So "Who do they play?".......

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Did you notice there was no thread challenging Boise State's ranking in the polls and their credibility last week with the worn out question "So who do they play?".....


Of course, last week Georgia played Idaho State? .....be glad it wasn't the other "State" team from Idaho..(BSU)..:rolleyes:



And Auburn played Chattanooga?..............


So who do they play?
:rolleyes::)

[David Weaver]

Take it from someone who went to a school who won championships as an independent and later went to a major conference..

.. things wouldn't be so rosy if boise state had to play tougher teams each week.

They don't have a claim to anything above and beyond what TCU, Auburn and Oregon have done. If they want a claim, they need to get out of the WAC. They can't expect that SEC and other major conference teams are going to schedule them AND then go face their respective conferences while BSU goes back to play a bunch of patsies.

The system is working the way it's supposed to work. There ought to be a playoff with the top four teams, but there isn't yet. Until then, it would be well beyond unfair to take the opportunity away from auburn and oregon when they've done more than BSU has done.

(Besides, Auburn probably had to pay money to get their quarterback...they need the ROI!!)

[Bob Turkovich]

Uh, Ken, I thought you weren't a Boise State fan.....

According to the Sagarin rankings, BSU's strength of schedule is ranked 72nd.....so, yeah, who do they play?

Of course, most of the ESS EEE CEE (play-for-pay) teams have higher rankings because of their "tough" conference schedules. Almost every major conference team schedules one tough non-conference game and the rest are cupcakes (because of that conference schedule). The majority of BSU's schedule are cupcakes.:p

I think you're better off sticking to the "No one wants to play us" theme......

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Bob,

I did drive by Boise State's field one time while in Boise but it was by accident.

And David when they have played these "more difficult...larger schools" in Bowl games in recent years they are 3 for 4. 75% bowl success rate is better than most of these so called tough teams.

I say Hogwash...... Just because a team plays in a difficult conference doesn't mean the best college football team is in that conference.

And Bob.....check the BCS rankings......the Harris Poll......The Coaches poll and the AP poll.......... there some numbers for you....


Come on whiners.....bring out your excuses....not reasons..excuses.......



Up next....let's hear it...

"Any team can get it up for one game".....come on let's hear it....whine some more.......create an excuse...
:rolleyes:

[Kent A Bathurst]

......... They can't expect that SEC and other major conference teams are going to schedule them AND then go face their respective conferences while BSU goes back to play a bunch of patsies..........There ought to be a playoff with the top four teams, but there isn't yet..........

Ken -

It's money. Under the current "championship" system, the AQ conferences have no incentive to schedule games with BSU or TCU or whomever. No money [for the AQ team anyway] in a home + home series, with a game played in Boise. No current AQ conference would invite BSU to join their conference for that reason alone. No interest in legitimizing BSU's claims. No interest in running the risk of a loss - and David does have a point in that regard - Yes, the Auburn Tigers played Chatannoga. Last week. Without looking, I'm going to hazard a guess that the Broncos played a weenie or two along the way somehwere.

The rest of Auburn's schedule includes Miss State, Steve Superior, Arkansas, LSU, Georgia, Alabama - and then the conference title game. Why schedule an additional out-of-conference potential killer game when you already have to face murderer's row? There's simply no incentive - a no-win situation. Wouldn't help Auburn in the slightest - would only help BSU.

The system sucks, but as long as its the system, will never ever happen. Altruism ain't in it, dude.

[David Weaver]

It may not be, who could tell? there really isn't a good way to tell without a playoff.

but you don't give the team with a weak schedule a chance over a team who has done the same thing with a tough schedule. That doesn't make any sense at all.

thus far this year, both teams that BSU beat that looked like they might be something (Va tech and oregon state) have turned out to be nothing teams.

VA tech is ranked, but they lost to BSU and James madison, and the rest of their schedule is patsies. James madison isn't even division 1, and they've got a losing record this season. Oregon state has lost 4 games.

TCU just put it to utah, was that last week? I would love to see a TCU/BSU game. I think Auburn is going to lose before the end of the year. I don't think oregon will, though.

As an outsider, I don't think BSU could hang with TCU.

[David Weaver]

It stung penn state plenty of times in the past, especially in the late 60s and early 70s. That's just the way it goes.

[Bob Turkovich]

Bob,

I did drive by Boise State's field one time while in Boise but it was by accident.

