Boise inks deal with UT Martin in 2013

For if our good friend ever would admit that Boise has proven over the last five years, that they indeed belong in the discussion, a contention accepted by nearly everyone, well, except him and a few die-hard AQ school fans, then he would have to admit that he was wrong.  Horrors!

Spinny reminds me of those religious movements that had their leader predict the End of the World.  Their followers went to the hillside or wherever they predicted the apocalyse to take place, and waited.  Alas, the devastation of Boise State never happened.  So, like those good hellfire preachers, they conveniently correct those erroneous predictions, and set up yet another barrier.

Let us take a moment to make COMMON SENSE out of yet another regurgitation of ole Smiley boy.

First Smiles, you CONSISTENTLY want to talk about a 5 year window. This sir is a problem. In doing this, you want the rest "excused" as if to say, " We weren't ready yet but now we are".

Well Smiles, let's apply some Big Boy LOGIC to this slanted reasoning of yours.

First Smiles, riddle me these: 

Is Texas Tech a POWER HOUSE FOOTBALL PROGRAM?
IS Cincinnati a POWER HOUSE FOOTBALL PROGRAM? 
Is BAYLOR a POWER HOUSE SMILES? 
Is OKLAHOMA STATE COWGIRLS A POWERHOUSE? 
Is Vanderbilt an Up and Coming Program Smiles? 
How about Ole Miss?  Powerhouse?
Are the Colorado Buffaloes a FORCE to be reckoned with?  
How about the Washington Huskies Smiles? Power to the 10th?

You see Smiles, on your little "Walton's Mountain" at which you live, you see ONE group of players successful against 95% of the Bottom Feeders of the football landscape, beat a few ranked teams and you see a "PowerHouse Program".  "As good as they come right smiles?

You have an Undrafted QB that you are claiming to be the Best QB in College History that half of his years, couldn't even wrap up a Mid-Major Title.

The problem with you Smiles, is Baylor had a Better QB than Boise did the last 2 years.  Cincinnatti has been ranked Higher than Boise in the last 10 years.  Cincinatti has been to More BCS Bowls than Boise. Okie State had a nice One year Run.  Ole Piss looked good for about 3 years.  Colorado went on a run for about 4-5 years.  Washington beat the daylights out of Boise. Texas Tech was ranked higher than Boise has EVER Been ranked and would have and Leach would have carved Boise up like a Thanksgiving turkey.

But see Smiles, ALL of those teams have to start over now.  Their top players either graduated or went Pro. They spent themselves on 4 to 5 years and caught a wave when the Big Boys were rebuilding.  This is how it happens. 

As for Boise, they don't have that much to worry about as they are going to Suck, be overrated again, and continue to schedule UT Martin, UC Davis, Weber State, HOPE LIKE HECK ARKANSAS or NEBRASKA actually WANT to play them and play Nevada for the National Pee Wee Flag Football Title.

It comes in waves smiley boy.  
 

Kellen Moore not getting drafted is pretty hilarious......

Qbs like Craig Krenzel, Matt Mauck, Josh Booty, Tee Martin etc even got drafted.........

This arguement is still going on?

Let us take a moment to make COMMON SENSE out of yet another regurgitation of ole Smiley boy.

I will grant you this, using common sense is a heck of a lot easier on my posts than on your muddled missives.

Then you rattle off a list of low to medium end AQ programs, and of course, ask your loaded questions.  And then in the next sentence, once again repeat your faulty thesis about Boise's position in all of this.  Let's go slowly, since I may lose you (pretty certain, you've been lost in your arguments for 5 years).

1. You constantly think that a team's status as a nonAQ or AQ means more than it really does.  All "AQ" status means is that they are guaranteed a nice paycheck every year for their program from the BCS.  All nonAQ means is less money.  Both are members of the BCS, both must follow the exact same NCAA rules, and supposedly, they both should receive the same consideration in poll rnakings.  But the truth is slightly different about their place in the perceived world.  This matters, since for folks like you, perception IS reality.

