TCU / Utah Line

[Harry0569]

From Pete Fiutak of college football news. This sums up my opinion

As of this moment, I vow not to keep saying that Boise State, TCU, and Utah could beat anyone on a neutral field. You know who can beat anyone on a neutral field? Everyone in the BCS Top 25.

Schedules do matter, and in fact, they’re everything, but deep down, you know that. What does it say that 21 of the top 25 ranked teams are from BCS conferences, yet three of the top five aren’t? It’s not that hard, people. Boise State, TCU, and Utah don’t play week in and week out schedules that the BCSers do, and while that’s been repeated ad nauseum, it doesn’t seem to sink in that the reasons those three teams are ranked so high are because they’re good and because they only have to get up for a few games.

Normally level heads (cough … Herbstreit and Palmer … wheeeeez) have gone Boise State batty, brushing aside the 400-pound schedule in the room. Of course the Broncos could beat Auburn or Oregon or Alabama or Ohio State on a neutral field. So could South Carolina. So could Wisconsin. So could Virginia Tech. So could Stanford. THAT’S THE POINT. The BCS teams have to do this, and on the road in some cases.

Does Boise State go unbeaten if it has to play at Michigan State, at Iowa, at Michigan and Ohio State, like Wisconsin does? If you don’t think the Broncos would win all four of those games, not to mention a home date against Arizona State, then you have your answer.

Does Utah beat Texas, and Oklahoma State, and Missouri in a three-game stretch, like Nebraska had to deal with, and then does it beat Oklahoma (most likely) in a Big 12 Championship? It might win three of those four games, but if you don’t think it could win all four, along with the rest of the Big 12 slate, then you have your answer.

Does TCU, Boise State, or Utah go without a blemish facing at Arkansas, Florida, at South Carolina, Ole Miss, at Tennessee, at LSU, Mississippi State, and Auburn, with six teams getting two weeks off to rest of and prepare for each showdown? If you don’t think so, then you have your answer with where you’re planning on putting Alabama if it wins out.

[FroggieFever]

tcu #3 lost to #6 boise which again proves my point that tcu was overrated then and is overrated now and that any top 10 team can beat them. i must point out that utah is also overrated this year so it's not really a fair comparison in this game. to me this is more like two top 25 teams playing.

[Nacho]

tcu is incredibly boring to watch.
boise is fun.
oregon boise would be a fun game.
hopefully utah will knock tcu out of this so it will be a moot point.

[ReedFrawg]

tcu is incredibly boring to watch.
boise is fun.
oregon boise would be a fun game.
hopefully utah will knock tcu out of this so it will be a moot point.

why so bitter? I enjoy watching a team play defense and rout everyone they play. Unlike you, I pull for all non AQs to succeed. If not TCU then I am all for Boise or Utah or SMU... I agree Oregon is fun to watch - hopefully Arizona or Ore State can take them out.

Rush Offense #9
Pass Offense #60
Total Offense #11
Scoring Offense #9

Total Defense #1

[ReedFrawg]

"Does Utah beat Texas, and Oklahoma State, and Missouri in a three-game stretch...?"

Absolutely Utah beats those 3 teams. Texas sucks, Ok state plays no defense and Mizzou got exposed (Mizzou also should have lost to San Diego State).

[Big Hoss]

Harry, I certainly lean more toward your side of the argument here, but determining which other teams are "better" than others based on who they play is still very, very subjective.

As an example, Oregon St has been ranked in the mid-20's of the Top 25 more than once this year. But then they get beat by whoever they play next. In one of their games a couple weeks ago, they showed their team stat rankings nationally, and almost all of their stats (rushing ypg, passing ypg, passing def, etc) were all between 90 & 105. Their highest ranking for any particular stat was close to 80. But many pollsters I guess had so much respect for who they played (and lost to, mind you) that they get ranked anyway.

So Oregon St having been ranked at some point this year bumps up the BCS ranking of all the Pac 10 teams that play them, even though they really haven't beaten any team of consequence.

It's all subjective, I know, but it doesn't make it easy to say that BCS conferences are always tougher than non-AQ conferences. We don't know for sure because the teams don't play each other. With the SEC, it's fairly obvious it's a tough conference (at least the top half), but beyond that, who really knows how good the ACC, Big 12, etc. are this year?

[FroggieFever]

why so bitter?

Because he's using idiot logic.

[Nacho]

tcu is incredibly boring to watch.
boise is fun.
oregon boise would be a fun game.
hopefully utah will knock tcu out of this so it will be a moot point.

why so bitter? I enjoy watching a team play defense and rout everyone they play. Unlike you, I pull for all non AQs to succeed. If not TCU then I am all for Boise or Utah or SMU... I agree Oregon is fun to watch - hopefully Arizona or Ore State can take them out.

Rush Offense #9
Pass Offense #60
Total Offense #11
Scoring Offense #9

Total Defense #1

very impressive. let me know when you play a d-1 school, smu excepted of course.

[ReedFrawg]

very impressive. let me know when you play a d-1 school, smu excepted of course.

What? TCU has 4 wins over teams with winning records. Includes 1 ranked team.

FYI just for grins for Oklahoma - tough week in week out schedule? 3 wins over teams with winning records. Includes 1 ranked team.

