Navy AD says Boise State "not worth it"

But maybe their gimmick is their ability to game the system...they certainly have proved they know how to do that.  So maybe they are a gimmick team afterall.

So, gaming the system is playing the bib boys tough most of the time and even winning some games?  I'll accept that definition of gaming.

 Sorry if you feel that being among the top 25-30% of Div 1 college football teams is slighting you, but that is the reality.

Let's see Bosie finished 14th in one poll that means they are among the top 12 %.  In the other poll they finished 18 which means they are among the top 15%.  Your biased math is show and also quite telling.

That was Chris Petersen's 2nd worst finish in the polls in his 7 seasons at Boise too, Bigred. It was a down season by our usual standards. In fact three out of the four years prior to Petersen taking over, Boise finished higher than they did this last season. I'm hoping the consistency continues and they can somehow find a way to elevate the program to even higher levels. It won't be easy. That's for sure.

The side benefit hasn't been mentioned, however.  If the divisions were reshuffled, the Alabamas, Floridas, OSUs. and Texases of the world wouldn't be able to set up a full OOC schedule of cupcakes.  No more scrimmages against bottom end FBSers and FCS wannabes.  They'd be forced to play other teams in the upper conferences, instead of an entire plate of cream pastries like they do now.   Horrors, maybe we'd discover that some of these "superior" teams might not be quite so superior, after all.  And teams like Boise would actually be able to have games against these big talking elites that wouldn't be caught dead in Boise in the present system.  But this might mean giving up those 3 or 4 automatic wins that they are so used to having.



I dont think BSU would be in the confs with the Alabamas, Floridas, OSUs and Texases of the world....They would move down a division with vandy, colorados, and kentucky......I agree though it could end the big name teams playing weak OOC opponents.....It could also end BSU playing a 100 SOS and thinking they deserve to be in the conversation with the other teams.   

It's not usually in the 100s although this year it was awful with zero ranked teams played and rated 119 out of the 124 teams on this website. I don't know what it was beyond 2009, but the previous three years it was 59, 53, and 71 with 7 total EOY ranked teams played. I know that's not the toughest schedule, but for a non-AQ that isn't bad at all. This year's SOS, terrible. I'll be the first to admit it. There's a million different indexes out there, but Boise's schedule isn't normally nearly as bad as a lot of people make it out to be. This past season would certainly be an exception. Hopefully, it will improve in the future. It will be difficult unless they get an invite from a major. If they ever even get one at all.

It's not usually in the 100s although this year it was awful with zero ranked teams played and rated 119 out of the 124 teams on this website. 



It tends to hover around 100.......Not a bad site for SOS below.....2009,10,11 seems like the exception for BSU....



[http://bcscentral.info/h/history.ht
ml






]
 

If Boise played all of its OOC games on the road against major teams, it would still have a low SOS according to most of the formulas out there.  I'll say it again, all SOS does is gauge the teams someone played, it really doesn't tell us how good the team is.  They often don't take key factors into consideration such as whether the game was at home or away, margins of victory and defeat, weather or field conditions, key injuries, lucky or unlucky bounces, and other factors too numerous to mention that can influence a real game.   They punish teams for things completely beyond their control, such as conference affiliation (why SEC fans love them, no doubt), the actions or lack of actions of teams that played the teams they played.  I can remember one, in which Billingsly, I believe, transposed two numbers on some other game which then accidently ranked Boise one spot too low in the BCS standings, at #11 instead of #10.  When reporters tried to figure out the algorithms involved or why the mistake wasn't caught, the website mysteriously crashed, and all the numbers magically reappeared in different order the next day with no explanation.  And of course, those algorithms are secret, we have to trust them.

Me, I'd rather watch real games than parse the various formulas that the authors refuse to share when they come up with these numbers.  Besides, since every one of them is different, it can lead to situations in which fans of the various teams can shop for the ones that put their favorite team higher, and their unfavorite one lower.  So some love Sagarin, some CBS, others one of the other dozen or so.

It's not a real number when everyone of them come up with different ones.  That's why no one uses them for more than a single factor among many.  Even the BCS only partially considers them, and they may use the worst formulas of all, ones that don't consider margin of victory.  So a one or two point loss in triple overtime counts the same as a six touchdown blow out.  Yeah, that makes sense.  Why?  The BCS didn't want to encourage bubble teams to "run up the score" in those throwaway games.  Not good for the cupcakes, you know.

But I get it, since SOS makes his team and his conference look better, BT tries to make them the be all and end all.

Yes, there are indeed three kinds of lies:  lies, damn lies, and statistics.

A very true statement, smiles. "All SOS does is gauge the teams someone played. It really doesn't tell us how good the team is."

It certainly helps when it comes down to deciding rankings and more importantly national championship match ups though.

Smiles.....


I agree with you in a way about SOS....It doesnt exactly show how good the team is but like you said it does judge the quality of the opponents one plays..............So could a 11-1 team with a SOS of 100 be as good as a 11-1 team with a SOS of 10? Sure.........But who has proved more?



This falls back into human vote though...People get upset and scream human bias with the polls but yet some fans like yourself dont like computer calculations either.......There is no way for a sport with 120 plus teams to play every other team.

smiles your truely a idoit. This isn't soccer and that idea SUCKS. The reason i say this is because, if i am a winner and then i go into next season with a bad team, why work hard i know we are going to lose.

geneh_32 that idea isn't bad if you can't put up with the Boise and nevadas crying how they're left out.   No the only way to be fare is go with a platoff and i say this because its not fare for a team like OU to play a hard schedule and get to the top, when a team like Boise st play Creampuffs to get to the same place.

