Never

 

Thanks for the piece of info. I never knew that, very interesting. Good for ND for sticking with service acadamies out of respect, but I'm sure they liked it better when they were easy wins.

That was amazing. As great as MU football was when I was there, we never had that big win against oklahoma or texas, or really, against a team we weren't supposed to beat. I can't believe it. Feels amazing, and god I love TJ Moe.

I can't believe we haven't seen Heads mention the ISU win over Texas. That has to be the biggest win they've had in years.

My school (as of next year) is making Oklahoma sweat.

You'll love it there. Especially with the football program churning out solid seasons every year.

 

Trying to figure out why OU would go for 2 after making it 36-27. Why not keep it a one score game for the final 6-7 minutes?

 

Amazing how many dumb decisions coaches make week in and week out at the college level.

I don't think that was a bad call. I know the idea is to cut it to 8 and make the other team nervous, but I think you want to know if you can make the 2 or not. With that much time left I think it's better to know if you need another score with 6 minutes left instead of putting all your eggs in one basket and being screwed with less than a minute to go if you're down 2.

I loved mizzou so much. The last two years of college there were incredible for many more reasons than just the lack of responsibility x college social life. Columbia is a wonderful town.

I don't think that was a bad call. I know the idea is to cut it to 8 and make the other team nervous, but I think you want to know if you can make the 2 or not. With that much time left I think it's better to know if you need another score with 6 minutes left instead of putting all your eggs in one basket and being screwed with less than a minute to go if you're down 2.

 

 

 

It has nothing do with making the other team nervous. It's all about keeping yourself in the game as long as possible. With 6 minutes left, odds are you'll probably only get 1 more chance so why risk putting yourself in a position where you need the ball twice. Plus it takes a lot of steam out of your team if you fail to get those 2 points. You only chase the points when you need to. OU didnt need to start chasing at that point.

Edited October 25, 201015 yr by zenryan

Auburn #1 in new BCS, what a joke. Boise still 3... Teams keep losing but they still don't get their chance. What a joke.

Auburn #1 in new BCS, what a joke. Boise still 3... Teams keep losing but they still don't get their chance. What a joke.

 

Auburn has beaten LSU, Arkansas, and South Carolina. They are far more deserving of being #1 than Boise.

Auburn #1 in new BCS, what a joke. Boise still 3... Teams keep losing but they still don't get their chance. What a joke.

 

Totally. I doubt Auburn or Oregon would have won road games at New Mexico St. or San Jose St. Boise St. is getting so screwed.

Mizzou #7...

 

If we get out of nebraska alive...big things bros.

Auburn has beaten LSU, Arkansas, and South Carolina. They are far more deserving of being #1 than Boise.

LSU has yet to pass my eye test, they're not that good(something a f***ing computer can't see). They beat VT who is ranked just as high as SC, and Arkansas has yet to beat anyone this year which according to people like you is all that matters. It's Boise's turn, and this whole they have not played anyone is a joke because they keep winning and everyone else keeps losing.

Its hard to give Boise State a shot when they play only 1 or 2 teams in the bottom half of the top 25 every year. Other teams keep losing because when you have 2 top 10 teams play in a single game, some one has to lose. Id rather give a 1 loss team a shot than Boise.

Auburn #1 in new BCS, what a joke. Boise still 3... Teams keep losing but they still don't get their chance. What a joke.

 

 

 

The fact that you think Boise is more deserving over Auburn is a joke. It's obvious you arent really a football fan and have no clue on what is going on. So just stick to crying about the little guy being left out in the basketball thread.

LSU has yet to pass my eye test, they're not that good(something a f***ing computer can't see). They beat VT who is ranked just as high as SC, and Arkansas has yet to beat anyone this year which according to people like you is all that matters. It's Boise's turn, and this whole they have not played anyone is a joke because they keep winning and everyone else keeps losing.

HA! Who has Boise played that passes your "eye test"? Auburn is so much more deserving its not even funny.

LSU has yet to pass my eye test, they're not that good(something a f***ing computer can't see). They beat VT who is ranked just as high as SC, and Arkansas has yet to beat anyone this year which according to people like you is all that matters. It's Boise's turn, and this whole they have not played anyone is a joke because they keep winning and everyone else keeps losing.

Auburn will lose at some point, so I wouldn't worry about that.

 

And you're never going to win the Boise argument around here. For as much as people make some of us out to be mid major homers, there's a bunch of people around here that will never, ever give Boise any credit just because they're Boise.

 

 

Auburn will lose at some point, so I wouldn't worry about that.

 

And you're never going to win the Boise argument around here. For as much as people make some of us out to be mid major homers, there's a bunch of people around here that will never, ever give Boise any credit just because they're Boise.

 

 

 

Boise will get credit once they schedule atleast 3 tough teams in consecutive weeks. Not this crap of opening weekend then play fluffs for 2 weeks before playing another mid level Pac 10 team.

 

Play 3 tough teams in 3 weeks just like everyone in the Big 12,SEC and Big 10 does every year.

Auburn will lose at some point, so I wouldn't worry about that.

 

And you're never going to win the Boise argument around here. For as much as people make some of us out to be mid major homers, there's a bunch of people around here that will never, ever give Boise any credit just because they're Boise.

 

 

That's why I wish there was a playoff so badly. So we can really see how good Boise State is. I believe in them and am on their bandwagon. But I'm almost positive they won't get in the championship game.

