams that with beat others 80% of the time, regardless of how "good" you think they are at their own level?

enigmaax;585173 wrote:So take Boise, OSU, Michigan State, and Wisconsin out and think about this:

WAC vs. BCS schools = 2-9 this year (4-9 if you want to throw in Boise)
Big Ten vs. Non-BCS schools = 19-3 (28-3 if you want to count the top teams)
The Big Ten was 7-5 OOC against BCS teams.

That is the difference - the rest of the WAC is going to win about 1 out of every 8-10 games against "real" schools year in and year out. You don't see a difference between one group of teams that with beat others 80% of the time, regardless of how "good" you think they are at their own level?

I never said the WAC was good. You know this, I've told you a million times. The WAC is awful. I am saying that Ohio State didn't exactly play a murderer's row this season and to suggest they did because they played college bluebloods is just erroneous. All along I have said Gee picked the wrong year to run his mouth because we didn't beat one single ranked school this season.

WebFire;581215 wrote:That's an irrelevant argument when everyone can use it. I'm not dogging OSU's schedule at all. It's a product of the current system. But OSU fans shouldn't be busting another team's balls about SOS when theirs isn't all that great.

True that OSU's schedule was weaker than normal this season, but they scheduled Miami when Miami was still relevant and the lower half of the Big 10 was weak this year. But that weak lower half of the Big 10 is still far and away better than the WAC, which Boise cleans up every year.

jordo212000;585498 wrote:I never said the WAC was good. You know this, I've told you a million times. The WAC is awful. I am saying that Ohio State didn't exactly play a murderer's row this season and to suggest they did because they played college bluebloods is just erroneous. All along I have said Gee picked the wrong year to run his mouth because we didn't beat one single ranked school this season.

We beat ranked schools, just none that ended up ranked in the final regular season poll.

What year did Ohio State and Miami sign their contract?

Well... Illinois will be playing Fresno on Friday. I think that will give us a good barometer of the difference between two middle of the road Big Ten-WAC teams.

We beat ranked schools, just none that ended up ranked in the final regular season poll.

And? Haha

They aren't ranked right now for a reason. Who cares if they were ranked in week 5 or 6 before they were exposed

jordo212000;585648 wrote:

And? Haha

They aren't ranked right now for a reason. Who cares if they were ranked in week 5 or 6 before they were exposed

I was just correcting your statement. The way you had it worded, it sounded like you were saying we never beat a team this season that was ranked.

johngrizzly;585618 wrote:What year did Ohio State and Miami sign their contract?

I believe it was anywhere between 6-8 years ago. I think right after the 2003 season. These contracts are usually signed years in advance.

big ten stalwart illinios goes down to the sisters of the poor (fresno st) of the wac. i wonder if gordon gee will comment on that game?

Maybe he will comment on the screwjob Illinois got. It doesn't matter. Illinois was playing for nothing, and Zook is an imbecile. Combine that with poor WAC officials, and you steal one at home.

KnightRyder;587012 wrote:big ten stalwart illinios goes down to the sisters of the poor (fresno st) of the wac. i wonder if gordon gee will comment on that game?

Yes, he probably should. Because we all know that one game is the be all end all to the WACkos.

Cleveland Buck;587013 wrote:Maybe he will comment on the screwjob Illinois got. It doesn't matter. Illinois was playing for nothing, and Zook is an imbecile. Combine that with poor WAC officials, and you steal one at home.

yea maybe he could comment on that blatant face mask that went uncalled when fresno was going for a 2 point conversion.

Or maybe the blatant holding on Fresno on their third TD...

ytownfootball;587209 wrote:Or maybe the blatant holding on Fresno on their third TD...

face it. after Gordon Gee ran his mouth about that conference the big ten went out and lost to them. quit whining about officiating. did it ever dawn on you that the big ten just might not be as good as you think? Gee should listen to the old adage , those who live in glass houses....

remind me who brought up officiating first...two way street chief

One (1), game, nice fucking sample size....

Lol

ytownfootball;587255 wrote:remind me who brought up officiating first...two way street chief

Cleveland Buck

ytownfootball;587255 wrote:remind me who brought up officiating first...two way street chief

One (1), game, nice fucking sample size....

