Skip to content

Auburn is the BcS No. 1, but why?

With Oklahoma BCS Rankings, Week Two.PNG

Permalink 89 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Rumor Mill
89 Responses to “Auburn is the BcS No. 1, but why?”
  1. edgy1957 says: Oct 24, 2010 11:29 PM

    The computers are looking at Oregon’s joke of a schedule and that’s why they’re not #1 and could end up not being #2. No matter how you slice it, playing New Mexico and Portland State isn’t going to do you any good and I don’t care if you made this schedule up 20 years ago, neither was an opponent that you can expect to be good today. Tennessee was a good schedule get but how were they to know that this team would go in the tank this year and Stanford will be a positive, as well. Arizona State, UCLA and Washington have also taken them down and will continue to drag them down. Their last 5 opponents won’t have a chance in hell of bringing their schedule up with the teams that they’ve already played.

  2. mike28212 says: Oct 24, 2010 11:32 PM

    Looking at those rankings, it seems Auburn is so high mainly b/c the computers don’t care much for Boise or Oregon.

  3. edgy1957 says: Oct 24, 2010 11:34 PM

    BTW, you need to change Auburn’s % from .1350 to .9153 (Or not). :)

  4. Drew says: Oct 24, 2010 11:40 PM

    I’m assuming you’re not quite sure how the BCS works… It uses three polls, yes. But the 1/3 that is the BCS poll is actually six computer rankings. The highest and lowest ranking (which was 6 and 11 for Oregon) are dropped, and the other four are averaged to find the BCS’s 1/3. So when you add it up where Oregon is ranked 8 in BCS, and 1 in the Harrison and Coaches poll, that is 10/3, which is about 3.33. Auburn’s was 2.6, and BSU was roughly 4. So that is why Auburn is ranked 1, Oregon is 2, and BSU is 3. Auburn has played 4 currently BCS ranked teams and Oregon and Boise only one. Strength of schedule is a big part in it too. Read more up on it. All of the polls are going to be questioned because there’s more than two teams undefeated. Even with a 16 team or 32 team playoff system, there will still be that 17th or 33rd team left out of the play off…

  5. Joe says: Oct 25, 2010 12:04 AM

    Who should be #1 then?

  6. allmaddenjack says: Oct 25, 2010 12:06 AM

    This is a sure way to get the Feds involved and muck up college sports forever. Antitrust, RICO acts, racketeering….crazy.

  7. Jdickey says: Oct 25, 2010 12:12 AM

    You really call yourself a journalist?

  8. burntorangehorn says: Oct 25, 2010 12:19 AM

    It’s because the other teams that are ranked highly in the human polls aren’t really good when human bias is removed.
    Humans can see some things that computers can’t in terms of judging quality, but are also very prone to bias. That’s why computers are important as well. I think it makes sense to not allow the humans to decide it all, because they were pretty bad at it in the years before the BCS. Remember the Bowl Alliance and Bowl Coalition?
    That said, I could get on board with a playoff, but only if there weren’t wildcards AND the bowls (and their traditions) were preserved. Any team wanting a shot at the championship would have to win its conference, and all conference champions would be in a playoff–no mid-majors treated as second-class citizens. Either give them equal shots at the title or put them in a separate football division, like FCS.

  9. BAtkins63 says: Oct 25, 2010 12:22 AM

    If you cannot figure out the “Why”, maybe you should take up writing for Ladies Home Journal. I hear LHJ is looking for an writer for lace undies,… or is it lace curtains. Let me check in with the Mrs. to verify. Skirt!

  10. funi says: Oct 25, 2010 12:28 AM

    It does nto matter, Auburn will lose at least 2 games. Hopefully Michigan State, Missouri, Boise State and TCU are all undeafted then see who goes!

  11. WarEagle1 says: Oct 25, 2010 1:41 AM

    John, as an Auburn fan I wanted to tell you that I think we need a playoff system. It is certainly not fair that teams like TCU and Boise State would hypothetically not get an opportunity to compete to become the national champion. It was not fair that Auburn did not get a chance to compete for National Champions in 2004 and clearly that was a mistake since that team had the highest number of NFL first round draft picks in history. The real problem is that we rank at all before a game is even played. Auburn started the year ranked 22nd and that was based primarily on numbers. There was no accounting for the human element that quite frankly is a hidden statistic that is not available before the season. It is in fact the driving force behind why we watch football and why some teams can go on to be undefeated. We can’t put a number on heart before we get the challenge.. and trust me Auburn University has plenty of heart. Calling us Barners shows ignorance to reality my friend. That is the root cause of the problem, ignorance to the reality of what might be true about a football team (or a community of barns lol–have you ever been to Auburn?) made by people who might be smart but don’t have the time to see every football field in the US and then pretend they know what they are talking about. War Eagle..

  12. hardjuge says: Oct 25, 2010 2:57 AM

    Well, Congress bless their little pea pickin hearts could say, We provide the money for all you schools and you are discriminating against Division IA(FBS) football(Pick your favorite reason for discrimination as any will do and mandate a playoff). Would be good for college presidents who for the most part have never ever been in the real world to find out they aren’t Alpha and Omega of life. Pick you favorite format for the play off, but personally I like a 16 team playoff. Divide FBS into 8 conferences with 2 divisions each and let the playoffs begin. Congress could make it a felony with a death penalty for not cooperating. LOL.

  13. haymakerajw says: Oct 25, 2010 7:17 AM

    I ask why not?
    This has the be the dumbest article I have read. Just filled with sarcasm and no point at all.
    I love how everyone wants a playoff but yet doesn’t offer a real solution. I don’t want a playoff like the NFL or even March Madness has. Yes I watch March Madness and the NFL playoffs but I’m also less apt to watch the regular season. At least with the BCS in place, we have excitement every week.
    I think the BCS is getting it right this year. There are 7 unbeatens and there is no way a human can rank them without subjection. So how do you analyze the teams? By who they played. Auburn clearly has the best resume, that’s why they’re number 1.

  14. Tiger Fan (Missouri) says: Oct 25, 2010 8:03 AM

    Very simple actually. Coaches and sportswriters go by the gut. Computers crunch the data. One simple comparison. Auburn opponents are currently a combined 37-23. 4 of those teams are in the BCS Top 25 (LSU #12, Arkansas, South Carolina, Miss. State #19, 20, & 21). Oregon opponents are a combined 17-33. Only one of those teams is in the BCS Top 25 (Stanford #13). And Boise State. Their opponents are a combined 18-27, one of those victories over a current BCS Top 25 team (Virginia Tech #23).

  15. villain_001 says: Oct 25, 2010 8:58 AM

    Oregon getting screwed right now, but in the end they’ll be on top… F the BCS

  16. bak says: Oct 25, 2010 9:55 AM

    People talk about the computer polls in the BCS as if computers are self aware. Rather, they will dispassionately execute any bias built into their evaluation program. We need a playoff system.

