Yeah Boise's No3 but anyone notice how empty their stands were?
- Thread starter McDawg
- Start date
I'd think it be like a Thursday night game for us. If we were No. 3 late in October, I'd think we'd have near 50,000 or more, even with a threat of rain. Certainly have seen lots of people at our games when there was much more than just a threat of rain and cool weather, even with a .500 or worse record.
If we were #3 in the BCS, I don't care what the whether was or what day of the week it was, it would be sold out. If it wasn't, then that's just sad.
ETA: Sold out with an actual attendance of over capacity.
ETA: Sold out with an actual attendance of over capacity.
It wouldn't shock me. I feel like Auburn is destined to lose somewhere. Michigan State will lose this week. Missouri will finish with at least 2 or 3 losses. The only undefeateds I see are Boise, TCU or Utah, and probably Oregon.
If TCU beats Utah, they may jump Boise to play Oregon. If Utah beats Boise, then you'll probably see Boise and Oregon for the title. Just my feeling on it, and it's probably the best thing that could happen.
As soon as the big boys figure out that the little guys can and will occasionally steal a spot in the title game, they will be more open to a plus one.
If TCU beats Utah, they may jump Boise to play Oregon. If Utah beats Boise, then you'll probably see Boise and Oregon for the title. Just my feeling on it, and it's probably the best thing that could happen.
As soon as the big boys figure out that the little guys can and will occasionally steal a spot in the title game, they will be more open to a plus one.
Watch, the winner of the Alabama, Auburn game will play in the NC game and if Oregon wins Saturday, which I think they will, they will play one of the two. Boise is number two in every single poll except the BCS.They are as high as they are going to go in the BCS, They have no other big games left on schedule to impress any one. Every voter or any one who has ties to the BCS know's they are going undefeated and if you know that at this point of the season then you schedule sux.
The only thing that could happen is one school wins the BCS but the AP names BSU National Champs. I think this happen in 03 when LSU won the BCS but USC got the AP. It might havebeen another year not sure.
The only thing that could happen is one school wins the BCS but the AP names BSU National Champs. I think this happen in 03 when LSU won the BCS but USC got the AP. It might havebeen another year not sure.
That year Nebraska and Michigan split.
What happens if Auburn loses to Alabama and then Alabama loses to South Carolina in the title game?
The polls will likely do what they can to try to keep it from happening, but I think TCU has a legit shot if the cards fall right. They probably have a better shot than Boise.
Honestly, I hope it happens, and even better would be for Boise or TCU to be No. 2 ahead of a 1 loss SEC team. The more chaos the better as far as I'm concerned.
What happens if Auburn loses to Alabama and then Alabama loses to South Carolina in the title game?
The polls will likely do what they can to try to keep it from happening, but I think TCU has a legit shot if the cards fall right. They probably have a better shot than Boise.
Honestly, I hope it happens, and even better would be for Boise or TCU to be No. 2 ahead of a 1 loss SEC team. The more chaos the better as far as I'm concerned.
Yea yea, they're No. 3 in the BCS. They've been dominating the WAC for so many years now, and they've been going undefeated or through 1 loss seasons so much lately that No. 3 in the BCS probably means less to them than it means to your fans just being in the Top 25 right now.
It's all relative. In the scheme of the season, this game wasn't a big one for them at all. If they were in their first year of BCS busting, then maybe.
It's all relative. In the scheme of the season, this game wasn't a big one for them at all. If they were in their first year of BCS busting, then maybe.
Every other Big 10, SEC, Pack 10 teams in the top ten are going to have to have two loses andthat will not happen. BSU don't play the schedule to move up any more. I am not a pride full person and will eat crow and admitt when I'm wrong and I will do the same here if BSU plays in the BCS NC game. I just don't think they can do it with their schedule and those computer guys must be thinking the same way.
Big D said:
The computer guys don't think at all. They just build their ranking system, input the data, and watch the results spit out.
The funny thing is, the computers aren't killing Boise and TCU. Both Boise (6) and TCU (4) have better computer averages than Oregon (8), which means the computers have more respect for their schedules than they do Oregon's, yet Oregon is ranked No. 2 in the BCS due to its poll average, and they would play in the title game over Boise and TCU today.
Boise is currently No. 2 in both polls. If Auburn loses a game and Oregon loses somewhere along the way, you can bet the polls will probably have them or TCU at No. 1. Right now, Alabama's computer average is No. 12 in the country. If they win out, they're going to need quite a boost to catch Boise and TCU in the computers, or they'd need the polls to jump them over Boise or TCU.