And David when they have played these "more difficult...larger schools" in Bowl games in recent years they are 3 for 4. 75% bowl success rate is better than most of these so called tough teams.

I say Hogwash...... Just because a team plays in a difficult conference doesn't mean the best college football team is in that conference.

And Bob.....check the BCS rankings......the Harris Poll......The Coaches poll and the AP poll.......... there some numbers for you....


Common whiners.....bring out your excuses....not reasons..excuses.......



Up next....let's hear it...

"Any team can get it up for one game".....common let's hear it....whine some more.......create an excuse...
:rolleyes:


Whoa, Ken. You titled this thread "So, Who do they play" not "Who's the better team". My response addressed what I thought was your original premise.

Look at BSU's schedule. Outside of VT and possibly OSU (not that tOSU), who on their schedule could give any of the other top 25 teams any realistic challenge. (BTW - while you're noting ranking systems, the Sagarin strength of schedule rating I mentioned is part of the BCS formula.)

Almost every other major team plays 4 or 5 teams that, on a given day, they could possibly lose to. Until there is a true playoff system (which I'm not in favor of - I preferred the pre-BCS system) the non-major conference teams run the risk of missing the big dance.

[alex grams]

I think it is a catch-22. If either BSU or TCU win out and play in the National Championship, then they give the BCS the right to say 'Hey the system works, and BSU/TCU got their shot', whereas if they are passed over, they may lose a chance at a national championship this year, but probably increase the chances of a +1 in future years. Darned if you do, darned if you don't.

That being said, if Oregon/Auburn play in the national championship, I hope the BCS doesn't pull the same crud and make BSU/TCU play each other.

Stick each of them against a BCS conference team, BSU vs Bama, and maybe TCU vs LSU/Big 12 champion.

Though I doubt both Bama would get in a BCS bowl if Auburn is in the championship, given that LSU is ranked higher than Alabama at the moment. But put TCU/BSU against some big names where if they win then they have every right to make any claim they want, but for the love of all the is good, don't make them play each other again and relegate them to the second page. If they want to make a name for themselves, give them the chance.

EDIT: All of that being said, I don't think a 1 loss team should get in over an undefeated team, regardless of Strength of schedule. If your BCS supporting argument is that every game is a playoff, and a 1 loss team gets in over an undefeated BSU/TCU, then you defeat your own argument.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

But Bob.....the argument everybody has been beating up BSU fans with..is ""They aren't that good and their record means nothing ...they shouldn't be so highly ranked......... because..."who do they play?".""

[Ken Fitzgerald]

What I like about college football is the immense part player and team emotions can play in a game.......that unpredictable feature.....

I stated very early on last year and again this year.

On any given day any college football team can beat another because of the part emotions CAN play in that game. The severely beaten can quickly become the victor because of those emotions.

I am not a Boise State fan. If I was, I could drive 30 miles north to watch them play the University of Idaho in the Kibbly Dome this evening.

Boise is 260 scenic 2 lane highway, mountains and rivers edge miles south and it takes over 6 hours to drive it at legal speeds.

I believe a team can play a tough schedule, win most and still not be the best team in the nation. I don't believe a teams schedule is an indication of the teams ability pro or con. Just because a team plays a weak schedule doesn't mean they are a lessor or greater team.

[alex grams]

Bob, I am curious as to why you support the pre-BCS system? It may be nostalgic, but I have to at least agree the BCS is an improvement over its predecessor. In the pre BCS sysytem you could have two undefeated teams at the end of the season and they would each play a non-undefeated team, not each other.

I second Ken's above statement. Schedule is not a reflection of talent, but no amount of debate can decide what should be decided on the field.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Another thing I love about college football is the rivalry games......thinking back to those games.........the highly ranked big team comes to play the outranked "lessor" team and gets stomped. On that day, the outranked team was better.....otherwise why'd they win? The other team beat themselves? Well...maybe but I'd suggest the underdogs got their emotions into the game and used it to their advantage....caught the big dog off guard....and beat them.


I recently started emailing a friend from high school whom I hadn't seen is August of 1967. He is now a professional gambler but only bets on professional football. In an email I told him that I had this great love of college football and I wondered if he'd placed bets on it. He said he only bet on pro football and he had friends who professionally bet on college ball but generally they stayed with betting on a given conference. He agreed college ball could be a little unpredictable.

