I am willing to admit when I am wrong.
I was wrong about last night on a variety of levels. I was wrong about it being a low scoring game, and I was wrong about Bosie State losing.
It's not because I don't like Boise State; I actually root for the Broncos because I think it might create the chaos necessary to get the ball rolling towards a playoff.
Yes, I am a playoff proponent, in part because it's nonsensical that in this day and age, when every other NCAA sport has a playoff that decides the champion, the participants in the national title game of the lead sport in college are picked by coaches, people formerly associated with the game, and a byzantine computer algorithm.
I am the kind of person who looks to the past to try and understand the present. How did we get here, etc. What I wanted to look at with regards to Boise State is how did we get here.
We all know about Boise State's impressive run through the WAC; they have won or shared tthe league title all but two years since joining it in 2001 (2001 and 2007 when Louisiana Tech and Hawai'i won it, respectively). Not only that, but outside of 2005' split title with Nevada, Boise State has gone undefeated every year it's won the WAC.
The WAC has been in a state of flux all of that time due to the comings and goings of teams and the reshuffling that took place due to the ACC expansion in 2004. What I wanted to focus on today was how Boise State has done in the part of the schedule that they have been able to control historically (to some degree). I wanted to see how the Broncos have fared in the non-conference portion of their schedule since joining the WAC in 2001.
So to the history books and the dusty parts of the interwebs where such data resides. I'd like to thank College Football Data Warehouse for providing me with the schedules for Boise State.
For this, I'll list the home games in blue and road games in red. Bowl games and neutral site games are listed in black. This includes the games through last night. (And yes, last night was considered a neutral site, even if it was a de facto home game for Virginia Tech. )
Rankings for opponents are from the coaches poll and reflect the team's rankings at the time of the game. Opponent's home conference in parentheses.
2001 (non-conference record: 2-2)
@ #21 South Carolina: L 13-32 (SEC)
Washington State: L 20-41 (Pac-10)
@ Idaho: W 45-13 (Sunbelt)
Central Michigan: W 26-10 (MAC)
2002 (4-1)
Idaho: W 38-21 (Sunbelt)
@Arkansas: L 14-41 (SEC)
@ Wyoming: W 35-13 (MWC)
Utah State: W 63-38 (Sunbelt)
Iowa State: W 34-16 in Humanitarian Bowl (Big 12)
2003 (4-1)
Idaho State: W 63-0 (I-AA)
@Idaho: W 24-10 (Sunbelt)
@Oregon State: L 24-26 (Pac-1o)
Wyoming: W 33-17 (MWC)
#19 TCU: W 34-31 in Fort Worth Bowl (C-USA)
2004 (3-1)
Idaho: W 65-7 (Sunbelt)
Oregon State: W 30-27 (Pac-10)
BYU: W 28-27 (MWC)
#8 Louisville: L 41-44 in Liberty Bowl (C-USA)
2005 (2-3)
@ #13 Georgia: L 13-48 (SEC)
@Oregon State: L 27-30 (Pac-10)
Bowling Green: W 48-20 (MAC)
Portland State: W 21-14 (I-AA)
#19 Boston College: L 21-27 in MPC Computers Bowl (ACC)
2006 (5-0)
Sacramento State: W 45-0 (I-AA)
Oregon State: W 42-14 (Pac-10)
@Wyoming: W 17-10 (MWC)
@Utah: W 36-3 (MWC)
#10 Oklahoma: W 43-42 in OT in Fiesta Bowl (Big 12)
2007 (3-2)
Weber State: W 56-7 (I-AA)
@Washington: L 10-24 (Pac-10)
Wyoming: W 24-14 (MWC)
Southern Mississippi: W 38-16 (C-USA)
East Carolina: L 38-41 in Hawai'i Bowl (C-USA)
2008 (4-1)
Idaho State: W 49-7 (I-AA)
Bowling Green: W 20-7 (MAC)
@ #12 Oregon: W 37-32 (Pac-10)
@Southern Mississippi: W 24-7 (C-USA)
#11 TCU: L 16-17 in SDCCU Poinsettia Bowl (MWC)
2009 (6-0)
#14 Oregon: W 19-8 (Pac-10)
Miami (OH): W 48-0 (MAC)
@Bowling Green: W 49-14 (MAC)
UC Davis: W 34-16 (I-AA)
@ Tulsa: W 28-21 (C-USA)
#3 TCU: W 17-10 in Fiesta Bowl (MWC)
2010 (1-0)
#6 Virginia Tech: W 33-30 in neutral site in Landover, MD (ACC)
So, for the record, since 2001:
Non-conference: 34-11 (including bowl games)
Bowl games: 4-4
BCS bowl games: 2-0
Vs. BCS conference schools: 7-8
vs. TCU: 2-1
vs. BYU: 1-0
vs. Utah: 1-0
vs. SEC: 0-3 (all on the road)
vs. Top-25 opponents: 6-5 (but on a 5-1 streak since playing Oklahoma in Fiesta Bowl)
It's not like this program is a flash in the pan. The Broncos have been steadily building themselves for the better part of a decade. Dan Hawkins started the job, but the program has hit another gear since Chris Petersen took over before the 2006 season, when the Broncos really started to become a national name.
