The Boise State Dilemma: The Problem Lies With The Voters
Last Monday night, Boise State made a statement about their legitimacy as a college football power by defeating the Virginia Tech Hokies in Landover, Md. in front of a very partisan Hokie crowd. The Broncos not only won, but engineered a last minute drive to complete a comeback victory after letting Virginia Tech back in the game after establishing an early 17-0 lead.
However, Saturday spelled doom for Boise State, on a day on which they didn't even play. Virginia Tech, looking to rebound against lowly James Madison, did the exact opposite by losing to the Dukes at home in Lane Stadium in front of a stunned crowd.
Boise State had been hoping that a win over a marquee team would be all that it needed to get to a national championship game. Unfortunately for the Broncos, the Hokies are looking less like a great team and any major clout that the Broncos had established last Monday night was quickly thrown into question as soon as jubilant James Madison players began celebrating on the field in Blacksburg.
Throughout all of the talk about Boise State, there has been one overwhelming question in the minds of the college football world.
Does Boise State deserve to play for the national championship after playing as weak of a schedule that they play year in and year out?
That really isn't the question that people should be asking. The real question is whether or not Boise State, regardless of schedule, is truly a great team.
Too many people are looking at the Broncos and saying that they may be ranked high right now, but that once conference play starts, they'll drop like a rock in the polls. Maybe not out of the top 10, but low enough to discount them from making a national championship game.
That is absolutely ludicrous thinking.
Rankings are made based on the voters opinion of how good a team is or isn't. As it stands right now, the overall consensus of the voters is that Boise State is the third best team in the country behind Alabama and Ohio State. Why that would ever change if all teams around them win the rest of their games is beyond me.
Hypothetically speaking, let's say that Boise State wins all the rest of their games the way one would expect them to: 30-40 point wins in conference and a solid two to three touchdown victory over Oregon State at home. Let's also say that teams like Oklahoma, Florida, TCU, and Oregon all win the rest of their games and stay undefeated. How would you rank them?
It really all comes down to a head to head thing. Do you believe Boise is better than XX school? And you do that with every one of them and however you feel about the matchup between the two schools, you rank them accordingly.
However, the key is to exclude who they are playing. If you think Florida is better than Boise State because Florida beat Georgia this week and Boise State beat Hawaii, then you're part of the problem.
This whole thing with Boise State is really quite simple. If you think they are a great team now, what is keeping you from believing they will be a great team later in the year? It's the same team. If you don't think they're a great team now, then don't rank them so dang high if you're only going to drop them later!
That's just stupid and it's the major problem with the polls: The what-have-you-done-for-me-lately mentality.
Boise State may not be deserving of the No. 3 ranking in the country, but to wait until they play bad teams later in the year to drop them is plain idiocy.
Fix the problem now voters, if you feel there is a problem!
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?