|
Post by bigdawgs on Nov 15, 2009 19:15:10 GMT -5
Game Stats
Boise AT La Tech Total Yards....Bulldogs 250 Broncos 507 First Downs...Bulldogs 15 Broncos 30
La Tech AT LSU
Total Yards.....Bulldogs 322 Tigers 246 First Downs....Bulldogs 23 Tigers 15
|
|
|
Post by dpb13 on Nov 15, 2009 19:47:42 GMT -5
It is also becoming very clear that Boise has tried to upgrade schedules and almost no one even picks up the phone. And unlike several years ago when they wanted home and home, now they are just asking to play anyone anywhere. I think the only thing that will help Boise in this situation if they could somehow get into the MWC. I know there is a bitter history between teams in the MWC and WAC, but until Boise, Fresno, Hawaii and Nevada get into a better conference, they are going to continue to have a problem getting recognition. BTW, based on what Nevada just did to Fresno and the fact that they have won 7 in a row, Boise might not ought to count that undefeated season in the bag quite yet. Boise is not exactly begging for BCS teams to play them, they want home and home, or 1 Million guaranteed. And why the hell shouldn't they? Is your team going to accept a game at say, USC for the 450k that Florida was trying to give Boise?
|
|
|
Post by wareagleray on Nov 15, 2009 19:55:43 GMT -5
That seems to be a heck of a sticking point. Boise's stadium seats...not a lot. Would teams think it'd be worth it to drop a million just to play them and have to travel to Idaho? I don't know. (again, no agenda here. Merely posing a question)
|
|
|
Post by bigdawgs on Nov 15, 2009 20:01:45 GMT -5
WER,
They are asking a million to come play someone on the road. Their small stadium really has no bearing because if the game is home and home, neither sides pays anything. The only issue is number of seats for the visiting teams.
|
|
|
Post by wareagleray on Nov 15, 2009 20:05:19 GMT -5
Would that cause any monetary loss? Let's say Auburn takes a home and home at Boise. On the surface, who would this profit more?
|
|
|
Post by bigdawgs on Nov 15, 2009 20:21:53 GMT -5
I assume it would be a wash....except for the pub that Boise would get, especially if they won. They lost badly in Athens in 05, but had they won it would have been huge.
|
|
|
Post by wareagleray on Nov 15, 2009 20:27:51 GMT -5
I was just wondering. Because I can understand Boise not wanting to get ripped off but I do wonder what would be in it for an Auburn. When Auburn played USF and we lost to them I heard a bunch that we scheduled them because it would be an easy win.
I mean, why go through the bullshit of hearing that when you could play a cupcake? I know that's not the popular thing to say.
If someone could do some number crunching, I'm far too lazy, I would appreciate the education on the benefits of a home and home for Boise vice a BCS conference opponent.
|
|
|
Post by bigdawgs on Nov 15, 2009 20:35:05 GMT -5
Unless I am mistaken, there is not a monetary issue. No money changes hands. Auburn allocates Boise visiting tickets and visa versa. I assume that Airfare from Boise to Auburn is the same both ways.
The reason Auburn pays Boise to come to their house is to offset the fact that Boise does not get a corresponding home game in return.
From a guaranteed victory perspective, it is easy to choose between Furman or Tennessee Tech and a Boise. But I personally kind of resent paying the same amount for my Georgia tickets to play Tennessee Tech as I do to play Georgia Tech. I think that is BS.
It is one thing to bash teams who avoid playing tough opponents. I think that has been part of Boise's MO under Dan Hawkins. Pat Hill and Fresno played anyone, anywhere. But now, it seems that teams are pretty much avoiding Boise...home and home or just away game.
|
|
|
Post by wareagleray on Nov 15, 2009 20:38:46 GMT -5
I hear you. And it does seem to be mostly money driven. Ok, it's all money driven, including the BCS title. You never know, maybe one of the BCS teams 'breaks the mold' and starts adopting the anytime, anywhere policy.
I truly would love for Auburn to do it. Why? Because that's a damn good way to get respect and keep it. Playing West Virginia was awesome. Let's play Michigan now. Let's play Kansas. It would be great to see that instead of the homesteading that seems to go on.
But the big deal now is the cost, I guess. Everyone seems to want to save money these days.
