re: ESPN Bowl Projections - LSU v. Oklahoma in NC

quote:

---

Seriously? A&M and Okie St only legit teams left.

---

This is why LSU should move to the Big-12. We'd be in the NCG every damn year!

I don't really want any part of OU. They're a good team wanting revenge in NOLA. Would be a tough game. I'd love to beat the shite out of Boise if we're lucky enough to get there.

quote:

---

I don't really want any part of OU.

---

FSU was all over that arse until the QB went down

I'm so confused. I don't know what to believe.

quote:

---

While I agree that Boise isn't built to sustain an SEC schedule, they can beat any team in the country in a one game scenario.

---

I have no idea why people keep saying this. Are there people out there ignorant enough to believe that football at any level has ever been a 1 game sport?

All levels of football that I have ever heard of have all, always been about a season. I've never once run across a football league giving a championship to a 1-0 team. Boise could beat the Green Bay Packers in "one game" and still not even win the MWC. Winning one game has simply never meant anything in football ever, until Boise State started doing it. Personally, whenever I hear someone say that it makes Boise State sound like a joke and makes that person sound like an idiot.

quote:

---

I have no idea why people keep saying this. Are there people out there ignorant enough to believe that football at any level has ever been a 1 game sport?

---

It is in the NCG. For instance, In December of 2010, LSU's entire season was one game - Texas A&M.

quote:

---

All levels of football that I have ever heard of have all, always been about a season. I've never once run across a football league giving a championship to a 1-0 team. Boise could beat the Green Bay Packers in "one game" and still not even win the MWC. Winning one game has simply never meant anything in football ever, until Boise State started doing it. Personally, whenever I hear someone say that it makes Boise State sound like a joke and makes that person sound like an idiot.

---

This really isn't difficult to understand. I'm not sure I can make it any clearer than I already have. Maybe if I typed slower you could keep up. I'll try:

Boise gets grief about its strength of schedule. This grief is well deserved.

However, often times people allow that criticism to bleed over into a one-game analysis. Such as

"Boise is from the WAC; there is no way they beat Oklahoma."

"Sure, Boise can beat Utah, but they don't have the athletes to beat Virginia Tech."

"Boise doesn't play anyone. They'll never beat Georgia."

See. These statements aren't logically sound because they attempt to take a season projection based on conference and apply it to a one game scenario.

Could Boise go undefeated in the SEC? No.

Could Boise beat any team in the SEC on any given weekend? Yes, they could.

So people who say "they can beat any team in the country in a one game scenario" aren't ignorant or an idiot. There just perceptive to recent history and understand that equating overall strength of schedule with a single game is a foolish thing to do.

quote:

---

Boise has the better QB

---

Landry Jones is no slouch. He's about to break Sam Bradford's passing record.

I think we'll beat any team in the country if we make it to the NC. I think OU would be tougher than Boise, though. I thought they looked pretty damn good against FSU...but I'm in the minority on that.

quote:

---

FSU was all over that arse until the QB went down

---

Why wouldn't they be? They have great athletes playing at home at night. The crowd was fricking fired up as they should be. OU still handed them a big fat L.

quote:

---

Both of them are making factually correct statements, both statements are obviously self-evident (since literally any team can beat literally any other team "in a one game scenario") and both are made in the foolish misconception that the statements have any relevence to football.

---

Fine. Since we are playing take everything said as super technical, I'll change my quote - Boise State would nothing more than a minimal underdog to any team in the country on a neutral field and would be favored against all but a handful of teams.

quote:

---

However, they are not quite as foolish as people who claim things like football is a 1 game sport "in the NCG."

---

Again, hypertechnical people aren't very amusing and aren't nearly as clever as they think. A "one game scenario" doesn't mean a one game season. It means a single game. And, in a single game, Boise State would be favored over all but a handful of teams.

Right now, I think Boise would be favored over every team not named Oklahoma, LSU, or Alabama.

And even then they are less than a touchdown underdog.

quote:

---

Right now, I think Boise would be favored over every team not named Oklahoma, LSU, or Alabama.

---

The truth, accuracy or supportability (or lack of any of these) are not the point. The point is, "what's the point?" As in, "what is the point of the statement?"

When people say, "Oregon has a dynamic offense with multiple playmakers that execute at a tempo that cause major problems for opposing teams' defenses," they are making the point that the nature of Oregon's offense is such that it significantly improves their chances of having a successful season, winning a Pac-12 Championship, and/or winning a National Championship. When people say, "LSU has a nasty defense that shuts down opposing offenses whether they are speed/finesse based, power running game based, or a balanced pro-style attack," they mean that LSU's defense is sufficiently strong that we have a good chance at winning the West, the SEC or even the National Championship, and that -- failing that -- we should at least have a very successful season unless our offense utterly collapses.

Do you see what I mean? When people make these observations, they are observations that have relevance to the outcome of the season, and how that season might stack up compared to other teams' season this year, or other seasons LSU has enjoyed. What relevance does, "Boise could beat anyone in a one game scenario" have to anything? I guess what I'm asking is, "so what?" It doesn't prove anybody wrong about anything since no one argues whether they could win a "one game scenario" since no one but Boise State (and their self-appointed advocates) ever bother with "one game scenarios" when discussing the quality of a team, or a team's championship credentials. And it doesn't prove anybody right about anything other than the patently obvious statement that one team could, in theory, beat another team on any given day.