Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

Seems like a smart thing to do. You were undefeated....no one else is.

Also If I were Brandon the entire week before our game with them i would refer to them as the National Champions.

"When your playing a team like this that won the national championship last year....etc."

That may seem disrespectful to Urbie tho.

But why state something that's not true? Why not just be proud of beating Oklahoma and winning a big time BCS Bowl? Peterson himself said on Cold Pizza that he ranked his team 4th because he felt like they were the 4th best team in the nation!

I'm the King of Sweden

In reality, Florida would beat Boise and Peterson knows that. Oklahoma was probably the most average BCS team to make it, and Boise had to resort to a hook and ladder, statue of liberty and a no look hand-off to beat them. It's great that Boise went 13-0 but put them through a major school schedule and they're not so fortunate.

Brigham Young won a national title out of the WAC going undefeated and beating a .500 Michigan team in the Holiday Bowl so I would see nothing wrong in sporting a t-shirt with the following logo:

jpfalcon09 wrote:In reality, Florida would beat Boise and Peterson knows that. Oklahoma was probably the most average BCS team to make it, and Boise had to resort to a hook and ladder, statue of liberty and a no look hand-off to beat them. It's great that Boise went 13-0 but put them through a major school schedule and they're not so fortunate.

Once again, that's not reality, and those aren't facts. Those are assumptions. Upsets happen all the time. I don't think you would say Auburn is a better team than Boise (At least I hope you wouldn't), but they sure handed Florida their asses. Why wouldn't Boise be able to?

Just because Florida played one awesome game doesn't make them some juggernaut. They were very fortunate to get through their schedule with only one loss. They beat Vandy by 3 or 4 and SC by 1 on 3 blocked kicks. Put Florida up against Boise's schedule, and I can't guarantee they have a better margin of victory.

Nobody on this planet knows if Boise is better than Florida or if Florida is better than Boise, and nobody will ever know.

And one more thing -- saying that Boise "had" to resort to trickery to beat Oklahoma completely distorts the complexion of the game. Boise dominated 80% of that game. They were forced to resort to the hook-and-ladder because their QB made a dumb throw. And why does the fact that they used misdirection and trickery to win the game diminish the accomplishment? Because they didn't run the ball up the gut for three yards on the last play that means they're somehow less of a team? Does BG's win in 2003 against Toledo mean less because J5 scored on a throwback pass? That line of thinking has never made any sense to me.

Jacobs4Heisman wrote: And one more thing -- saying that Boise "had" to resort to trickery to beat Oklahoma completely distorts the complexion of the game. Boise dominated 80% of that game. They were forced to resort to the hook-and-ladder because their QB made a dumb throw. And why does the fact that they used misdirection and trickery to win the game diminish the accomplishment? Because they didn't run the ball up the gut for three yards on the last play that means they're somehow less of a team? Does BG's win in 2003 against Toledo mean less because J5 scored on a throwback pass? That line of thinking has never made any sense to me.

That line of thinking as been around for probably thousands of years. "Superior" losers use to console themselves after having their asses handed to them. I'm pretty sure (Zom will let us know) that the British use this same excuse because the American Colonials didn't stand in a straight line to shoot the red-coats.

Jacobs4Heisman wrote:And one more thing -- saying that Boise "had" to resort to trickery to beat Oklahoma completely distorts the complexion of the game. Boise dominated 80% of that game. They were forced to resort to the hook-and-ladder because their QB made a dumb throw. And why does the fact that they used misdirection and trickery to win the game diminish the accomplishment? Because they didn't run the ball up the gut for three yards on the last play that means they're somehow less of a team? Does BG's win in 2003 against Toledo mean less because J5 scored on a throwback pass? That line of thinking has never made any sense to me.

I agree with both points here. Boise clearly handled Oklahoma for the majority of the game using a straightforward attack and would have had the game wrapped up if not for a couple dumb plays towards the end.
Rather than saying they had to resort to the hook-and-ladder, I'd say it's great they were able to execute the hook and ladder and fake pass at the end of the game.
Personally, with the way the Gators played in the NC, I don't know if I'll say that Boise could beat them, but as has been said, nobody knows and that's the problem.