  17. BrownsTown says: Oct 25, 2010 10:29 AM

    “This is a sure way to get the Feds involved and muck up college sports forever. Antitrust, RICO acts, racketeering….crazy.”
    ++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    Yeah, but the last guy to take on the BCS hasn’t been heard from in over a year. Coincidence?
    JT,
    You might want to have someone else start your car for a few weeks.

  18. oldaufeller says: Oct 25, 2010 10:38 AM

    Winners win games. Champions beat winners.
    Auburn was left out because of a weak schedule (at least that was the excuse and I’ll take it at face value: 2004.) I would love to see AU and Oregon this year. But high ranking teams that play weak schedules get punished in the BCS rankings. If want to address that problem, you need to talk to scheduling a few years in advance.
    Since I follow Auburn, I watch all their games. It’s interesting how outside observers “discover” that Auburn can be beat by exploiting our weak defense. You don’t think Arkansas, South Carolina, LSU, and Clemson knew that? Wasn’t Enough. Plus our defense is starting to tighten up. It happens as our young and depth challenged defense gets some very challenging game play. On the job training you might say.
    The truth is I haven’t watched all of Oregon’s and Bioise State’s games. I’ve seen the highlight reels, I’ve picked up some games, but I won’t pretend to make a summary judgment about their play. Until one of them is stuck in a stadium with Auburn I can’t tell you who’s better. I personally would love to see a playoff.
    Perhaps if there are still two unbeaten teams after the NC is finished, maybe they could have a 59 minute bragging rights scrimmage for charity at the stadium of the team left out of the NC.

  19. edgy1957 says: Oct 25, 2010 10:44 AM

    The computers had to take out margin of victory years ago and that is what put Auburn at the top. As an example, Oregon is 6th with Sagarin but if he uses the formula that he’s used for years, they’re 1st. Meanwhile, Auburn is 3rd for the BCS but 6th with his non-BCS formula.
    The problem that some people have is that the computers differ in what margin of victory means. Most fans look at Oregon’s 69-0 beat down of Portland State or their 72-0 whipping of New Mexico as positives while the computers look at it as overkill and actually penalize them (even more so for trying to embarrass an FCS team). Without margin of victory, computers can only look at their schedule and that doesn’t bode well for Oregon (I have them as 105th in SOS and 106th in adjusted SOS, which takes into account their level of competition). Bring back margin of victory and you get better results but be careful about what you wish for because it also means that some teams get penalized even more for whipping on dead bodies.

  20. gncnew says: Oct 25, 2010 10:45 AM

    “Barners”?
    Wow – I’ve not heard that since I talked to the last bitter Alabama fan… oh wait – was that you?
    So who exactly is supposed to be number one in your eyes then?
    Boise? Because they’ve been tearing it up through the teams that Auburn schedules for season openers and home coming?
    Oregon because they’ve whipped up a frenzy of points to sub par team? (seriously – going for it on fourth and goal in the fourth quarter when you’re up by 40 points?…. wow – impressive).
    How about Mizzu? They beat “#1″! right… oh wait – that was a number one from this BS system.
    Please put the bias back in your pocket. To complain about the system is one thing. To outright call it’s results a “BS” because whatever team you’ve got a man crush on isn’t benefiting is just juvenile.

  21. HandsofSweed says: Oct 25, 2010 10:47 AM

    The American Football Coaches Association recently noted that the Ohio High School Athletic Association has the best and most logical/equitable playoff system in America. The Harbin computer point system we use out here should be the model that the NCAA adopts. I think that Georgia uses it too, if I recall correctly.
    The Harbin system would accurately account all opponents wins/losses into 1st level points (for beating a team) and 2nd level points (when you beat someone, how did they fare in the rest of their games?).
    Ohioans love to complain (LOL), but NOBODY EVER gripes about the computer point system here. It is what it is, and it’s fair, if nothing else. The NCAA could use it to make a playoff system fair OR just to determine BCS teams. Either way, you’d have to be a punk b***h to complain about a Harbin points system.

  22. edgy1957 says: Oct 25, 2010 10:49 AM

    BTW, I have been advocating what I believe to be the perfect idea for the BCS: a playoff that keeps the bowls. It involves 4 permanent BCS conferences and 4 that change every so often but that’s only for automatic bids. The other bids would come from the BCS poll and could even include the champion of any non-BCS conference. Go to boards.edgy-sports.com and look for it in college football.

  23. DCroz says: Oct 25, 2010 10:59 AM

    Before everyone gets all insane, remember that this is the final BCS poll…for the month of October. There is still a lot of football to be played, and several contenders will be weeded out over the remaining 5-6 games everyone has left. It’s all fun to debate now, but save the high blood pressure meds for the day after the conference championship games the first weekend in December.

  24. Sean Martin says: Oct 25, 2010 11:23 AM

    If Oregon State beats Oregon, then Boise State will be pushed to #1.

  25. blitz4848 says: Oct 25, 2010 11:45 AM

    When it’s all said and done Dec 4th
    NCG will be Auburn vs TCU
    “4” teams undefeated–2 will be left out
    Mich St will be undefeated and LEFT OUT!!!!
    Boise St will also be undefeated and OUT as well
    This will be the yr that TV as well as Conress puts tremendous pressure on NCAA for a playoff
    NCAA will go to a PLUS “1” to try and NOT be forced into a full blown playoff system. Big 10 fans will be screaming the loudest as Michigan St will be in the same position Auburn was in 2004.
    Having 3,4 or more undefeated teams this yr would give all us in favor of a playoff of some sort
    a really good chance of moving NCAA football into the 21st century. It’s hard to justify being one of the biggest sports cash cows in the country and having no sane playoff system in place.

  26. blitz4848 says: Oct 25, 2010 11:46 AM

    @ Sean Martin
    Not if Auburn beats Alabama and then South Carolina in the SEC ch game

  27. Claudius says: Oct 25, 2010 12:07 PM

    What those of you who lament that the coaches’ and AP polls are human-based and therefore subject to human emotion forget is that: Hey, guess what: The sacred BCS computers did not program themselves. They were programmed by humans and those humans had emotions too. Those humans decided what weight to put to a particular stat. Those humans decided what stats to overlook. Those humans put in stats that heavily favored the large conferences that have A LOT of money riding on BCS appearances. A lot of money that hinges on the hype built around those powerhouse conferences. So long as the Oregon Ducks are the best team in college football, the BCS will continue to exclude them because the Ducks are not a national TV draw.
    One example? You all preach about how important it is that a team’s opponent be ranked. Well now, pray tell tell how can a team scheduled to play USC get any “strength of schedule” points this year or next since USC is barred from BCS?
    Do the computer rankings take into account the sudden slap to your once highly-ranked program after it gets pummeled by Oregon so thoroughly that the rest of its season is a tailspin?
    “Strength of Schedule” is a perceived statistic that was created to favor the supposed powerhouse conferences. It is an emotional statistic because it was devised by a human. Instead of being a real stat like wins v. losses (or total yardage or total margin of victory or average points per game), it’s an amalgam of stats (opponents win-loss, current rankings, future rankings, etc.).
    So to say that the BCS computer rankings “take the human emotion” out of the equation in order to balance out the polls is simply not a tenable position.

