This more than demonstrates what is going on in college football. It is also an
example of what is going on in America by the greedy. It is done at the expense
of those who are considered "not worthy". It is a part of the whole thought
processes and belief systems of many who believe that they are more deserving
than others. It is about the "have's" and "have not's". "If I can get more $$
and legally get a way with it, then who cares". The whole capalitistic system in
America needs to be revamped, along with the welfare system, the immigration
laws, etc. If we don't, then it will be at the demise of America. Sometimes, we
can be our own worst enemy.
It is all about the media. I don't think anyone really believes the MWC/WAC can
compete with the SEC, BIG 12 or the BIG 10 on a day in day out basis. But what
impresses me is they are targeting the two weakest BCS conferences. The BIG EAST
and the ACC. Afterall, since they are in the BCS why can't we be in? I will tell
you why. The media. Those conferences might have lower TV ratings and less
attendance but they still have the eyes of the east coast media. And I doubt
that will change. Talk all you want of going into the PAC 10, or other
realignments but we are in the forgotten Rocky Mountains. The best shot is to
get Boise State into the MWC, dump New Mexico and now you have a more appealing
conference to join the BCS. That could easily happen since we are half way thru
the "evaluation" period. I don't want to join PAC 10. The Arizona schools have
not fared as well as people think. BIG 10 and BIG 12 won't even consider us.
MWC, get Boise State.
While I'm a fan of abolishing the BCS, I note that this chart is skewed. It
compares only 2 of the 6 conferences that make up the BCS against the MWC and
WAC (presumably the 2 that compare least favorably). And it shows the best of
the MWC or the WAC each year. I wonder whether a complete, unskewed chart, might
still show the same argument for abolishing the BCS.
I love how a team that is exploiting the system better than anyone is
complaining about it.Boise State found a way to play only 5 road
games in a 12 game season next year. I don't think they've had to play a road
game against a top 25 opponent in the last 5 years.It makes me mad
that they fix their schedule to make sure they go undefeated and get a free ride
to BCS games, while the rest of College football has to earn their way in.BSU might have top 5 tallent, but until their schedule improves their
program will continue to be a side show.The BCS is a joke but Boise
State is the punch line.
To byronbca: If your going to rip on BSU you may want to get your facts right.
Boise state plays 6 road games and 6 home games in 2010. Haven't beaten a road
top 25 team? They beat a ranked Oregon at Autzen the 2008 season. I guess your
not impressed with them beating #3 ranked TCU on a neutral field? Oh well.Your
schedule complaints are hollow as they play VaTech on the road and Oregon St
next year. Your comments have nothing to do with the topic at hand.
Re: just curiousNo question: any conference that has had 15 years of
millions of dollars/year and a chance at the 'National Championship' can start
to recruit big name players and compete on a day in/day out basis.
Some people like to justify themselves by puttin gothers down. For the most part
the Broncos have owned the Mountain West for the last 10-15 years. Very seldom
has a MWC team manage to beat the Broncos and yet these people complain that
they don't measure up. Maybe byronbca you need to look at who your pointing at?
Re: say whatBSU is playing VaTech at FedEx field which is a nuetral
site, and even though it's back East BSU's logo will be in one of the end zones,
and Oregon St is a home game.So to recap: that's 6 home games 5 road
games and 1 game played on a nuetral field.You are right however
about Oregon, so they have beaten exactly 1 ranked team on the road in the last
five years.I actually was impressed with BSU's victory over TCU, I
just don't think they earned the right to play them since their schedule was
shamefully weak.And Finally I think the "biting the hand that feeds
you" argument is valid and on topic in this case since I don't believe any team
has benifitted more from how the BCS is structured than BSU.
I’m a huge Ute fan but I have to give it up for BSU. A basically unknown
school in an unknown region of America has done some really remarkable stuff on
the football field.If a football power house can be built in little
old Nebraska why not Idaho?
It should be illegal. All schools that are in the NCAA should have a shot at the
Wah Wah Wah. The third anti BCS article of the week and it is only Tuesday!The big boys created the top bowl games and signed the greatest media
packages that ultimately built the BCS. The BCS schools didn't take money from
the podunk conferences, they made the revenue streams.As for playing
in the NC game, build a program that can be nationally ranked 1 or 2 and you are
in. BSU is well on the way. The Utes were no where near the top two the year
they played Bama. Crushing the Crimson Tide while barely surviving games
against wmc teams does not a champion make.It is fun to hear y and U
fans rip on BSU while at the same time crying that the BCS system gives them no
respect. The Smurf-Turf boys showed once again that they own the wmc as they
Wow! Hedge, that is the first positive post I have read!
This fan of the MWC has nothing but admiration for the next team to join the
conference: BSU in 2011.
The fans of BSU have a point. Many people (myself included) did not give BSU the
respect that they deserved. Beating a very strong TCU team made me see the error
of my ways. BSU is for real. I would love to see them in the MWC.