Great Post fleeced from another board...

[AUBSC76 0]

"To all the Boise. TCU apologists

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Did anyone see Gary Danielson on the Tony Barnhardt Show Tuesday on CBS College Sports? He made two exceptional points that gave me newfound respect for the guy.

Even though you'd hardly know it listening to a CBS game broadcast, he's an extremely intelligent guy.

Note: What I'm about to describe was done with paper props ... I guess Danielson did it in the dressing room preparing for the interview.

This was on the topic of Boise et al being in the BCS title game over a one-loss BCS school, specifically Boise's "anytime, anyplace" scheduling thing that we all know is completely false.

First off he had a piece of paper with an old schedule from 1980. The team played @LSU, @Nebraska, @Pitt, @Miami, vs. Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl.

He then showed the schedule of the same team In 1981, @Nebraska, @Ohio State, @Notre Dame, @Pitt, @LSU and @Florida.

This team finished 6-5 one season and 7-4 in those years and that team was Florida State.

His point? That FSU did it the right way and earned their way to being considered up there with the big boys by actually playing them week in and week out for years at time. Not playing one or two games all season and expecting to be up there with the top schools that have been at the top of the polls forever.

Second, he had a list of three different sets of golf scores. First set had an average score 69.05, second set average 69.43 and third set with two players averaging scores 69.89.

He made the point that you would expect the first set of scores to be from the best golfers. But the first set was revealed to be Nationwide Tour scores, the second Champions Tour scores and finally PGA Tour scores.

The whole point was that the Nationwide Tour had better scores than the PGA Tour one year, but it doesn't mean that Nationwide players are better than PGA Tour players. The Nationwide guys are dying to get on the PGA Tour so what's the difference? That difference was that the PGA Tour courses are much more difficult than the Nationwide courses, much like playing in a BCS conference is considerably tougher than playing in the WAC.

I thought those were two great counterpoints to the Boise "BCS is supposed to include the two best teams regardless of their schedule" argument .... and to a lesser degree TCU (though I have no problem with an undefeated TCU making the title game over any BCS school with 2 losses)"

[Rickys Rants 0]

Thanks for sharing!

[BornaTiger 0]

great read, 76!

[AUBSC76 0]

I know that some (many?) on this board will disagree with me but I think that Gary Danielson, Ron Franklin, and Todd Blackledge are the three best analysts in college football (and Chris Speilman isn't far behind.)  They all know and recognize the nuances of the game (ie: where the ball should be thrown on pass plays, timing, blocking and coverage schemes, etc.) and they don't wait for their producer in the production trailer to whisper "what everyone just saw" in their ear nor feel that they must fill the air with worthless trivia and personal anecdotes that have nothing to do with the game.

The presentation described in the OP is not the first time that Gary Danielson has presented a clear challenge to a BCS pairing travesty that is beginning to "get legs" in the media.   In 2006, I think that we would have seen a rematch of tOSU and Michigan in the BCSCG if not for Danielson's persistent (though not emotional), credible and convincing rebuttal to Herbstreit & company's advocacy of it.  (As we know tOSU was demolished by Florida and Michigan lost it's bowl as well.)   It is too bad that CBS pairs Gary with that drivel-gushing Verne Lundquist though. 

[AUnCullman 601]

I know that some (many?) on this board will disagree with me but I think that Gary Danielson, Ron Franklin, and Todd Blackledge are the three best analysts in college football (and Chris Speilman isn't far behind.)   They all know and recognize the nuances of the game (ie: where the ball should be thrown on pass plays, timing, blocking and coverage schemes, etc.) and they don't wait for their producer in the production trailer to whisper "what everyone just saw" in their ear nor feel that they must fill the air with worthless trivia and personal anecdotes that have nothing to do with the game.

The presentation described in the OP is not the first time that Gary Danielson has presented a clear challenge to a BCS pairing travesty that is beginning to "get legs" in the media.   In 2006, I think that we would have seen a rematch of tOSU and Michigan in the BCSCG if not for Danielson's persistent (though not emotional), credible and convincing rebuttal to Herbstreit & company's advocacy of it.  (As we know tOSU was demolished by Florida and Michigan lost it's bowl as well.)   It is too bad that CBS pairs Gary with that drivel-gushing Verne Lundquist though. 

I disagree, Herm Edwards who calls the games on ESPNU is the best, hands down.

Just kidding.....

That guys a joke, if he still has a job next year I will be surprised.

[AUnChas 14]

The second "golf" example is an empiric argument, and despite being poignant and insightful, it's not one that pollsters or talking heads typically utilize. Unlike in bball, where we may argue over the results of the analysis on who gets in, there's a clear methodology, "look at the body of work" and they employ empiric evidence to that end. Today, because of Herbstreit's constant drivel about BSU and TCU "can play with anyone on any given day" argument, it's reduced the analysis to simply a projection based on the "eye test".

