NCAAF  > General NCAAF  > Mandel says Boise St may be best.....
October 18, 2010, 02:58 PM
And I agree with him. BSU is extremely talented, extremely well coached, and very experienced. In my Vegas Line Power Index I have them only trailing Oregon and by only a slight margin.

However, in order for them to play for the BCS title enough voters will have to decide that perceived strength is worth more than a season's worth of accomplishments. Is this fair? Depends on where you sit. There's not a lot that is fair in life, and that holds very true for college football.

Working in Boise's favor is recent history and a growing belief among voters that this team deserves its moment in the sun. If it happens, I will not cry foul though it goes against my long held belief that accomplishments should be weighed the most heavily in determining the final ranking. If Boise runs the table it will make for an exciting title game with someone and Boise may well be favored in it.

What worries me is that like the Hawaii(extremely weak undefeated team) game of 3 years ago set an unfair precedent against the smaller conferences, a team like Boise(extremely strong undefeated team) may swing the pendelum in an unfair direction the other way, and set a precedent for voters to quit emphasizing schedule strength.

What say you?
Comment #1 has been removed
October 18, 2010  04:23 PM ET

I don't think boise or TCU will have enough poll strength to end up #1 or #2, unless the entire SEC west, Ohio State, Nebraska and OU all go into a funk and lose two games each.

For Boise & TCU's sake, I am hoping that neither the Big10 or Pac10 gets to the NCG--if they did, Boise/TCU would go to the Rose Bowl and I doubt that beating a Pac10 or Big10 team (no matter how good they are) would silence the doubters.

The gold standard is beating an SEC team in the NCG or the Sugar Bowl. Utah did that in a convincing manner, and IMO that is why Boise and TCU are currently ranked where they are. To get over the final hump and be considered for the NCG, Boise/TCU need to show that Utah's win wasn't a fluke. This year's squads are essentially paving the road for next year's MWC champion.

Comment #3 has been removed
October 18, 2010  04:40 PM ET

I hate "the best" comparison.

The BCS championship is a pecking order determined by qualifications, not the "best".

Number 1 is record.
If the teams have the same record, then the tie must e broken.

2. Perceived strength. Again, if this is a tie (and at the end of the season, it should be), then the tie must be broken.

3. Strength of schedule (quality wins).

4. Strength of conference (quality conference wins).


Being undefeated isn't enough. Being talented isn't enough. If the voters look for something quantifiable instead of subjective, then Boise is in trouble.

October 18, 2010  04:47 PM ET
QUOTE(#3):

Their window of opportunity may not extend to next year. I'm pretty sure that Boise and TCU starters are mostly seniors. I think many of Utah's are too. Next year's MWC champ may be Nevada.

True. Plus, Utah will be in the Pac12 next season, so they will be doing their best to undermine the MWC--both on the field and off it.

I wonder how much Boise and TCU's recent success has translated into improved recruiting classes?

Comment #6 has been removed
October 18, 2010  05:18 PM ET
QUOTE(#4):

Number 1 is record.If the teams have the same record, then the tie must e broken. 2.

Mostly true, but somewhere a line in the sand has to be drawn. That is the tricky part.

No one thought Hawaii should be in the BCS title game in 2007 and rightly so. So in every case a determination needs to be made looking at more than just the record. Don't you think? I know I do.

October 18, 2010  05:35 PM ET
QUOTE(#6):

However, I'm painfully aware that a bunch of new kids, no matter how good, need time to coalesce into a championship caliber team.

About five games, plus a bye week :)

In retrospect, I think Mack got caught looking ahead to the RRSO and a trip to Lincoln. Despite the two losses, I'd say the future is very bright in Austin. Y'all do need a power running game to be a complete team, though.

October 18, 2010  05:53 PM ET
QUOTE(#3):

Their window of opportunity may not extend to next year. I'm pretty sure that Boise and TCU starters are mostly seniors. I think many of Utah's are too. Next year's MWC champ may be Nevada.

Bah, SDSU will take the MWC next year baby!

You are right though. IMHO the elite MWC teams and BSU have been every bit as good as anyone else the last few years-its simply much harder to reload for the smaller teams. Next year BSU will be nowhere near as good and will probably be the 3rd place MWC team.

October 18, 2010  05:56 PM ET
QUOTE:

And I agree with him. BSU is extremely talented, extremely well coached, and very experienced. In my Vegas Line Power Index I have them only trailing Oregon and by only a slight margin. However, in order for them to play for the BCS title enough voters will have to decide that perceived strength is worth more than a season's worth of accomplishments. Is this fair? Depends on where you sit. There's not a lot that is fair in life, and that holds very true for college football. Working in Boise's favor is recent history and a growing belief among voters that this team deserves its moment in the sun. If it happens, I will not cry foul though it goes against my long held belief that accomplishments should be weighed the most heavily in determining the final ranking. If Boise runs the table it will make for an exciting title game with someone and Boise may well be favored in it.What worries me is that like the Hawaii(extremely weak undefeated team) game of 3 years ago set an unfair precedent against the smaller conferences, a team like Boise(extremely strong undefeated team) may swing the pendelum in an unfair direction the other way, and set a precedent for voters to quit emphasizing schedule strength. What say you?

