Like i said many times before big time college football needs a 8 or 16 team playoff. Don't know if Boise State best team or not but everytime they have played with the big boys they have won or held their own. Until we have a playoff we will never know who best team really is.

 

I think 16 would be way too many. I could get on board with 8, although I'm not sure the number 8 team in the country should be considered a national championship caliber team when it comes to football. I like the idea of a Plus 1, and I really like the idea SI's Stewart Mandel pushed this week and also last year. Seems very fair, yet maintains serious regular season importance due to the difficulty of reaching the top 4.

 

A refresher: 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.)

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/stewart_mandel/11/03/mailbag/index.html

I know it's often all we have to judge on, but bowl game scores can be very misleading. First, each team has up to a month to prepare. Second, there is always a question about motivation when it comes to the postseason. For instance, Utah beat Alabama in the Sugar Bowl a couple years ago. Was Utah the better team? Most would say no. But what motivation did Alabama have, knowing they had lost their chance at a national title a month earlier in losing to Florida.

No argument here. In these one game scenarios anything can happen. Teams like Bama in your example and OU from a few years ago are in a lose-lose situation. If they win, they are supposed to win, lose and they are goats.

If they win, they are supposed to win, lose and they are goats.

 

100% correct. Very well said.

I think Boise could go 7-1 in the SEC. Great QB, NFL talent at various postions, and a boatload of seniors. Oh yeah, a heckuva coach, too. Alabama would probably be only the game they would not be favored in. And yes, that includes Auburn. Of course, home field would dictate the odds.

I think Boise could go 7-1 in the SEC. Great QB, NFL talent at various postions, and a boatload of seniors. Oh yeah, a heckuva coach, too. Alabama would probably be only the game they would not be favored in. And yes, that includes Auburn. Of course, home field would dictate the odds.

There is no way they would be favored in every SEC game but Bama.

There is no way they would be favored in every SEC game but Bama.

 

I would think Auburn, Alabama, and LSU would be favored against Boise. I'm not sure if anyone else would be. But keep in mind, Kentucky only had to play one of those three. Couldn't a similar thing happen to Boise, thus making a legitimate case for their finishing 7-1.

Should Tulane have been in the NC a few years ago when they were undefeated?

We'll see. Boise seems to always win their bowl game. I think they'd wipe the floor with Nebraska or Oklahoma. I think they beat Ohio State too, as well as TCU.

 

Wipe the floor? Come on dude really? They would struggle to score against against Nebraska let alone wipe the floor with them.

Wipe the floor? Come on dude really? They would struggle to score against against Nebraska let alone wipe the floor with them.

 

I don't know if Boise would "wipe the floor" with Nebraska, but there have been very few teams that Boise State has "struggled to score" against. If Boise and Nebraska played this season, I'd probably pick Boise something like 24-17, especially if a neutral game. It might be more on the blue turf, maybe less in Lincoln. I mean a bad Texas team did go to Lincoln and win this year - why shouldn't we expect more from a good Boise team?

Here's the problem with college football, we may never know how good Boise really is...

Here's the problem with college football, we may never know how good Boise really is...

 

So true. Arguing about it doesn't really solve anything - much like politics, people are entrenched in their beliefs and likely won't change. It seems so obvious that a playoff would (A) make a ton of money and (B) crown a champion in a way the public, and likely players, want. But alas.

I don't know if Boise would "wipe the floor" with Nebraska, but there have been very few teams that Boise State has "struggled to score" against. If Boise and Nebraska played this season, I'd probably pick Boise something like 24-17, especially if a neutral game. It might be more on the blue turf, maybe less in Lincoln. I mean a bad Texas team did go to Lincoln and win this year - why shouldn't we expect more from a good Boise team?

 

You mean like they were able to score on the average VaTech Hokies?

Wipe the floor? Come on dude really? They would struggle to score against against Nebraska let alone wipe the floor with them.

 

NHS your bias is showing. I hate Boise State but I think they are at least 2 TDs better than Nebraska. The Black Shirt defense is overrated, and Nebraska is not that good when teams can crowd the box and force Martinez to pass. I like Pelini and Nebraska alot better than Boise, I don't think they'd be any trouble.

They are every bit as deserving as TCU and Oregon.

You mean like they were able to score on the average VaTech Hokies?

 

Yes. They scored 33 points that game, correct? I believe Boise State can score 30 on almost anyone.