Lol

yea you brought up the officiating. i think the term you used was "screw job" and "stealing a win"

My problem with AQ schools who have this attitude (and as has been pointed out, most of them silently do) is that if you just take care of your schedule and win, you don't have to worry about any of it. A non AQ school is never going to get in the NC game over an AQ school if both are undefeated; that point has already been proven several years over. The problem arises when you have 1 (or even sometimes 2 loss teams) that feel like they should still get the nod over an undefeated non AQ "because of the conference" they play in. I don't give a crap what conference you play in. WINS talk. Unless everyone has 1 loss at the end of the year, you really don't have an argument. There's a reason that only a few schools go undefeated in a given year, because it's hard to do. TCU and Boise state get better talent than the respective schools in their conferences, and it gives them a huge advantage. But so do teams like OSU, USC, Texas, Florida, Alabama etc. Who do you think are getting most of the 5* guys in the nation? Those schools. So they have the same advantage over their conference teams as the few best mid-major schools have over their conference. So if you're going to penalize a midmajor for going 11-1 by not even letting them into a BCS bowl, the least you can do is be consistent and keep a 1 loss AQ team out of the national title if there's an undefeated non AQ team in front of them. You can't penalize one team for losing a game, and then turn around and reward a different 1 loss team by letting them go to the NC game. It's a double standard, and the AQ schools try to downplay the fact that it is a double standard by repeating the manta "they don't play anybody" over and over again. If you say it long enough, a lot of people will start to believe it.

Cleveland Buck;587013 wrote:Maybe he will comment on the screwjob Illinois got. It doesn't matter. Illinois was playing for nothing, and Zook is an imbecile. Combine that with poor WAC officials, and you steal one at home.

Well I guess they figured it will the the only time in the next 10 years an AQ school will ever agree to play them at Fresno, so they might as well take advantage of it. If AQ schools would just grow a set and sign normal, home-and-home contracts like they should, they would get better officiating crews. But no, they like to make mid-majors come and play them at their place 90% of the time. Don't complain about officials giving a team an advantage, when the other team consistently uses it's status to give itself advantages in scheduling and location every year.

Red_Skin_Pride;587590 wrote:Well I guess they figured it will the the only time in the next 10 years an AQ school will ever agree to play them at Fresno, so they might as well take advantage of it. If AQ schools would just grow a set and sign normal, home-and-home contracts like they should, they would get better officiating crews. But no, they like to make mid-majors come and play them at their place 90% of the time. Don't complain about officials giving a team an advantage, when the other team consistently uses it's status to give itself advantages in scheduling and location every year.

Or they will just stop playing there altogether if they can't even get a fair game out of it.

So is this a Boise State/TCU vs. BCS conferences or Boise State/TCU vs. Big Ten?

The MWC and WAC have two teams each that would win the Big East this year. Both Boise State (assuming Virginia Tech wins tonight) and TCU would challenge for the ACC title. The Big East is just as weak top to bottom as the MWC/WAC. I really don't see how anyone can argue differently.

That, in my opinion makes any argument against non-automatic qualifiers entirely moot. If the Big East has a bid, everyone should because they are just pathetic.

That said, Boise State's or TCU's body of work this season is much worse than Ohio State's. Yes, Ohio State schedules one "traditional power" every season. Whoopie. Sometimes it works, like with Texas and Southern Cal, but other times it's a colossal failure like with Washington and Miami. I don't like the "it was scheduled years in advance" argument, because it doesn't really matter in my opinion. It's not really an excuse, since you only scheduled one power when you could schedule two traditional powers and really win the schedule argument.

Ohio State has played one GOOD team: Wisconsin. Miami and Iowa are above average at best, with Iowa being the better team. Penn State is rebuilding and Michigan is average. Everyone else on the schedule is below average or just plain bad.

Marshall, Ohio, Eastern Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Purdue, and Minnesota. Laughable schedule right there. Ohio State and teams who play schedules like that have absolutely no room to talk. We live in a day and age where teams are playing the weakest schedule they can get away with because it increases their chances of going undefeated and reaching the national championship purely on their reputation. What a fucking joke.

Wisconsin...............Virginia Tech
Iowa......................Nevada
Miami.....................Hawai'i
Penn State..............Fresno State
Michigan.................Oregon State

The rest of the teams are garbage. The schedules are just about even in my opinion with Ohio State's beaten slightly better.

And who has played for a national championship with a weak schedule? I'm talking about weak top to bottom conference and out of conference?

The OOC schedules are always going to be a joke because teams want to be healthy and relatively unchallenged for the tough conference grind. I'm fine with that, as long as the conferences end up being tough (this year: Pac 10, Big 12, SEC, Big 10).