2. You mistake budget size for the worthiness of the team that actually plays on the field.  Funny thing, in every other sport, it's possible for a small market team to play for it all.  It often happens.  But in football, we've careful stacked the deck to make such a possibility next to impossible.

3.  Boise, in case you haven't noticed, plays the teams they play, because, well, that is the conference to which they belong, they have to play them.  Sensitive to loud mouths like you, Boise is making a good faith effort to change this, switching conferences twice now.  But I've yet to see you acknowledge that, well, since acknowledging that would force you to confess that Boise might possibly belong in the discussion.

4. In scheduling, like everyone else, Boise seeks to develop its own program.  It isn't particularly interested in enriching OU's or anyone else's.  Ideally, good football schedules should be "win-win" propositions, good for both sides.  Why is this simple concept so difficult for you to grasp, Spinny?  Boise will schedule games that are in its best interest, ones that will bring in good money, and further its cause.  to do different would be stupid, don't you agree?

5. Boise is doing what they can.  Every year they agree to play a marquee team, almost always on the road. And every year, at least so far, they have WON those games.  That is the difference between Boise and North Texas or Idaho.  Those teams are rent-a-mules, easy wins for anyone who brings them in.  Boise?  Er, no, they might beat you, suddenly the list of schools interested in a game dramatically goes down.  But when Boise, in order to get a home game, is forced to take on a lesser foe, oh boy do you guys scream.  The double standard is incredible, even more so when you guys are too dense to even get it.

But see Smiles, ALL of those teams have to start over now.  Their top players either graduated or went Pro. They spent themselves on 4 to 5 years and caught a wave when the Big Boys were rebuilding.  This is how it happens.

We'll see, now won't we?  I suspect that Boise will not be as good this year, you don't lose the best senior class in history without taking some hits.  But I watched Spring practice, they'll be fine.  I like the kid from Florida, he fits the Kellen Moore mold, undersized, smart, leadership qualities in spades.  You see, my friend, Boise isn't just landing a few local kids, although we've once again got some great ones.  Boise is picking up state champions and players of the year from all over the country these days.  You really need to keep up.  One of these days it may dawn on you.

Oh, I take that back, nothing has dawned on you in five years, I'm not holding my breath now.  Rest well, my old (really old) friend.  Peace.

 In scheduling, like everyone else, Boise seeks to develop its own program.  It isn't particularly interested in enriching OUr or anyone else's.  Ideally, good football schedules should be "win-win" propositions, good for both sides. 



Smiles Boise st may have made contact with some Big Boys and believe me with what Boise has to offer in return is what is stopping any big boys from playing them. Believe me with what Boise st has to offer, it will make the likes of YOU rich, so quit making that crap up. As long as Boise keeps making its offers so one sided their not going to play any big boys other then the one they play every year.
So its Boise that needs to quit using that nobody will play us excuss. Their not going to till Boise gets off their high horse and makes it fair, Offering the visitng team 4 times less then what boise is getting is not a fair deal, and teams like you say OU dam sure won't  get rich off of those kinda deals.

1. You constantly think that a team's status as a nonAQ or AQ means more than it really does.  All "AQ" status means is that they are guaranteed a nice paycheck every year for their program from the BCS.  All nonAQ means is less money.  Both are members of the BCS, both must follow the exact same NCAA rules, and supposedly, they both should receive the same consideration in poll rnakings.  But the truth is slightly different about their place in the perceived world.  This matters, since for folks like you, perception IS reality.

Wrong Smiles.  AQ vs Non-AQ means All of the difference in the World. 

MAJOR Universities AQ to Mid-Major Non-AQ carries the Same "Gap" in talent level as Non-AQ Mid-Major to 1AA or FCS. 

The Parallel is almost exact.  There are Plenty of FCS clubs that can beat teams from the WAC my friend. 

AQ if FAR Superior to Non-AQ and it has been proven and will continue to be proven.

Yes Perception is reality and so is Reality.