  28. Deb says: Oct 25, 2010 12:23 PM

    Oh pooh!
    Pooh pooh pooh!
    I prefer cowtown to barners because I believe that’s what Bear used to say. And I diss Auburn because they’re Auburn. It’s called college rivalry. What fun would college football be without it?
    funi, my Steelers pal, let’s hope your prediction of Auburn’s two losses is accurate. Let’s hope one of those is the Iron Bowl. I’m salivating with anticipation :)
    Since number one has been knocked off three weeks in a row, it’s a bit premature to start planning the championship game, don’t you think? And it doesn’t matter where Auburn sits. If they lose the SEC championship, they lose the shot at the national title.
    Plenty of football left to be played before any trophies are awarded.
    ROLL TIDE!!!

  29. blitz4848 says: Oct 25, 2010 12:52 PM

    Hey Deb–give me a shout at yahoo.

  30. edgy1957 says: Oct 25, 2010 12:54 PM

    blitz4848 says:
    Mich St will be undefeated and LEFT OUT!!!!
    ******************************
    Won’t happen. The computers favor Michigan State over TCU and it only gets worse for them from here. If they all win out then it’s going to be Auburn, Oregon, Michigan State, TCU and Boise State and it might even be close as to whether Boise finishes 5th or not and the gap between Oregon and Michigan State could close enough for them to pass the Ducks for 2nd place. What won’t happen is that TCU passes Oregon unless the Ducks lose. Utah and San Diego State are good teams left BUT UNLV and New Mexico will drag them down more than the others will lift them up. It’s better than Boise but it’s not enough to overcome Oregon’s place in the polls.

  31. West_the _Best says: Oct 25, 2010 1:06 PM

    @claudius Right on. The fact that margin of victory is not explicitly taken into account by the BCS computer programs handicaps great teams in a weak conference. Boise State is a great team but is in a crappy conference, they will compete with and beat any team in the nation in my opinion. But they and TCU and Utah are given shortshrift by the computers and the rest of the BCS conference supporters. You can not tell me that the MWC is not stronger than the Big East or the ACC, both do not deserve an automatic bid this year. A playoff system is the only fair way and all the BS analysts that oppose it are fearful that their BCS team will get their tails whipped.

  32. rlsmit says: Oct 25, 2010 1:24 PM

    I’m saying it here. A one loss SEC team will (should) Jump TCU, Boise State if they go undefeated, I know it sucks but it’s true. Same as for a one loss Big Ten / Big twelve team. Look at any of the one loss SEC, Big X, or Big XII teams, they are, in my opinion, a better overall team than an Undefeated Boise State or TCU. Lastly, in my opinion, any of the abovementioned one loss teams, has earned the right to be at the NC game over a TCU or Boise State. I’m not buying into their BS hype just because they are undefeated, TCU and Boise State should be undefeated given their schedule. And please don’t bring up past freaking accomplishments because that has no bearing on this season. Only reason these two teams are even in the NC Game talk is because of their pre-season rankings, (which was again BS by the way).

  33. Floridacock says: Oct 25, 2010 3:04 PM

    The only reason we don’t have a playoff is so bloggers and the press have something to talk about. The current system is saving your job! Don’t complain

  34. WingT says: Oct 25, 2010 3:09 PM

    Well, one things for sure, we will get closer to defining the contending teams after this weekend. Oregon has to go to USC, Missouri has to go to Nebraska and the Barners have to go to Ole Miss and play the Nutt’s team. This game will be known as;
    ” The Great Laptop Snatchers Face Off”
    lol….
    Roll Tide

  35. BrownsTown says: Oct 25, 2010 3:35 PM

    At some point, it’s hard to keep the Boise States of the world out of the big games when they have a proven track record:
    – BSU over Oklahoma in the 2007 Fiesta
    – Utah over Bama in the 2009 Sugar
    – BSU over Oregon 2x 08-09

  36. rlsmit says: Oct 25, 2010 4:17 PM

    They beat four ranked teams in as many years, What kind of track record is that, that’s a typical season in the ummm SEC, BIG X or BIG XII,
    BSU shouldn’t even be in the title picture.

  37. p3csub says: Oct 25, 2010 4:21 PM

    PAC1o guy complaining about Auburn ranked over Oregon. Did you read where the SEC wanted to talk about playoff and PAC10 did not want to discuss http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/news?slug=dw-expansion060610
    The PAC10 wants the status quo the complains about the status quo. Heck, no. 2 in the BCS is just as good as number 1.

  38. thanosazlin says: Oct 25, 2010 4:29 PM

    i’m sorry but auburn got screwed in 2004 when they went undefeated. the BCS is screwed up and not fair we need a playoff system. and there is no doubting that SEC is one if not the strongest conf in NCAA football. and like a previous poster mentioned, auburn has already played several highly ranked teams compare to BS and O.

  39. whatever13 says: Oct 25, 2010 5:04 PM

    As I posted last week, when another blogger on this site whined about OU being “#1″ thanks to the computers–the computer programs are all designed to determine the strongest team at the end of the year, not the middle. Until then their data is incomplete. They do not look ahead at the upcoming schedule and anticipate wins/losses. Complaining about computer rankings until the end of the season is silly.
    IF Auburn and Oregon remain undefeated, then, yes, they are locks to play in the BCS championship game. Big “if,” but IF they get that far, then they deserve it.

  40. Liketorun says: Oct 25, 2010 5:33 PM

    Up front I will tell you that I am a native Oregonian and have watched football for a half-century, yes I am dating myself.
    First, I agree with Auburn being placed 1st given the season thus far despite Oregon’s obvious blowouts. Frankly, I am surprised that Oregon is first in ALL the human polls.
    Having said that … this Oregon team is good, and good as a team. Their defense is better than has been seen (take a look at their second half defensive statistics) and historically they get better as the season ages. I have watched a lot of football this year and I do follow the SEC and midwest teams. This team is better than last year’s team and if they don’t self-destruct whoever they get in whatever bowl game better watch out.
    Further I believe if the Pac-10 (next year Pac-12) team was USC on top there would be a lot less discussion despite the fact Oregon has a pretty impressive record the last 15 years. The Pac-10 has played well against the SEC during the last decade (+50%).
    If Oregon remains undefeated I do think they should get a shot at the title, but they haven’t earned it yet.

