WHO IS MORE IMPRESSIVE???

[Dossenator]

The part that impresses me about TCU is that they have played 2 more games than Boise and given up fewer points....against similar competition. In the end, if they played, I think the game would be very close. Either team could win.

[Cane from the Bend]

I've posted this in another thread, thought it is how I feel;

As a non-automatic qualifier team, TCU should have to prove themselves the same as Boise St. If you allow TCU to jump Boise, when the HornedFrogs played an FCS team, then you would be showing them some sort of favoritism.

All I hear when it comes to these teams, is who have they played ... but, when we take a look at their schedules, you'll see Boise at least played all FBS teams in their OoC competition, where TCU did not.

If one is to evaluate a team's value based on the strength of said team's schedule ... we have to diagnose all factors as to measure that competition difficulty.

If that emphasis is based on the programs within non-automatic qualifier conferences, then there has to be some specific criteria.

It may be true that the Mountain West Conference is more difficult to play in than the Western Athletic Conference; based on the top teams there within ... though, not-so-much when you view the teams from the bottom two thirds of these conferences.

Both Boise State & TCU played two BCS conference teams.
Both Boise State & TCU defeated those BCS teams.
Both Boise State & TCU beat a common opponent, Oregon St.

However, TCU played Tennessee Tech, a non-FBS program. That to me has to devalue their schedule strength to some degree.

And, to me, it would seem as though giving TCU a higher ranking than Boise St, when TCU played an FCS team knowing the criteria of expectation viewed as strength of schedule; well, it just feels like poll voters are giving the HornedFrogs a pass here.

.

.

.

[billybud]

TCU looked better against Oregon State.

I have TCU above Boise.

[Vileborg]

Boise St. they beat TCU last year and brought back the same team who seems to have gotten even better.

[Spence]

Boise St. they beat TCU last year and brought back the same team who seems to have gotten even better.

+1 It seems what happens on the field only matters if you want it to matter.

[billybud]

Yeah Spence...and the year before, TCU beat Boise. Both games were close enough that they could go either way. I don't think they, either game, signifies who would win this year.

Playing a common BCS opponent, TCU had a better game. That of itself might not mean much because it is the match up between Boise and TCU that counts. I think that TCU does deserve to be above Boise based on this year's body of work.

[donovan]

What this brings home, week after week...it is difficult to judge, rank, rank, etc. based on this year alone. It is almost impossible to forget previous years, though I think in principal, that should be the way it is done. The ranking system starts out with a seeding that is very difficult to overcome, so ....well...My money is that both Auburn and Oregon will be beat. Georgia and Oregon State will be the culprits or heroes. Georgia will be so ready inwardly and Houston will have a stellar game. Oregon State will do on defense what will stop Oregon. They will quit shifting their defense before the ball snap. That will take Oregon's surprise away and Rodgers, the fireplug, will rip through Oregon's defense. Will be close...

[Spence]

Yeah Spence...and the year before, TCU beat Boise. Both games were close enough that they could go either way. I don't think they, either game, signifies who would win this year.

Playing a common BCS opponent, TCU had a better game. That of itself might not mean much because it is the match up between Boise and TCU that counts. I think that TCU does deserve to be above Boise based on this year's body of work.

Which has been my point. I don't think there is much difference between the two in strength. If you look at the body of work, I think that overall TCU has played a stronger schedule, but Boise State has played the best team.

[Dossenator]

Last year should have no baring on this year. Also, that so called better team that Boise played lost to a FCS team (James Madison beat Virg Tech by more points than Boise did....and James Madison beat them in Virg Tech's home stadium). I just can't get past that. No way Virg Tech is top 25 material....top 25 teams do not lose to FCS teams (even the good ones).

[Spence]

Last year should have no baring on this year. Also, that so called better team that Boise played lost to a FCS team (James Madison beat Virg Tech by more points than Boise did....and James Madison beat them in Virg Tech's home stadium). I just can't get past that. No way Virg Tech is top 25 material....top 25 teams do not lose to FCS teams (even the good ones).

I can't get past it for Virginia Tech. There is no excuse for not being ready to play anyone - but that is what it was with VT and JM. Everyone knows that. JM was playing the super bowl and VT was on a quick turn around after the BSU game. VT probably didn't spend two seconds watching film on JM and expected to sleep walk through the game.

If last season has no bearing on this year how can anyone do a preseason poll?

[Dossenator]

There should not be a pre season poll...I think most of us agree on that. At this point in the season we should be judging teams on what they have done this year only.

[Spence]

There should not be a pre season poll...I think most of us agree on that. At this point in the season we should be judging teams on what they have done this year only.

I agree with that, except you can't. I can say - and I believe that Arkansas this year is very good (better then their record), but what if Alabama isn't good. What is LSU isn't good. What if the entire SEC isn't good. - History tells me they probably are good, but if I don't consider that, very little can be gleaned by the OOC records - that is true of most teams and most conferences - so how do you know unless you consider recent history?

Unless you are breaking down film - measuring how quick OLinemen come out of the blocks. How fast the receivers can cover a short, middle, or long route and things like that - how do you know? I don't break down film on college teams. I don't have access and the TV replay doesn't provide the views or the angles to do it. So I look at those teams as stronger, because they have been stronger, and I form my opinion with that as my starting believe. I can say it is a matter of fact, but it is more a matter of recent history. Alabama won the national title last year, they got the benefit of the doubt because of it. Even though most probably had some doubt when they played so close to Penn State - a team that was playing a walk on QB. No matter how much we want to hold it out, recent history is factored in our opinion.

[Brian Roastbeef]

There should not be a pre season poll...I think most of us agree on that. At this point in the season we should be judging teams on what they have done this year only.

I do agree with that. It leads to a situation similar to golf, where Tiger Woods is still #2 in the world, (only recently lost #1) despite not having won anything in more than a year.

Of course, as Spence illustrated far better than I, how do you replace it? Even if you wait a few weeks into the season, how do you determine that 4-0 Alabama is better than 4-0 Utah? If you say strength of schedule, then how do you determine that Penn St, Arkansas, and Duke are stronger opponents than Pittsburgh, UNLV, and New Mexico? Their common opponent San Jose St. saw similar scores. Alabama beat them 48-3, Utah 56-3. At some point history always gets involved when you have to decide that one team has better players or beat better opposition...

[billybud]

VT, in 2008, was also not the same team early that they later become...The ACC Champ Virginia Tech also lost early to ECU in 2008 than went on to throttle a good Cincinnati team in the Orange Bowl.

I think that VT was a little slow coming out of the blocks.