Boise State Vs. VT

[romo2to]

But you can't prove that.

At least give Boise state a chance to prove they can't play with the "big boys".


Everytime you put them on the same field with a good team they play well.

They normally win when they play the "big boys."

 

[Cythim]

But you can't prove that.

At least give Boise state a chance to prove they can't play with the "big boys".

I know, but you starting making statements you cannot prove ("Boise St would cruise through that schedule" (I am paraphrasing here)) so I continued on. The only way to prove Boise St can beat any of these teams is to play them, and the only chance they would be able to get is in a playoff.

Everytime you put them on the same field with a good team they play well.

Everytime they are put on the same field with a good team the games means much more to Boise St than it does to their opponent. The only win they have so far that has impressed me is the Fiesta Bowl against OU, but everyone knows Stoops hates to win bowl games so even that wasn't very impressive.

 

[Jack-Reacher]

Everytime they are put on the same field with a good team the games means much more to Boise St than it does to their opponent. The only win they have so far that has impressed me is the Fiesta Bowl against OU, but everyone knows Stoops hates to win bowl games so even that wasn't very impressive.

LOL riiiggghhhhttt Stoops throws those games because he doesn't like Bowl games. I wonder how you typed that with a straight face. The TCU game wasn't impressive either huh? Pesky 3rd ranked teams. Of course that game meant nothing to them either I suppose. Both teams get up for those games, VT was up for it's game, saying that it doesn't mean as much to other team is ludicrous. How about swallowing your pride and just admitting that BSU has an excellent program and can compete with anyone. It's not that hard to admit. You do not have to be in the Pac-10, Big12 or SEC to have a good football program.

 

[2much2soon]

You know what really scares BCS conference front-running fans?

They know BSU has won 2 Fiesta Bowls against highly ranked teams, twice abused a high-ranked, highly-regarded Oregon team, and won nearly every game on their schedule over the past 4 years.

With WAC recruits!

I think Ryan Clady may have been the only 3-star recruit they have ever had.

BCS conference front-running fans are in shock over what BSU might do if they were in a BCS conference and recruiting 4 and 5 star recruits.

BSU is beating everyone on their schedule with Pac 10 castoffs from Cali and small town kids from the Pacific NW.

 

[Cythim]

LOL riiiggghhhhttt Stoops throws those games because he doesn't like Bowl games. I wonder how you typed that with a straight face.

I didn't type it was a straight face, it was a joke referencing Stoop's poor performance in BCS games (his record is 2-5). I'll try to speak more slowly for you.

The TCU game wasn't impressive either huh?

While I wouldn't call TCU's win impressive, I think they are a better team that has to play a tougher schedule than Boise St each year. BYU, Utah and Air Force are much better teams than Nevada or Fresno St. When TCU goes undefeated it is a big deal, but beating a second rate team from a major conference is not impressive.

Pesky 3rd ranked teams. Of course that game meant nothing to them either I suppose. Both teams get up for those games, VT was up for it's game, saying that it doesn't mean as much to other team is ludicrous.

It isn't ludicrous. Virginia Tech isn't playing for a national title but they are playing for an ACC championship and a chance to make a BCS game. When they are starting the season they are more worried about Miami, Georgia Tech and the ACC title game than they are about beating Boise St. This matchup was all about money for VT, they were paid $2.35 million (BSU earned $1.25 million) for playing this game. Taking that loss is worth more than beating a D-II school.

How about swallowing your pride and just admitting that BSU has an excellent program and can compete with anyone. It's not that hard to admit. You do not have to be in the Pac-10, Big12 or SEC to have a good football program.

Pride has absolutely nothing to do with it. I am all for fair play and small schools but I am also for rewarding the teams that deserve it. Right now only two teams get the chance to compete for the national championship and unfortunately Boise St does not have the capability to do enough to earn one of those two spots over a one loss team from the Big 12, Big 10 or SEC unless they start scheduling and beating true contenders in non-conference play.

 

[Jack-Reacher]

I didn't type it was a straight face, it was a joke referencing Stoop's poor performance in BCS games (his record is 2-5). I'll try to speak more slowly for you.

Oh your right your reference was crystal clear... since you said that win would have been impressive, but OU didn't get up for the game.. ok my bad..

While I wouldn't call TCU's win impressive, I think they are a better team that has to play a tougher schedule than Boise St each year. BYU, Utah and Air Force are much better teams than Nevada or Fresno St. When TCU goes undefeated it is a big deal, but beating a second rate team from a major conference is not impressive.

Yet somehow BSU beat the superior TCU team. No argument about the weak teams in the WAC, however BSU consistently beats teams from larger conferences.

It isn't ludicrous. Virginia Tech isn't playing for a national title but they are playing for an ACC championship and a chance to make a BCS game. When they are starting the season they are more worried about Miami, Georgia Tech and the ACC title game than they are about beating Boise St. This matchup was all about money for VT, they were paid $2.35 million (BSU earned $1.25 million) for playing this game. Taking that loss is worth more than beating a D-II school.

So Boise took less money to play a game in a larger conference even though they were the higher ranked team? I wonder if this could speak to the problem BSU has in getting teams to schedule them? Your right though, I am sure that VT wanted to start out the year with a loss, that will sure help them seal up that ACC Championship.

Pride has absolutely nothing to do with it. I am all for fair play and small schools but I am also for rewarding the teams that deserve it. Right now only two teams get the chance to compete for the national championship and unfortunately Boise St does not have the capability to do enough to earn one of those two spots over a one loss team from the Big 12, Big 10 or SEC unless they start scheduling and beating true contenders in non-conference play.

Their scheduling issue does not rest solely on the shoulders of BSU. Teams do not want to schedule them. Do you think OU would schedule them as their "tuneup" game? So by your logic, then next year when BSU moves into the MWC they would have a better argument for contending for a national championship?

I understand the strength of schedule argument, I do not shy away from it, without a doubt the WAC is a joke of a conference that hurts them every year. What kills me is that people act like BSU hides out in this conference so that they do not have to play the larger teams. Why is Nebraska playing Idaho instead of BSU? Oh that's right because they wouldn't sign a 1-1 deal with BSU whereas Idaho was happy doing a 1-2 deal. This all circles back to where the NCAA needs to schedule these non conference games so that they are meaningful. What benefit does a large school get from playing a far inferior team? It's a lopsided system that favors a handful of conferences.