And that is what I like about it. Young athletes with wild adrenalin rushes!

Disclaimer: I am not a Boise State Fan. I have never attended one of their games. I do not know their fight song or if they even have one. I did drive by their field one day by accident. I apologize. I was lost. I do not own a BSU sweatshirt, t-shirt, ball cap, or beanie. I have no intentions of purchasing one. I am not a Boise State fan.:D

[Chris Kennedy]

Disclaimer: I am not a Boise State Fan. I have never attended one of their games. I do not know their fight song or if they even have one. I did drive by their field one day by accident. I apologize. I was lost. I do not own a BSU sweatshirt, t-shirt, ball cap, or beanie. I have no intentions of purchasing one. I am not a Boise State fan.:D

Methinks you doth protest too much.

I keep reading that you are not a Boise State fan -- in posts about Boise State. I have read your opinions about college football, and yet, several of those posts go on about Boise State. And with this current thread, you seem to be making the challenge regarding "Who they play?" and throwing the gauntlet down because no one is speaking up about the ranking.

Okay -- I get it -- you're not a fan. But you have to admit -- you are their advocate.:D

I won't defend the BCS or rankings. To be honest, I really cannot get worked up about these things. I enjoy watching Michigan and Cal because I went to both schools, and it is a connection I have to them. How it is decided which is best? Meh. I won't back a playoff system either because I am a professor, and while they may be Division I, those athletes (no matter the sport) are students. Having playoffs at the end of the semester is a bad thing. My school is Division III, but it drives me and my student-atheletes crazy at the end of the semester when they are being pulled away from classes by NCAA championships.

Cheers,

Chris

[Ken Fitzgerald]

I use them only as an example of why some of the current arguments pro and con BCS and the previously used methods have serious holes in them.

On any given day, any college team could beat another as a result of emotions.

Neither the old method of selection nor the BCS is actually capable of producing an undisputed champion......and neither method is completely fair.

I also believe the argument that playing a tough schedule and winning a majority or even all of the games doesn't mean a particular team is the best in college football. The team might be good...might be tough but still not the best team.

Even if there was a national playoff, there are people who would argue when "their" team lost, that a single game couldn't or shouldn't decide a championship.

I really don't have a favorite team. I have never attended a college football game. I did see two college fields....one in Boulder, CO.....and one in Michigan but I forget which one M or MS?

[Gary Hodgin]

Did you notice there was no thread challenging Boise State's ranking in the polls and their credibility last week with the worn out question "So who do they play?".....


Of course, last week Georgia played Idaho State? .....be glad it wasn't the other "State" team from Idaho..(BSU)..:rolleyes:



And Auburn played Chattanooga?..............


So who do they play?
:rolleyes::)

I'm not a Boise State hater. I think they're a good team, but it's hard to tell where they'd be if they played more quality teams.

Auburn did play UTC, soft for them, last week. But, the three games prior were against Arkansas, LSU, and Ole Miss. To get to the title game they'll have to beat Georgia, Alabama, and either South Carolina or Florida. I pretty sure 8 teams on Auburn's schedule have been ranked in the top 25 at some point in the season and several in the top 10. I doubt Boise State has played that many quality teams in the last three years. Now, I know they didn't play them because they're not on the schedule, but the fact is they don't play many quality teams over the course of their season.

Personally, I don't think Auburn will make it. Georgia has gotten better during the year. No body is tougher than Alabama, especially at home. Florida should beat SC and is much better now than earlier in the season. My prediction is Oregon vs TCU in title game. Boise State could get in if either falter.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

so explain this......the Harris Poll...........the coaches poll..........the AP poll......... the computer give them a ranking of #4.

Are all of these polls wrong?

Just because a team plays a tough schedule and wins most or even all of the games doesn't mean in a championship game they could not lose to another team. So what value would the tough schedule then have? Zip....Zero...... It would be worth nothing.

Too much importance is placed on schedules and conferences.

Example....I know people who will argue the SEC is the toughest conference.....likewise I know people who will argue the Big 12 is the toughest conference......

[Don Alexander]

while its entertaining to debate the merits of ratings and it is fun to speculate on how teams would do against other teams they will never play this season the fact is that ALL of the polls, ratings and rankings are purely guesswork having so little basis in anything substantively measurable that drawing conclusions from them is pretty much useless


i love college football because of the passion and enthusiasm with which it is played and wouldn't it be funny if BSU and TCU ended up playing for the "title" ? it would definitely give the talking heads plenty of fodder to flap their jaws about (can you say global warming? :D )

[Gary Hodgin]

so explain this......the Harris Poll...........the coaches poll..........the AP poll......... the computer give them a ranking of #4.