2. You mistake budget size for the worthiness of the team that actually plays on the field.  Funny thing, in every other sport, it's possible for a small market team to play for it all.  It often happens.  But in football, we've careful stacked the deck to make such a possibility next to impossible.

Smiles, I can quote you more than 2 Dozen Times Claiming how much better Boise would be if it had the Budget of the Big Boys.  You have Contradicted yourself yet again.  Plus, Football is a MUCH bigger arena than basketball or Hockey.  Terrible comparison.

3.  Boise, in case you haven't noticed, plays the teams they play, because, well, that is the conference to which they belong, they have to play them.  Sensitive to loud mouths like you, Boise is making a good faith effort to change this, switching conferences twice now.  But I've yet to see you acknowledge that, well, since acknowledging that would force you to confess that Boise might possibly belong in the discussion.

The Conference they belong and competition they play can be used in any conversation. Which is EXACTLY why Boise can't be compared properly to The Best of the Majors. 

Unless of course you are prepared to Concede that Montana is very comparable to Boise State today? Which may be vaild right? How about James Madison University?

4. In scheduling, like everyone else, Boise seeks to develop its own program.  It isn't particularly interested in enriching OU's or anyone else's.

Ok, sounds good.

5. Boise is doing what they can.  Every year they agree to play a marquee team, almost always on the road. And every year, at least so far, they have WON those games.

They are 10-17 Smiles.  How is that "winnning every year" smiles?

Well, I see that you continue to use the broken clock is correct twice a day form of statistical analysis, Spinny.

You can't argue with someone who uses the hopeless point that a whole slate of AQ teams "would" have beaten Boise State.  Heck, use that logic and Jennifer Aniston "would" have married me if she had only played me.  How stupid to even use such would of could of should of arguments?

The trouble is that no one can either prove or disprove such speculation.  And your only "proof" is this single statistic that has to use games played in 1996 in order to "prove" how good Boise was in 2011 or to specualte how good they will be next year.

You are simply wrong, Spinny.  To even attempt to argue that Boise St. is by definition inferior to any AQ team is stupid beyond words.  Use what ever criteria you care to use, win/loss records, number of players drafted, poll standings, expert analysis, game film, coaches' opinions, TV ratings, hell, even national opinion polls, and so forth, Boise's team last year was clearly in the top tier of all teams in the country.  This opinion is supported almost universally by anyone with even a smidgen of unbiased analytical ability. 

Which is clearly why you don't get it, my old, old friend.  No one else with any kind of credibility agrees with you, but you continue to pontificate.  Even among fans of the big schools, every year the circle of people who so totally reject Boise grows smaller.  Keep it up, Spinny, pretty soon it will be down to you, Sooner Shel, diffendale, and a couple of diehard Bama fans.  Well, maybe GatorLass, you really need to get her phone number. 

Let's see, we are due for another Mt. Union comparison.  Gotta love you, Spinny, you are one of a kind.

You can't argue with someone who uses the hopeless point that a whole slate of AQ teams "would" have beaten Boise State.  Heck, use that logic and Jennifer Aniston "would" have married me if she had only played me.  How stupid to even use such would of could of should of arguments?

The trouble is that no one can either prove or disprove such speculation.  And your only "proof" is this single statistic that has to use games played in 1996 in order to "prove" how good Boise was in 2011 or to specualte how good they will be next year.

Again Smiles and his hypocrisy.

Smiles, what do we have as evidence that Boise is better than James Madison U?

What do we have as evidence that Boise is better than Montana when the last meeting btween the two teams, Montana took Boise to the Woodshed beating them by 4 touchdowns?

You have no argument Smiles.

Your team continues to hide behind the Smoke and Mirrors. 

Smiles, what do we have as evidence that Boise is better than James Madison U?

What do we have as evidence that Boise is better than Montana when the last meeting btween the two teams, Montana took Boise to the Woodshed beating them by 4 touchdowns?

You have no argument Smiles.

Your team continues to hide behind the Smoke and Mirrors.