Jacobs4Heisman wrote:

jpfalcon09 wrote:In reality, Florida would beat Boise and Peterson knows that. Oklahoma was probably the most average BCS team to make it, and Boise had to resort to a hook and ladder, statue of liberty and a no look hand-off to beat them. It's great that Boise went 13-0 but put them through a major school schedule and they're not so fortunate.

Once again, that's not reality, and those aren't facts. Those are assumptions. Upsets happen all the time. I don't think you would say Auburn is a better team than Boise (At least I hope you wouldn't), but they sure handed Florida their asses. Why wouldn't Boise be able to?

Just because Florida played one awesome game doesn't make them some juggernaut. They were very fortunate to get through their schedule with only one loss. They beat Vandy by 3 or 4 and SC by 1 on 3 blocked kicks. Put Florida up against Boise's schedule, and I can't guarantee they have a better margin of victory.

Nobody on this planet knows if Boise is better than Florida or if Florida is better than Boise, and nobody will ever know.

And one more thing -- saying that Boise "had" to resort to trickery to beat Oklahoma completely distorts the complexion of the game. Boise dominated 80% of that game. They were forced to resort to the hook-and-ladder because their QB made a dumb throw. And why does the fact that they used misdirection and trickery to win the game diminish the accomplishment? Because they didn't run the ball up the gut for three yards on the last play that means they're somehow less of a team? Does BG's win in 2003 against Toledo mean less because J5 scored on a throwback pass? That line of thinking has never made any sense to me.

I do agree that upsets happen a lot, I guess the jist of my post was that it would be very intriguing at least for myself to see Boise have to go through a Big 12 or Pac 10 schedule and come out unscathed. It's hard for me to look at their record with the teams they played and justifyably say they're deserving of being crowned national champions, even with an undefeated record. I know it's a great accomplishment and by no means do I mean to diminish what they did, they were a great team. I would feel the same way about BG too if they played a pretty weak OOC schedule and the MAC was mediocre. That's where the playoff system needs to be implemented so we don't need to have discussions like this and the teams can battle each other to show who truly is the top team.

I didn't mean to ruffle any feathers.

and for the record the Statue of Liberty and "no look hand off" that was referred to in this thread. were in fact the exact same play. The other tricky play that was run, was the back up RB taking the direct snap out of shotgun and throwing to the TE in the endzone!

My dad and I watched the replay of this game tonight, and as we were watching the overtime I said to my father (who is OSU alum and a big OSU fan) that I think Boise would have smoked OSU like Florida did - they run the same type of schemes.

He just looked at me and said: "Yup."

Bleeding Orange wrote:My dad and I watched the replay of this game tonight, and as we were watching the overtime I said to my father (who is OSU alum and a big OSU fan) that I think Boise would have smoked OSU like Florida did - they run the same type of schemes.

He just looked at me and said: "Yup."

I agree, OSU has all kinds of problems with nontraditional formations.

And to go along with j4H, Boise did not use trickery to win that game. Anyone who watched that game from start to finish would agree that Boise was the better team on both sides of the ball. I don't see how OU is an average team. They lost two regular season games and one them was a give away by the refs.

I think OSU has problems with Orange and Blue....Boise would have smoked them.

As far as boise being the better team, all the proof you need is watching how their lines controlled play. Ian Johnson outran Adrian Peterson, and Barry Alvarez said all night that he was impressed by their line play on both sides of the ball.

I thought it was interesting that the rest of the WAC went 2-1 in bowl games. Hawaii's offense is strong enough to outscore anyone in the country on any given day. San Jose State beat New Mexico in New Mexico. Nevada lost by one point to Miami.

I believe the SEC proved it was the strongest conference this year, but I wonder how many SEC teams would have gone through the WAC schedule unscathed this year.

This sounds like an argument for a playoff!