  41. West_the _Best says: Oct 25, 2010 6:57 PM

    @rlsmit,
    You can say it all you want, but it doesn’t make it correct. All you BCSer have a flaw in your logic, in fact it is circular. If for example SEC teams are rated high in the beginning of the season (which they generally are), then an SEC team can load up on powder puff teams (which they generally do) for its out of conference games and then just play each other. The computer sees that it is playing “highly ranked” teams, i.e., each other and maintain their high ranking based on “strength of schedule”. A WAC team or MWC team plays out of conference teams, but has to hope that they are highly ranked the year that they play them. If not then they are screwed, preseason, these nonBCS conference teams are not ranked and therefore when they play each other the computers downgrade the wins. I am not saying that all conferences are at the same strength, but there is a definite bias against some conferences because some of the teams at the bottom are indeed weak. This just forces the top teams to look for a better conference. Utah is going to the PAC 12 and Boise State is going to MWC from a weaker WAC. The best teams regardless of conference affiliation should have a shot at the national title. Give me a playoff system.

  42. rlsmit says: Oct 25, 2010 8:35 PM

    @West_the _Best
    Yeah but you’re assuming the best team is found in those smaller conferences. What makes them the best team? I haven’t seen any reason why BSU should be ranked over a Michigan State or Aurburn, (according to the AP poles). The only reason they are ranked higher is because misguided hype during the preseason. They are nothing more than the best team in the week conference. At no time this year have they played an above average team and earned a win. (that’s including VT and OS). If you want a spot at the top earn it. Don’t cry and beg your way to a NC game. Plain and simple, they haven’t earned it. Undeafeated in the WAC? really, is a BS prerequisite for the NC.

  43. rlsmit says: Oct 25, 2010 8:41 PM

    Oh almost forgot, most of those “Powder Puff” teams are WAC/MWC teams. Even if we do play these teams we still have at minimum again at minimum, 3 nationally ranked teams. Come on dude, this is not evan an argument.

  44. edgy1957 says: Oct 25, 2010 8:49 PM

    West_the _Best says:
    @rlsmit,
    *********************
    Not true. Loading up on cream puffs actually hurts you with the computers as they do Oregon. The computers deal with who you’ve played and NOT who you will play and that’s why you see teams in power conferences move up in the computer rankings later in the season. Computers don’t know “ranked” opponents, they only know opponents and their opponents and that means more than anything to them.
    A lot of Auburn fans are still fit to be tied over their snub in 2004 but the fact is that the record of their out of conference opponents was .424 while it was .515 for Oklahoma and .556 for USC and not only that, they were the only one to play an FCS team and that lowered the bar even more since their opponents were 90% FCS, which doesn’t help. Even if you just add in the W-L record for their conference mates, it still gives the edge in strength of schedule to Oklahoma and USC.
    Of course, this would all be a moot point if they were to have a playoff. :)

  45. rlsmit says: Oct 25, 2010 9:45 PM

    You know what you are right we need a playoff system, so all you “Small School,” dreamers really get to see what’s it’s like to play a big conference schedule back to back to back. I wish that so bad right now. You play one big school during some bowl game pull a lot off the wall tricks and win, and you think that bs will fly again the next week in a playoff system? Really? You guys are dreaming, always have been.

  46. edgy1957 says: Oct 25, 2010 10:26 PM

    rlsmit says:
    You know what you are right we need a playoff system, so all you “Small School,”
    *****
    First of all, I’m not a small school dreamer and for all the crap that you want to spew, don’t forget that the so called superior teams with superior schedules like Oklahoman and Alabama have been handed their walking papers by Boise and Utah.

  47. rlsmit says: Oct 26, 2010 7:02 AM

    Great Comment edgy, but like i said before that’s one game play alabama one week oklahoma the next, then auburn, then i don’t know, LSU. You think Boise can handle that schedule? Really? Like i’ve said before anyone can win one game at any given time, but Bosie, Utah, even TCU can’t handle a playoff system, they cry for it, because that’s the “it” thing right now, but in actuallity that will hurt them. I wish there was a team right nwo that played a schedule with Alabama, LSU, South Caralina, etc, oh wait there is, it’s the number one team Aurburn. Watch out for the Boise state and San Jose game, that’s gonna be a classic. Shut the eff up!!!

  48. rlsmit says: Oct 26, 2010 8:22 AM

    ONe game edgy, one game. IN a playoff you’ll have to do that back to back to back. I’m saying a Boise State / Utah / evan TCU can’t handle a playoff like that becasue at no time in thier regular schedule do they play that type of series. So, in actuality a playoff system would do more harm than good to a BSU / Utah / TCU. Anyone one team can win one game at any given time App State proved that. I’m saying that won’t happen in a playoff system. Oh and about your walking papers, try this on for size.
    2005 (10-3) Georgia 48-13 (9-4) Boise St.
    2002 (9-4) Arkansas 41-14 (12-1) Boise St.
    2001 (9-3) South Carolina 32-13 (8-4) Boise St.
    2000 (6-6) Arkansas 38-31 (10-2) Boise St.

  49. Liketorun says: Oct 26, 2010 10:28 AM

    A lot of good comments this topic and even before the BCS existed there were a lot of us who thought some sort of playoff system would be a better solution than simple voting of any kind. Teams change due to injury during the season and who might be in the top four during any given week might change simply because of that or a team having one bad week.
    There is no system that will produce a national champion that we are all going to feel warm and fuzzy about, but I do think the current system leaves us all hanging and annoyed when its over.
    Personally, I would like to see four teams taken out of years end bowl games play 1-4, 2-3, based on combined polls, winners of 1-4, 2-3, play for NC. More games than this would be too brutal for the players IMO.
    No, this aint perfect either, and yes everyone would argue that number 5 got screwed, but then number 5 did lose their bowl game.
    It would satisfy most of those I watch football with more than the current feeling of left hanging and would give those ‘weaker’ conferences a shot.

  50. MarkJHerren@live.com says: Oct 26, 2010 10:36 AM

    Beginning this Saturday, there will be big changes and decisions made week-to-week. As an Alabama Fan, the Crimson Tide gets a much needed BYE week and then the FOCUS will be one game at a time with LSU first But, when it comes Iron Bowl Week, there is a good chance that Auburn will not be ranked #1. Ole Miss and Georgia have a chance to be big time SPOILERS. Chattanooga is even in that mix and Auburn expects a laugher —– but on the other side of the State, Alabama has that same schedule and Bill Curry (Georgia State) would LOVE nothing more than to upset Alabama. Mississippi State is closer than Auburn (geographically) and always plays a physical game against Bama.

  51. edgy1957 says: Oct 26, 2010 11:07 AM

    rlsmit says:
    Great Comment edgy, but like i said before that’s one game play alabama one week
    ********************
    Champions find a way, no matter the conference or their standing in the conference. Let’s not forget that the NCAA has several teams in basketball that have lost 10 or more games in a season that finished as the #1 team in the nation after winning 4 or 5 games that they shouldn’t have.
    After watching Boise and TCU play, I think that they could hold up against the Big Boys as much as any of them would against each other. The problem is that the Big Boys are tired of losing to them and last year, the Fiesta was the sacrificial lamb and for the first time a several years, the BCS Buster didn’t have a BCS scalp to hang on its mantle and I believe that should they both finish undefeated this year, they will end up in the same boat. If the bowls do it again this year, there should be a revolt because it only proves that the BCS wants no part of them and would rather pay them the big money to participate, as long as they don’t upset the apple cart.