As predicatble as dust when the wind blows on the plains of Oklahoma.

So using the same logic, can you prove that Oklahoma is better than James Madison?  Of course you can't.

Let's see, the last meeting between Boise and Montana was back when they played in the same division, what, 15 or 20 years ago?  And what again does this prove, besides that Boise, since being in division one has made amazing progress?

Of course I have no argument, nor do you.  You can't refute something that doesn't happen.  You can't prove something based on speculation.

The only proof would be if the teams you list would actually set up a game.  Trust me, we Boise fans would love the chance.  But it seems that none of these brave talkers are willing to set these things up, especially on a level playing field.

No, you try to base arguments based on woulda coulda shoulda.  Of course such tripe can't be refuted.  Me?  I prefer actual games played in the current century with players who are currently playing, not games played back when Barry Switzer purchased his players or when Boise was in division 1aa.

Let's see, we are due for another Mt. Union comparison.

actually what Mt Union has done under Larry Kehres is much more impressive then what Boise has done recently

there are no athletic scholarships at the Division 3 level, yet Kehres has been able to find the best of whats left after 1-A 1-AA and D2 teams take their players and coach them up into winners to be part of a program that has been a machine at their level for the past 20 or so years 

since 1986 Mt Union is 317-24-3  with 10 national titles.....complete domination of their level of play, a level with very little resources.

actually what Mt Union has done under Larry Kehres is much more impressive then what Boise has done recently

there are no athletic scholarships at the Division 3 level, yet Kehres has been able to find the best of whats left after 1-A 1-AA and D2 teams take their players and coach them up into winners to be part of a program that has been a machine at their level for the past 20 or so years 

since 1986 Mt Union is 317-24-3  with 10 national titles.....complete domination of their level of play, a level with very little resources.

Ive said it time and time again osubuckeye.  I think they could beat Boise 5 or 6 out of 10.

Ive said it time and time again osubuckeye.  I think they could beat Boise 5 or 6 out of 10.

I definetly would not say that

the talent gap between Division 1 and Division 3 is pretty big 

I'd say Mount Union completely dominating their division for 20+ years is a lot more impressive then Boise stringing out a good decade against the middle-bottom of their division 

To even attempt to argue that Boise St. is by definition inferior to any AQ team is stupid beyond words. 

No it isn't.  It is very easy to do. They are inferior to many many AQ programs in every sense of the word.  Boise just gets to hide from the onslaught 11 out of 12 games every year. Pretty simple to do.

 Boise's team last year was clearly in the top tier of all teams in the country.  This opinion is supported almost universally by anyone with even a smidgen of unbiased analytical ability. 

Clear as MUD Smiles.  There is no way whatsoever to prove analytically any such thing as it is based on pure speculation.  Boise beat UGA and Oregonao State dude. In fact, they didn't even beat Oregeno State very convincingly at all.

If you can draw a conclusion analytically from a 2 out of 12 indicator, you are one hell of a genius.

Boise is awarded the Media and pollsters "Affirmative Action Vote" year after year and you know it.

Problem is, when you are the recipient of it, you seem to LOVE it too much to argue.

Your MWC CHAMPIONS, the team that beat Boise, Lost to SMU for crying out loud.  Further, they SHOULD have lost to La Tech in the Poinsettia Bowl.

Gone for a few days, and Spin goes on a spiral.

Wrong Smiles.  AQ vs Non-AQ means All of the difference in the World. 

AQ if FAR Superior to Non-AQ and it has been proven and will continue to be proven. 

The Conference they belong and competition they play can be used in any conversation. Which is EXACTLY why Boise can't be compared properly to The Best of the Majors.  

<span style="color: #333333;">  
 

Hmm. Damn sPIN, I guess you should have let Boise and TCU know that before they played the Big 12 champ, the Pac champ, the ACC champ, and the Big 10 champ. It doesn't look like they got the memo.

Noise State University may have to remain in the MWaC! Big East is even less stable than the MWaC!