Blog Entry 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

Posted on: December 8, 2008 1:47 pm

Let the complaints begin.

We all know about Texas' beef with the BCS system. The Longhorns feel they should be in the BCS National Championship over Oklahoma because they finished with the same record and beat Oklahoma on a nuetral field.

We will continue to hear that talk through the New Year.

But what about Boise State?

The Broncos are ranked No. 9 in this week's 120, but they will be left out of the BCS Bowl picture as a two-loss Ohio State will meet Texas in the Fiesta Bowl.

The Poinsettia Bowl, which will feature the Broncos and No. 11 TCU, will have two higher ranked teams than the Orange Bowl (No. 12 Cincinnati and No. 19 Virginia Tech). The Holiday Bowl will have No. 14 Oklahoma State and No. 15 Oregon.

"As long as the Ohio State players and coaches aren't tired of coming to the Valley of the Sun, we're not tired of having them," Fiesta Bowl CEO John Junker said. "The university is the same, but the players all are different. It's just another version of that great tradition, and anytime you can match up a co-Big Ten champion against a No. 3 program that people think should be playing for the national championship, it seemed like a natural."

Welcome to the bowl system -- it's not about how many losses you have or where you are ranked. It's all about tickets, TV ratings and marketability. And that hurts Boise State.

Last year, the Georgia/Hawaii Sugar Bowl had the lowest TV ratings of any BCS game, the year before it was Oklahoma/Boise State. And in 2005, if was the Utah/Pittsburgh Fiesta Bowl.  

The Fiesta Bowl had the choice to take Utah or Boise State instead of the Buckeyes, but President John Junker chose to go with the Buckeyes even though they've played there four times since 2003.

"It was (discussed)," Junker said of Ohio State's visits to the website "But it's not like it's professional football. Obviously in the years that (Ohio State has) appeared, it's always a different group of players with the changes on their roster."

Sorry Boise State, take your undefeated record and higher ranking somewhere else. But don't feel bad for them, because Ohio State coach Jim Tressel doesn't.

"I've got to be honest with you, I didn't feel for them, because I'd rather go," Tressel said of Boise State. "I'm a compassionate guy, but to an extent ... I'd rather the Buckeyes be there."

Boise will now take its show on the road to San Diego in what could be one of the best non-BCS games on the schedule.


... San Jose State (No. 70), Bowling Green (No. 80), Arkansas State (No. 84) and Louisiana-Lafayette (No. 92) are the only bowl-eligible teams not playing this postseason.

... The Hawaii Bowl features two of the lowest-ranked teams in the 120 -- No. 65 Notre Dame vs. No. 67 Hawaii.

... Florida Atlantic is the lowest-ranked team is the lowest-ranked team in a bowl game at No. 85. The Owls lost to Arkansas State 28-14 a few weeks ago, but didn't make a bowl game.



Since: Mar 11, 2007
Posted on: December 13, 2008 12:05 am 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

you dont get it do you 1. There is no such thing as SOS

it is something used to ensure only

acc big10 big12 pac10 se big east conferences get (a big plus)

If you are in DIV1 you should be treated the same as all the other teams

Therefore  don't tell me arguements for those   7 teams that lost  ONE GAME  THEY ARE ALL LOSERS

utah   vs   boise state   is the only    FAIR  UNBIASED  DECISION


i'll ask you one question  what if  there were 4 undefeated teams from the   1 acc 2 big10 3big12 and 4pac10

who plays?  i'll tell you   whoever gets the most popular votes is who  STUPID  LIKE YOU

Since: Mar 11, 2007
Posted on: December 13, 2008 12:02 am 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

    GET A LIFE.  You just do not understand. 

1. top 10 tens in bcs standings  ugh ....they are all voted there by idiots...a set up and you fall for be fair


Do you reallly think Alabama because they lost their last game shd not be in championship game hmm lost last game OUT

DO you really think USC because they lost their 3rd game shd not be in national championship game hmmm OUT

Do you really think Oklahoma who lost to TEXAS with same record should be in   hmmm OUT

Do you really think FLORIDA who lost to wow MISSST shd be in GAME  HMMM OUT
Do you really think TEXAS TECH shd be in championshipgame they lost their next to last game hmmm OUT

Do you really think Penn ST who lost to MICH ST(WHO) shd be in championship game hmm OUT

Do you really think TEXAS who lost to OKLAHOMA shd be in championship game hmmm OUT

IF YOU IN DIV1 you should all be equal no BIAS

YOU ARE BIAS DUMB AND BRAINWASHED IF YOU THINK EVER ANY1 can be VOTED #1 cause they happen to be 2nd or 3rd and #1 loses funny ....6 #-1's last year   4 this year who is really #1 who the dummies vote #1 or the team with best record



Since: Aug 6, 2008
Posted on: December 12, 2008 10:05 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

Boise State really does not have the say as to what conference they play in. If they did then they would have jumped to the MWC or even the PAC-10 (where their wrestling team has competed for years) a long time ago. Unfortuneately, it is not up to them, the choice belongs to the conferences. That being said, as bad a mess as the BCS is if it was not for the BCS than teams like Boise State and Utah would never even have the opportunity to play in these major bowls. These bowls would be like every other bowl and have contracts with conference champions like every other bowl out there. Boise State only got the to play TCU this year is because the PAC-10 was short of teams to fulfill there contracts. Bowls that take conference champions never have that problem. Therefore Boise State, Utah, Hawaii, TCU, and BYU should be glad for the BCS just because it give them an opportunity to play major schools on the national stage. After watching all of Boise State's games this year I think that they would have a hard time beating a power team this year like they did to Oklahoma in the Fiesta Bowl. The Boise State team is far more talented right now than they were a couple years ago, but they have not played as well. Next year though, Boise State will start ranked higher and should not have any trouble going undefeated. Next year all the other mid-majors will be waiting for BSU to lose so that they can have our spot in a BCS bowl. Boise State has a young team and they will only get better over the next two years. If we beat TCU with this young team than a major bowl is ours to lose next year instead of waiting for BYU, TCU, and Utah to lose.

