Should JMU play for MNC?
by Orangetower87 on Sep 11, 2010 3:24 PM CDT
Email
PrintFans of the so-called "big" (FBS) programs can no longer argue that small schools like James Madison University do not deserve a chance to play for the MNC. Hopefully, beating a highly-ranked, historically dominant FBS program like Va Tech proves beyond a doubt to fans, coaches, and journalists that FCS schools are every bit as talented as BCS programs and mid-majors. Should it matter that JMU only plays subpar FCS schools the rest of the year? Of course not. All that matters is that JMU did the best it could, given its limitations, in one game against an FBS program. They should not be penalized for the fact that nobody wants to schedule them in Out Of Conference games. And so all that matters is beating one genuinely decent team, and then not losing. No whining SEC! If you want to play for the MNC, you just need to win all your games. Like BSU and TCU, and now, JMU.
All comments, FanPosts, and FanShots are the views of the reader-authors who create them.
100 comments
|
5 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
"Appalachian"
I couldn’t butcher that any worse if I tried. No disrespect intended. Go Mountaineers.
I love boise state
Plus
This one was a true road game! Kudos for JMU. I wonder if they got over $1 million to play at Va Tech?
I understand the new standard
If you defeat a school which subsequently loses to a 1-AA school, you should immediately be eliminated from national championship contention.
We’ll file this one away for future reference.
Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!
Here is my question
Pollsters used that BSU game to let BSU jump us in the polls…obviously it looks weak now…
Question is: If we go through our gauntlet and somehow we manage to keep winning, and BSU plays their cupcakes and wins big, do we jump them back? If we do, then it all evens out and this is moot. If pollsters play the ‘BSU did nothing to deserve to lose their spot’ card, then it’s a big problem.
It's certainly possible...
…and, I would say, probable (even “quite” probable). But it is not something one can automatically assume as definite.
And that’s the point I’ve been stressing. A PU that is undefeated at the end of the regular season — despite today’s VT loss and assuming the typical PU victory this season looks like the typical PU victory of recent seasons — will get much more consideration for a spot in the championship game than did any of the lesser undefeateds (Cincy, TCU and PU) last season.
I strongly believe that an undefeated PU will trump any other non-BCS undefeated, like a TCU could be. I also strongly believe that, if PU is undefeated and only one BCS school is as well, PU goes to the bigger game in Glendale, period.
If two or more BCS conference champions join PU as undefeated, it gets interesting. If that pool is (Bama, OSU, PU), PU is almost certainly shut out.
Substitute Texas for either Bama or OSU, and I think it becomes “probable” instead of “almost certainly”. But it would be debated more than the relative merits of Texas and Cincy/TCU were last year.
It gets interesting if you substitute another undefeated team from any of those three conferences (such as OU, Nebraska, Iowa or anyone else in the SEC), since it would by definition be a team which started behind PU in the polls yet beat one of the top two-three teams.
An undefeated Oregon would be another interesting team to throw in the mix. At least PU and OU would have a common opponent in Oregon State.
I think PU trumps undefeated champs of the ACC and Big East in any 3+ undefeated team scenario.
But, again, lots of football to play. Hell, the three undefeateds at the end of the season could be PU, TCU and (Oregon/Iowa). Then what?
Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!
by Hopkins Horn on Sep 11, 2010 5:06 PM CDT up reply actions
The narrative backlash may be beginning
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Sep 11, 2010 5:12 PM CDT up reply actions
Oh, sure
Here too. Though one could argue that Staples is arguing more that other people besides himself will start making the same sorts of arguments we’ve seen on BON today.
But it’s to be expected. It’s the storyline of the season, and all of those voices out there will want to have their own unique spin on it.
Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!
by Hopkins Horn on Sep 11, 2010 5:15 PM CDT up reply actions
The standard remains
That you must do more than beat one or two AQ teams a year to be considered worthy of MNC. Because if the standard is that you only need to beat one decent AQ school a year, then JMU has as much right to say they should play for the MNC, as BSU. Would you have put an undefeated BSU in the 2008 MNC game over Texas or ou, if Va Tech was their only decent win?
by Orangetower87 on Sep 11, 2010 5:08 PM CDT up reply actions
We're forgetting the subjective element
We get too caught up in this who-beat-whom business that we forget that a significant element of ranking teams is using your own eyes and, based on years of experience watching college football, evaluating how good a team they are relative to everyone else, regardless of who they play. You could substitute the New Orleans Saints’ roster for that of PU, and those who rely solely on this who-beat-whom mechanism would find a way to deny that they would be the best team in college football, regardless of the strength of their schedule.
And in that respect, I truly believe that PU will prove to be one of the top two-to-five teams out there, regardless of their schedule and regardless of who the teams they defeat subsequently lose to. Over the course of the season, I’m sure that view will be more finely tuned. (Top Two? Top Five? Top Ten?).
Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!
by Hopkins Horn on Sep 11, 2010 5:20 PM CDT up reply actions
OK then...
…if I use my eyes, then I see the BSU went up 17-0 and saw VT come back, take the lead, and choke the game away. I was not impressed with BSU’s defense, and after watching the JMU/VT game, I’m not very impressed with their offense.
by vy til i die on Sep 11, 2010 5:26 PM CDT up reply actions
That's fair
That’s a much more valid reason, in my eyes, to vote PU down than “Look! VT lost to JMU! That means that a team that wasn’t on the field today isn’t that good!”
Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!
by Hopkins Horn on Sep 11, 2010 5:38 PM CDT up reply actions
That is not my argument
Did I say PU is not good? I was trying to show that the rationale for ranking them in the top 2 or 3 programs on the basis of beating one decent team a year is flawed, because a single game can be won or lost by any team. Even JMU can win one big game a year.
by Orangetower87 on Sep 11, 2010 5:46 PM CDT up reply actions
Based on minimal personnel losses from last year, and a solid win this year
There are few teams in the nation with better 2010 resumes so far. Some will easily pass Boise State in terms of resume, because BSU’s schedule goes downhill from here, but right now it’s not unwarranted to rank them highly. They almost always live up to their ranking, too, or even transcend it.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 11, 2010 6:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Resumes
is the correct way to rank people. i agree beating va tech is more than we have done. but if you are going to rank by resumes at the end of the year, that almost guarantees that BSU will not be in the championship. beating Va Tech is not enough on a resume to merit MNC consideration. If BSU joins a major conference, like Utah did, and wins 11 or 12 games, then by all means they deserve to play for it all.
by Orangetower87 on Sep 11, 2010 7:15 PM CDT up reply actions
Easier said than done
But you know what? The harder part of that is joining the major conference, not winning 11 or 12 games.
That’s right, I said it: it would be easier for Boise State to win 11 or 12 games playing a Pac-10 or Big 12 schedule than to actually join either of those conferences. It’s like being the type of candidate who could easily win the presidency in a general election, but has no prayer of winning the party nomination.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 12, 2010 11:19 PM CDT up reply actions
evidence, please
of this candidate who could easily win the presidency in a general election but has no prayer of winning the party nomination?
and that BSU has been blackballed by the Pac-10 and Big 12? Pac 10 didn’t have a problem with Utah joining.
by Orangetower87 on Sep 14, 2010 4:46 PM CDT up reply actions
Off the top of my head...
of this candidate who could easily win the presidency in a general election but has no prayer of winning the party nomination
Wasn’t this generally believed to be a serious impediment to any chance Colin Powell would have had running for the presidency, if he had been so inclined, in 1996 or 2000?
Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!
by Hopkins Horn on Sep 14, 2010 5:08 PM CDT up reply actions
No - the GOP wanted Powell to run
They knew he would win. Powell said the impediment was that his wife objected.
by Orangetower87 on Sep 14, 2010 5:15 PM CDT up reply actions
If you mean the “GOP establishment,” sure, there were plenty who wanted him to run, especially in 1996, because he was seen by DC insiders as having the best chance to win. But I’m not sure how well he would have done in a primary contest which would have been way too far to the right for his comfort.
