You're right I forgot once they went to a seperate champ game, there are 4 BCS + Champ, so yeah Iowa/Boise would be the last one.
Brent Musburger
- Thread starter hedgehog
- Start date
You're right I forgot once they went to a seperate champ game, there are 4 BCS + Champ, so yeah Iowa/Boise would be the last one.
TCU, Cincy and Boise St are great teams. All of the "they wouldn't be able to compete in a better conference" arguments are stupid because they do not factor in things that would allow these teams to compete. Everyone just assumes these teams would get the same level of recruits and never evolve.
Take Cincy as an example. They were an average CUSA team and have turned into an offensive juggernaut in an AQ conference. Why? They are now able to tell recruits that if they come to UC they will be able to play in a BCS Bowl with a chance to play for a NC. They have access to BCS money and have improved their facilities. Recruits don't have to go to OSU and sit on the bench in order to be a part of a BCS Bowl team.
TCU and Boise St have a disadvantage in recruiting because they have AQ schools telling kids that TCU and Boise St have no chance of playing in a BCS Bowl or for a NC. Well, TCU and Boise St do have a chance to play for a BCS Bowl, but they have to go undefeated. Playing for a NC is only a pipe dream at this point. These two teams have a history of winning now. Putting them into a AQ conference would only improve their standing with recruits and allow them to compete for conference and national championships.
TCU and Boise St are not KY, Ark, Vandy, Miss St, Ole Miss, S Car, Baylor, Iowa St, or Tex Tech. Those schools have a history of being mediocre. I don't know if it's coaching or recruiting, but I don't see any of them ever really competing for a championship. So, if we're just giving opinions this is mine. No one really knows how Team A would compete in Conference B because there's no way of finding out. BUT, to believe teams can't evolve or improve their standing with access to increased funding and better recruits is to be blind to the way college football works.
Take Cincy as an example. They were an average CUSA team and have turned into an offensive juggernaut in an AQ conference. Why? They are now able to tell recruits that if they come to UC they will be able to play in a BCS Bowl with a chance to play for a NC. They have access to BCS money and have improved their facilities. Recruits don't have to go to OSU and sit on the bench in order to be a part of a BCS Bowl team.
TCU and Boise St have a disadvantage in recruiting because they have AQ schools telling kids that TCU and Boise St have no chance of playing in a BCS Bowl or for a NC. Well, TCU and Boise St do have a chance to play for a BCS Bowl, but they have to go undefeated. Playing for a NC is only a pipe dream at this point. These two teams have a history of winning now. Putting them into a AQ conference would only improve their standing with recruits and allow them to compete for conference and national championships.
TCU and Boise St are not KY, Ark, Vandy, Miss St, Ole Miss, S Car, Baylor, Iowa St, or Tex Tech. Those schools have a history of being mediocre. I don't know if it's coaching or recruiting, but I don't see any of them ever really competing for a championship. So, if we're just giving opinions this is mine. No one really knows how Team A would compete in Conference B because there's no way of finding out. BUT, to believe teams can't evolve or improve their standing with access to increased funding and better recruits is to be blind to the way college football works.
again, TCU and Cincy would finish at the bottom of the Big 12 the right two teams are playing in Pasadena under the current system. We need a playoff system so these teams can play it out. 5 undefeated teams and the best two are Texas and Alabama
Last edited:
The top teams schedule one solid non conference game a year AT THE MOST almost every year.
Look at the Florida schedule this year:
Charleston Sou.,FIU,Troy, and FSU and ALL AT HOME. That is no better than what Texas scheduled this year had Utah not bailed.
Also Bama added VT late and dumped a garbage team to do it.. There other non conference was FIU,N Texas, Chattanooga.
Top rated have proven you don't have to play tough non conf. which sucks.
I wish the NCAA would schedule 1 game for every team every year.
Force teams to play a team deemed their equal once before conference play.
opinion
opinion
The big 12 sucks, i watched iowa state ,a team iowa beat by 30 in ames go to nebraska and beat them on there home field. okl. down but still beats okl. state 27-0 a joke. Texas is not that good with no running game.I have watched this tcu team all year and this years team is very different than the past. This year they have a defense like ussual but can move and score with anyone. I think tcu can and would give florida all they want.with team speed on defense and a great push from the d-line. cincy is not a very good defensive team at all and will get beat up against a team with a defense. No one in the east has one if pittsburgh was the best defensive team in the conference.
opinion
The big 12 sucks, i watched iowa state ,a team iowa beat by 30 in ames go to nebraska and beat them on there home field. okl. down but still beats okl. state 27-0 a joke. Texas is not that good with no running game.I have watched this tcu team all year and this years team is very different than the past. This year they have a defense like ussual but can move and score with anyone. I think tcu can and would give florida all they want.with team speed on defense and a great push from the d-line. cincy is not a very good defensive team at all and will get beat up against a team with a defense. No one in the east has one if pittsburgh was the best defensive team in the conference.
