Boise State beats Oklahoma by two touchdowns in the Fiesta Bowl.
Florida beats OSU close in a boring and uninspired game.
USC beats Michigan in a pedestrian game.
When the dust settles, the most impressive win in the bowl games belongs to Boise State, and they are the only unbeaten team in the country.
Unlikely, absolutely.
Is there any way that the Broncos could convince voters to give them First Place votes?
Wouldn’t the Broncos would have much the same claim to the No. 1 ranking that B.Y.U. had at the end of the 1984 season, when poll voters awarded the Cougars the national championship?
While I’m not sure what this has to do with the hurricane season :), I absolutely agree with you. In fact, I mentioned this scenario earlier, and personally I don’t care whether Florida’s win over OSU is “boring and uninspired,” or whether USC beats Michigan. In my mind, if Florida beats OSU, in whatever fashion, and Boise wins impressively over Oklahoma, then, case closed, Boise should be the AP national champ. The only knock on the Broncos has been their schedule, but if they beat a “for real” team like the Sooners, impressively, in what will essentially be an away game (unless Boise fans travel better than I expect), that should eviscerate the “they haven’t played anyone” argument. They would then have proven themselves to be “for real,” and I don’t think you can give the national championship to any one-loss team over an undefeated team that’s proven itself in such a manner.
Of course, you’re right, the only way it could actually happen that Boise would get enough AP votes to win, would be the combination of results you mentioned… and probably not even then. But I would vote for Boise if the things I mentioned happen, regardless of anything else.
I have no idea whether you’re a Notre Dame fan, Anon… but I love how Domers have totally adopted those images of Pete Carroll’s frustration as their own, even though Notre Dame had nothing to do with producing them — on the contrary, the Irish got demolished by the Trojans just a week earlier, causing downright glee for the Poodle. Yet several Irish have left comments with those images of Carroll grimacing at the end of the UCLA game, and I’ve seen them on Domer blogs, several NDLS students are using them as their new Facebook profile photos, etc.. … it’s really quite amusing.
I don’t recall tons of USC fans posting pictures of Charlie Weis’s reaction after the Michigan game on ‘SC blogs and so forth. But then, Notre Dame fans really, really, really hate Pete Carroll. I guess I can understand why, after five straight losses to him, only one of the five being remotely close…
Of course it was more than “remotely close” (although, the term “sore loser” comes to mind…hee hee…j/k); I didn’t mean to suggest otherwise. The phrase “only one of the five being remotely close” doesn’t imply anything about the one that was close, it implies something about the four that weren’t. In other words, what I’m really saying is, “that one was very close, but the other four weren’t even remotely close.” Maybe that’s not clear, but that’s how I would read the sentence if anyone else wrote it, so that’s why I wrote it that way. :)
December 12th, 2006 at 9:42:48 pm
What if…
Boise State beats Oklahoma by two touchdowns in the Fiesta Bowl.
Florida beats OSU close in a boring and uninspired game.
USC beats Michigan in a pedestrian game.
When the dust settles, the most impressive win in the bowl games belongs to Boise State, and they are the only unbeaten team in the country.
Unlikely, absolutely.
Is there any way that the Broncos could convince voters to give them First Place votes?
Wouldn’t the Broncos would have much the same claim to the No. 1 ranking that B.Y.U. had at the end of the 1984 season, when poll voters awarded the Cougars the national championship?
December 12th, 2006 at 10:21:36 pm
While I’m not sure what this has to do with the hurricane season :), I absolutely agree with you. In fact, I mentioned this scenario earlier, and personally I don’t care whether Florida’s win over OSU is “boring and uninspired,” or whether USC beats Michigan. In my mind, if Florida beats OSU, in whatever fashion, and Boise wins impressively over Oklahoma, then, case closed, Boise should be the AP national champ. The only knock on the Broncos has been their schedule, but if they beat a “for real” team like the Sooners, impressively, in what will essentially be an away game (unless Boise fans travel better than I expect), that should eviscerate the “they haven’t played anyone” argument. They would then have proven themselves to be “for real,” and I don’t think you can give the national championship to any one-loss team over an undefeated team that’s proven itself in such a manner.
Of course, you’re right, the only way it could actually happen that Boise would get enough AP votes to win, would be the combination of results you mentioned… and probably not even then. But I would vote for Boise if the things I mentioned happen, regardless of anything else.
December 12th, 2006 at 10:30:41 pm
I would love to see Boise St. win the NC. Almost as much as I love this:
http://images.bruinsnation.com/images/user/6/PC.SouthernCal.06.gif
December 12th, 2006 at 10:37:04 pm
I have no idea whether you’re a Notre Dame fan, Anon… but I love how Domers have totally adopted those images of Pete Carroll’s frustration as their own, even though Notre Dame had nothing to do with producing them — on the contrary, the Irish got demolished by the Trojans just a week earlier, causing downright glee for the Poodle. Yet several Irish have left comments with those images of Carroll grimacing at the end of the UCLA game, and I’ve seen them on Domer blogs, several NDLS students are using them as their new Facebook profile photos, etc.. … it’s really quite amusing.
I don’t recall tons of USC fans posting pictures of Charlie Weis’s reaction after the Michigan game on ‘SC blogs and so forth. But then, Notre Dame fans really, really, really hate Pete Carroll. I guess I can understand why, after five straight losses to him, only one of the five being remotely close…
December 13th, 2006 at 1:41:36 am
I would say it was quite a bit more than “remotely close,” (the term “illegal play” comes to mind) but you have a very legitimate point
December 13th, 2006 at 1:48:51 am
Of course it was more than “remotely close” (although, the term “sore loser” comes to mind…hee hee…j/k); I didn’t mean to suggest otherwise. The phrase “only one of the five being remotely close” doesn’t imply anything about the one that was close, it implies something about the four that weren’t. In other words, what I’m really saying is, “that one was very close, but the other four weren’t even remotely close.” Maybe that’s not clear, but that’s how I would read the sentence if anyone else wrote it, so that’s why I wrote it that way. :)
December 13th, 2006 at 8:40:13 pm
Whoa…how do you know he’s not a UCLA fan, Loy?
December 13th, 2006 at 9:33:46 pm
31,31,31 and 20 aren’t remotely close games. Maybe you mean people kept their remotes close during those games and changed the channel a lot.
I can’t blame them.
December 13th, 2006 at 9:34:50 pm
Wobbly, please see: “I have no idea whether you’re a Notre Dame fan, Anon… but [etc. etc.]”