What has some hands wringing already, though, is now that the Broncos have cleared the early season hurdle (although Oregon State still comes to the blue turf in two weeks) of a top-10 opponent, how far/how high will Boise State rise. They were moved up from number five to number three in the coaches poll released today, but we won't get the Harris Poll results for another couple of weeks, and the BCS standings sometime in late October.
When some more games get played and some things shake out, I don't see the Broncos being higher than number three in the BCS standings if Ohio State and Alabama handle their business. The albatross that is the weekly WAC power rating (and I think a couple of losses) will keep Boise State from Glendale.
Then again, stranger seasons have occurred recently....
Showing posts with label Boise State Broncos. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Boise State Broncos. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Tuesday's Quick Slant: Get on the bus?
Apparently Pat Forde is going to drive the bus from Boise, Idaho to Glendale, Arizona, declaring last night that it's time to "Get. On. The. Bus." and leading the Forde Yard Dash this week with the same declaration.
I'm still going to wait to see if the Broncos can navigate some late season traps. Even though I was wrong about last night, I don't think it's a cakewalk for the Broncos at this point to head to the BCS title game.
Let's see when the Harris Poll comes out in October and how much they get penalized for the WAC strength of schedule - unless the WAC is miraculously going to beat up on all of their non-conference opponents.
I'm still going to wait to see if the Broncos can navigate some late season traps. Even though I was wrong about last night, I don't think it's a cakewalk for the Broncos at this point to head to the BCS title game.
Let's see when the Harris Poll comes out in October and how much they get penalized for the WAC strength of schedule - unless the WAC is miraculously going to beat up on all of their non-conference opponents.
Sunday, September 5, 2010
Monday's Quick Slant: A glance at Virginia Tech-Boise State
It's the final game of opening weekend, and a fitting way to end the unofficial final day of summer.
Boise State playing a "neutral site" game against Virginia Tech in Landover, MD. (Washington, D.C.)
The number 3 ranked Broncos are the favorite and return 21 of 22 starters. Virginia Tech is among the favorites to win their division in the ACC.
While Boise State quarterback Kellen Moore is the more heralded of the signal callers, it would be foolish to overlook Tyrod Taylor of Virginia Tech. Taylor is a senior and has a huge arm, although his accuracy could be better. Taylor also can make plays with his legs, although he was not called on to do so that much last season.
Virginia Tech also has a talented backfield, with sophomore Ryan Williams being joined by returning junior Darren Evans to form a formidable one-two punch. Also, look for Taylor to utilize the big play with his arm by throwing to Jarret Boykin and Danny Coale.
Boise State will use some gadget plays and a healthy dose of screens and draws to take advantage of a normally aggressive Virginia Tech defense early on to set up some more conventional offense a bit later in the game. But look for diversified playcalling from the get-go, with multiple looks and formations and motions within the first 15-20 plays from the Broncos.
I said last week I see the Broncos losing two games this season: one game to Idaho. I think the other game is tonight. It will be close and a defensive struggle, but I think that the Hokies will make one more play than the Broncos (a blocked kick, perhaps) and that one play will make the difference. And then we'll see how the voters respond.
Virginia Tech 16, Boise State 14
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Pac-10 Expansion Round 3: C.R.E.A.M.
(For previous installments on Pac-10 Expansion, visit here and here.)
Round three of Pac-10 expansion talk has us looking at some financial information about the current membership of the conference and the contenders.
The information looked at in this exercise is taken from reports that the colleges and universities across this land submitted to the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Postsecondary Education. The site "Equity in Athletics Data Analysis" has all of the nasty bits about how much schools spend on athletics.
Time to make some more sausage.