Are all of these polls wrong?

Just because a team plays a tough schedule and wins most or even all of the games doesn't mean in a championship game they could not lose to another team. So what value would the tough schedule then have? Zip....Zero...... It would be worth nothing.

Too much importance is placed on schedules and conferences.

Example....I know people who will argue the SEC is the toughest conference.....likewise I know people who will argue the Big 12 is the toughest conference......

Ken,
I'm saying that BSU will most likely get in if TCU or Oregon falter. The only other team above them is Auburn and I think Auburn will falter. I'm not challenging BSU's rankings. I do believe it's hard to judge a team's strength without judging the strength of its opponents in a system where teams don't play common opponents. Therefore, I factor in strength of schedule. Its not everything, but its something.

BSU has played three teams that have ranked in the top 25 this year, one in the top 10 (VT which was ranked 10th on opening day). No SEC team has played such a weak schedule, and I'd guess that no team in the Big Ten, Big 12, or Pac 12 has played one. Therefore, if a team from one of these conferences (maybe others) is undefeated and BSU is undefeated I would put the other team in the championship game. It is more difficult when BSU is undefeated and the other team has one or two losses.

Unfortunately, this leaves BSU (and others like it) out of the championship in most years. I'd rather have some sort of play off system, but that doesn't exist. It may appear to be unfair to BSU, but the greater inequity would be to penalize a team that has played a difficult schedule by ranking another one with a passive schedule above it if the two have similar records. If Boise wants to stay in the WAC and compete for national championships, then it has to strengthen its non-conference schedule. It needs to schedule just about all of its non-conference games against teams with strong reputations. VT was a good start, but it needs a couple more like that. If it could add two or three teams like USC, Ohio State, Oklahoma, and Texas to its schedule I don't think it would have a problem at all.

The University of Memphis has a similar problem in NCAA basketball tournament seedings. Memphis plays in a weak conference so it has to schedule teams that it knows typically have high rankings. This gets its rpi up enough to where it has a decent shot of a good tournament seeding.

[Jerome Hanby]

so explain this......the Harris Poll...........the coaches poll..........the AP poll......... the computer give them a ranking of #4.

Are all of these polls wrong?

Yes all those polls are wrong. They are either human beings that have the typical wacky sense of fairness almost all human beings exhibit when the issue really doesn't matter or they are computer programs trying to analyze data that by it's very nature cannot be consistent. Basically they are saying that 1 + 1 = 2 with no possible way to validate that those two 1's are equivalent. If Boise played an SEC caliber schedule (or even the ACC) and were undefeated, then we can talk. As it sits, they play a bunch of teams that aspire, someday, to be also rans. They do have a good team, good coaches, and when you play girls schools, guess what, you breeze through your schedule with few injuries. So you arrive at the end, in better physical shape, 10 or 11 no holds barred scrimmages where you can tune your playbook with no fear of losing, and you have a month to get ready for the only major team you are going to play all season. The only thing we have on which to judge their prowess is a first game tussle with VT that except for the final score was basically a tie. So I think we can say that Boisie State is a little better than VT and we've had a chance to see VT in some actual games. No one is touting them for a shot at the championship. Maybe TCU, Boisie, Utah, East Carolina, and Central Florida could rope in the rest of the misfits and leftovers (maybe Baylor and UAB) and build a conference that could yield some decent schedules.

Just another thought, is there a big stadium anywhere near Boise? I know Alabama used to play a handful of home games at Legion Field years ago, maybe Boise could setup something similar to entice quality schools to schedule a one and one with them.

[Rick Moyer]

Did you notice there was no thread challenging Boise State's ranking in the polls and their credibility last week with the worn out question "So who do they play?".....


Of course, last week Georgia played Idaho State? .....be glad it wasn't the other "State" team from Idaho..(BSU)..:rolleyes:



And Auburn played Chattanooga?..............


