CollegeFootballPoll.com Message Board

After watching Boise State lose their bowl game the way they did, I have to admit I was wrong in saying on Dec. 8 that they deserved a BCS invite. TCU was the better team. BSU's game plan was terrible and they were out-played. They had chances to put the game away. Their offense played too conservative in the red zone. Plus that prevent defense at the end of the first half that allowed TCU to score was what turned the tide.

TCU is a better team. Boise was thrown off, did not do the Red Zone at all. They were out coached.

And as for deserving a BCS game...not sure anyone that counts, says they did. Straw man arguments are the fuel of this message board.

Well fluiddude...TCU did play Oklahoma this year. That question was settled fairly decisively.

TCU lost by 25..NOT the better team. There are some that will say the Texas may be the better team...they could be right.

fluiddude wrote:Hey Donovan, I was looking for Mr. Head Butt, #21, and couldn't see him. Is he injured or has he been benched?

He played. At one time they mentioned his ejection from the Oregon game. It was when he came in with the helmet on TCU, no penalty called, was certainly not as egregious at Oregon, but it is his way of tackling and no one seems to stop it. He had a good game...but BSU was just out played....

TCU might be better than Cincy or VT...I'll grant you that...they also might not be. We won't know.

You cannot judge whether a team should or not have been in a higher level bowl game based on how they play in the game that they fell to.
The "snub" itself can cause a team to become complacent or at the very least be distracted. Sometimes it can make them come out more fired up as well. You just never know.

Personally, I thought TCU was the better team but I still wouldn't say that Ohio State was more deserving of a BCS bid than Boise State was simply because of how they played in the Poinsettia Bowl. That is like comparing apples and oranges. The year Boise State beat Okahoma in the Fiesta Bowl they may have lost in the Humanitarian Bowl had they gotten snubbed, it is hard to say what would have happened, but it certainly wouldn't have surprised me.

Well...I will wait until a team like Boise beats a few good teams in the regular season to assume that they got snubbed...

billybud wrote:Well...I will wait until a team like Boise beats a few good teams in the regular season to assume that they got snubbed...

Understood, but they did beat just as many good teams as Ohio State, their primary competition for the spot, did.

My argument isn't whether or not Boise State deserved a BCS bid compared to the elite teams in the country but that they got "snubbed" when comparing them specifically with the Buckeyes.

billybud wrote:TCU might be better than Cincy or VT...I'll grant you that...they also might not be. We won't know.

In my mind, TCU is very likely better than either team, but absent of a more precise manner of deciding it, it's something of a mystery. But, the simple fact is TCU beat a top-10 team. And did it w/o a key player.
Robert Henson was ineligible due to academic reasons. He was replaced by Washington, who proved his equal, perhaps even his superior, but his absence was a factor, nevertheless, in the outcome of the game.

Why is it so hard for you to accept that a team from the Mountain West Conference might be better than a team from a BCS? Why should it matter, where, or even who a team plays, as long as they play well?
Derek, I believe refers to Boise St, implying they would be lucky to win 7 games, if they were an Atlantic Coast Conference member. I beg to differ. What makes the ACC so special? By the way, Billybud, you stated 10 ACC teams were selected to play in bowl games. That's incorrect. 7 were. And 6 were bowl-eligible from the Western Athletic Conference, but only 5 were selected. 5/9 vs. 7/12. Not so different, really.

I don't mind you having an opinion, you're entitled to it. But I wish you would give credit where it belongs. You suggest Boise St is some kind of aberration, almost as if they don't belong in the WAC. I don't really understand that mindset. What difference does it make, really? Is the Pac-Ten that much better, athletically? Fresno St has beaten Pac Ten teams, including this year, when they won at UCLA. Don't bother posting the record, but UCLA did beat Tennessee and gave USC a game, but unfortunately lost to them to end their season 5-7. Is that really that bad? Yeah, Washington & Washington St. were disappointing. But they also were competitive against each other, as they usually are, in the Apple Cup. Teams typically play to the level of their competition. The Western Athletic Conference has some outstanding football teams, IMO.

You can't say that TCU is better or worse then Cincy or Virginia Tech. You don't know, I don't know. What I do know is that the ACC and the B-East have automatic bids to the BCS. So do those teams belong, yes. They won their conference. That is what they needed to do.

As for saying that Boise State didn't deserve the BCS bid. I agree with Fluid, they certainally deserved it over Ohio State with 2 losses. Whether or not they got beat or not doesn't matter. Ohio State will get beat too.

Is it fair to say that Ohio State may also lose to TCU on a neutral field? It's like deciding who the biggest snubs were on Selection Sunday. Regardless of what they do in the NIT, their body of work during the regular season may have been worthy. I still say that Boise State was more deserving even if Ohio State does beat Texas.

OSU played three teams in the Top 30..losing to the two that are in the final top 10....Boise played one team in the top 30....

I kind of think, that had Boise also played USC and Penn State, they would also have a couple of losses.

I don't base my opinion on who a team loses to during the season. Anyone can lose. Playing good teams isn't good enough IMO.

But what would you base your opinion of Ohio State on if they played Boise's schedule?

If you don't base an opinion of who they lose to (and how they played in the loss),,you must base an opinion on who they beat (as I do). And if you played such a very, very weak schedule at Ohio State (Boise's #113 schedule), how would you base your opinion? Would you come out and say..."Yes, we deserve to go to a BCS bowl. True, we didn't really play much of anybody, but also we didn't lose to any of those patsies."

I know you go back and forth some on this Spence..but I like your former thinking...

That is the point., that is what the road to the BCS is about. Playing a great schedule and showing you are as good as your record indicates. You need to beat as many good teams as is possible according to your schedule. The games should be difficult to make it to the BCS.

A mid-major that has not beaten a team in the final AP 25 hasn't earned the right to play in a BCS bowl.

I have argued this for several months. Couldn't agree more.