But, yes, the objections of his wife were also quite well-known.
Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!
by Hopkins Horn on Sep 14, 2010 6:01 PM CDT up reply actions
And that's all for the political discussion before this morphs into something unnecessarily partisan...
Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!
by Hopkins Horn on Sep 14, 2010 6:02 PM CDT up reply actions
Take any political election
But for starters, I’ll say John McCain in 2000. Not that I voted for him in 2008, but I think he would’ve beaten Gore in 2000.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 14, 2010 6:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Your evidence?
Is that you personally think McCain would have won in 2000? But your own criterion was that the candidate would have easily won – where is the evidence McCain would have easily beaten Gore? Gallup poll, anything?
by Orangetower87 on Sep 14, 2010 7:29 PM CDT up reply actions
Are you kidding me?
Okay, you asked for an example. McCain’s a guy who might have. I made an analogy for purposes of rhetoric. You know what rhetoric is, right?
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 14, 2010 8:14 PM CDT up reply actions
Do you know what an analogy is?
You made an analogy to argue a point, but for it to work you have to have a real world example. That is the purpose of an analogy – to point to real world examples that are in a comparable relationship, thereby giving the reader a new point of view. When this becomes evident, you get mad.
by Orangetower87 on Sep 14, 2010 9:19 PM CDT up reply actions
No, an analogy does not need a real-world example
For example, Norman Schwarzkopf once said that going to war without France is like going deer hunting without your accordion. Do you suppose there are real-world examples Stormin’ Norman should have cited there?
But if you need one, take today’s Republican primary in Delaware:
ABC News’ Devin Dwyer reports: Christine O’Donnell, the Sarah Palin and Tea Party backed candidate, dealt a stunning blow to the Republican establishment Tuesday night, defeating the moderate, party-favorite veteran Rep. Mike Castle in the Delaware GOP senate primary.
With 100 percent of precincts reporting, O’Donnell won 53.1 percent of the vote to Castle’s 46.9 percent.
"The last several weeks have been spirited, shall we say," Castle told supporters after the results came in. "The voters in the Republican primary have spoken and I respect that decision."
Castle is the eighth GOP establishment-backed candidate to be upset in a primary challenge this year.
His loss immediately casts doubt on GOP chances of winning the senate seat, which had been hed by Democrat Joe Biden for 36 years, and could close the door on a Republican effort to gain control of the Senate in November.
Unlike Alaska, where conservative lawyer Joe Miller shocked Republicans by defeating sitting Sen. Lisa Murkowski in last month’s primary, Delaware is a heavily Democratic state and recent polls have shown O’Donnell would face a much more difficult race against Democrat Chris Coons than would Castle.
In this instance, the candidate that won in the primary is expected to have a much more difficult road to winning than the other candidate would have had.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/09/14/hours-polls-close-gloves-come-delaware/
And if that’s still not solid enough evidence, take Joe Lieberman’s 2006 senate election. He lost in the democratic primary to Ned Lamont, but he won in the general election over both Lamont and the winner of the republican primary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Lieberman#Primary
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 14, 2010 9:25 PM CDT up reply actions
It appears you meant to say
candidate, but said president. in other words, you were thinking people would take your initial comment more broadly than just presidents. yes, there are tons of examples of candidates in statewide elections that lose in primaries despite being more acceptable to the general public – this is a well known phenomenon. but not so much with presidents. if that seems too literal for you – well, i am by education and trade a political scientist, and to me a presidential election is very different from a senate election. i see your point on the analogy – that is a good example. but i still don’t get yours – are you saying BSU would easily win the Big 12/Pac 10/MNC if they played in one of those conferences?
by Orangetower87 on Sep 14, 2010 9:57 PM CDT up reply actions
I'm saying that it would actually be harder for Boise State to gain entry to one of those conferences...