So who do they play?
:rolleyes::)

I think this expalins things pretty well http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fbleacherreport.com%2Farticles%2F4 39583-boise-state-is-the-little-team-that-can-national-title-worthy-in-2010&ei=J5XeTPTWA4L48AbztuCpDw&usg=AFQjCNGgxq9RKtlmL4XpJ8xlkN7QMulRKQ

The knock against Boise State is that their undefeated status is suspect because of the limited number of "good" teams they play. I think they are a very good, maybe even great team, but I don't think they would be undefeated playing five ranked teams over the course of the season. Especially if a few were back-to-back. Boise has been able to win (lately) their big games over very good teams, but have been able to coast thru much of the season(s) in recent years. As Ken points out in another post, the emotion of college football is huge, and it's much easier to get pumped up for one or two "big" games, especially when you haven't been battered by a few Heisman candidates in several consecutive weeks. Don't get me wrong, I'd love to see a Boise vs. (whomever #1 or #2) for the BCS, but the argument stands that it's easier to be undefeated against an overall weaker schedule. Are they good enough to be undefeated if they had played four ranked teams by now? Maybe. I wish they had. I hope they will be able to enact a tougher schedule in the future, and get the recognition they may deserve. But until they actually beat four really good teams in a season, their record is suspect. I think they're very good. I'm just not convinced they'd be undefeated playing a tough schedule.


It stung penn state plenty of times in the past, especially in the late 60s and early 70s. That's just the way it goes.
Exactly. I'm a PSU fan and it stung several times when they went undefeated and didn't get National Champion status. "All you can do is win every game" was said. I believed it. But in retrospect, I think a team should have to prove their worthiness by playing a better schedule than maybe what PSU did in some of that era. Were they good enough to beat anyone? Yes I think they were. Could they have been undefeated playing 4-5 ranked teams then, don't know. If they had played 4-5 ranked teams and lost only once, would they be a worse team than one that went undefeated playing maybe only one ranked team? I doubt it. We'll never know. Even if we have a playoff system, it doesn't insure the best team is champion. Anybody think the New England Patriots weren't they best team a few years ago (18-0) until they lost the Super Bowl?


Some teams get undervalued because of past history just as some teams get overvalued because of past history (don't get me started about Notre Dame :(). So, if Boise continues to beat everybody, including their "big" games, they will get their shot at a championship. Be careful what you wish for!

[Ken Fitzgerald]

I will say it again.....

Too many people place to much importance on playing a "tough schedule". I don't care if team plays in the SEC, the BIG 12 or what conference. Playing in a tough conference or a tough schedule is no guarrantee that the best team in college football is in that list of teams.

BTW...I didn't watch last nights BSU vs U of I game but my wife and visiting daughter did watch it on television. I was in the shop trying some knob experiments. According to the wife, there was plenty of emotions showing between the teams before and during the game.

Okay....so....if 2 teams square off in a playoff game...final game.....does the winner become the national champion?............even if the winner played a less than difficult season?

One game......all the marbles.....no more whining.....they're the champs?

Somehow I believe the whine to that would be "Anybody can get it up for 1 game".

I believe there are a large number of fans who will make excuses and not accept anyone but their conference and their team as the biggest, the baddest and the best and they should have been the champs regardless of how the winning opponents performed in that game.

[Kent A Bathurst]

I believe there are a large number of fans who will make excuses and not accept anyone but their conference and their team as the biggest, the baddest and the best and they should have been the champs regardless of how the winning opponents performed in that game.

You've been watching too many University of Michigan games. Big House now expanded to hold >110,000 degreed whiners.


Into the foxhole now................:D

[Gary Hodgin]

I'll agree that the best team in the country may not be from the toughest conference or play the toughest schedule, but that's not the issue with BSU.

The issue is on what basis do we select the two teams that get into the national championship game. BSU looks as good as anyone if you only look at won/lost. Auburn, Oregon, and TCU have the same won/lost. How do you choose the two?

I think it's foolish to not consider the relative difficulty of the schedules. Otherwise, a Pop Warner team could lay claim. And once you bring in difficulty of schedule, it opens up the possibility that a team with one or two losses may be more deserving of the national championship than an undefeated team. This is what the BCS attempts to do. It's not a perfect system, but at least it considers both won/loss (weighted more heavily) and schedule difficulty (weighted less heavily but accounts for something).

[Michael Weber]

"Steve Superior" HA! Never heard that one. Thanks for the laugh.

[Kent A Bathurst]

"Steve Superior" HA! Never heard that one. Thanks for the laugh.

He's hilarious - as long as he isn't making fun of your team.