  52. edgy1957 says: Oct 26, 2010 11:10 AM

    rlsmit says:
    2005 (10-3) Georgia 48-13 (9-4) Boise St.
    *****************
    Ho ho ho, you showed me, right?
    Hey, there was a time just a few years ago that Notre Dame won their 43rd straight game against Navy and now, Navy has won 3 of the last 4. What’s your point?

  53. rlsmit says: Oct 26, 2010 12:15 PM

    You decided to mention BSU vs OK, and Utah vs Alabama. I decided to mention some other games BSU has played in. TCU and BSU playing like the Big boys is so easy for you to say when you’re not looking at thier caliber of competition. Forget all these Pointless stats, you can’t sit here and tell me that BSU and Utah play the same caliber of oppents that teams like Ok, Bama, Aurbun, even Ohio State. And it’s that same very they shouldn’t even be mentioned in National title contention. They haven’t proved it on the field. going undeafeated in the WAC and beating OK one time back in 2007 are not prerequisites for the 2010-2011 National Title, give me a freaking break!!!

  54. edgy1957 says: Oct 26, 2010 12:51 PM

    rlsmit says: October 26, 2010 12:15 PM ET
    You decided to mention BSU vs OK, and Utah vs Alabama. I decided to mention some other games BSU has played in.
    *******************
    While CLEARLY overlooking other games – how convenient. Why don’t you go back to 1994 when they were in I-AA or 1996, their first year in I-A?
    You must be new here because I’ve have talked about the caliber of their competition and frankly, there are years that some of the BCS Big Boys have fed on the trash in their conferences and then when they got to the BCS games, were taken down handily. Like it or not, the MWC and WAC have been AS GOOD as the Big East and ACC, the two worst BCS conferences. When THEY are as good top to bottom as every BCS conference then you have a right to crap on the WAC and MWC. The WAC as we know it, is dead after this year and they drop to the bottom with the Sun Belt. The MWC loses some glitter with Utah and BYU leaving but they gain the best of the WAC and they’re easily as good from top to bottom as the Big East and ACC. It’s too bad that BYU and Utah didn’t stay because at the worst, that would have easily made the MWC, the fourth best conference in FBS.

  55. edgy1957 says: Oct 26, 2010 1:01 PM

    BTW, once upon a time, there was a team that the Big Boys said didn’t belong at their party. Their schedule was said to be weak and they didn’t deserve to be considered for the national championship because they didn’t play as many tough games week after week like they did and the Big Boys avoided scheduling them like the plague and only played them in the bowls, where that little team won more than they lost. Then one day, they finally started playing them and while they got a few wins in, at first, the little team started taking them out behind the woodshed and then they actually won a national championship and a few years later, another and the little team that could was then invited to join the Big Boys and while the Big Boys snickered at how they were going to get plastered now that they were playing Big Boys week after week, they actually thrived and the Big Boys learned that they weren’t as big as they thought. That little team? Penn State…..

  56. rlsmit says: Oct 26, 2010 2:00 PM

    @ Edgy,
    I’m tired of conversations. My point is simple, Boise State has not earned the right to be in the National title Talk based upon this years performance. There’s no way you can justify that whay they’ve done this year qualifies them to be ahead of teams like Auburn, Michigan State, Missouri, Alabama, or Ohio State. There’s no way that makes since. Yes i do know the Bama and Ohio State lossed one game. Once Boise State strengthens thier Schedule, that’s all we are asking, then we might take them seriously. But as of right now i see them as a Unacomplished team that uses past acoomplishments to justfy preseant day entitlements. Get a Life.

  57. rlsmit says: Oct 26, 2010 2:08 PM

    Almost forgot, MWC and WAC as good as the ACC Look at the one on one Match ups. Maybe the MWC might have a shot, but the WAC doesn’t even come close. Hell the number one team in the WAC right now is freaking Hawaii. Really?
    Whatever you’re smoking, patent it, it’ll make you millions one day

  58. edgy1957 says: Oct 26, 2010 2:50 PM

    rlsmit says:
    @ Edgy,
    *******************
    It’s the same thing that goobers said about Penn State and when they finally started playing them, they found out that they were wrong. 40 years ago, a team like Boise State didn’t have a chance because they would more than likely have 40 or 50 players on scholarship while a team like Oklahoma would have more than 100 (and there were no limits on how many scholarships that a school could hand out) but now, they’re limited to 85. 40 years ago, a school that was the equal of an App State today, could only hope to stay within 65 points of Michigan but now, with the scholarship gap now at 22 (85 vs 63), the quality of athlete made it possible for them to pull off what has been called the greatest upset in FBS.
    At one time, guys like you said that Penn State hadn’t earned the right and they were just as wrong then as you are now.

  59. edgy1957 says: Oct 26, 2010 2:56 PM

    rlsmit says:
    *****************
    You need to patent what you’re smoking because you obviously don’t have a clue if you believe that Hawaii is the number one team in the WAC. Hawaii is listed first based on the fact that they’ve played 4 WAC games to Boise’s 2 but if you think that they’re the #1 team in the conference over the #3 team in the country, you’re nuts.

  60. rlsmit says: Oct 26, 2010 3:47 PM

    If the season ended right now, who would win the WAC? Hawaii, therefore they are the number one team in the WAC right now. Just like Oregan’s the number one team in the PAC-10 and Michigan State in the Big Ten.
    IF BOISE STATE PLAYED AURBURNS SCHEDULE THEY WOULD BE LUCKY TO BE at .500 RIGHT NOW.
    How did Penn State gain respect? Joined the BIG Ten? They joined after thier two titles. They started playing quality teams. BSU has not earned anything BASED ON THIS YEARS SCHEDULE, they played a difficult DIV 1-AA schedule at most and cry they should be in the National Title game? They shouldn’t be in the BCS Picture.
    END OF STORY

  61. rlsmit says: Oct 26, 2010 3:50 PM

    Speaking of Hawaii, Remeber what happend to them right? All that talk about being in the national championship game, What has BSU ever done against the SEC, beside bend over and take it. BSU beating Bama or Aurburn WILL NEVER HAPPEN!