It has nothing do with making the other team nervous. It's all about keeping yourself in the game as long as possible. With 6 minutes left, odds are you'll probably only get 1 more chance so why risk putting yourself in a position where you need the ball twice. Plus it takes a lot of steam out of your team if you fail to get those 2 points. You only chase the points when you need to. OU didnt need to start chasing at that point.

I don't understand this logic at all. You need a two either way so what's the difference? If you don't get it, you're down an extra score no matter when you go for it. The risk of needing the ball an extra time is missing the two. It doesn't matter when you miss it.

 

Like I said before, you want to know what you need ASAP. If you get the two, it's obviously just a 7 point game. If you miss it, you still have 6 minutes to get two scores. You know you can't spend the whole clock on one drive. If you go for it down 9 and miss it, you know you need to play for 2 scores. If you don't go for it and don't get the 2 the next time, the game is pretty much over.

Auburn will lose at some point, so I wouldn't worry about that.

 

And you're never going to win the Boise argument around here. For as much as people make some of us out to be mid major homers, there's a bunch of people around here that will never, ever give Boise any credit just because they're Boise.

 

As long as Boise not only plays in the WAC, but is tricky with their OOC schedule, then yes I will not give them credit. Boise loves to play their toughest game OOC as the opener (Oregon last year, Virginia Tech this year) and I'd bet that's no coincidence since the opener in college football is typically a weak game for teams since there is no preseason. Would Boise have beaten Oregon in October of last year or would they beat Virginia Tech now? I say no and no. As well, despite being in the WAC, Boise schedules teams like Toledo and Wyoming out of conference. They know the WAC hurts them, so schedule 4 BCS teams out of conference if you're so interested in being #1. And even with all of that said, Boise doesn't have the test of multi week stretches of stiff competition like the Auburn's of the world do. Without all of these advantages, Boise State would not go undefeated. End of story. If Boise is the only undefeated team at the end of the season or one of two, I have no problem with them playing for the title. But if they finish ahead of any of Auburn, Michigan State, Missouri, or Oregon despite such a school going undefeated, then we have a big problem.

 

Fans of Boise State and TCU (TCU is only a hair behind Boise State right now, and may pass them later on this year if they can pull it off against Utah) REALLY need help this weekend. Michigan State won't lose if they win this weekend, I can't see Oregon losing if they survive this weekend, and Missouri has a shot to run the table if they survive Lincoln.

Edited October 25, 201015 yr by whitesoxfan101

I don't understand this logic at all. You need a two either way so what's the difference? If you don't get it, you're down an extra score no matter when you go for it. The risk of needing the ball an extra time is missing the two. It doesn't matter when you miss it.

 

Like I said before, you want to know what you need ASAP. If you get the two, it's obviously just a 7 point game. If you miss it, you still have 6 minutes to get two scores. You know you can't spend the whole clock on one drive. If you go for it down 9 and miss it, you know you need to play for 2 scores. If you don't go for it and don't get the 2 the next time, the game is pretty much over.

 

 

 

You dont understand the logic of keeping it a 1 possession game with 6 minutes left instead of needing a score, an onside kick and another score? And since OU didnt get the 2, they felt the need to kick an onside kick with 6 minutes left. So they would have needed an onside kick, a score, another onside kick and a score within 6 minutes.

 

 

 

I don't understand this logic at all. You need a two either way so what's the difference? If you don't get it, you're down an extra score no matter when you go for it. The risk of needing the ball an extra time is missing the two. It doesn't matter when you miss it.

 

Like I said before, you want to know what you need ASAP. If you get the two, it's obviously just a 7 point game. If you miss it, you still have 6 minutes to get two scores. You know you can't spend the whole clock on one drive. If you go for it down 9 and miss it, you know you need to play for 2 scores. If you don't go for it and don't get the 2 the next time, the game is pretty much over.

It's not that you want to know what you need right away...it's that you need the opponent to play it like it's a one possession game. You don't go for the 2 until you absolutely have to, and most teams do this.

Auburn will lose at some point, so I wouldn't worry about that.

 

And you're never going to win the Boise argument around here. For as much as people make some of us out to be mid major homers, there's a bunch of people around here that will never, ever give Boise any credit just because they're Boise.

Yes, a blanket statement that really has no validity. When Boise beats some legitimate team, they will get credit. its as easy as that. Until then, every other undefeated team in the country coming out of major conferences has to lose.

I'm fine with stoops looking like an idiot.

Yes, a blanket statement that really has no validity. When Boise beats some legitimate team, they will get credit. its as easy as that. Until then, every other undefeated team in the country coming out of major conferences has to lose.

What I said certainly wasn't a blanket statement but whatever. And no, for some people(not all) it doesn't matter who the hell Boise beats, they've beaten "legitimate" teams before and there's always still some other excuse on why they're not good enough to play with the big boys.

 

And you want a statement with no validity? How about the fact that everyone keeps saying that Boise would already have 2 or 3 losses if they played in bcs conference? Why is that exactly? Because there name is Boise State, that's all, that statement has not freakin validity at this point.

 

 

And you want a statement with no validity? How about the fact that everyone keeps saying that Boise would already have 2 or 3 losses if they played in bcs conference? Why is that exactly? Because there name is Boise State, that's all, that statement has not freakin validity at this point.

 

No its because of the players on the team.

 

Now they may not have 2-3 losses, but I sincerely doubt that if Boise played a Big 10, SEC or Big 12 slate that they would go undefeated. Most teams in those conferences are going to have to beat 2-3 teams ranked in the top 15 and 1 of those games will potentially be on the road.

 

I think Boise would be in the middle of the pack in most conferences.