I'm just saying there is a better possibility of it happening than you think. It's going to be difficult for a 1 loss team to jump both schools, especially if they keep climbing. You have to remember also that TCU has Utah (No. 7 in the polls, No. 8 in the BCS) still on the schedule. They win that one convincingly and they'll receive a boost both in the computers and in the human polls. Don't get me wrong. They'll both need help, but after the last couple weeks, they don't need less help than before.
These folks whoput the data into the computer rankings do.</p><p itxtvisited="1">Peter Wolfe<br itxtvisited="1">Wes Colley<br itxtvisited="1">Sagarin <br itxtvisited="1">Seattle Times <br itxtvisited="1">Richard Billingsley <br itxtvisited="1">Kenneth Massey</p>
Boise might be okayin the computers now but it's going to get worse as their schedule plays out.Bama would jump them. Any other 1-loss team, I'm not so sure as they wouldn't necessarily get the respect in the polls. Depends on the team. It definitely isn't a case ofjust any 1-loss Big 10, SEC, or Pac-10 team passing them.One thing about Boise and TCU is that they need each other. If one of them falls, the other loses what's basically abuffer spot in the polls which is holding Bama and everyone else back a notch.
The interesting thing for Oregon is... what happens if Michigan State or Missouri manages to jump Boise and TCU in the polls? Would they be able to pass Oregon in the BCS?
The interesting thing for Oregon is... what happens if Michigan State or Missouri manages to jump Boise and TCU in the polls? Would they be able to pass Oregon in the BCS?
Y
yagsigwadirruzza
Guest
unless it's an SEC team (likely Alabama). You're still not getting it. The Fiesta bowl was a playoff last year. Basically the winner was going to get a shot at the Title the following year (2010). The matchup was created for this reason. The voters know it, the BCS knows it. THIS is the year Boise gets a shot assuming they are undefeated and there are not 2 undefeated teams ahead of them. At this point, if Auburn or Oregon loses, Boise is in. If Auburn wasn't an SEC team, they'd be a shoo-in right now. Boise would get the nod over an undefeated Big 12 or Big 10 team, book it. They know that **** won't fly vs. an undefeated SEC team, though. The nightmare situation for Boise is a one loss SEC team, and that would be a coin flip. The SEC has that much power.
I think it's wrong on so many different levels. But it's reality. They are using past seasons to determine the current one. Wrong. Humans are swaying the vote in favor of Boise when theoretically they should somewhat match the computers. Wrong. The entire notion that you could assume, one year prior, that both Boise and TCU would be undefeated THE FOLLOWING YEAR proves that their competition is worthless.
But then again, Boise, not TCU, has risen to the occasion when they've been asked to. They've won bowl games, they beat Oregon last year and Virginia Tech and Oregon State this year. The only mystery is figuring out how to give them a chance without screwing the alleged better teams. No one can really say for sure how Boise would fare against an Alabama or Auburn.
I, for one, hope we see an SEC vs. Boise matchup in the Title game to put this argument to bed forever. Oregon vs. Boise would tell me nothing unless Oregon just rolls them up. I want to see Boise vs. the perceived biggest and strongest conference in the land. Last time it happened they got skullfucked.
ETA: ...and I want to see this matchup when it counts. Not a Sugar bowl where Bama doesn't care, or a Fiesta where Oklahoma doesn't care. The Title game, where there's tons for BOTH teams to play for.
I think it's wrong on so many different levels. But it's reality. They are using past seasons to determine the current one. Wrong. Humans are swaying the vote in favor of Boise when theoretically they should somewhat match the computers. Wrong. The entire notion that you could assume, one year prior, that both Boise and TCU would be undefeated THE FOLLOWING YEAR proves that their competition is worthless.
But then again, Boise, not TCU, has risen to the occasion when they've been asked to. They've won bowl games, they beat Oregon last year and Virginia Tech and Oregon State this year. The only mystery is figuring out how to give them a chance without screwing the alleged better teams. No one can really say for sure how Boise would fare against an Alabama or Auburn.
I, for one, hope we see an SEC vs. Boise matchup in the Title game to put this argument to bed forever. Oregon vs. Boise would tell me nothing unless Oregon just rolls them up. I want to see Boise vs. the perceived biggest and strongest conference in the land. Last time it happened they got skullfucked.
ETA: ...and I want to see this matchup when it counts. Not a Sugar bowl where Bama doesn't care, or a Fiesta where Oklahoma doesn't care. The Title game, where there's tons for BOTH teams to play for.