Boise st's IN conf and OUT of conf schedule is weak....... For a total SOS of garbage....

geneh_32 that idea isn't bad if you can't put up with the Boise and nevadas crying how they're left out.   No the only way to be fare is go with a platoff and i say this because its not fare for a team like OU to play a hard schedule and get to the top, when a team like Boise st play Creampuffs to get to the same place.

I still think my suggestion (or rather Gator Lass's) is better for Boise State and all of the "have not" schools. They get their own bowls, their own playoffs and they don't have to worry about IC or OOC SOS anymore.

Sure, they can still have bowls that "crossover" and play a "have" opponent like the MAACO Bowl, Liberty Bowl, etc. But I say let them have their own "BCS" games, their own playoffs, etc. The Fiesta Bowl is without a contract after 2013 as the Big 12 champ will no longer play there. The Fiesta Bowl could feature the entire playoff or the majority of it and make the same money they made before with one game. The system could be designed so that it would work and make plenty of money of all of the "have nots" to share however they choose to share it.


And like the AFL teams did, someday they can improve their quality of play and join the NFL as equal partners, if they choose to do so.

I still think my suggestion (or rather Gator Lass's) is better for Boise State and all of the "have not" schools. They get their own bowls, their own playoffs and they don't have to worry about IC or OOC SOS anymore.

Sure, they can still have bowls that "crossover" and play a "have" opponent like the MAACO Bowl, Liberty Bowl, etc. But I say let them have their own "BCS" games, their own playoffs, etc. The Fiesta Bowl is without a contract after 2013 as the Big 12 champ will no longer play there. The Fiesta Bowl could feature the entire playoff or the majority of it and make the same money they made before with one game. The system could be designed so that it would work and make plenty of money of all of the "have nots" to share however they choose to share it.


And like the AFL teams did, someday they can improve their quality of play and join the NFL as equal partners, if they choose to do so.




I don't necessarily see this as the "haves" and "have nots", but rather as finding a way to eliminate some of the problems facing FBS.  This move, more than likely, will be made at the conference level rather than a mass re-alignment of schools in new conferences, so I would anticipate that those are the existing blocks of teams in this shift.

Again, if a conference such as the B12 or PAC wants to expand, it is up to its members.  Likewise, you have to accept that the schools that are presently in the conferences are there because their co-members want them there for some reason.

Keep in mind, though, that at this point there are very few teams that may appeal to a conference for expansion, and even fewer, if any, that would be the subject of an outright swap.  Especially when it comes to swapping members, I just don't see conferences going through that process to swap out what is more than likely going to be teams in the bottom-half of the division or subdivision.  They already have programs that are struggling to be successful with 30,000 seat stadiums in isolated markets and no other sports or academics to bring to the table.

I dont think BSU would be in the confs with the Alabamas, Floridas, OSUs and Texases of the world....They would move down a division with vandy, colorados, and kentucky......I agree though it could end the big name teams playing weak OOC opponents.....It could also end BSU playing a 100 SOS and thinking they deserve to be in the conversation with the other teams.  


Considereing that TCU moved to the "big leagues this last year, in a rebuilding year for them, and suspending/kicking off some players for drugs, there is no reason not to expect the same form Boise if not better.  In a better league you get better players.  In a better league your SOS immediately improves.  The biggest miscarriage of justice with Boise is no one recognizes (outside of Boise fans mostly), is that they have on of the best coaching staffs in the country.  And consistantly create game plans far superior to thier opponents.  All this high and might pontification and people don't realize that even the mighty SEC was by and large a one horse conference (Alabama) until the 90's.            

Actually geneh, I was refering to your newest love interest, North Carolina. 

Actually geneh, I was refering to your newest love interest, North Carolina.

What about North Carolina? And I have stated many, many times that I like ALL of the ACC schools.

I apologize geneh, I meant no disrespect. I've always rooted for UNC. In my much younger days, I played a couple of summers of basketball with a kid who went to UNC on a b-ball scholarship.

How will you feel if some schools from the ACC are cast to the wayside as "deadwood"?

smiles your truely a idoit.

Let's see, this poor tortured soul can't spell, punctuate, capitalize, nor back his argument with reasoned analysis.  But yet somehow, he is smart and folks who disagree with him are "idoits,"  whatever that is.  Just a hint, little fellow, if you are going to challenge the intelligence of another poster, try to write a sentence or two that shows that you actually went to school somewhere.

To be name-called by someone such as this is truly an honor.  Rest well, Sooner Shel, rest well.

How will you feel if some schools from the ACC are cast to the wayside as "deadwood"?

Not well. Not well at all.

Duke pretty much was "cast aside as deadwood." That is, until they brought in Cutcliffe, who has cleaned house and set up camp. Duke just went to their first bowl game since 1994, 18 years ago. Most people had written off Duke as a permanent creampuff. Not anymore. These guys will beat you now if you take them too lightly.

UNC and NCSU have been producing decent teams of late, too. The thing about the ACC teams is that we have a whole of lot of dollars to kick around. I just wish all of the ACC schools would put those megabucks into a premier coaching staff and proceed to kicking SEC ass! FSU is coming back around and so is Clemson. VT and GT have dropped off the landscape for the moment.

Right now about the only team we have that could be cast to the wayside as deadwood is Wake. Gone is the fear of the Demon Deacons on the BB court and nobody is afraid of their football team.

Even Virginia went 8-5 in 2011 so there is a speck of hope for them.

I am excited about picking up PItt, Syracuse and Louisville, all good schools with potential, both if BB and football. Trading Maryland for Louisville was great if you ask me. We could always pick up Navy later if we want a Md. presence.



What's going on with New Mexico State now? Have you heard anything?