NDL Forum

cdub21 wrote:mark what if it comes down to tcu and boise both undefeated with bama(or whoever) also. who gets to go? youve been defending boise in this thread but what if. i personally think it should be tcu cause i like them, plus they play tougher conference. but i think alot of people are gunna use the bcs game last year which would be a shame since its not the same teams.

Mtwasik wrote:

TerpsMustDie wrote:Alabama, Ohio State, Oregon, Nebraska, Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, South Carolina, LSU, Stanford, and USC should be ahead of them as a minimum. Obviously my homer side would put WVU ahead of them, but I'll wait until this weekend concludes to make that statement.

Yeah, homerism for real here WVU, are you kidding me? Needed a miracle to beat a winless Marshall team, TCU is rolling everyone (and already easily handled Oregon State in the opener), yet you want to put them ahead.

Texas has looked very unimpressive so far (should have beat its teams by lot more), Oklahoma so far has beaten a bottom half WAC team by seven and then on its home field, barely held off Air Force from the MWC to win by three. LSU needed two dropped passes in the endzone to beat North Carolina's B team. That's not what top four teams do. And USC, are you kidding me? They are lucky to be ranked, hell, Virginia and Hawaii almost beat them, you may be the only person in the country that thinks USC is better then TCU and Boise this year.

Arkansas, South Carolina, and Stanford though do have impressive seasons so far, but that's how the poll works, if you had a bad season the year before, you start out at the bottom of the poll, if you win you move up.
, Arkansas, South Carolina, LSU, Stanford, and USC.

See, people that think like that, that's why Florida State gets ranked top 25 every single preseason even though they've had like 9 straight 7-6 seasons. You get ranked top 5 because of performance, not previous history. Boise wins at Wyoming 55-3, was up 21-0 in the first quarter, Texas on its home field beats Wyoming 34-7 and it was actually close at halftime, why rank Texas ahead of Boise?

Mtwasik wrote:And why is it whenever someone says no way Boise could go undefeated, they always bring up having to go undefeated in the SEC? Is it a requirement that you have to play in the SEC to play in the title game?

Think about this. The 2004 Utah went undefeated, and CRUSHED Big East champion Pitt in the FIesta bowl, absolutely embrassed them.

Now ... everybody raise your hands who thinks that the 2004 Utah team would not have gone undefeated in the 2004 Big East ... that brings up a good point, doesn't it?

Here's another one. Anybody who thinks that Boise or TCU would not go undefeated in this year's Big East, raise your hands (Utah already beat the preseason favorite, Fresno already beat Cincy, West Virginia needed a miracle to beat Marshall) ... yet if they were in that league, there wouldn't be as many complaints about them in the title game.

Mtwasik wrote:I don't think this year's South Carolina team is a middle of the road team in the SEC, they look pretty damm good so far, and I think will win their division, that was also my problem with your analogy. No. 12 in the nation isn't a middle of the road team, that's ranked seven spots higher then the highest ACC or Big East team, No. 12 in the nation is a pretty good team.

But, to make a better argument, take a Big East team, and say how would they do in the WAC and MWC, and we already know that answer this year in at least 2 matchups. All TCU and Boise want is the same access that Big East teams have. Big East shouldn't hold onto BCS status just because they were grandfathered in and there is no threat of ever losing that status.

Remember, if the conferences had to reapply today for BCS status ... MWC wouldn't meet all of the standards ... BUT, neither would the ACC, Big 10 or Big East the past few years. BCS has to watch themselves, they are opening themselves up to anti-trust issues, that's why if Utah had stayed, we were assured of becoming BCS because they would have given us an exemption to allow us in, so they wouldn't have to worry about being sued.

TerpsMustDie wrote: Again, you are falling on the old bash the Big East argument. The reality is the Big East has met and exceeded the requirements of being a BCS conference. The ACC has statistically been the weakest BCS league over the past few years. Last year the Big East started out with 0 ranked teams and ended with 3, one of them being top 5. Not bad for a league with 8 teams. Wait until the end of the year for this crap. Also, the MWC has been severely weakened with the loss of Utah and BYU.

Also, the Big East is way too powerful in basketball to get screwed in football. Until the conferences are destroyed in their current form, this will continue to be the case.

Mtwasik wrote:Talking the last 2-3 years. In someone shows me in print that the Big East on all three categories ranked higher then the MWC, I'll shut up about it.

Oh, and the MWC has won the Bowl challenge three of the last six years. Next highest is ACC with 1 1/2

Number of Bowl Challenge Cup Championships
Conference Times Most Recent
Mountain West 3 2009–10
Atlantic Coast 1½ 2005–06(1)
Big Ten 1 2002–03
Big East 1 2006–07
Pacific 10 1 2008–09
Big 12 ½ 2005–06(1)
Conference USA 0
Mid-American 0
Southeastern 0
Sun Belt 0
Western Athletic 0

Mtwasik wrote:Well, Utah was in a BCS game twice (also won the 2004 Fiesta Bowl)

TCU was in last year's Fiesta Bowl, lost to Boise. The year before, the Poinsetta made an exception to match up top-12 TCU and Boise.

Las Vegas Bowl matches MWC against the Pac-10
Emerald Bowl at times matched the MWC against the ACC
New Mexico is MWC vs. WAC
Armed Forces is MWC vs. CUSA (think AF easily beat Houston in this last year)

and then we've been in others as well, they switch each year. It's defintely not the quality of what the BCS leagues play.

TerpsMustDie wrote:Mark, it has to do with where your BCS representative is ranked at the end of the year.

Mtwasik wrote:

TerpsMustDie wrote:Mark, it has to do with where your BCS representative is ranked at the end of the year.

??????????????

Like I said, show me where in print, it says the Big East ranks ahead of the MWC in terms of grading a conference for BCS strength. Just because in your mind, having a team higher in the BCS that means you're higher, that's not how the BCS system works, its been printed up numerous times this year, as the formula for deciding if a non-BCS league can get an auto-bid was finally released by the BCS this year.

And remember ... just because your teams got into the BCS doesn't mean they were ranked higher then the MWC teams that year, just means that you have an auto bid is all.