  62. edgy1957 says: Oct 26, 2010 4:42 PM

    rlsmit says:
    If the season ended right now, who would win the WAC?
    *******************
    Nice try, since the season doesn’t end now and if it did, you can bet that the WAC would give it to Boise State. I don’t buy the .500 mark but whatever trips your delusions.
    How did Penn State gain respect? How about 2 national championships and kicking the crap out of the Big Boys BEFORE they joined the Big 10.
    Based on the fact that you don’t know what a I-AA schedule is, you might want to go back and look it over instead of spouting your BS. Unlike Auburn and Oregon, Boise State won’t play a single I-AA school.
    BTW, Boise State isn’t crying one bit about anything. The only ones who are crying are the BCS fans who don’t like watching teams break into their inner circle. The funny thing is that 40 years ago, if your team wasn’t Oklahoma, Nebraska, Ohio State, Michigan, Notre Dame or Alabama, they and their fans looked down on YOU, even if you’re from a so-called BCS school. Also, let’s not forget that the Big East didn’t exist until 1991 and their 3 best teams went to the ACC and ended the stranglehold that Florida State had on that league. Those two leagues are “BCS” leagues but they’re not as good as the MWC and not much better than the WAC. When things shake out next year, neither will come close to what the MWC will have to offer.

  63. rlsmit says: Oct 26, 2010 5:17 PM

    stop with this 40 years ago bs, it’s not 4o years ago. You can’t provide me with three quality oponents Boise State has played this season or will play untill they reach a bowl game.
    I’ll Wait…
    AND FYI there’s a reason why they’re called “Non BCS qualifiers” That’s exactly how they should be treated.
    ((How did Penn State gain respect? How about 2 national championships and kicking the crap out of the Big Boys BEFORE they joined the Big 10.))
    BSU has played how many “big boys”
    1 Oklahoma in 2007

  64. edgy1957 says: Oct 26, 2010 5:17 PM

    rlsmit says:
    Speaking of Hawaii, Remeber what happend to them right?
    *********************
    You choose to pick the ONLY BCS Buster that lost. Hawaii was actually the BCS Buster by default since it was a down year in 2007 for the normal BCS Busters. Yes, they finished the season undefeated but they had to rally 4 times that year, including two overtime games, in order to remain so. Only the most hardened of Hawaii fans picked them to come within 10 points of Georgia. The BCS Busters are 3-1 and were deprived of a chance of going 2-0 last year because the BCS was afraid of how that would look.
    BTW, what about the Big 10? Remember when they lost 6 straight BCS games? The Big 12 is 7-10 in BCS games, the Big 10 is 10-11, the Big East is 6-6 and the ACC is 2-10. Only 2 BCS conferences have winning records, the SEC and the Pac-10. Just how do the BCS Busters not rate a seat at the table when many of the other conferences are choking on their own vomit? How about Notre Dame and their sterling 0-3 mark in the BCS?
    Also, let’s not forget that Connecticut didn’t become I-A until 2000, South Florida, had no football program until 1997 and didn’t become I-A until 2001 and that 4 of the Big East members were either independent or members of non-BCS conferences before they came in to replace Miami, Boston College and Virginia Tech. Because the league only has 8 members and plays only 7 conference games, it’s virtually impossible for them to not become bowl eligible (6 of 8 have made it for many years).

  65. rlsmit says: Oct 26, 2010 5:21 PM

    Those two leagues are “BCS” leagues but they’re not as good as the MWC and not much better than the WAC. When things shake out next year, neither will come close to what the MWC will have to offer.
    *******************************************
    Give 3 schools form both confrences that are good. WAC only has one and they are suspect.
    MWC maybe Airforce, maybe TCU and that’s it
    All of these teams would be underdogs against Florida State, Miami, BC, Georgia Tech.
    MWC / WAC are equal with the ACC?
    pass what you’re smoking

  66. rlsmit says: Oct 26, 2010 5:23 PM

    Those two leagues are “BCS” leagues but they’re not as good as the MWC and not much better than the WAC
    *******************************************
    Still can’t believe you said that. Just because you did, you’re now on the ignore list.

  67. rlsmit says: Oct 26, 2010 5:50 PM

    By the way espn just posted that Hawaii is ahead of Boise State in the WAC. So if the season did end now the WAC wouldn’t give Boise a pot to piss in
    I just confirmed it only edgy believes edgy
    now i’m truly done with this conversation

  68. edgy1957 says: Oct 26, 2010 5:58 PM

    rlsmit says: October 26, 2010 5:17 PM ET
    You can’t provide me with three quality oponents
    ***************
    You’ll wait, as if I’m NOT going to come up with 3. Are you so ignorant that YOU can’t find three? Let’s start with Virginia Tech then move on to Oregon State and finally, take you pick from Nevada, Hawaii and Fresno State.
    BTW, I bring up 40 years ago to prove that Big Bigots like you existed THEN as they do know; only back then they fed on their own. You complain about Boise State but back then they complained about Vanderbilt and Northwestern.

  69. rlsmit says: Oct 26, 2010 6:11 PM

    Vandy Really? Northwestern aside from 2003/4 they’ve done what?
    VT ok
    Oregon State, try again
    Nevada, Hawaii, Fresno, Really?
    i didn’t name three ’cause you can’t name three!!

  70. edgy1957 says: Oct 26, 2010 6:14 PM

    rlsmit says:
    *****************
    You really don’t have a clue, don’t you?
    Maybe Air Force, maybe TCU? That’s about the dumbest thing that I’ve seen here. How about UTAH and no MAYBE about TCU.
    Underdogs to BC? What planet have you been on for the last few months, URANUS? BC is 2-5 and if you think that they’d be underdogs to them then you are a fool. Air Force lost to Oklahoma by 3 and they took Florida State behind the woodshed by 30 and the Seminoles were so full of themselves that they only beat BC by 5. FSU beat BYU by 24, a week after AF beat them by 21. Not a lot of separation there, genius.
    Georgia Tech? You mean the team that lost to Kansas, the team that lost to North Dakota State, the team that has lost to 3 FCS teams: Northern Iowa, Western Illinois and Southern Illinois? That Georgia Tech?
    You’re the one that needs to pass on what you’re smoking because you’ve obviously got a lot of brain damage to believe that. Why don’t you get off your ass and actually do some research before you open your mouth and put in your foot, over and over and over, like you do.

  71. edgy1957 says: Oct 26, 2010 6:32 PM

    rlsmit says: October 26, 2010 6:11 PM ET
    Vandy Really? Northwestern aside from 2003/4 they’ve done what?
    *************************
    That was the point, you boob. Oh and again, RESEARCH. Northwestern did NOTHING in 2003 and 2004. HOWEVER, in 2008, they were 9-4 and in 2009, they were 8-5 and this year, they’re 5-2 and they gave Michigan State all they could handle last week. BTW, I guess it just went over your head but the point was that there was a time that if you weren’t the top one or two teams in any “BCS” league, you were looked down upon by the team and their fans. Not just Vandy and NW but Purdue, Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Stanford, Oregon, Oregon State and on and on it went. Many of the younger fans of these teams look down at teams like Boise but there was a time when they had to hide their heads in shame when they were being laughed at by the top of THEIR Leagues (Until Bob Devaney came along and changed the fortunes of Nebraska, the Big 8 was known as Oklahoma and the Little Seven nationally).
    Fresno State is 5-2, with their only losses to Hawaii and Mississippi and they have a BCS scalp, Cincinnati, who plays in the — wait for it — Big East. Nevada is 6-1, with their only loss being to — gasp — Hawaii AND they took California behind the woodshed. Hawaii is 6-2 and should finish 10-3.
    Meanwhile, you only show your ignorance by putting down Oregon State. They’re a better team than you think and they’re a quality win.