As much as I'm still the bitter boyfriend that the girlfriend (Cam) left me and broke my heart, I think Auburn will win out and go to the BCS game. Alabama hasn't exactly been impressive and they are the only ones left that I think has a good chance of beating Auburn. By then, Auburn fans will be nutso crazy (as if they aren't already) and the Iron bowl will be the biggest game it's ever been. Auburn has had some close calls this year but I think it's all coming together for them. I just don't think Alabama will beat Auburn. I'll be willing to eat my crow and take my medicine if I'm wrong.
I really don't like the possibility of Oregon going undefeated especially considering the fact that they have USC, Arizona and Oregon State on their schedule. Oregon State has ended their hopes quite a few times in recent history so I wouldn't put it past them to do so again. The BCS teams I see that have the best shot of going undefeated this season are Michigan State and Missouri. Michigan State more so than anything due to the fact that the Big 10 doesn't play a conference championship. Since their schedule only has a pretty good Iowa team and a mediocre Penn State left, I think they have the best shot of going undefeated, especially considering the glaring omission of Ohio State.
Missouri, although I'm willing to bet that they won't, probably has the second best shot. I'm extremely confident that they won't be undefeated considering that the last 4/5 games on their schedule are losable games. I probably should include Kansas anyway since that's a pretty big rivalry game, and in a lot of case, it's never a guarnateed which team will win even when one is creem of the crop and the other is at the bottom of the barrel. But even if they do so, they'll more than likely play Oklahoma in their conference game, and it's extremely hard to beat a good team twice. If any year were to see a BCS buster, then this is probably the best time for it to happen, and I think it'svery possible. Am I willing to bet it will happen though? Hell no.
Missouri, although I'm willing to bet that they won't, probably has the second best shot. I'm extremely confident that they won't be undefeated considering that the last 4/5 games on their schedule are losable games. I probably should include Kansas anyway since that's a pretty big rivalry game, and in a lot of case, it's never a guarnateed which team will win even when one is creem of the crop and the other is at the bottom of the barrel. But even if they do so, they'll more than likely play Oklahoma in their conference game, and it's extremely hard to beat a good team twice. If any year were to see a BCS buster, then this is probably the best time for it to happen, and I think it'svery possible. Am I willing to bet it will happen though? Hell no.
Unless you think all the Harris poll voters, all the USA Today poll voters, and the guys who program the computer rankings are in on it. The fact is, TCU is very close to Boise right now and their game with #8 Utah will almost certainly jump them past Boise if they win it. It's going to be hard for any 1-loss team other than Alabama to jump either Boise or TCU (assuming they stay undefeated). But it's TCU, not Boise that has the best chance of landing in the title game. Boise's close to being capped out right now. They can't move up much in the human polls (they're #2 in both) and their schedule won't let them move up in the computer polls (they're #6 right now) and in fact may even move them down in the computer polls.</p>
Y
yagsigwadirruzza
Guest
all that BS you said about computer polls this and that.....it'll get done. If Boise State is undefeated at the end of the year, and either Oregon or Auburn is not, they will be in the BCS title game UNLESS a one loss Alabama or Auburn pulls some magic out of their hat. At that point, it will be the SEC lobbyists vs. Boise lobbyists (combined with the support of all the other non-BCS schools, SEC haters, Herbstreit, ESPN, etc etc etc). A debate that would resemble the California/Texas vs. Michigan in the Rose Bowl deal a few years ago.
You can run and tell that.....
You can run and tell that.....
Y
yagsigwadirruzza
Guest
since I somewhat agree.But I just can't see them not jumping Boise or TCU considering that they're playing better competition towards the end of their schedule. What hurt Boise is the fact that Nevada lost to Hawaii 2 week ago, and that Hawaii's presence has dropped somewhat, especially when losing to USC and Colorado. Had both of those teams been undefeated when they met, Boise would still have 1 more undefeated team on their schedule. They're fortunate that Nevada has been ranked for one last time, but them being undefeated would have helped that much more.
With the schedule that Mizzou and Michigan State have should no doubt catapult them over Boise, especially Mizzou since they actually play a conference championship (given the unlikely situation that they both go undefeated).</p>
With the schedule that Mizzou and Michigan State have should no doubt catapult them over Boise, especially Mizzou since they actually play a conference championship (given the unlikely situation that they both go undefeated).</p>
Y
yagsigwadirruzza
Guest
or when you're just dead wrong in an argument. Quick to pull out the PURGE!!!!, DS we have to get of these dubmass idiots !!!!!!! whens hd6 coming back ?!?!?!