…than to actually win all the games necessary to win the conference, once in it.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 14, 2010 10:19 PM CDT up reply actions
The problem is
That we don’t have enough evidence to be sure that PU really would be one of the top five teams in the nation. We have to see how they play week in, week out, against solid programs. We have one close game against an opponent that lost to an FCS school. That is not enough to merit serious consideration. I do not hate PU. But AQ schools play much tougher competition 10 or 11 games of the year, so we have much more information about how they stack up.
by Orangetower87 on Sep 11, 2010 5:43 PM CDT up reply actions
Other way around
If the saints played at BSU and destroyed the WAC teams they faced, it would not prove anything about how they would fare against NFL teams. We know the Saints are good because they beat a lot of other talented NFL teams. We don’t know how good BSU is because they haven’t faced a lot of talented BCS teams.
by Orangetower87 on Sep 14, 2010 7:44 PM CDT up reply actions
They've faced a number of them
Do you feel it’s fair for the system to lock Boise State and every team in the “mid-major” conferences out of championship contention? Boise State has played a number of BCS teams, including some in BCS games, and has done very well. And you know darn well that Boise State would join a major conference so as to play the normal BCS route to a championship shot if an invitation were offered by any such major conference. As it is, though, they’re locked out regardless of whether or not they win all their games.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 14, 2010 8:19 PM CDT up reply actions
As I've said on this thread
I would like a playoff. I would very much like to see BSU play more quality AQ teams – last year I thought it was unfair to both BSU and TCU to have to play each other. If no playoff, then I would like BSU to follow Utah’s lead and join a major conference (I know you say the big boys wouldn’t let it be so, and if that is so, that is wrong. But I ask again if you can point me to an article or something supporting that assertion.). And I think that TCU would have a natural home in the Big 12 and would welcome them and Houston.
by Orangetower87 on Sep 14, 2010 8:55 PM CDT up reply actions
But accepting that a playoff isn't going to happen...
…what is Boise State’s recourse? Or TCU’s? They currently have no plan of action available to them, other than what they are already doing: winning all their regular-season games, some against BCS teams, including in bowl games.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 14, 2010 9:12 PM CDT up reply actions
As for supporting evidence for my statement that Boise State doesn't have an invitation...
That’s not really a reasonable request. Evidence of absence, as they say, is not absence of evidence. However, let’s go with some logic:
1. Boise State has recently shown the willingness to jump ship for what it perceives as a better conference, doing so by agreeing to join the MWC.
2. The Pac 10 and Big 12 are both better conferences than the MWC, and Boise State knows this very well.
3. If 1 and 2 are true, then it follows that, had Boise State received an invitation from either of the two most logical suitors (Big 12 and Pac 10), Boise State would have accepted that invitation over the one from the MWC.
Is there a logical fallacy in that? I suppose there’s an off-the-wall argument that Boise State is secretly afraid to join a major conference, and would rather turn down all that money in favor of being a big, poor fish in a small pond, but it’s highly unlikely. Short of official statements from the Big 12 or Pac 10 that articulate specific disinterest in Boise State, these circumstances offer about as strong of evidence as we’re going to see.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 14, 2010 9:19 PM CDT up reply actions
There can never be a logical fallacy
When everything is supposition.
by Orangetower87 on Sep 14, 2010 9:39 PM CDT up reply actions
Okay, if you don't agree with the use of the term "logical fallacy," that's one thing
But do you agree with the numbered statements or not?
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 14, 2010 9:42 PM CDT up reply actions
Sure, points 1 and 2
But I don’t know about point 3. I know that a lot of times realignment rumors get made public – and I would think Boise might want the word out that they were doing all they could to play in one of the AQ conferences. And I don’t know how negotiations work. Does BSU approach a conference, or the other way around? When I asked for evidence it wasn’t to contradict you—I just don’t know how these things work and I haven’t heard any reports that BSU was being blackballed.
by Orangetower87 on Sep 14, 2010 9:50 PM CDT up reply actions
I could be wrong, but...