The factors we are examining today for the schools are:
1) Number of players on the football team
2) Operating expenses per player
3) Expenses by the football program
4) Revenue brought in by the football program
5) Profit/loss by the football program
6) Athletic department revenue
7) Athletic department expenses
8) Profit/loss by the athletic department
The numbers are from the last fiscal year for higher education (July 1, 2008-June 30, 2009). Before we go any further, let me post the cautionary note from the OPE:
Everyone got that? Okay?
Great. Here we go:
Pac-10 Financial Analysis
Once again, it appears that the best fit for the Pac-10 if it were to expand would include some combination of Colorado, BYU and Utah. While their spending habits (especially for BYU and Utah) are more in line fiscally with Washington State than with, say, USC, they are definitely ahead of Fresno State or Boise State with regards to the funds available and funds expended.
Round three of Pac-10 expansion talk has us looking at some financial information about the current membership of the conference and the contenders.
The information looked at in this exercise is taken from reports that the colleges and universities across this land submitted to the U.S. Department of Education's Office of Postsecondary Education. The site "Equity in Athletics Data Analysis" has all of the nasty bits about how much schools spend on athletics.
Time to make some more sausage.
The factors we are examining today for the schools are:
1) Number of players on the football team
2) Operating expenses per player
3) Expenses by the football program
4) Revenue brought in by the football program
5) Profit/loss by the football program
6) Athletic department revenue
7) Athletic department expenses
8) Profit/loss by the athletic department
The numbers are from the last fiscal year for higher education (July 1, 2008-June 30, 2009). Before we go any further, let me post the cautionary note from the OPE:
"Please note that valid comparisons of athletics data are possible only with study and analysis of the conditions affecting each institution"
Everyone got that? Okay?
Great. Here we go:
Pac-10 Financial Analysis
Once again, it appears that the best fit for the Pac-10 if it were to expand would include some combination of Colorado, BYU and Utah. While their spending habits (especially for BYU and Utah) are more in line fiscally with Washington State than with, say, USC, they are definitely ahead of Fresno State or Boise State with regards to the funds available and funds expended.
Monday, February 22, 2010
Pac-10 Expansion Round 2: Television Market Share
In the first round of Pac-10 expansion talks, I posted the reputational academic bonafides of the current Pac-10 Schools and their potential new brethern.
In this round, we will look at the television markets that are currently being utilized and what a newcomer would have to offer.
Now, when talking markets, we are going to refer to the specific regional markets for these teams. The market sizes are done based off of data from Nielsen Media Research.
So, while Oregon games might be shown in Portland, the designated market for Oregon is Eugene.
It's important to note that the Pac-10 has six schools in the top fifteen markets, including two teams in the number two market of Los Angeles, CA. So, obviously, the Pac-10 would probably want to bring in a market with a pretty significant reach.
Also note that some markets encompass more than one city.
First, the Pac-10 schools. Home market in parentheses:
Arizona (Tucson): 66
Arizona State (Phoenix): 12
California (San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose): 6
Oregon (Eugene): 119
Oregon State (Eugene): 119
Stanford (San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose): 6
UCLA (Los Angeles): 2
USC (Los Angeles): 2
Washington (Seattle/Tacoma): 13
Washington State (Spokane): 75
And the potential contenders that I have identified for ascencion to the Pac-10:
Boise State (Boise): 112
Brigham Young (Salt Lake City): 31
Colorado (Denver): 16
Fresno State (Fresno/Visalia): 55
Utah (Salt Lake City): 31
As in round one, it looks like Colorado, Utah and BYU are the front runners after round two, as the Denver and Salt Lake City markets outpace Fresno and Boise.
In this round, we will look at the television markets that are currently being utilized and what a newcomer would have to offer.
Now, when talking markets, we are going to refer to the specific regional markets for these teams. The market sizes are done based off of data from Nielsen Media Research.
So, while Oregon games might be shown in Portland, the designated market for Oregon is Eugene.
It's important to note that the Pac-10 has six schools in the top fifteen markets, including two teams in the number two market of Los Angeles, CA. So, obviously, the Pac-10 would probably want to bring in a market with a pretty significant reach.
Also note that some markets encompass more than one city.