Nebraska dominated ISU but 8 turnovers most in redzone killed them. Nebraska also went into Blacksburg and dominated VT but lost on a fluke in the end. People act like Nebraska sucked all of a sudden.
Should have beat ISU,VT, and Texas. Only game they were never in was TT on the road.
Lee killed them in every loss.
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
Maybe Texas is the best after Alabama, maybe they are not but to say the Big12 sucks is comical.
The Big10 sucks and they are getting 2 in the BCS.
The Pac10 didn't beat anyone out of conference other than USC win over Ohio St. I mean Stanford couldn't win @WF the week after Baylor won there.
And please don't try and compare Mountain West or WAC top to bottom to the Big12.
SEC was best conference and you can throw the other big conferences in a hat and pick which was #2.
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
The SEC was not the best conference this year.
Big 12 = Overrated.
I'll agree with you that the Big 10 flat out sucks.
The only reason that Texas is in the title game is the name brand. They played like shit coming down the stretch and do not deserve to be in the title game. Simple as that.
So then what is the best confernce because it is not Big10,Big12,ACC, or Pac10.
It is clearly the SEC and I don't even give a damn about the SEC.
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
The Pac-10 was the best conference this year. The SEC was simply not impressive this year and usually I argue how great they are. Not this year.
The main point is that if TCU was in the Big12 or SEC, they would have had a shot at the title. They would have had a shot in those leagues. To think they couldn't compete is kidding yourself.
Dont think this was the best SEC year but stil tops in my book.
Auburn,Fla,Alabama,Ark,LSU,So. Carolina and Ole Miss were unbeaten in non conference games.
Auburn beat WVU
Georgia beat Ariz. St and GT.
So. Carolina killed Clemson.
LSU won at Washington.
UCLA did win at Tenn.
USC did win at Ohio St.
The rest did nothing.
Arizona got smacked by Iowa.
Oregon got smacked by Boise.
Stanford lost at WF.
Auburn,Fla,Alabama,Ark,LSU,So. Carolina and Ole Miss were unbeaten in non conference games.
Auburn beat WVU
Georgia beat Ariz. St and GT.
So. Carolina killed Clemson.
LSU won at Washington.
UCLA did win at Tenn.
USC did win at Ohio St.
The rest did nothing.
Arizona got smacked by Iowa.
Oregon got smacked by Boise.
Stanford lost at WF.
Last edited:
Please, the big 12 was down and its not even a discussion and the big 12 north is a trainwreck...kansas state played nebraska for the RIGHT to go to the champ game, yet wont even qualify for a bowl:mj07:
look at some of these highlights
Baylor(4-8) loss to UCONN
Colorado losses to TOLEDO and West Virginia
Iowa St. crushed by 32 pts to IOWA
Kansas losers of 7 straight and beat NO ONE
Kansas St losses to La-Lafayette and UCLA
Missouri loss to 4-8 baylor
Nebraska losses to VATECH and Iowa State:142smilie
Oklahoma 5 LOSSES, BYU and MIAMI
Ok State loss to HOUSTON shut out by Oklahoma
Texas A&M loss by 28 to ARKANSAS, 62 put on them by KSTATE and 65 by Oklahoma
Texas Tech loss to HOUSTON, loss to A&M by 22
In what discussion??
Nobody said the Big12 was great this year or even good as far as conference goes.
They did not suck anymore than ACC or Big East though and top to bottom they were better than Mountain West and WAC because those bottom dwellers were pathetic in those conferences.
I agree the Top 2 are SEC and Pac10. Not sure there is much debate in those.
Thought SEC was still better than Pac10 as they were clearly better at the top and the thought better in the middle ranked teams.
And Missouri easily beat the 2nd best team in the WAC(Nevada in Reno).
I think Boise is overrated this year but no way is TCU overrated. They are the real deal. No argument from me.
Also Baylor won @WF the week before Stanford lost to WF.
Last edited:
- Feb 26, 2001
- 13,593
- 164
- 63
I don't really care to spend time on digging up all the schedules. Maybe I will later, but the Pac 10 was very good this year. Like I said I love the SEC, but it was a down year for them. Now a down year for them is still a very good year. I just think the Pac10 was the best. We will see how they do in the Bowls. Not that it means much with such a small sample size.