…it looks almost certain that Boise State doesn’t have a prayer to go into the Pac 10, and the Big 12 hasn’t discussed expansion at all. The Pac 10 has set academic criteria (that apparently didn’t apply to the Arizona schools or Wazzu) that, all by themselves, would eliminate Boise State from consideration.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 14, 2010 10:15 PM CDT up reply actions
Has there been anyone who has said that BSU deserved a BCS championship shot for beating VT?
I haven’t seen a single person actually say that. Straw man.
Yawn.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 11, 2010 6:19 PM CDT reply actions
You are kidding, right?
You mean besides ESPN, Sporting News, Bleacher Report, and about a dozen major newspapers this week?
ESPN: http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=forde_pat&id=5541826
Sporting News: http://www.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/feed/2010-09/vatechboise-st/story/new-no-1-boise-state-stakes-claim
Bleacher Report: http://bleacherreport.com/articles/453508-boise-state-busts-all-the-myths-deserves-title-shotso-far
by Orangetower87 on Sep 11, 2010 7:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Thank you, genuainely, for posting this
by BrooklynHorn on Sep 11, 2010 10:40 PM CDT up reply actions
I didn't read every word of those
But just in the first one, can you tell me where in there it says that Boise State should be in the BCS championship based on beating VT? I sure don’t see it. I think you’re completely misinterpreting. I think the writers are saying that Boise State deserves to be in the conversation, whereas they’ve been categorically shut out of it up until now.
Very disingenuous, IMO, to say that anyone’s saying that BSU should play in the national championship based just on beating VT. I haven’t seen a soul say they should.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 12, 2010 11:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Sorry, I thought you were rational
but now i see you are working overtime to stretch my point into what you want it to be. i am saying BSU does not deserve to be in the championship discussion because they play a ridiculously weak schedule. just like Cincy last year and Hawaii in 2007. plenty of folks in the media have said that BSU does deserve MNC consideration. of course no one has said “well, BSU beat VT, so that’s one half of the MNC game, no matter what else happens” and what is disingenuous for you to ask a dumb question and pretend you got a dumb answer. you asked if anyone has said BSU deserves a “championship shot” which i took to mean “in the discussion,” assuming you talked like normal football fans do. i gave you too much credit. won’t happen again.
by Orangetower87 on Sep 14, 2010 4:44 PM CDT up reply actions
of course no one has said "well, BSU beat VT, so that’s one half of the MNC game, no matter what else happens" and what is disingenuous for you to ask a dumb question and pretend you got a dumb answer.
Check the title of the thread. You gave someone too much credit, but it wasn’t to me, but to yourself. You baited with this thread with a thread title that implies that some have raised the issue that BSU should play for a national championship for beating VT.
Back to your dumb answers.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 14, 2010 6:26 PM CDT up reply actions
You are half right
I only had a minute and wrote my gut reaction to being told I was misrepresenting things – i should not have said you asked a dumb question. And I realize that my post was sarcastic and I should have been prepared for some responses like yours. But I still think you are way off base by interpreting my post the way you did. I don’t think anyone else did.
by Orangetower87 on Sep 14, 2010 7:37 PM CDT up reply actions
Let's face it, Hopkins Horn is heavily invested in BSU
BSU could be exposed as an Al Qaeda sleeper cell tomorrow and Hopkins Horn would still spend all day defending them. There’s something to be said about picking a side and sticking to it, but damn, dude is INVESTED!!!
In-VINCE-able.
There are a lot more on this board who seem to be invested in knocking PU at every turn
Gotta keep the odds as even as possible!
Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!
by Hopkins Horn on Sep 11, 2010 7:15 PM CDT up reply actions
Have you...
ever witnessed anyone really change his or her mind on any issue? I haven’t. Calling any human being stubborn is redundant.
by BrooklynHorn on Sep 11, 2010 10:46 PM CDT up reply actions
JMU's big win is tainted
because VT lost to a WAC team last week
If you're so sure of what it ain't, how about telling us what it am!
by circa1015 on Sep 11, 2010 7:52 PM CDT reply actions 3 recs
HH does love the blueboys...and that is cool.