First, the Pac-10 schools. Home market in parentheses:
Arizona (Tucson): 66
Arizona State (Phoenix): 12
California (San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose): 6
Oregon (Eugene): 119
Oregon State (Eugene): 119
Stanford (San Francisco/Oakland/San Jose): 6
UCLA (Los Angeles): 2
USC (Los Angeles): 2
Washington (Seattle/Tacoma): 13
Washington State (Spokane): 75
And the potential contenders that I have identified for ascencion to the Pac-10:
Boise State (Boise): 112
Brigham Young (Salt Lake City): 31
Colorado (Denver): 16
Fresno State (Fresno/Visalia): 55
Utah (Salt Lake City): 31
As in round one, it looks like Colorado, Utah and BYU are the front runners after round two, as the Denver and Salt Lake City markets outpace Fresno and Boise.
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Pac-10 Expansion Round 1: Academics
So now that the call has gone out from Pac-10 commish Larry Scott that the Pac-10 will be looking into expansion by two members over the next 12 months or so, I thought it would be fitting to jump on the bandwagon and see who the most likely candidates are.
Immediately, because this is football driven, the most likely candidates that came to mind for most folks were BYU and Utah. Boise State, Colorado and even Fresno State have been mentioned in some circles as potential targets as well.
Since the Big Ten is also mulling expansion (as I wrote about here), I thought it would be a good time to do some in-depth analysis of the situations.
We'll get to the Big Ten soon. Let's start with some Pac-10 comparisons.
Expansion at this point is being driven by the almighty dollar and by football; conference championship games are viewed as cash cows by the leagues, and as a way to stay relevant and potentially get two teams into the BCS.
Now, I have made no secret of my disdain for the BCS. I even advocated for radical realignment at one point, but that's another column.
The question, for me, that arises outside of the on-the-field impact has to be off-the-field as well. Namely, when the Pac-10 and Big Ten expand, I think that they are going to look for schools that are in the same neighborhood academically.
Remember, the conferences are not only who you play on the field; often, they are the people you collaborate with and compete with off the field and in the classroom, too.
The Pac-10 has a reputation as being one of the stronger conferences academically, so that part of the profile is what we will examine first for these schools.
While the metrics I am about to use are by no means perfect, they can provide us with a portrait of what candidates may fit best for the Pac-10.
I am keeping the list of potential members to the five schools mentioned at the top of this piece; while other schools may get floated out there for consideration, I think that the final applicant pool for these two open positions will come down to these five.
The four things we will look at as we compare the candidates to the current Pac-10 are:
So, for the Pac-10:
Arizona:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 102 (highest ranking number assigned—128)
Enrollment: 36,932
Arizona State:
AAU member: No
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 121
Enrollment: 49,171
California (University of California-Berkeley):
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 21
Enrollment: 32803
Oregon:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/High Research Activity (RU/H)
US News National Ranking: 115
Enrollment: 20,296
Oregon State:
AAU member: NO
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: Tier 3
Enrollment: 19,193
Stanford:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 4
Enrollment: 18,836
UCLA (University of California-Los Angeles):
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 24
Enrollment: 35,966
USC (University of Southern California):
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 26
Enrollment: 32,160
Washington:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 42
Enrollment: 39,199
Washington State:
AAU member: No
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 106
Enrollment: 23,241
Average ranking for the Pac-10: 62.3 (for the 9 ranked schools)
Average enrollment: 30,780
And now, the contenders:
Boise State:
AAU member: No
Carnegie Classification: Master's Colleges and Universities: Larger Programs
US News National Ranking: n/a
Enrollment: 18,332
BYU (Brigham Young University):
AAU member: No
Carnegie Classification: Research University/High Research Activity (RU/H)
US News National Ranking: 71
Enrollment: 34,347
Colorado:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 77
Enrollment: 32,362
Fresno State (California State University-Fresno):
AAU member: No
Carnegie Classification: Master's Colleges and Universities: Larger Programs
US News National Ranking: n/a
Enrollment: 19,781
Utah:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 106
Enrollment: 28,933
So while AAU membership is not a total barrier to being a member of the Pac-10, I do think that it becomes clear, from looking at some of this information, that BYU, Colorado and Utah are the top three contenders for expansion from an academic standpoint.
But fear not, for we will also look at other factors in the coming days that may influences things in other directions.
Immediately, because this is football driven, the most likely candidates that came to mind for most folks were BYU and Utah. Boise State, Colorado and even Fresno State have been mentioned in some circles as potential targets as well.
Since the Big Ten is also mulling expansion (as I wrote about here), I thought it would be a good time to do some in-depth analysis of the situations.
We'll get to the Big Ten soon. Let's start with some Pac-10 comparisons.
Expansion at this point is being driven by the almighty dollar and by football; conference championship games are viewed as cash cows by the leagues, and as a way to stay relevant and potentially get two teams into the BCS.