Forgive the ramble and thanks for the words. Other than a couple of clowns and trolls I actually do come to this board to learn and I appreciate it greatly when I do.
|
|
|
Post by nvajacketsfan on Nov 15, 2009 20:52:33 GMT -5
Would that cause any monetary loss? Let's say Auburn takes a home and home at Boise. On the surface, who would this profit more? Boise hands down. Auburn wins and it is still Boise St, a team that has had a good streak, but is still not a major conference.
|
|
|
Post by nvajacketsfan on Nov 15, 2009 20:55:22 GMT -5
I hear you. And it does seem to be mostly money driven. Ok, it's all money driven, including the BCS title. You never know, maybe one of the BCS teams 'breaks the mold' and starts adopting the anytime, anywhere policy. I truly would love for Auburn to do it. Why? Because that's a damn good way to get respect and keep it. Playing West Virginia was awesome. Let's play Michigan now. Let's play Kansas. It would be great to see that instead of the homesteading that seems to go on. But the big deal now is the cost, I guess. Everyone seems to want to save money these days. Forgive the ramble and thanks for the words. Other than a couple of clowns and trolls I actually do come to this board to learn and I appreciate it greatly when I do. But at some point is it really worth it to play the tougher schedule. You only need to play enough good teams that if you go undefeated you get into the dance. UF didn't play anyone spectacular to start the season but they are still #1.
|
|
|
Post by bigdawgs on Nov 15, 2009 21:04:06 GMT -5
As long as Florida remained unbeaten you are correct. But, if they had lost one and say Miami, Oklahoma and USC had one loss too? Florida is in a world of hurt because of that schedule. As long as they are unbeaten and their main competitors have played schedules that are as bad as theirs, then they can get away with it.
But there is also something to be said about actually playing someone who has a pulse, unlike Charleston Southern and Florida what ever the shit.
|
|
|
Post by tophb21 on Nov 15, 2009 21:07:17 GMT -5
I hear you. And it does seem to be mostly money driven. Ok, it's all money driven, including the BCS title. You never know, maybe one of the BCS teams 'breaks the mold' and starts adopting the anytime, anywhere policy. I truly would love for Auburn to do it. Why? Because that's a damn good way to get respect and keep it. Playing West Virginia was awesome. Let's play Michigan now. Let's play Kansas. It would be great to see that instead of the homesteading that seems to go on. But the big deal now is the cost, I guess. Everyone seems to want to save money these days. Forgive the ramble and thanks for the words. Other than a couple of clowns and trolls I actually do come to this board to learn and I appreciate it greatly when I do. But at some point is it really worth it to play the tougher schedule. You only need to play enough good teams that if you go undefeated you get into the dance. UF didn't play anyone spectacular to start the season but they are still #1. Unfortuanately, I agree with NVA. That is what the sport has been relegated to. If you have time on your hands, go take a look at schedules for teams like Bama, USC, Texas, Nebraska, OU, Miami, etc from the 80's and 90's. It's really sad what the OOC has become..........pretty much a joke for the most part. (Please spare me the one or two exceptions to the rule each year)
|
|
|
Post by pittnd1 on Nov 15, 2009 22:03:45 GMT -5
I agree with the win is a win is a win arguement. Just try to fill out your top 25 ballot and you'll see that its hard to find teams to put in there.
I just thought it was funny when people were bagging on Boise about their schedule...there were people making fun about Boise's narrow win over La Tech. And people saying watch how much LSU kills La Tech by in comparison. So is La Tech that good that they can take 2 top 10-12 teams to the wire?
|
|
|
Post by someday on Nov 15, 2009 22:57:06 GMT -5
As to the money on a H&H, there is money that that is exchanged. There is nearly always a nominal travel fee paid by the home team to cover expenses so there is no out of pocket costs to come play. The more elite, there bigger the group(such as band bigger staff, etc.), the more money changes hands. I have heard that it can run up wards of 250k to 350k, depending on who the traveler is.
Boise pays a D1aa about 250k plus expenses, which would be somewhere in the same ballpark to a traveling H&H team(note that the D1aa is one way with no return trip)
Seats are a problem in smaller stadiums as some elite teams require 7k tickets for their fans. Boise must expand to accommodate the big teams in a H&H as 7k tics would be about 1/5 of their gate. Oregon gave up only 2k tics to Boise last year, and I believe Boise gave up only 2k to Oregon as well. There were many Oregon fans that bought up cheap season tics just for the one game at Boise.( Normally there are no season tics for sale, but the large boost in cost coupled with the economy left a few season tics unsold before the first game)
What would be in it for Auburn to schedule a H&H with Boise is an sos bump if Auburn thinks they have a team for a title run. It was sos that left them in the cold in their 04 season. As to a 1&done, Boise would still lose money over a home game, but a win would gain exposure which leads to fan base and more money down the road not to mention recruiting.