I just cannot take them seriously until they adopt a non-gimmicky approach to their turf.
"Stats are for losers. I like winning games." ~ Will Muschamp
"I always felt like, and I paid a price for it, that it didn't seem right for one guy to bring me down." ~ The Tyler Rose
"I'm Colt McCoy and I Am Second." ~ Colt McCoy
no one gets on Tulane
The green wave have been playing on green turf for years
by longhorn_dan on Sep 11, 2010 10:42 PM CDT up reply actions
That's like not digging Kate Beckingsale if she chooses to wear the wrong color of lipstick
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 12, 2010 11:23 PM CDT up reply actions
Brutal
Brutal loss if you’re a Boise State fan. They need chaos amongst the big boys…
Again, for those who were prematurely rooting against Boise because of some imagined sense that they had it all way too easy… you were wrong. They are right on track to miss the MNC after an undefeated season again. They need help.
You ain't hurt...
imagined sense? that's pretty funny
I never received a rebuttal the other day; thought perhaps either you never read my response, or backed down to popular opinion.
Regardless, this in no way serves as evidence against the argument that Boise does less throughout a 14-week season than a typical SEC team, At best it serves as evidence that Boise St; will not turn out to be a factor this particular season.
by BrooklynHorn on Sep 11, 2010 10:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Brutal,...
Can’t wait for Pat Forde’s spin on this. His journalistic credibility (if he ever had any) didn’t cover the spread.
In my conspiracy imagination
this is how it happened:
BCS deepthroat: “Hey VA Tech, we gave you a shot and you fought a good fight, but you lost it and let us all down.”
VA Tech: “We fought hard, we could have… should have won.”
BCS: “Yeah, but you lost. Now you know what you have to do.”
VA Tech: “Ok, ok, we’ll drop one to Miami or Florida State towards the end.”
BCS: “No, sorry, that’s not good enough this year, big names and too late in the season, the die will have been cast.”
VA Tech: “What are you saying? North Carolina? NO, no not Duke, you couldn’t mean Duke?”
BCS: “You’ll be wishing it was Duke. FBS won’t do it this time.”
VA Tech: “What do you mean, I don’t get it?”
BCS: “You have to take one for the system and you owe us, it’s a nice program you got there, would be a shame if something were to happen to it, just ask USC and North Carolina. You’re going to take a dive for us, this week at home against James Madison.”
VA Tech: “No, we can’t, we’ll all get fired, we’ll be the next Michigan-like laughingstock.”
BCS: “You’ll do it and you’ll thank us for it, if you don’t, don’t bother showing up for film study on Sunday and better start having someone else start your car.”
by tdwalsh on Sep 11, 2010 11:38 PM CDT reply actions 4 recs
The diff between JMU and BSU...
Is BSU has proven themselves the past couple of years. They dont win one big upset and then lose to other FBS schools.
Looks like PU weathered the storm
If it really was going to be “Bye Bye Boise” as a result of another team’s loss, wouldn’t that punishment have occurred the week that other team lost?
PU did lose a handful of votes, as did TCU and Florida (and even us [two votes]), and they seem to have been sucked up primarily by Oregon.
Still a lot of football to be played, but I fear that those who wish to be rid of having to worry about, or read about, an undefeated PU just two weeks into the season will have a lot longer to wait.
Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!
It won't be a storm
more a gradual shift against BSU IF a team makes it through the SEC, Big XII, Big X, or Pac 10 without a loss, that they deserve to play in the MNC more than an undefeated Boise. I think opinions may be more split if there are one-loss teams at the top of those four conferences. But generally, I think opinion will shift as the BCS conferences play big games. On the other hand, I would be totally fine with having Boise and TCU taking two spots in an 8 team playoff at the end of the year if they finished undefeated. I was impressed with the Utah team that spanked Alabama two years ago. Would have liked to see them play another major program.
by Orangetower87 on Sep 12, 2010 2:37 PM CDT up reply actions
For what it's worth...