Utah State (2-6) W by 7 at home
Fla State (6-2) W (good win)
Air Force (5-4) W by 3 at home
Cincy (3-5) W by 2
Texas (4-4) W
Iowa State (5-4) W
Mizzou L
Colorado (3-5) W

[Harry0569]

Great stats, but let's look at TCU's competition.

Oregon St: passing yards 57th, rushing 88th, points for 49th, points against 74th
Tenn. Tech: garbage with cheese
Baylor (more and more a quality win for the Frogs) Passing 10th, Rushing 31st, points for 23rd, points against 52nd
SMU Passing 20th, Rushing 69th, points for 59th, points against 71st
Colorado St. Passing 54 , Rushing 89 , points for 102, points against 101
Wyoming Passing 105 , Rushing 116, points for 114, points against 97
BYU Passing 106 , Rushing 75, points for 113, points against 71
AFA Passing 116, Rushing 2, points for 53, points against 49
UNLV Passing 97, Rushing 104, points for 111, points against 113

AVGS: Passing 71, Rushing 72 , points for 78, points against 79.

Not really a murderers row of scheduling, so obviously the statistics will be inflated. Am I saying that TCU is overrated? No, I think they are a quality team, but if they played in schedule where they faced quality teams week in and week out, their statistical rankings would be much lower.

[Nacho]

until there is a real playoff system this is what we get.

[Harry0569]

until there is a real playoff system this is what we get.

Amen. One is needed desperately.

[Big Hoss]

It's a catch 22...be in a non-AQ conference where you likely stand a better chance of going undefeated, or be in a BCS conference where you stand a better chancing of losing at least 1 game because you play relatively tougher schools each week?

How many BCS bowls do you think Tx Tech would have been in over the last 10 years had they been in the Mountain West instead of the Big 12 where they had at least 1 loss every year because they faced the likes of Texas and OU every season? At least 2 or 3, I think.

If Boise St had been in a BCS conference the last few years, they may not have had an opportunity to get to any of the BCS games because they might not have won out and put themselves in that position. Sure, I believe they have the ability to beat any school in the nation, but the question is would they?

So what would be better for a school like TCU then? Being in a position like they are today, where if they win out, they'll likely be in a BCS bowl OR be like Tech has been the last few years and miss out on BCS bowls because Texas or OU is always at least 1 win better? I guess that depends on how much money TCU would get by being in a BCS conference every year vs. one-time BCS bowl payouts.

[Harry0569]

The Mandel Plan everybody!
Under the Mandel Plan, the No. 1 and 2 teams would host semifinal games in their regular bowl destinations. Just like today, two bowls could lose their host champions, only they'd be the No. 3 and 4 teams instead. Since Nos. 3 and 4 are currently non-AQ teams, however, the Big Ten champ would be the only team displaced this year. A new bowl would be added to the lineup (I'm using the Cotton) to maintain 10 BCS bids. And the championship game would take place a week after the last scheduled bowl. (This year's Cotton Bowl is Jan. 7; using the same calendar, this year's title game would be pushed four days later.)

Mind you, we're a long way from knowing who this year's conference champions will be, so for the purposes of this illustration, I'm using either the current first-place team or the highest-ranked BCS team where there are ties. With no anchor conference, the Cotton gets first at-large choice, followed by the Orange, Cotton (again) and Fiesta (which has last pick this year). The two semifinal games appear in bold.

• Jan. 1 Rose: No. 1 Oregon (Pac-10 champ) vs. No. 4 Boise State (non-AQ)

• Jan. 1 Fiesta: No. 7 Nebraska (Big 12 champ) vs. Pittsburgh (Big East champ/fourth at-large)

• Jan. 3 Orange: No. 8 Oklahoma (second at-large) vs. No. 22 Virginia Tech (ACC champ)

• Jan. 4 Sugar: No. 2 Auburn (SEC champ) vs. No. 3 TCU (non-AQ)

• Jan. 7 Cotton: No. 6 Alabama (first at-large) vs. No. 9 Wisconsin (Big Ten champ/third at-large)

• Jan. 14 championship game: Rose Bowl winner vs. Sugar Bowl winner

The Mandel Plan was mostly well-received last year. The biggest complaint was the fact that one team (in this case Oregon) would have three more days of rest than the other (Auburn). I'm not sure that's avoidable, unless ESPN would be willing to air four of the five games on New Year's Day (not likely) or the dates weren't determined until the matchups were known (not practical). Since both would have more than a week to prepare, I don't think it'd be that big of a deal.

A plus-one would be incredibly helpful this year given the fundamental dilemma involving this year's pool of contenders. Any objective person would agree that, based on their schedules, undefeated Oregon and Auburn would be more deserving of being ranked No. 1 and 2 in the final standings than Boise State, TCU or Utah. Yet plenty of objective people (like me) also believe that the best team in the country this year may be Boise, TCU or Utah. At the very least, those three may present a tougher matchup for Oregon and Auburn than those two would each other due to their superior defenses.

Under the current system, there's no right answer for picking two of the four; under my system, the teams could solve the quandary themselves.


Read more: http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/w ... z14FieuOpe

[ReedFrawg]

until there is a real playoff system this is what we get.

Amen. One is needed desperately.

+1

And it wouldn't be that tough to pull together. Keep the bowls and have a small playoff. It gets old hearing how the little schools can't compete while at the same time not being given the opportunity.