  72. rlsmit says: Oct 26, 2010 8:50 PM

    Edgy
    Fresno State 5-2 and the 5 wins were against who? no one
    Nevada 6-1 and they’ve played? same again
    Hawaii 6-2 and they’ve played? umm drawing blanks here.
    I’m going to keep this going
    BSU / Utah / TCU undefeated and they’ve played?
    You bring up Cincinnati like they’re a good team. You also brought up California, don’t know why they’re worth mentioning.
    You keep bringing up past stats like they have any bearing on this season. Guess what edgy…they don’t. None of these teams you’re so patiently fighting four have accomplished anything….wait for it……THIS YEAR!!!
    who cares NW was 9-4 in 200? who cares, who cares BSU beat OK not last year, or the year before that, or the year before that, in 2007.
    These teams have weak schedules in a weak conference.
    BTW comparing BIG East teams accomplishments in this Argument holds no salt.
    I’ll tell you what If it’s not SEC i don’t want to hear it.
    Good day, day dreamer!!!

  73. edgy1957 says: Oct 26, 2010 9:35 PM

    rlsmit says:
    *****************
    You are so full of crap that if they gave you an enema, they could bury you in a match box. I can’t help but laugh at “If it’s not SEC i don’t want to hear it.” What a load of horse crap. That would mean that you might as well forget the Big 10, the Big 12, the Big East, the ACC and the Pac 10 because the top of the SEC rarely plays regular season games against the top of the other BCS conferences.I guess that also invalidates Oregon’s lofty position because they don’t play the SEC, right? You really are a piece of work.

  74. rlsmit says: Oct 26, 2010 10:39 PM

    Now you’re getting it, 4 championships in a row
    what ever you got to say can’t compare buddy
    !
    BSU struggling vs LA tech, and your a national title contender? now that’s a load of crap!!!

  75. edgy1957 says: Oct 26, 2010 11:37 PM

    rlsmit says:
    *********************
    Open mouth and insert foot.
    1. BFD, this year it could be Oregon or Missouri or Boise State. Each year, it’s a different story.
    2. Boise is hurting itself more than LA Tech is doing it to them.
    3. You are showing anyone that’s actually following this conversation that you are the least knowledgeable person here. Why don’t you stick with soccer, which seems to be more your speed.

  76. rlsmit says: Oct 27, 2010 9:36 AM

    First of all, i’m not worried about any following the conversation. My knowledge of college football is, in my opinion, based upon my own interest. i.e i’m a big SEC fan, as suck don’t really concern my self with the other conferences, except when they’re trying to debate something that does support any weight. I’d admit, i had a few “typos” knowing that Penn State joined after the Big ten after thier two national championships, i wrote before by mistake it happens, also confused Northwestern with Kansas-State, similar color scheme in such.
    My point is simple BSU play last night was not impressive, Texas A&M looked more impressive last night over La Tech then BSU did. PATEHTIC WAC FOOTBALL TEAMS!!!!

  77. rlsmit says: Oct 27, 2010 9:40 AM

    Misspelld pathetic, but i’m sure you’ll bring it up.
    Boise State doesn’t belong in the National Title talk, don’t brag about thier number one defensive rating, when they play schools like San Jose State, New Mexico State, Toledo, and Wyoming. Hell with that schedule they should be undefeated.

  78. edgy1957 says: Oct 27, 2010 12:40 PM

    rlsmit says:
    ****************
    Buckwheat, you are the worst speller here and YET, you’re the one who brought it up. I don’t do that to anyone unless it’s to let the authors know that they had a typo but that’s it. My God, if I ever went after every wrong “you’re/your, there/their, to/too”, I’d be spending my whole day correcting people, including myself.
    Now, as the for the rest: you are a goofball. Texas A&M? I hate to tell you this but since that game, they’ve changed QBs and they’ve done much better. Ross Jenkins was inserted into the lineup in the second quarter of the Hawaii game and the team hasn’t looked back. He’s changed their whole season and while he had a few that Boise dropped, he also managed to move that team, only to have their drives stall in the red zone (some of it due to some poor play calling). Whine about LA Tech but how “impressive” was Auburn against Miss State or Clemson or Kentucky? Alabama almost lost last year to a Tennessee team that everyone here likes to put down but I don’t hear anyone complaining that they shouldn’t have been in the NCG.
    Again, you’re foolish. I’m NOT saying that they shouldn’t be undefeated with their schedule or can’t you read? Why don’t you go back and look and you’ll see that I expect that either TCU or Utah will pass them based on THEIR schedules and if they remain undefeated like Boise (I said the same thing last year and a few people thought I was nuts until it happened). I don’t expect Boise to even remain in the Top 5 because of their schedule UNLESS the other undefeated teams start falling. You simply are too dumb to realize that you’re arguing about a scenario that won’t happen if form holds true. What’s even funnier is that to make your argument, you’re talking down all these teams, including a lot of BCS teams so that you can make a point and you’re looking pretty silly doing it.

  79. AUFANFORLIFE says: Oct 27, 2010 1:25 PM

    I keep hearing, I can’t believe Boise State is ranked so high! I watched last night cause I can’t believe the polls could be wrong LOL. The game last night (on the terrible blue field) looked like Boise was playing a high school team. Granted it was the first and only Boise game I have seen but I don’t get it either…how can Boise be ranked so high? Quarterback is good, but can only be as good as his receivers and he has some good ones.
    Enjoy the rest of the season…it has been a good one!

  80. rlsmit says: Oct 27, 2010 1:41 PM

    @ Edgy
    Buckwheat, you are the worst speller here and YET
    *******************************************
    blogging here, not so much concerned with the spelling as you are, honestly since all you see is “rlsmit” don’t really care to much.
    Also seems like you’ve added 5th grade name calling to arguments, i’m sure that gets you far in life.
    Dumb, Buckwheat, foolish, anything else you got in that big brain of yours.
    here’s the point i look at reality, you can sit in your or your moms basement and play all the computer simulations / spreadsheets you want. the fact remains is that BSU have yet to prove themselves. Your earlier arguments about Penn State or even Arizona State are on the contrary, these teams have proven it. Blowing out New Mexico State, Toledo, San Jose State, and any other WAC Team should not be an automatic bidder for the national titile game.
    You are a dreamer, and i hope 1957 was not the year you were born, ’cause if it was then you’ve spent all your time arguing with an 18 year old.
    and at 53 that’s sad.
    (I hate to tell you this but since that game, they’ve changed QBs and they’ve done much better) What constitutes as better? losing 14 @ home to NAvy and losing by 20 to Hawaii, that’s your definition of better?
    Either more reason to finally conclude that you have no idea, again no idea, of what you’re talking about. You’re a Boise State fan and you want to see them in the National title Game, everything else you’ve said, is pointless.
    You arguments have no basis for anything regarding this year,