…Brad Edwards was quoted as saying (and I believe after the VT loss) that an undefeated PU would wind up ahead of any one-loss team save a one-loss SEC champ.
Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!
by Hopkins Horn on Sep 12, 2010 3:25 PM CDT up reply actions
We need a playoff
And no, i don’t have the answer. I would like Boise and TCU to get their day, but not at the expense of teams that play much tougher schedules. I have to think Boise would lose at least one game in a BCS conference (except maybe the Big East).
by Orangetower87 on Sep 12, 2010 3:40 PM CDT up reply actions
That's not the storm they need to be worried about
The season is young. The issue is that they were counting on this win over Va-Tech to be their ace card if and when they finished the season undefeated. That card is not yet gone, but it took a serious hit, not only from the loss but from the rough day for the entire ACC. They’ll stay at #3 for now, but will that last as the season progresses? If the voters do as they should (which, of course, they often don’t), they will take in each team’s total resume by the end of the season, and I can’t see how an undefeated Boise State is more impressive than a 1-loss team from the other major conferences minus the Big East.
by TheElusiveShadow on Sep 12, 2010 3:34 PM CDT up reply actions
Plus
The computers will start to slam BSU when they come out due to inferior SOS every week, and the more Va Tech loses the weaker it gets
Yep
BSU will fade as we get to November and the SEC and Big 12 matchups come into play.
"You've got to think lucky. If you fall into a mudhole, check your back pocket - you might have caught a fish" -- Darrell Royal
by SpiritOfTheFedora on Sep 20, 2010 11:28 AM CDT up reply actions
The next obvious benchmark for boise st
is how they deal going to Wyoming next week. If they put Wyoming away in the matter that we did, or better, it could serve to quiet a lot of the doubts that were raised by VTs lost yesterday (after a VERY short week. why the hell did they not have a scheduled bye?)
after a VERY short week. why the hell did they not have a scheduled bye
I know that pointing this out, and the fact that it was the classic definition of a let-down game, would only be met with responses of “FCS”, but, yeah, there is that.
Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!
by Hopkins Horn on Sep 12, 2010 3:24 PM CDT up reply actions
I totally agree
I am sure VaTech (a program I really like, because I think Beamer is a class act) was thinking they didn’t need much time to prepare for JMU, win or lose to Boise (whose coach I also really like – seriously, he should be in a position to take over a major program someday ala Urban Meyer).
by Orangetower87 on Sep 12, 2010 3:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Boise should pound them
i think they are well aware that we played Wyoming this week, and they will want to beat them by 20 more than we did. then they will be completely fired up for OSU, because they know the nation will be watching to see how legit they are. then they just have to not get bored with NM State (3-10 in 2009), Utah St. (4-8), San Jose St. (2-10), Toledo (5-7), La Tech (5-7), Hawaii (6-7), and two decent mid-majors, Idaho (8-5) and Nevada(8-5).
by Orangetower87 on Sep 12, 2010 3:32 PM CDT up reply actions
Absolutely not
Wrong argument! In no way is a team like James Madison qualified to be considered a serious team. The difference between decent FBS teams and ‘great’ FCS teams is so vast that it is ridiculous. Va Tech as they have proven so far are a terrible team this year. With losses to Boise State and now James Madison they have proven that they are so bad that they couldn’t win the FCS this year if they tried to. But does that mean that teams like JMU can come and beat a powerhouse team like Texas A&M, TU or Bama? absolutely not that’s pure fantasy. Infact, if some FBS teams like Baylor, Minnesota, Colorado, Washington State, Duke, New Mexico etc for example that keep having more than three terrible losing years they should be relegated to the FCS. The FBS membership needs to be more competitive and if some teams can’t keep up they need to be taken out of the FBS, instead of bringing in other fluke teams from the FCS and diluting the competition in the FCS.