To me, this then undermines the "meaning of the regular season" because for these teams it's a "projection", not an actual regular season test (or series of tests). But ESPN, esp Fowler, is known for propagating the idea that it's the most "meaningful regular season in sports". With BSU and TCU, based on the schedules they play, not it's not.

there's lots of other valid counterarguments here, but one that I often point to is that in the B10, without a championship game and unbalanced schedule, the best teams don't all play one another. There's less teasing out of the best of the best, and you see what happens every time a B10 team gets into the NCG. They get hammered. It's not to say that EVERY time they'd get hammered, but it's the fact that you're "projecting" what you think is a great team. It could be that you project right, but without the series of tests throughout the regular season, your projection increasingly loses credibility or legitimacy, and more often than not, you'll be wrong. The pt is this type of "projecting" has no place in the landscape of college football if you truly believe that the regular season is the "most meaningful in sports."

[bird36 5]

Great Post.  Boise, TCU and Utah, Tulane etc.......  Hide behind "home and home".  If you can't play the top teams as part of your conference then you better schedule 4 top 20 programs for your out of conference games. 

Boise's out of conference schedule:  Virginia Tech (good program),  Oregon State (medium program) ,  Wyoming (bad program),  Toledo (MASH's Corporal Klinger was from there)

If Boise wants a shot they need to replace Wyoming and Toledo with good programs such as (Auburn, Alabama, LSU, Tenn, Florida, UGA, Texas, OK, Ohio State, Michigan etc...........)

I don't hold it against a team who schedules a good program and when they play the program the team is not as strong that particular year.  For example if Boise scheduled UGA or Florida or Texas this year I would not hold it against them,  But Wyoming and Toledo  Come on your not even trying.

[AUFan1 0]

It's called paying your dues, and Boise hasn't done that against stiff competition week in and week out. The line during the VT game was if Boise wins, they should be able to win out with a possible shot at the title. If you get to coast after week 1 of the season, you do not deserve a title shot... period

[AUnChas 14]

I don't know if it's as much as they have to "pay their dues" as much as it is they could have schedule 2/1 with the big powers and refused it. They want a 1/1 to do it. Why? because the Herbstreits of the world are legitimizing this approach. If you're the AD at BSU or TCU, seriously, why create a FSU like schedule from the early 80s? The system, the actors in the system (the "media) are validating this approach to the regular season. At the same time, they are saying "it's the most meaningful regular season in sports". NO, IT'S NOT because you're validating a schedule and approach of playing two consequential games per year. the B10 and P10 have lived and profited IMMENSELY from this same approach for years.

Remember, in bball, the weak OOC schedules were not rewarded when it came tourney time. Some deserving teams got left out initially, despite great wins and nice records, all because they played a weak OOC schedule. They got PENALIZED for that approach. In football, we are legitimizing and validating that approach.

[AUBSC76 0]

I guarantee you that the Boise State folks and their apologists at ESPN were sweating when GaTech was leading #22 VaTech (Boise's only quality win) by 14 at Blacksburg and rejoiced when the Hokies pulled it out in the closing minutes.  With only #23 Nevada the only half-way respectable opponent left to play, they'll be sweating out VaTech's trips to North Carolina (6-3) and Miami (6-3), a loss to one would be damaging and a loss to both disasterous to Boise State's BCSCG aspirations. 

[wellsheit 0]

Now that a 2+ loss bama team has no shot at a NCG, I wonder if Danielson will pull for one of the non-AQ's.

[norcuron 35]

Boise is a 5th grader beating up a room full of kindergarteners one at a time and is wondering why they dont have A MMA heavy-weight belt.  

Their answer to their schedule weakness? leave the WAC and join the MAC! What a joke!

I bet that in the expantion the PAC10 would have taken them, The BIG 12 would have taken them. The big 12 probably would still take them and one more team. (I say give them Arkansas and we take Ga Tec or Clemson)

My point is this spring they had their shot to move into prime time but didnt.

[around4ever 4,139]

I think Boise is off the BCS radar now.  TCU is the big BCS buster now.

[AUnChas 14]

Indeed, TCU has the signature win, and a blowout on the road, they will be promoted by the media as the legit NCG team now. The problem is not only our perception problem, but someone like Brando, who is clearly promoting the non-auto quals like BSU and TCU. With this win by TCU, I wouldn't doubt that for him, like some other voters, they see leaving out a BCS team in the NCG as a way to leverage the system for a playoff. For voters like him, AU would just be the unfortunate BCS team left out for the "greater good". That's why it was very important, IMO, when we dropped to #2.

[Chaotic_zx 1,052]

IMO, while all good teams have weakness. Auburn and TCU are the best two. Oregon and Auburn are mirrors of one another(in that both have good O).

Another point of note. Boise claims they would play anyone/anytime. Then they try to charge $1 Million to play a OOC game. They have nobody to blame but themselves. Step up and stop acting like your above it all. A lot of people point to the Oklahoma game but never mention the UGA game. One of them is irrelevant without the other.