"You cant spell Citrus without UT"

The Auburn University library had a fire - 20 books were burned. "The sad thing is that 15 of them hadn't even been colored yet."

[Ken Fitzgerald]

Gary,

One of the reasons for starting this thread is to point out there is no method you could use that would be completely fair in determining a national college football champion. It's impossible.

On any given day any college football team is capable of beating any other college football team because of the huge part emotions can play in a game.

The process to select the teams to play in a championship game would inevitably be unfair to some team or teams.

A tough schedule doesnt' mean the better team played in any of those games.

Let me give you an example. A couple of years ago Oklahoma played BSU in the Fiesta Bowl. People will argue that Oklahoma played a tougher schedule and did it without the aid of Adrian Peterson. Yet BSU won in the final seconds with "trick" plays....( better coaching IMHO). Now you can argue that the tough schedule effected Oklahoma by the loss of their star running back. That's true BUT.. they'd successfully played a large part of their "tough" schedule without him. I would suggest the BSU players...their emotions as a result of the "David vs Goliath" syndrome kept them in the game and better coaching in the final seconds by using totally unrelated "trick" plays won the game. BTW...there are no "trick" plays IMHO. There are just plays that are used often and those that are not used as often and as a result catch your opponents off guard.

The old bowl system wasn't fair. How was it fair that only teams from selected conferences played in certain bowl games.

I'm sorry. I have a huge amount of respect for the SEC...the Big 12 and other conferences but it still doesn't mean the best team of college football comes from those conferences....or any particular conference in a given year.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

BTW....you would not believe the politics locally over BSU and University of Idaho!?

Boise State is changing conferences so they can have a "tougher" season to eliminate that whine. One of the results is they don't have the University of Idaho on the their schedule for the next 2 years.

The University of Idaho is 30 miles north of where I live.

The locals are extremely upset with that.

[Gary Hodgin]

Gary,

One of the reasons for starting this thread is to point out there is no method you could use that would be completely fair in determining a national college football champion. It's impossible.

On any given day any college football team is capable of beating any other college football team because of the huge part emotions can play in a game.

The process to select the teams to play in a championship game would inevitably be unfair to some team or teams.

A tough schedule doesnt' mean the better team played in any of those games.

Let me give you an example. A couple of years ago Oklahoma played BSU in the Fiesta Bowl. People will argue that Oklahoma played a tougher schedule and did it without the aid of Adrian Peterson. Yet BSU won in the final seconds with "trick" plays....( better coaching IMHO). Now you can argue that the tough schedule effected Oklahoma by the loss of their star running back. That's true BUT.. they'd successfully played a large part of their "tough" schedule without him. I would suggest the BSU players...their emotions as a result of the "David vs Goliath" syndrome kept them in the game and better coaching in the final seconds by using totally unrelated "trick" plays won the game. BTW...there are no "trick" plays IMHO. There are just plays that are used often and those that are not used as often and as a result catch your opponents off guard.

The old bowl system wasn't fair. How was it fair that only teams from selected conferences played in certain bowl games.

I'm sorry. I have a huge amount of respect for the SEC...the Big 12 and other conferences but it still doesn't mean the best team of college football comes from those conferences....or any particular conference in a given year.

Ken,
I agree the best team may not come from one of the best conferences nor from one that plays the toughest schedule. Absent a playoff system of some sort, there has to be some way to select the top two teams to play for the championship. IMO, a system that includes both win/loss and strength of schedule is preferred to one that doesn't.

The NCAA basketball tournament does this through seeding. Teams win high percentages of wins but low rpi still get in the tournament but have to establish their bona fides by playing up. If NCAA football had such a system then BSU could get in the tournament and play up. The current BCS system is better than the old, but is far from perfect and it's very possible that the best team in the nation doesn't get into the championship game, and on a given day, several teams might have been able to defeat the "national champion."

These problems are always going to be there under any system. For example, the Giants won the Series by winning the NL pennant from the Phillies. I was happy to see this, but I seriously doubt the Giants could beat the Phillies in more than 3 or 4 out of 10 best of seven series. The first year Steve Carlton left the cardinals and went to the phillies he won the Cy Young award with a 27-10 record. That year the phillies only won about 58 games (as I recall). If you played the Phillies on day Carlton pitched, you were playing one of the best teams in baseball. If you played them on other days, you were playing one of the worst. There's a little luck or random chance with anything like this.

