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: Oct 28, 2007
Posted on: December 8, 2008 10:02 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

Obviuosly you don't understand that bowl games are about money too.  OSU vs Texas last year was the highest rated tv sporting event in 2006. The two schools have large TV audineces and a legion of fans who buy tickets hotel rooms etc. I have been to the Fiesta bowl twice in 2002 when ( The overraed Miami was beat by Ohio State for the National Championship ) and When 2006 the ( Overrated Ntredame was beat by Ohio State ) both times the press as they will this time will be happy to have Buckeyes in town who spend money and are not cheap. As some bar and restaurant owners told me some schools just don't travel well and don't spend money. Yes as a Buckeye and OSU alum I'm used to all the whining from the non BCS conferences and I empathize. But guys The Big Ten is a huge TV market and that is why consisitently we have two teams going to the BCS every year...and all that money gets share equally with all teams in the Big Ten. ! Sorry Boise...Idaho does not have enough eye balls.

Since: Sep 14, 2008
Posted on: December 8, 2008 9:56 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

I'm interested in reviewing how it is the fault of Boise State in playing in the WAC.  The WAC and the Mtn. West both were better conferences this year than the PAC 10, Big East, and ACC.  It's embarssing that the "tradition" of those conferences counts more than the performance on the field.  Who will play them?  How many times does a BCS school pay out so they don't have to play these games that were scheduled 4 years ago?

I actually blame the lame automatic qualifiers from the BCS conferences that suck.  With the exception of USC, can you honestly tell me that Cinn and VT played a harder schedule in a tougher conference?

Since: Apr 24, 2008
Posted on: December 8, 2008 9:40 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise


Everybody has some great ideas.  Here is one for you to ponder.

Take only Conference Champions.  Have the MAC Champion play the Conference USA Champion and The Mountain West Champion play the WAC Champion in play in games for the final eight.   The Big Ten and PAC 10 could play in the Rose Bowl, The Big East and ACC in the Capital One Bowl, The Big 12 against the MWC/WAC Winner in the Cotton Bowl, and The SEC against the MAC/C-USA Winner in the Chick-fil-a Bowl.

Winners play in Orange and Fiesta, and Championship in the Sugar.

No Polls, No BCS, Stronger out of Conference Schedules.

It might look like this:  Buffalo vs. East Carolina  Boise St. vs. Utah in play in games.

Rose Bowl  USC vs. Penn State,  Capital One Bowl Va Tech vs. Cincinnati, Chick-fil-a Bowl Florida vs.Buffalo/East Carolina, and Cotton Bowl  Oklahoma vs. Boise St./ Utah

Seed the winners:  Fiesta Bowl  Oklahoma vs. Cincinnati and Orange Bowl  Florida vs. USC

Then the Championship, again No Polls and No BCS.

Yes Texas gets screwed, but the Big 12 is to blame for that.

Since: Sep 2, 2006
Posted on: December 8, 2008 9:29 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

So a five-point road win at Oregon is somehow unquestionably better than wins by five touchdowns apiece at Michigan State and Northwestern? Seriously, those wins are just as good as anything Alabama, Cincinnati, Utah, and Virginia Tech can bring to the table. Might as well throw Penn State and USC into that bunch too because they've only really beaten Ohio State too, who shouldn't count; after all, the Buckeyes don't have any signature wins and obviously don't belong in a BCS game.

I don't see how they "benefitted" from getting beat by USC, either. It appeared to me they lost ten positions in the polls that they had no chance of ever getting back. Even if they'd beaten Penn State they'd only be 9th instead of 10th and people like you would be saying they don't belong in the BCS because they lost to the ONE good team they played.

Since: Dec 13, 2006
Posted on: December 8, 2008 9:05 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

I'm enjoying the naysayers and know-it-alls who put down Boise's conference and schedule.  Yeah, we'll just pick up the phone and switch conferences.  Right. 

The simple fact is that for any nonBCS team to even have a chance, they must go undefeated, unlike an elite school that can lose one or two games and still get selected.  Boise schedules at least one major BCS school per year and seeks reciprical deals to play the best competition availble.  Sure, Boise could do "one and dones" with any number of major schools, be a road warrior and have the deck staqcked against them in every game.  And should Boise lose a single one of those games?  Bye bye BCS.  So they dominate their conference, year after year, and usually win those BCS match-ups. 

So you tell me, which is smarter? Go undefeated and be in the mix every year; or listen to wannabe know-it-alls who have no clue as to what a lower budgeted team must do to even be competitive?  Boise builds program, establishes its fan base, and is expanding its stadium.  Gee, Boise's approach seems to be working.  Teams like Fresno St., who schedule anyone anywhere, can't even win their own conferences, and often don't even sell out their home games.

By the way, I'm still waiting for ANYONE to prove me wrong.  I'll repeat.  Only about a dozen teams, all with budgets exceeding 50 million, have any real chance to ever play in an national championship game.  All the rest play only for scraps.

Since: Sep 14, 2008
Posted on: December 8, 2008 8:57 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

Look at Boise State's wins and then look at Ohio State's wins. 

There is not much difference at all, and in my opinion, Ohio State should not benefit from getting beat by 30+ points out in LA.  Boise State won all of their games including on the road at Oregon.  They deserve a BCS bid before Ohio State (no questions about it).  Heck TCU should get the bid before Ohio State.  Look at their schedule if you want a tough one.

Hence, my statement that TCU vs. Boise State will be the best bowl game of the season to watch.

Since: Oct 24, 2006
Posted on: December 8, 2008 8:53 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

Boise State and their conference are a freaking joke, end of story.

Since: Oct 24, 2006
Posted on: December 8, 2008 8:52 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

Boise State and their schedule is a freaking joke, end of story.

Since: Sep 14, 2008
Posted on: December 8, 2008 8:51 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

Everyone always says Notre Dame gets put into BCS bowls because of their name and money draw, but what about Ohio State.  Where is their big-time win?  They lost against the only two good teams they played against.  Don't get me wrong, they had big time wins over Youngstown State, Ohio University, Michigan, Purdue, and Troy.  Put them in the National Championship! (sarcasm folks)

Please let me hear an Ohio State fan defend this bowl bid.  (They will get beat by at least 4 touchdowns against an upset Texas team, who needs style points in an effort for a split national championship.)

Since: Oct 5, 2008
Posted on: December 8, 2008 8:35 pm 120 -- No BCS for No. 9 Boise

I meant I hope Texas puts tOSU in their place, and they will!

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