Jackets-It would be Boise that would be favored and not the other way around. I know its hard to adjust to this. Maybe in a few years, things will get back to the past. But who knows. Boise has the youngest team in the nation right now, and their current run is a decade long. Don't expect Boise to be going anywhere soon.
Boise has publicly announced they would be open to a anyone, anytime guarantee game about once a year. A couple of ooc home games must be retained for budget purposes. Incidentally there have only been three (3) AQ teams to man up and do a H&H with Boise. All local NW neighbor programs.
|
|
|
Post by bigdawgs on Nov 15, 2009 23:04:57 GMT -5
I don't think you are going to find many, if any Majors that will give Boise a home and home except those from the region. And I don't have a real heart burn with that....it is a long way to go for folks in the east and usually you are going to want to make it a worthwhile trip for your fans. But I would think that Boise should be able to attract MWC and PAC 10 and maybe Big 12 North teams like Colorado.
|
|
|
Post by BTB07 on Nov 15, 2009 23:12:03 GMT -5
This has been interesting to read.
We have to be careful with the single game comparisons though.
Is Oklahoma better than Boise State this year? If I use the Tulsa game I could certainly 'prove' it. Oklahoma beat them like a red-headed step child (45-0) and Boise State beat them by 7.
Was the game impressive for LSU? Um...hell no. Is it a game that I willing to use to make a blanket statement about the strength of the WAC? Um...hell no.
It doesn't take away from Boise's strength as I think they are a pretty damn good football team, but comparative scores of La Tech are not going to convince me.
|
|
|
Post by bigdawgs on Nov 15, 2009 23:36:41 GMT -5
Comparative scores are never the answer. If someone wants to compare scores, Boise walloped Fresno on the Bulldogs home field. Fresno played Cincy very, very tough at Nippert. Then again, Nevada just pile drived Fresno. And that is what I mean.
Now head to head I understand.....and I saw Boise treat Oregon like a red headed step child.
And while we are at it.....saw TCU drub Utah and BYU and beat a pretty fair Clemson team in Death Valley. If I were Texas, Bama and Florida I would want to avoid TCU at all costs.
|
|
|
Post by BTB07 on Nov 15, 2009 23:43:37 GMT -5
TCU is scary as hell man. They play nasty defense, and will continue to have that chip on their shoulder. Certainly a scary opponent for any team out there right now.
Another comparative score with Boise State: Boise State 34 UC Davis 16 (18 point difference) Southern Utah 56 UC Davis 35 (21 point difference)
Actually the above example has a bigger difference 3 points, than the LSU and Boise scores against LA Tech 2 points (8 and 10 point wins).
Boise and TCU are very good teams and I think TCU is better right now. In large part because of the superior competition they get in the MWC (please go to the MWC Boise, please!)
|
|
|
Post by bigdawgs on Nov 15, 2009 23:56:01 GMT -5
There is a lot of lingering bitterness between WAC and MWC members over the current MWC teams leaving the old WAC and the arrival of new members. I think that might weigh heavily in any decision on adding Boise and several others.
In a perfect world, I add Boise, Fresno, Nevada and Hawaii. I don't think it will happen unless the MWC teams think it benefits them too.
|
|
|
Post by BTB07 on Nov 15, 2009 23:59:07 GMT -5
There is a lot of lingering bitterness between WAC and MWC members over the current MWC teams leaving the old WAC and the arrival of new members. I think that might weigh heavily in any decision on adding Boise and several others. In a perfect world, I add Boise, Fresno, Nevada and Hawaii. I don't think it will happen unless the MWC teams think it benefits them too. Good points BD. A conference with TCU, Utah, BYU, Air Force, Nevada, Boise State, and Fresno State would be an outstanding conference. I guess they could add another team and play 7 IC games in a round robin format, and that would give them more opportunities to play OOC games (hopefully they can get someone to play them). Certainly an interesting idea, and one that seemingly benefits all involved...
|
|
|
Post by redstick13 on Nov 16, 2009 4:32:53 GMT -5
Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't someone within Boise's athletic department just make a statement that went along the line lines "We would like to make arrangements with PAC 10, Big XII or Big X teams."? So in one statement they say they can't get H&H to boost their schedule but also effectively say "we really aren't interested in playing 3 of the BCS conferences.". I'm sorry but I'm tired of hearing about Boise and to be honest I think they're playing the "woe is me" card when it comes to scheduling and still riding the success for their Fiesta Bowl win. TCU doesn't seem to be having problems boosting their schedule and they haven't had near the exposure or bowl success of Boise.