[David Weaver]

BTW....you would not believe the politics locally over BSU and University of Idaho!?

Boise State is changing conferences so they can have a "tougher" season to eliminate that whine. One of the results is they don't have the University of Idaho on the their schedule for the next 2 years.

The University of Idaho is 30 miles north of where I live.

The locals are extremely upset with that.

Penn State doesn't play pitt, anymore, either, because they can't agree on terms of who plays where. Pitt wanted a home and home, but they don't draw fans, and truthfully, nobody other than pitt alumni pay even moderate attention to pitt.

BSU skill wise is ready to take the steps to get strength of schedule where it needs to be, that's good. It will leave some people behind, but all they have to do to put their programs on the map is win like BSU does.

However true the argument that the best team may not be in the best conference may be, it doesn't lead to any reasonable conclusion within the current system if you don't give the team who has done the most the first chance at the championship game. Winning more difficult games is doing more.

Rick had it right about psu. In those seasons they went undefeated, there really wasn't something about the way they beat their opponents or who they beat that would lead you to realistically say "oh, they were totally robbed and definitely the best team in the country". I think texas won the year they went undefeated, and penn state beat missouri 10-3 in whatever bowl they were in. Missouri was rated #6. (though texas played a lower ranked team than penn state did and beat them by less). Penn state was also undefeated including the orange bowl, i think, the prior year.

[Ken Fitzgerald]

That Northwestern game was a good example of a momentum swing due to an emotional swing. You could see a physical difference in their hits and their confidence after that interception.

I was cooking dinner for 5 and didn't know for sure how the game ended until just now.

Emotions plays such a huge part in the game at the college level.

I enjoy college football.

[Kent A Bathurst]

.........I don't think Auburn will make it. Georgia has gotten better during the year............ Florida should beat SC and is much better now than earlier in the season..........

Gary - this all sounded perfectly logical to me when you wrote it. Then - BOOM goes the dynamite!!

Not to make Ken's argument for him - but that's why they play the games, eh?

On to Tuscaloosa and Atlanta............

[Kent A Bathurst]

That Northwestern game .......... didn't know for sure how the game ended until just now..........Emotions plays such a huge part in the game...........

Too bad you missed it - terrific finish. Not only pure emotion, but confidence as well - tho that likely falls under "emotion". NW had won 4 of the previous 5 games, and when they started that final drive, they were un-worried, un-frantic, very confident, that they could pull it out. And there they went down the field.........

[Gary Hodgin]

I believe Auburn will falter because they have to play three (now 2) real good teams in order to make it to the championship game. However, at this time, I feel Auburn deserves to be ranked 1 or 2 based on its won/loss pct. and strength of schedule. If they lose to Alabama or South Carolina I may change my mind, depending on how others do. It's hard for any team to make it through a tough schedule undefeated. Consequently, strength of schedule should be considered in determining which two teams make it to the championship game.

I agree with Ken's point that's its possible that the best team in the nation may not play a tough schedule or play in a tough conference. We just don't know who the best team is. But we do have to select two teams to play in the championship game under the current system. I don't see any way to do that with any degree of fairness without ranking based on win/loss pct. and strength of schedule. If everyone played identical schedules, then we could look at won/loss pct. alone. Boise St. doesn't well on won/loss but no so well on strength of schedule. Nevertheless, if Auburn and Oregon do play in the championship game and one wins it's possible that Boise St. is a better team. We'll never know.

A playoff system of some sort would help resolve some of the problems in picking a national champion but it's impossible to design a perfect one. We could award the championship to the team with the highest Division I winning percentage. We could establish that by having each Div. I team play all of the others. Of course, that's not very practical because we'd have to play a game about every other day year round, or something like that. There are other playoffs that are more practical but there's no perfect one.

[Rick Moyer]

Um .....nevermind!

[Ken Fitzgerald]

On any given Saturday or....Friday night any college team can beat another college team because of the effect emotions have at this level of play.

The BSU defense was flat all evening and when the Nevada quarterback scored on that 18 yard run, it lifted his team and further flattened BSU.

Last night as in every game...the best team won.

I love college football!

[Paul McGaha]

I love it too Ken.

Currently watching Arkansas/LSU. Looking in on Florida/Florida State.

Watched Alabama/Auburn yesterday. That's 2 high end college football teams right there.

Only bad thing is the season is wraping up.

PHM