Leprechaun - I did read the post, but you claiming that you are objectively evaluating Boise State is totally untrue. You obsess about the schedule, but what you're avoiding is the fact that most of Boise's schedule is conference games, which is beyond their control (with the exception of Idaho and Wyoming). 67% of their games are conference games - which, by the way, is the same percentage you described as "VERY prevalent" when applying it to margin of victory in the formula. So it would appear that Boise's conference schedule is having a VERY prevalent impact on how their overall schedule difficulty is viewed.
You said it won't be because they weren't in a good conference, but because they played an easy schedule and someone else played a more difficult one. How can you say that when all of the (allegedly) difficult games the SEC teams are playing are coming IN CONFERENCE? Have you seen Auburn's non-conference slate? Arkansas State, Clemson, Louisiana-Monroe, and Chattanooga. Tell me that VaTech, Wyoming, Oregon State, and Toledo aren't a tougher slate than that. This is all about conference affiliation, and the conferences in power protecting the status quo.
You admit Texas isn't a good team this year, but when Nebraska goes down to them, you said verbatim "That's what happens when you play tough teams. Sure, Texas looked like ass against UCLA and Oklahoma, but they are still a very good team. Don't worry, I'm sure Boise will beat up on Southwest San Diego State today :)"
When VaTech lost to James Madison, I said it was a letdown game, and VaTech would still win the ACC. You said VaTech isn't a good team, because any decent team could have a letdown week and still pull it out against 1-AA competition. But now you say that despite Boise's victory over VaTech, that you don't think they would beat them if they played now. What about the way Boise is playing would lead you to believe this? The answer is nothing...you just figure that since VaTech is playing better right now than they were then, that Boise would go down to them.
Oregon State is only mediocre now because they lost James Rodgers. They weren't mediocre then.
Looking at common opponents is standard practice when evaluating teams. It can not be used as a primary indicator or in a transitive nature (e.g. JMU beat VaTech by 4 but Boise beat them by 3, ergo, JMU would beat BSU by 1), but when all else is equal, as in two top ranked teams in Alabama and Boise State both playing well by all objective measures, it can provide supplemental perspective. Boise has proven they belong in the conversation with 1-loss Alabama, if not in the pole position ahead of them.
I give no credit to Auburn because they are not a complete football team. They are a slightly better version of Michigan from earlier this year with Denard. And look how that turned out. Oregon and Boise both play offense AND defense.
But here's the crux of my beef with you. It appears that in your mind, there is nothing...NOTHING...Boise can do on the field that will change your mind. As long as there is an undefeated from an AQ conference or a 1-loss "powerhouse", you have no problem with jumping them ahead of Boise because of the schedule. Boise could drop 100 on Nevada, and it wouldn't change your mind. My problem with that is you are hinging who should get into the NC game based solely on the decisions of the AD in deriving a schedule, which is often based on availability, interest, and logistics, not to mention an overall willingness from an opponent to schedule the matchup. None of this is based on how the players are performing on the field. This, to me, is ridiculous. Furthermore, even when the AD has done their job and scheduled a decent non-conference slate, or so it would appear at the time, you are taking away from that team when those opponents stumble after losing the head to head matchup. Look at Utah. In addition to the Mountain West schedule (which is tougher than both they ACC and Big East), they scheduled Notre Dame AWAY. They decided to come play in freakin' Notre Dame stadium! At first glance, it would appear that takes balls, and is a legitimate scheduling move to prove their worth. But they ND gets their ass handed to them by Navy, and all of a sudden it's Utah who is really fucked. How does that make sense?!
We both agree we need a playoff, and this year is a PERFECT example of that. But the only shot we have at a playoff is the fans standing up and crying "FOUL!" for a purported injustice. So long as you're OK with a 1-loss SEC team and any and all undefeated AQ teams jumping Boise State, we have no outrage. We have no discontent. We have "a playoff would have been better, but the BCS did the trick". And I call bullshit on this.
No comments:
Post a Comment