Early BCS projections: Boise State #1, Oregon #2

fortunately we got past relevant Washington State then *phew*

 

I disagree with this premise.

IMO, beating Stanford by 21 at home > beating Va Tech by 3 on the road (if for no other reason than the basic assumption that home field advantage is only worth 3 points).

ASU & OSU are about equal (as evidenced by the Beavs 3-point victory over the Devils in Corvallis), so it should follow that an 11 point victory @ ASU is approximately equivalent to a 13 point home victory over OSU. No advantage here either way.

After that, BSU's resume has 3 teams that are bottom-25 nationally; UO's does as well, but it also has the 35-point road-win over an SEC team. So, cumulatively, I would say that UO's schedule has been better than BSU's by virtue of the Tennessee game, and their overall performance has been better based on the nature of their victory over Stanford (dominance, as compared to BSU's nail-biter over VT).

 

I don't think (going back a bit) that an undefeated Boise State or TCU would break through into top 2 territory if both Oregon and Ohio State are undefeated. Or if Alabama was still undefeated.

It's a fun talking point now, but the discussion comes in at the end of the year when you have multiple unbeaten teams, because anyone with a loss stands behind those with no losses. Alabama has basically lost its "playoff" and now has to wait for others to lose to win the national championship. Same if Oregon or Ohio State or Nebraska loses...I'm not the biggest fan of this "well, if they were in a real conference" garbage. Boise State and TCU are beating everyone on their schedule, including teams like Va Tech and OSU from the big conferences.

If you want to bitch about Boise State being unbeaten, then schedule them in Week Two, kick their ass and they're out of the picture. If you don't want to, stfu and play your schedule perfectly and you'll be above them. If you think it's unfair that your schedule's too tough, leave your conference, give up the 8 figures you get every year for having good bowl tie-ins, and go join the Sun Belt or go independent or something. (on a side note, Navy's been to 7 bowls in a row). But you don't get to get the money from being in a conference with tons of bowl tie-ins and sponsors and TV money coming in, while complaining that the teams are too hard, and get sympathy from me.

For every game against Florida or Oklahoma or Auburn or USC, the big schools also play Kansas State, Vanderbilt, Kentucky, Iowa State, WSU, etc.

 

I guess my retort then would be that OSU isnt relevant to to Oregon's being relevant until December 4th. Right now the only team that is relevant to my fanhood, and what Oregon needs to do, to get where it wants to go, is UCLA.

 

I do have to add on to Natebishops part on that.. very many threads that are about Ducks have something where a Beaver fan has to mention something. I think I made a thread a while back about Darron Thomas which in no way had anything to do with the Beavers, pro or against. And A reply was made with a pic of Katz (sp?) saying something along the lines of "we have a good QB too" or something to that extent. Like I have said many times before, I respect the hell out of Riley and the OSU program, but a large portion of the Internet fans of OSU at least have a big time "little brother" "look at me, notice me" syndrome. Not saying that as a negative of the program, or entire fan base though.

 

I believe he is a Beavs fan and Alumni if I'm not mistaken.

 

I base what I think with my interaction with Beaver fans... or with the Ducks and Beaver threads I see on here, I would say that the majority of ones that are "Hijacked" would be Beaver stuff injected into Ducks threads.

I'm not saying that you are one of these, and that both fanbases are perfect. But I would say that OSU fan has as much of a little brother syndrome as Duck fan has an elitist syndrome (both are extremely annoying btw)