JP,

Don't think that your worry is too well founded. The MWC will be the only non-AQ conference that has teams that will get the benifit of the doubt for the next 2 or 3 years. C-USA or the MAC would have to have a team make it to a BCS game and then repeat in order to get the same treatment. In any event this year and next it cetainly looks like it will be easier for a BE team to go undefeated than a MWC team-so if you are looking for an unfair edge look to the BE or possibly even the ACC...

October 18, 2010  06:00 PM ET
QUOTE(#7):

Mostly true, but somewhere a line in the sand has to be drawn. That is the tricky part. No one thought Hawaii should be in the BCS title game in 2007 and rightly so. So in every case a determination needs to be made looking at more than just the record. Don't you think? I know I do.

Agree, which is why Baylor and OrSU were on the TCU sked and OrSU and VT for the BSU sked. Hawaii played only one BCS team the year they went and squeaked by UW at home if memory serves.

TCU and BSU also get a little credit for time served-neither has lost a regular season game in almost 2 seasons now. Utah gets credit for playing big in big games-but they don't really count anymore since they join the secret handshake club next year.

October 18, 2010  06:58 PM ET
QUOTE(#3):

Their window of opportunity may not extend to next year. I'm pretty sure that Boise and TCU starters are mostly seniors. I think many of Utah's are too. Next year's MWC champ may be Nevada.

Both are pretty heavily senior laden teams, but at the same time, one has the best record of this decade and the other is in the top ten. Right or wrong, and Mr. Stoops, don't take this the wrong way, neither TCU or tBSU are prone to running up scores. TCU starts yanking starters pretty quickly and I think tBSU does too. The young guys get LOTS of playing time compared to schools that believe "style points" mean winning by 70 points and keeping the starters in til 2 minutes left.
TCU and tBSU are getting better and better recruits every year. I think TCU's class of 2010 was ranked 20something which ain't bad for them.

October 18, 2010  07:00 PM ET
QUOTE(#9):

Next year BSU will be nowhere near as good and will probably be the 3rd place MWC team.

I think either TCU or tBSU will win the MWC next year. SDSU is really on the rise, tho. I mean, who wouldn't want to go to school in SD with the chicks there, not that chicks are the most important thing for a 18 year old.

October 18, 2010  07:17 PM ET
QUOTE(#11):

Agree, which is why Baylor and OrSU were on the TCU sked and OrSU and VT for the BSU sked. Hawaii played only one BCS team the year they went and squeaked by UW at home if memory serves.

Go Baylor, need them to knock off OU and Okie Lite.

Comment #15 has been removed
Comment #16 has been removed
Comment #17 has been removed
October 19, 2010  12:26 AM ET
QUOTE(#16):

Correction: 8 3-stars for BSU (read wrong line)

Both programs have done a heck of a job getting the absolute most from their recruits and building a TEAM.

October 19, 2010  12:29 AM ET
QUOTE(#18):

Both programs have done a heck of a job getting the absolute most from their recruits and building a TEAM.

Agreed. BSU will have Moore coming back next year too.

 
October 19, 2010  05:52 AM ET
QUOTE(#10):

JP, Don't think that your worry is too well founded. The MWC will be the only non-AQ conference that has teams that will get the benifit of the doubt for the next 2 or 3 years. C-USA or the MAC would have to have a team make it to a BCS game and then repeat in order to get the same treatment. In any event this year and next it cetainly looks like it will be easier for a BE team to go undefeated than a MWC team-so if you are looking for an unfair edge look to the BE or possibly even the ACC...

I think my original post should have said "place less emphasis on schedule strength" instead of "quit emphasizing schedule strength".

Like you pointed out, that trend could affect weak AQ conferences as well as Non AQ.

And you are correct, it is more than likely a fear that is unlikely to play out in any major way, because I think voters do a decent job of analyzing the specific situation. This season may be a unique one, but the trend of the voters' mindset seems to have swung back toward less schedule strength consideration in the rankings.

Comment

Remember to keep your posts clean. Profanity will get filtered, and offensive comments will be removed.


Truth & Rumors

MOST POPULAR

  1. 1
    Clippers, Warriors exchange barbs
    Views
    751
    Comments
    436
  2. 2
    Time to penalize NHL's perennial losers?
    Views
    909
    Comments
    271
  3. 3
    Report: Raiders to release Terrelle Pryor on Monday
    Views
    1250
    Comments
    59
  4. 4
    Will NFL owners blackball Donald Trump?
    Views
    1050
    Comments
    54
  5. 5
    Packers lovers have own dating site
    Views
    961
    Comments
    45

SI.com

SI Photos