Is Auburn overrated?

[IslandRed]

Yeah, at some level, it's inherently ridiculous:

Q: Why can't we be in the national championship game? We're undefeated.

A: Because you didn't play a strong enough schedule.

Q: Okay. Will you schedule us out of conference?

A: No.

Q: So then what?

A: To have a strong enough schedule, you pretty much have to be in one of the BCS conferences.

Q: Okay. Can we be in your conference?

A: No.

Although I love college football enormously, one of the things I most love about college basketball is that Hoosiers can still conceivably happen. In college football as it exists today, a non-BCS school could have a team that could spot the Green Bay Packers seven points a half, but barring extraordinary circumstances, they won't get a chance at the big prize.

[KronoRed]

The last one there should be:

Q: Okay. Can we be in your conference?

A: Sure, but we need to have an opening first, and your other sports programs need to not be a complete embarrassment.

See Utah.

[Brutus]

The last one there should be:

Q: Okay. Can we be in your conference?

A: Sure, but we need to have an opening first, and your other sports programs need to not be a complete embarrassment.

See Utah.

Let's be honest... Utah was taken, not really for their sports per se, but because they are the flagship university in a state of over 3 million people. That's essentially it's own DMA market that hasn't been tapped into, and since the Pac-10 still has an eye toward their own sports network, they were taken because that could wind up providing valuable inventory down the line.

[cincrazy]

Auburn isn't a great team, but in this particular year, they're certainly one of the best in college football. I think anyone in the top 11 or 12 can pretty much beat anyone else on any given day, it truly is a toss-up. Would be a perfect year for a playof...... ah, never mind.

[bucksfan2]

Re Boise St's soft schedule.

I heard it mentioned on the radio that they were offered a 2 for 1 series with Nebraska. They turned it down.

[Boston Red]

Re Boise St's soft schedule.

I heard it mentioned on the radio that they were offered a 2 for 1 series with Nebraska. They turned it down.

Nebraska tried to get something valuable (an extra home game) for free. Boise simply asked for the going rate. Complete non-story.

As a matter of fact, Michigan State actually gave Boise State more money for a 2 for 1 than Boise State asked for from Nebraska.

[bucksfan2]

Nebraska tried to get something valuable (an extra home game) for free. Boise simply asked for the going rate. Complete non-story.

To me it is a story. BSU needs strength of schedule. They need to increase the competition of their schedule regardless if that means they lose some money. To me they need to play anyone anywhere.

[Boston Red]

So not only do they have to do 2 for 1s (name another program about to go to its third BCS game in five years willing to do that), but they have to let Nebraska bend them over in the process? That makes no sense. Nebraska should get a windfall (free home game against a marqee opponent) because of the ridiculous BCS system in place? Why wouldn't Nebraksa do a better deal (for Nebraska) than the one Michigan State just agreed to?

[bucksfan2]

So not only do they have to do 2 for 1s (name another program about to go to its third BCS game in five years willing to do that), but they have to let Nebraska bend them over in the process? That makes no sense. Nebraska should get a windfall (free home game against a marqee opponent) because of the ridiculous BCS system in place? Why wouldn't Nebraksa do a better deal (for Nebraska) than the one Michigan State just agreed to?

Colorado is taking a $1M payday to go play at OSU. UC took a payday to go to Tennessee and Washington DC to play Va Tech.

BSU isn't getting bent over in this process. They need to bolster their schedule because they play in the WAC. Would we expect a MAC conference team who runs the table to play in the National Championship game? Bosie needs a stronger schedule and needs to accept deals like this. If they want the home pay day then good for their bottom line not for their BCS Championship hopes.

[WVRed]

Nebraska tried to get something valuable (an extra home game) for free. Boise simply asked for the going rate. Complete non-story.

As a matter of fact, Michigan State actually gave Boise State more money for a 2 for 1 than Boise State asked for from Nebraska.

Correct me if im wrong, but wasn't this the same Boise State who last season was offering to come to any top teams stadium with no return trip to Boise?

Beggars can't be choosers.

[Boston Red]

Correct me if im wrong, but wasn't this the same Boise State who last season was offering to come to any top teams stadium with no return trip to Boise?

Not for free. The VaTech deal was a 1 for none. But they got paid for it.

[Boston Red]

Colorado is taking a $1M payday to go play at OSU. UC took a payday to go to Tennessee and Washington DC to play Va Tech.

I'm not sure what the issue is, then. Boise asked for the same $1 million payday to take Nebraska's deal. They were willing to take the payday to play twice in Lincoln. Just lilke they took the payday to play VaTech in D.C. Just like they're taking the payday ($1.2 million) to play twice in East Lansing.

[Todd Gack]

Has the BCS ever selected the wrong champion?

[Sea Ray]

We'll never know. With a playoff a one or two win team may very well beat the BCS champion. For example last year Boise St may or may not have able to beat Alabama. We'll never know and that's the point. It wasn't settled on the field

[IslandRed]

To me it is a story. BSU needs strength of schedule. They need to increase the competition of their schedule regardless if that means they lose some money. To me they need to play anyone anywhere.

It's basically impossible to satisfy some people on this score, though.

* For most people to change their minds about BSU's worthiness, they probably have to beat a team that's minimum Top 10-15.

* They probably have to win two or three such games to really make a case.

* Most scheduling is done years in advance.

So what is the probability, really, of knowing today what schools they'll have to have on the schedule in 2013 and beyond to impress voters and computers enough to get into the national title game? I mean, suppose they'd lined up Tennessee, Michigan and Texas a few years back for 2010. Would winning those games be proof to you they belonged in the big game, or would they be waved off because those teams aren't much good this year?

Even if you don't really think Boise State is one of the two best teams in the country -- and I don't -- it's still obvious the system is rigged.