Since: Nov 16, 2008
Posted on: December 11, 2008 12:54 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

Quick, name three NFL players from Boise State. Didn't think so.

Ryan Clady, Chris Carr, Darren College, Orlando Scandrick, Korey Hall, Gerald Alexander, Legadu Naanee, Quintin Mikell, Jeb Putzier, Derek Schouman......oh wait you just said three


Hey, Darren College?  Quintin Mikell?  He said quickly. I bet researching those names took you over an hr.  Ha ha

Since: Dec 10, 2008
Posted on: December 10, 2008 5:52 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

wow, do you not know anything about sports. how many teams in bsu's conference are in the top 25?  and by your stupid theory, your saying that penn st will kill usc because oregon st beat usc and penn st killed oregon st.

Since: Nov 5, 2007
Posted on: December 9, 2008 11:47 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

Here's a thought experiment for people:

The two main arguments against an undefeated  mid-major like BSU having any business in a BCS game are:
  1) if they played in a BCS conference, they wouldn't be undefeated;
  2) any BCS team would be undefeated if they played BSU's schedule.

The problem with the first, is that it's an unprovable assertion, that relies on the assumption that an undefeated mid-major is inferior to all the BCS conference teams it would play.

The problem with the second, is that it's an unprovable assertion, that relies on the assumption that a BCS team is superior to all the mid-major  teams it would play.

Now, here's the thoughtful part:  assuming the second scenario with a BCS team like tOSU, how would they be ranked if, after all, they didn't play any marquee teams?  If you can supply an argument -- other than BCS bias -- why they should play in a BCS bowl, then how would that same argument NOT apply to BSU?

Not arguing for BSU or against tOSU, just trying to get my brain wrapped around the whole thing...

Since: Sep 3, 2006
Posted on: December 9, 2008 8:41 pm
This comment has been removed.

Post Deleted by Administrator

Since: Nov 4, 2007
Posted on: December 9, 2008 5:27 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

I hope Ohio State to get mutilated in Phoenix. I truly hope so. GO HORNS!

Since: Dec 13, 2006
Posted on: December 9, 2008 4:55 pm

Why Most d-1 Schools play for consolation prizes

Ok...every team that plays in a BCS conference has a chance of playing for the national championship game. So, you've already eliminated about 1/2 of all d-1 schools. So, even though the NCAA puts them in the same category, all 55 nonBCS schools have ZERO chance.  Sweet.

Look at the rankings of such teams as South Florida, Mizzou, etc. last year--not powerhouses before that, but had they kept winning, they would have been in the game.  So to say less than twenty is a gross exaggeration.  That puts at least 66 teams in the running (65 from the conferences + Notre Dame).

S. Florida & Mizzou had little chance.  If any one of the "elites" had the same or even a worse record, they would have been picked ahead of either.  Witness last year: LSU (an elite) and Ohio St. (another elite) were chosen over several schools with equal or better records.  Witness this year:  Had Mizzou beaten Oklahoma in the Big 12 Final, they had ZERO chance of going to the NC game.  Oklahoma & Texas (both elites) get the nod over Texas Tech (non elite) even though TT has the same record, just not as much love in the polls.  If USC and Ore. St. had tied, USC would get the nod, 99 times out of a hundred.  Witness this year:  Ohio St.  lots of money, fans, and tradition is chosen over a Boise St. team who took 40,000 fans to Glendale two years ago, and did everything asked of them this year.  All because an inferior OSU team plays in a conference perceived to be better with players perceived to be better.  Perceived, never proven on the field. 

As it turned out, Kansas, UConn, Mizzou, and all of the other 1 loss teams were passed over.  They don't have the big budgets, fans or glammor associated with the dozen or so elites.  The only case where I might concede a little more latitude is in the SEC, since any one of a number of schools has a chance to go undefeated, win the chapionship and play in the NC.

I stand by my original claim.  Baring some kind of a total eclipse of the football sun, only about a dozen or so elites have any chance of being named to the NC game.  If any non elite BCS school were to become an upset champion, they would get a BCS bid, yes, but not a spot in the NC game, unless literally all of the elites knock each other off.

Since: Dec 9, 2008
Posted on: December 9, 2008 4:18 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

On the BCS, my problem isn't with the match-ups, it's with automatic qualifiers. Teams get left out because some of these AQ's get a spot regardless of how bad they stink as a team. The computers already account for strength of schedule, so what is the point of an automatic qualifier?

In my mind, the AQ conferences, are privileged for their history, tradition, fan base, and television audience. Certainly all very strong factors for making money and good television. Unfortunately, the BCS isn't about winning, or determining a winner, it's about money and television... and that's too bad for those of us who want to know who the best is. For the record, I don't think it is BSU.

Finally, is BSU really whining? I don't think BSU wrote the article.

The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or