You can't have a computer system to accurately rank teams that only play 12 or 13 games and have minimal intraconference match ups.
It's just not possible. I can buy computer ranking systems for basketball and baseball much more because they're dealing with roughly 30 and 60 game samples.
That's infinitely better than a 12 game sample. Think of what the RPI looks like in basketball 15 games into the season. I know it's not the best comparison, but take any other basketball ranking, Sagarin, Pomeroy, etc. All of them look really stupid early in the year, and that's even with almost nothing but intraconference match ups and cross-regional match ups to input.
I will say that the computers do about as good of a job as you can possibly do with such a small sample size, but they are still not even close to as good as you could get with your human eye judgement. That's why I think the human polls should be the ultimate deciding factor. I really wish they'd change it from a 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 weight to each poll counting as half of your ranking with the computer polls only in existence to break a tie, if for instance one poll has Team A at No. 2 and B at No. 3, and the other poll has them flipped.
I'd even settle for 45/45/10, but I think the computer polls need to be given a whole lot less weight than they are today. When you look back at every BCS controversy, with the exception of situations with more than 2 undefeated teams, the human polls appeared to have it right, and it was the computers that messed up the match up. The eye test and gathering votes from many people using the eye test is the best indicator for a football polling system.
It's just not possible. I can buy computer ranking systems for basketball and baseball much more because they're dealing with roughly 30 and 60 game samples.
That's infinitely better than a 12 game sample. Think of what the RPI looks like in basketball 15 games into the season. I know it's not the best comparison, but take any other basketball ranking, Sagarin, Pomeroy, etc. All of them look really stupid early in the year, and that's even with almost nothing but intraconference match ups and cross-regional match ups to input.
I will say that the computers do about as good of a job as you can possibly do with such a small sample size, but they are still not even close to as good as you could get with your human eye judgement. That's why I think the human polls should be the ultimate deciding factor. I really wish they'd change it from a 1/3, 1/3, 1/3 weight to each poll counting as half of your ranking with the computer polls only in existence to break a tie, if for instance one poll has Team A at No. 2 and B at No. 3, and the other poll has them flipped.
I'd even settle for 45/45/10, but I think the computer polls need to be given a whole lot less weight than they are today. When you look back at every BCS controversy, with the exception of situations with more than 2 undefeated teams, the human polls appeared to have it right, and it was the computers that messed up the match up. The eye test and gathering votes from many people using the eye test is the best indicator for a football polling system.
"It'll get done." Care to tell us just HOW "it'll get done." This isn't like the basketball tournament wherethere's aselection committee to pick who's in the title game. There's a formula and whoever the top 2 teams are per the formula will play for the national title. And I gave several reasons why Boise will have a hard time moving up, and especially why they'll have a hard time staying above TCU. If you've got a half-way decent response, I'd love to hear it.
Y
yagsigwadirruzza
Guest
Reread my entire first post in this thread. Boise and TCU had their defacto playoff last January.
There's a reason all but one of the "formulas" are secret. Yes, those formula makers are protecting their livelihood. But they are just like Congress.
There's a reason all but one of the "formulas" are secret. Yes, those formula makers are protecting their livelihood. But they are just like Congress.
The metro Boise area alone is 600,000 population, not including people within 3-6 hours drive. Lots of people come to State and Ole Miss from further than 2-3 hours - Memphis, Birmingham, Atlanta, Dallas, etc. They come late in the season when we're 3-6, they come when it's cold and they come in the rain. After years of dominating the WAC, talking about getting in the NC game and being a perennial top 10 team, it just seems to me that Boise should have 60,000 people on a regular basis, then maybe 45,000 on a cold, wet Tuesday night.