  81. edgy1957 says: Oct 27, 2010 3:07 PM

    rlsmit says: October 27, 2010 1:41 PM ET
    @ Edgy
    Buckwheat, you are the worst speller here and YET
    *******************************************
    blogging here, not so much concerned with the spelling as you are, honestly since all you see is “rlsmit” don’t really care to much.
    ***********************
    Show me ONCE where I ever actually called YOU or anyone other than John, Ben or Sean out for their spelling and I’ll apologize to you. That’s not going to happen because I don’t care. Seriously, YOU are the one that brought up the thing about the spelling.
    No, I wasn’t. 1957 was the year one of my brothers died. I’m older than that and BFD. If that’s the case then you should just shut up because that would mean that everyone here that’s over 18 has no business arguing with you.
    Seriously, are you still unable to do any research or are you trying to go at this blindly? Jenkins didn’t get his shot until the second quarter of the Hawaii game so it wouldn’t matter how badly Navy beat them because he wasn’t the starter. When he entered the Hawaii game, the team was down 24-0 and he took them to a TD on his first drive and they outscored Hawaii 21-17 and were within 2 TDs before Hawaii put it away midway through the 4th quarter. Since then their offense has performed much better under Jenkins.
    Buckwheat, I’m A TROJAN. I have spent more time around the country watch all levels of football and seeing more than you will ever see when it comes to the changing face of the game. I could give a rat’s ass about Boise State (I actually feel that TCU is the better team) except when it comes to Big Bigot butt sniffers like you that don’t understand how the game has changed. There was a time that the Big One or Two of the Big conferences looked down at the butt end of their own so-called Big Conferences and laughed at them as derisively as they do the WAC and the MWC, now. 40 years ago, the Big Bigots could give out unlimited scholarships and even their own conference mates couldn’t keep up with them. Once they started limiting the number of scholarships, even the bottom of their conferences could compete with them. The 25/85 limit has meant a lot in leveling the field, both in the BCS conferences and without.
    You can complain that Boise needs to join a real conference but the fact is that if they did, the prestige of that conference would bring in better athletes and a prime program like Boise would be able to stay above the bottom feeders of their new conference, just as Penn State, Arizona and Arizona State have done (and Utah will when they join the Pac-12).

  82. rlsmit says: Oct 27, 2010 4:05 PM

    @ Edgy
    Last comment than i got spelling to work on,
    my point is simple and please use whatever medicine is prescribed right now for you to keep focus.
    You haven’t proved that BSU deserves a National Title Game soley based upon what they’ve accomplished THIS YEAR. Its FOOLISH to argue that Boise State is a TOP TEN TEAM when they haven’t played top ten talent. VT is not a top ten talent, neither is Oregon state. So what have they done this year that qualifies them to earn TOP TEN or in this case #3 team in the countery?
    ONE WORD:
    NOTHING!!

  83. ckorducksfan says: Oct 27, 2010 5:27 PM

    Oregon deserve to be number 1!! Where is the love? Chip has this team rolling right now and I just came across a clip from this news conference explaining the inspiration behind how he has built this team. It’s a book called Water the Bamboo. Check out the video of him speaking about it. http://waterthebamboo.com/blog/press/oregon-ducks-ranked-1/

  84. edgy1957 says: Oct 27, 2010 7:03 PM

    rlsmit says:
    You haven’t proved that BSU deserves a National Title Game sol
    ********************
    It wasn’t my intent. I talked about how the powder puff schedule would hurt teams, which is the opposite of what West_the _Best was saying. If you looked before your message, you’d see that I specifically said that if they win out, it will be Auburn (not Boise), Oregon (not Boise), Michigan State (not Boise), TCU (not Boise) and Boise (yes, Boise) BUT that I could also seeing Boise not make the Top 5, as well. I ask you, just where does that mean that I believe that Boise should have a shot at the NCG, especially when I don’t believe that they would even make the Top 4 or even the Top 5? Like it or not, Boise has played a team was ranked in the Top 10, which Michigan State hasn’t done and Oregon has only done once and Auburn didn’t do until last week. You can play games all you want but you and others have pointed to teams that were ranked but aren’t now when you’ve talked about how other teams have played ranked teams.

  85. Liketorun says: Oct 27, 2010 10:21 PM

    Like Auburn in 2004 getting passed over for Oklahoma, Oregon got passed over for Nebraska in 2001. Nebraska had lost to Colorado but still made it to the NC. Oregon played Colorado and crushed them in the Fiesta bowl. So, ya, as an Oregon follower I was peeved at that. However, I can see the justification for the computer calculation placing Auburn first given this years beginning rankings and games played thus far. Yes I live in the Pac-10, and historically I believe the Pac-10 has been slighted at times, but not so much with the SEC as in comparison with the Big-12, and most of it was prior to the BCS. The SEC has proved to be the stongest conference overall and after six games with the initial rankings where they were it makes sense. Coaches and AP polls are done by people with anticipation and subjectivity into the remaining games.
    Oregon needs to finish strong and the one SEC game with Tennessee just turned out to be bad luck for them this year. USC won’t help Oregon as much this year even if Oregon does win because of their ineligible status which certainly impacts their enthusiam some along with their 5-2 record.
    I hope Oregon and Auburn make it. I think they both deserve it having been left out before when they were probably the better teams … but they both need to earn it. This is a new year.

  86. rebalynne says: Nov 18, 2010 12:25 AM

    Auburn should not be #1. Simply said.

  87. southernpatriots says: Jan 19, 2011 8:34 PM

    This is written WAY AFTER the FACT, but the reason for Auburn to be #1 is…they were and they are! If they won the SEC they win the BCS, which of course they did. If they win the SEC West they have played the best schedule in the country (apart from some other SEC west teams) and deserve to be ranked #1 which they recently proved they were and are #1. We are LSU alums but we have to give honor to whom is due and honor is due to Auburn. Congratulations! We hope to have an improved offense in 2011 season and that should equal more than 7 more points, and hopefully Auburn does not have Cam, and that should take away some points so LSU should win the west in 2011.

  88. After undefeated season six years ago, Auburn is BCS No. 1 – USA Today | The Fresno News says: Mar 16, 2011 1:02 AM

    [...] fallCBSSports.comQuick Link BCS reaction Auburn gets its turn on the No hot…SportingNews.commsnbc.com -SI.com -NESN.comall 580 news [...]

  89. Broncos can’t buck this trend – ESPN | The Fresno News says: Mar 17, 2011 8:04 AM

    [...] No. 1 hot seatSportingNews.comAfter undefeated season six years ago, Auburn is BCS No. 1USA Todaymsnbc.com -Dots Period -CBSSports.comall 945 news [...]

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!