As for TCU, if Baylor doesn’t beat them next week, then SMU will when the Frogs go on the road for the first time.
by YUMC on Sep 12, 2010 6:20 PM CDT reply actions 2 recs
You're awesome.
But does that mean that teams like JMU can come and beat a powerhouse team like Texas A&M, TU or Bama?
Full of win. I think you missed the sarcasm in the original post though.
I thought YUMC was being sarcastic
by calling aTm a “powerhouse”
by Orangetower87 on Sep 12, 2010 7:10 PM CDT up reply actions
YUMC sighting!
always makes me happy
If you're so sure of what it ain't, how about telling us what it am!
Haha
This guy.
"You never lose a game if the opponent doesn't score." - Darrell Royal
by BMC237 on Sep 12, 2010 9:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Rec'd
Other Receiving Votes: Oklahoma
by pleaseplaykindle on Sep 13, 2010 2:19 AM CDT up reply actions
I hate having to think about shit like this.
Let’s just do a 64 team playoff and be done with it.
Other Receiving Votes: Oklahoma
by pleaseplaykindle on Sep 12, 2010 6:52 PM CDT reply actions
68*
"You never lose a game if the opponent doesn't score." - Darrell Royal
by BMC237 on Sep 12, 2010 9:04 PM CDT up reply actions
Never understood all the Boise hate? Are yall hating on them because they play a harder schedule than we do or hating on them because they are a better team than us?
I love seeing everyone get jealous around here
"We'll be baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack!"
by greenspointexas on Sep 13, 2010 4:14 PM CDT reply actions
With allies like these, who needs enemies?
Hungry Hippos, baby! It's on!
by Hopkins Horn on Sep 13, 2010 4:28 PM CDT up reply actions 3 recs
Pride of Cougar High
proud to swim home
by learned hand on Sep 13, 2010 4:44 PM CDT up reply actions
He's got BSU fee-vah
And more Moore is the only cure.
by Orangetower87 on Sep 13, 2010 5:34 PM CDT up reply actions
YUMC and gpt sightings?
unintentional comedy overload
If you're so sure of what it ain't, how about telling us what it am!
by circa1015 on Sep 13, 2010 7:30 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
Please tighten your control of the language
That anyone can abuse the nominative case within the very sentence in which he’s already displayed proper usage is astonishing. And I’m almost entirely sure you’ve misused the word jealous. Envious is more likely what you mean.
You’re pissing me off.
by BrooklynHorn on Sep 14, 2010 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
+1000 for the grammar snark
love it
Never ask a man if he's from Texas. If he is, he'll tell you soon enough. If he's not, don't embarrass him.
Not so sure about proper usage
Using the words “we” and “us” when you mean “you” is hardly proper. While some of us may stretch the meaning of words like we and us when referring to a team for which we don’t actually suit up, it is understandable. When you did not attend a school, and are not in any sense a fan of that school, then using those words is inexcusable.
Sorry, greenspoint, I see I used two 5 syllable words in that reply, so it’s probably more than you can comprehend. Maybe if you go back to UH and get a Master’s in Comprehending English-type language stuff, you will understand. Or not.
Oh, and by the way, BH, another rec for this. I’m jealous envious.
.
by Longhorn in Canada on Sep 14, 2010 7:14 PM CDT up reply actions
I generally am not a fan of using the word "we" unless I am literally part of the effort
And I don’t think any fan qualifies unless he is on the roster, or at least has been on the roster at some point.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 14, 2010 8:22 PM CDT up reply actions
You're damn right he does
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.
by burntorangehorn on Sep 14, 2010 10:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Sorry
Why would we hate them because they play a harder schedule than UH does, or because they are a better team than UH? Actually, we’re not sure about either of those.
.
by Longhorn in Canada on Sep 14, 2010 7:22 PM CDT up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
