22.May.2010 Boise State Deserves to Play for the National Title? Also Known as: Angrybeaver Attacks Ted Miller
Have you ever seen the show “Masterminds” on TruTV? It chronicles brilliant schemes that lined the pockets of the world’s most duplicitous criminals. The show is fascinating because of the internal conflict it creates in the viewer. On one hand, you know these men are criminals. Yet, the elegance and brilliance of their crimes forces you to respect them. It’s in this manner I respect Boise State. They play the game (i.e. system) brilliantly. They are truly masters of manipulation, and that is what is rewarded in modern college football. So, kudos, and I mean that. I wish the Beavers were so savvy.
That being said, I don’t think they’re a National Title team, and further, I think they’d be a middle of the PAC team were they in the conference. “Getting up” for one game a year is simply not the same as having to do it every week. Ted Miller wrote the following piece, and it infuriated me that someone as intelligent as Ted has fallen for the smoke & mirrors that is Boise State. The discussion follows:
First, it’s not Boise State’s fault they are in the WAC. I’m sure they’d join the Big 12 or Pac-10 if invited. Moreover, the Broncos are aggressive nonconference schedulers. This fall, they play Virginia Tech and Oregon State, a top-10 team and top-25 team, respectively, from BCS conferences.
Boise State deserves — and has earned — national respect, see a pair of Fiesta Bowl wins as well as a home-and-home sweep versus Oregon. If the Broncos go undefeated in 2010, at this point it seems to me they deserve a chance to play for the national title over a one-loss team from a BCS conference (though a qualifier on that is if both Virginia Tech and Oregon State go belly-up and lose a bunch of games).
Further, you could argue that Texas played a regular-season schedule in 2009 that is comparable to what Boise State faces in 2010. The Longhorns slate looked weak in the preseason and weaker as the season went on. And Florida played only one team that ended up ranked in the final top-25 — No. 17 LSU — during the regular season.
Moreover, I think it’s more equitable to, as you say, “ding” the “have” schools for avoiding competition than the “have not” programs. Those schools you mention have a choice, and sometimes they choose the cowardly path and play four nonconference patsies.
So, no, if USC, Texas, Ohio State, Florida or Miami played Boise’s schedule and went undefeated I would not necessarily put them in the national title game. But I might with Boise State.
You’re a smart guy, so I am really surprised you’re not seeing through the smoke and mirror show that is Boise State. Let’s dissect your argument.
1. Boise State plays a tough OOC schedule.
2002: Idaho, Arkansas (lost by 4 touchdowns), Wyoming, Utah State
2003: Idaho State, Idaho, Wyoming, Oregon State (loss)
2004: Idaho, Oregon State, BYU
2005: Georgia (lost by 5 touchdowns), Oregon State (loss), Bowling Green
2006: Sacramento State, Oregon State, Wyoming.
2007: Weber State, Washington (lost by 10 to a 5-7 Huskie team), Wyoming, Southern Miss (that’s Southern Miss, not Ol’ Miss).
2008: Idaho State, Bowling Green, Oregon, Louisiana Tech
2009: Oregon, Miami (OH), Bowling Green, UC Davis, Tulsa
I have them at 5-5 in their “difficult” OOC PAC-10 and SEC games, having lost to some horrendous Pac-10 teams (2005 Beavers, 2007 Huskies) in that time period. I think you’re being confused by the smoke and mirrors of scheduling, the fact that they tend to win their “big games” on Thursday nights, the outcome vs Oregon the past two years, etc. You’re not looking at their entire body of work. Unless you think playing Idaho, Idaho State, Utah State, and Wyoming are difficult games. Maybe you do.
2. You frown upon the “have” schools playing patsies. Yet, your claim that Boise State deserves to play for the national title, by definition, makes them a “have” school. It is incongruent, Ted, and you know it, to award x and penalize y for the same behavior.