« TCU's Kirkpatrick, Texas' Acho among 2010 Lombardi semifinalists | Main | UT loses another committment »

October 31, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

It amazes me that Boise State keeps getting looked over. Coach Peterson has only lost 4 games in 5 years, including wins over Oklahoma, Oregon, and TCU. Doesn't that show everyone that Boise can play with "big" conferences?


Its about THIS season. Simply, their resume doesn't remotely compare to Auburn's. Clearly, on any given day, they can beat the big boys, but if they were IN one of those conferences they would be an 8-4 type team. You can't measure what they do in a ONE time shot versus taking the pounding week after week by physical opponents. Comparing Boise to Auburn or Oregon is just apples and oranges.

Dear Lance,

Complete biased speculation and unsubstantiated BS! No reason BSU or TCU (for that matter) couldn't beat mediocre SEC teams every week by two TDs like they are beating bad WAC and MWC teams by 6 TDs. Your rediculous bias shows ignorance and lack of education. I'm sure you believe that Florida is still good this year just because their name is Florida. GMAB!


How long will it take people like you to understand? There is a reason that we refer to the BCS conferences as POWER conferences. Week in and week out, teams in POWER conferences lay it all on the line. A loss in those conferences means you fall, but not out of the top 20 (of course!) because your playing a POWER team! The Boise's (and TCU's) play in playpens compared to the POWER conferences. When there's only one (or two) other teams in the playpen that are worth watching, you really only have to win TWO games a year. Quite simple, don't you think?

I agree completely that TCU and Boise St need to be in a power conference to see how they stack up. That said, they have proved deserving of being in a power conference, more so then many of the teams already in one based on their record in the last decade. They've dominated at the level they are at for many years, showing they're not a flash in the pan. So what else do they have to do to be invited? Someone explain how Texas Tech, A&M, and Baylor deserve to remain in the Big 12 based on the last 10 years and TCU does not, outside of money. As to attendence, TCU's is going up, and if playing other Texas schools, they will be sellouts vs. what they were back in the SWC days. Wyoming and UNLV don't send enough fans here to fill it out. So lets leave attendence out of the argument for the moment and tell me why, for pure football competitiveness, why they shouldn't be invited to a good conference and allowed to compete. And what's wrong with 8-4 in a power conference if invited?

And one more thing. Instead of turning up noses and spewing out how unworthy TCU is ( UT fans ), it would be nice simply to acknowledge them as having done very well for being one of the smallest Division 1A schools can do, especially with limited resources and having to take recruits that Texas, Oklahoma, and others overlook. If the tables were reversed, would your school do that well? My point is not that they should be the next BCS champion, but that they've done extremely well and are deserving a shot at the next level, which they will not get.

On Sept. 18, TCU crushed Baylor 45 to 10,
On Oct.30 Baylor humbled UT 30 to 22. So much for your power schools!

Please note that TCU is 13-3 in it's last 16 games against AQ schools. Stop slamming us for not playing teams that simply refuse to play us unless it's a bowl game and they have no choice. And stop with the "it's just a temporary good run" BS. This run of bowl appearances began with our victory over USC in the 1998 Sun Bowl and we've had good years ever since.

The comments to this entry are closed.