...the computers are unbiased and humans are not. Computers aren't swayed by Mark May or Kirk Herbstreit. Humans are (at least some of them).<div>
</div><div>If you read about things like cognitive dissonance, confirmation bias, and illusory superiority it makes you much less confident in the "eye test" because people, more often than not, see what they want to see, not necessarily what is...</div><div><div>
</div><div>I do agree that it's an unfortunately small sample size, but the only remedy for that is to play more games.</div></div><div>
</div><div>As far as Boise & TCU goes, they might be great football teams. Maybe they are the best. Maybe not. But one thing isn't disputable. They don't play enough consecutive tough games to be in the conversation with an SEC team. There isn't a single SEC coach who wouldn't trade schedules with them in a second. The cumulative effect of playing so many good teams in a row is that your depth (or lack thereof) and emotional fortitude (or lack thereof) are exposed (just ask Alabama). I'm sure they'd have loved to get a LaTech at home in the middle of that Arkansas, Florida, South Carolina, Ole Miss, Tennessee, stretch.</div>
</div><div>If you read about things like cognitive dissonance, confirmation bias, and illusory superiority it makes you much less confident in the "eye test" because people, more often than not, see what they want to see, not necessarily what is...</div><div><div>
</div><div>I do agree that it's an unfortunately small sample size, but the only remedy for that is to play more games.</div></div><div>
</div><div>As far as Boise & TCU goes, they might be great football teams. Maybe they are the best. Maybe not. But one thing isn't disputable. They don't play enough consecutive tough games to be in the conversation with an SEC team. There isn't a single SEC coach who wouldn't trade schedules with them in a second. The cumulative effect of playing so many good teams in a row is that your depth (or lack thereof) and emotional fortitude (or lack thereof) are exposed (just ask Alabama). I'm sure they'd have loved to get a LaTech at home in the middle of that Arkansas, Florida, South Carolina, Ole Miss, Tennessee, stretch.</div>
I understand everything you're talking about, and yes there are flaws with human polls and human bias, but those flaws are less than the flaws that come with a computer ranking system that doesn't have a large sample size.
I know the RPI is a flawed ranking system, but I'll use it as an example. A few years back, SMU's basketball team about 10 games in was in the Top 10 in the RPI. They finished outside the Top 200, because they weren't good.
With a small sample size though, the computer ranking system was really flawed.
Since the season isn't getting any longer, the computer polls are flawed and will continue to be flawed.
Human polls are flawed, but without a larger sample size, they are less flawed than the computer rankings. No one in their right mind would have Oregon No. 8 in the nation based on what they've done to this point. The computers do, because they don't have a large enough sample size. And guess what, they've already accumulated 2/3 of the data they will receive.
Take Nebraska in 2001 as an example. The human polls had them No. 4 in the final poll behind a 2 loss Colorado team that beat them by nearly 30 points, who was ranked No. 3 and a one loss Oregon team that was ranked No. 2. Miami was an undisputed, undefeated No. 1. Miami played Nebraska. Oregon played Colorado. Oregon throttled Colorado convincingly. You mean to tell me that Oregon didn't deserve to be playing Miami instead of Nebraska or Colorado? The eye test was more accurate than the computer polls that helped put Nebraska in the title game.
I know the RPI is a flawed ranking system, but I'll use it as an example. A few years back, SMU's basketball team about 10 games in was in the Top 10 in the RPI. They finished outside the Top 200, because they weren't good.
With a small sample size though, the computer ranking system was really flawed.
Since the season isn't getting any longer, the computer polls are flawed and will continue to be flawed.
Human polls are flawed, but without a larger sample size, they are less flawed than the computer rankings. No one in their right mind would have Oregon No. 8 in the nation based on what they've done to this point. The computers do, because they don't have a large enough sample size. And guess what, they've already accumulated 2/3 of the data they will receive.
Take Nebraska in 2001 as an example. The human polls had them No. 4 in the final poll behind a 2 loss Colorado team that beat them by nearly 30 points, who was ranked No. 3 and a one loss Oregon team that was ranked No. 2. Miami was an undisputed, undefeated No. 1. Miami played Nebraska. Oregon played Colorado. Oregon throttled Colorado convincingly. You mean to tell me that Oregon didn't deserve to be playing Miami instead of Nebraska or Colorado? The eye test was more accurate than the computer polls that helped put Nebraska in the title game.
They need to earn it by scheduling real competition or sit their blue asses on the sideline where it belongs.
The game loses tons of credibility with them in it. It will do real damage to the whole BCS "system". I don't care if they win it or lose it; they got there through the back door so just them being there is wrong as far as I'm concerned.
I have heard that they turned down a game with Nebraska. Even if this is not true, they need to be making an effort to schedule some real games. I don't say anything about fairness: just pointing out that ******** stinks.
The game loses tons of credibility with them in it. It will do real damage to the whole BCS "system". I don't care if they win it or lose it; they got there through the back door so just them being there is wrong as far as I'm concerned.
I have heard that they turned down a game with Nebraska. Even if this is not true, they need to be making an effort to schedule some real games. I don't say anything about fairness: just pointing out that ******** stinks.
Miami often struggled to fill their stadium even when they were winning titles in a much larger metropolitan area.
It just depends on what your fanbase is like and what your surrounding areas are like.
It just depends on what your fanbase is like and what your surrounding areas are like.