Three years after beating OU in the Fiesta Bowl and this is the Boise OOC schedule?
Oregon Miami (OH) Bowling Green UC Davis Tulsa
If a BCS team were to have that as an OOC slate they would be slow roasted over a hot fire. If Boise wants to be taken seriously, and looked at in the same light as a competitive BCS team, then they need to step it up and put together a schedule that shows they are serious.
|
|
|
Post by redstick13 on Nov 16, 2009 4:47:31 GMT -5
The real truth about Boise is they're scared of Amos Moses. There I said it.
|
|
|
Post by bigdawgs on Nov 16, 2009 7:41:48 GMT -5
TCU doesn't have as much problem getting opponents because they are in Texas. Boise is in Idaho. Hmmmmmmm
Plus, TCU is a traditional team. They should have been in the Big 12 all along.
But even with that going for them, neither Clemson or Virginia has given them a return game. Arkansas and LSU both have home and home scheduled with the Frogs.
Utah has home and home with Pitt, Boise, Colorado, WSU and an away game in South Bend. BYU has Washington, FSU, Arizona State and Boise.
Boise has managed to get home and home with Utah and BYU on the schedule as well as Oregon State.
I don't think there is much doubt that previously Boise opted for the easier schedule believing that the ONLY chance they had to go to a BCS game was to win them all. Fresno opted to play sometimes brutal OOC schedules. Thus far Boise appears to have been the better planner....but now they have changed their philosophy.
I know eveyone is totally obsessed with the BCS title game. But for me the great thing about CFB is the REGULAR season. And if I have the choice of going Between the Hedges to see Tennessee Tech or Boise, which do you think I prefer? But as long as we sell 94K tickets to Tennessee Tech, we will continue to see that sort of garbage.
A caveat to that is this year. With Georgia playing 3 OOC BCS opponents and two of them on the road, I don't have any issue with one Tenn Tech type game. But most teams don't play those 3 BCS opponents and I see no problem with playing another team with a pulse. What would be wrong with say....Georgia Tech, Boise State, Central Michigan and New Mexico State?
|
|
|
Post by bigdawgs on Nov 16, 2009 7:47:41 GMT -5
Boise is playing Va Tech next year in "neutral" D.C. I don't recall Boise ever saying they were blowing off anyone. I do think the PAC 10, outside of the Oregon teams and WSU and the Big 12 are geographically the closest? Colorado seems like it would be a good fit.
|
|
|
Post by redstick13 on Nov 16, 2009 8:34:08 GMT -5
bd, Boise is relatively close to Big XII North, Big X, and PAC 10 north country. It's not as far out of the way as some like to think. I've driven from Denver to Yakima, WA before and spent a night in Boise. It's no worse than driving to Gainesville from Baton Rouge. Then again, I traveled all the way from Tallahassee to Seattle to watch LSU play. Maybe I'm not the best person to comment on this subject.
Probably a bigger issue for Boise is that nobody really cares about CFB around here. NFL is bigger.
|
|
|
Post by bigdawgs on Nov 16, 2009 8:40:47 GMT -5
Redstick,
I think we are agreeing on this. I too have driven from Denver to SLC and on up to Boise. My point is that for teams in those confences, the travel costs are less than say a Miami or South Carolina or Penn State. The Broncos should focus on the PAC 10 and Big 12.
|
|
|
Post by nvajacketsfan on Nov 16, 2009 9:02:58 GMT -5
For us East Coasters, that is a VERY long drive.
This is also one of the reasons that ACC got out of the Smurf Turf bowl. It was cold as hell, difficult to get to, and supposedly nothing to do there.
|
|
|
Post by redstick13 on Nov 16, 2009 9:08:50 GMT -5
"supposedly nothing to do there."
I would say they are spot on with that statement.
|
|
|
Post by Geaux Tigers on Nov 16, 2009 9:14:27 GMT -5
Come on guys, 2 pages and not one that equates to what the thread initiator was looking for.....
I give it the old College try:
Here goes: La Tech is in the WAC, the WAC is awesome but gets no respect. La Tech went into Baton Rouge and played to Mighty Tigers to within 8 points and thus proves that the WAC is fucking increadible. Boise is also in the WAC, Boise is undefeated, therefore, Boise is more incrediable than the 86 Chicago Bears.
I know it doesn't give the WAC enough credit but I tried.......
|
|