Now, I have made no secret of my disdain for the BCS. I even advocated for radical realignment at one point, but that's another column.
The question, for me, that arises outside of the on-the-field impact has to be off-the-field as well. Namely, when the Pac-10 and Big Ten expand, I think that they are going to look for schools that are in the same neighborhood academically.
Remember, the conferences are not only who you play on the field; often, they are the people you collaborate with and compete with off the field and in the classroom, too.
The Pac-10 has a reputation as being one of the stronger conferences academically, so that part of the profile is what we will examine first for these schools.
While the metrics I am about to use are by no means perfect, they can provide us with a portrait of what candidates may fit best for the Pac-10.
I am keeping the list of potential members to the five schools mentioned at the top of this piece; while other schools may get floated out there for consideration, I think that the final applicant pool for these two open positions will come down to these five.
The four things we will look at as we compare the candidates to the current Pac-10 are:
- Is the school a member of the Association of American Universities?
- How is the school basically classified by the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (aka "Carnegie Classification", or "What kind of school are you?")
- What is the school's US News and World Report National University Ranking?
- What is the overall enrollment of the institution? That includes all students, undergraduate and graduate.
So, for the Pac-10:
Arizona:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 102 (highest ranking number assigned—128)
Enrollment: 36,932
Arizona State:
AAU member: No
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 121
Enrollment: 49,171
California (University of California-Berkeley):
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 21
Enrollment: 32803
Oregon:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/High Research Activity (RU/H)
US News National Ranking: 115
Enrollment: 20,296
Oregon State:
AAU member: NO
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: Tier 3
Enrollment: 19,193
Stanford:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 4
Enrollment: 18,836
UCLA (University of California-Los Angeles):
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 24
Enrollment: 35,966
USC (University of Southern California):
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 26
Enrollment: 32,160
Washington:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 42
Enrollment: 39,199
Washington State:
AAU member: No
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 106
Enrollment: 23,241
Average ranking for the Pac-10: 62.3 (for the 9 ranked schools)
Average enrollment: 30,780
And now, the contenders:
Boise State:
AAU member: No
Carnegie Classification: Master's Colleges and Universities: Larger Programs
US News National Ranking: n/a
Enrollment: 18,332
BYU (Brigham Young University):
AAU member: No
Carnegie Classification: Research University/High Research Activity (RU/H)
US News National Ranking: 71
Enrollment: 34,347
Colorado:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 77
Enrollment: 32,362
Fresno State (California State University-Fresno):
AAU member: No
Carnegie Classification: Master's Colleges and Universities: Larger Programs
US News National Ranking: n/a
Enrollment: 19,781
Utah:
AAU member: Yes
Carnegie Classification: Research University/Very High Research Activity (RU/VH)
US News National Ranking: 106
Enrollment: 28,933
So while AAU membership is not a total barrier to being a member of the Pac-10, I do think that it becomes clear, from looking at some of this information, that BYU, Colorado and Utah are the top three contenders for expansion from an academic standpoint.
But fear not, for we will also look at other factors in the coming days that may influences things in other directions.
Thursday, September 3, 2009
How Do You Solve A Problem Like LeGarrette Blount?
It was a decent game on the Smurf Turf in Boise State, although it was quite a sloppy victory for the Broncos.
But the real action took place after the game, as Oregon Ducks star running back LeGarrette Blount punched Boise State defender Byron Hout.
Now, Hout did push Blount in the shoulder and shouted something in his face.
But I'm sorry. Unless he trashed your momma or another close female relative, you don't punch a player in the face.
Hell, even if he did trash talk a female relative, you just simply cannot do that.
Things also began to escalate further as Blount had to be restrained by Boise Stadium event staff and local police as he started to charge at some of the fans sitting near the players tunnel.
I think that new head coach Chip Kelly has to have a long, long conversation with Blount. Considering that Blount was kicked out of practice earlier this year, I think Blount might be sitting out some more.
Because the behavior that Blount exhibited Thursday night was immature and unconscionable.
But the real action took place after the game, as Oregon Ducks star running back LeGarrette Blount punched Boise State defender Byron Hout.
Now, Hout did push Blount in the shoulder and shouted something in his face.
But I'm sorry. Unless he trashed your momma or another close female relative, you don't punch a player in the face.
Hell, even if he did trash talk a female relative, you just simply cannot do that.
Things also began to escalate further as Blount had to be restrained by Boise Stadium event staff and local police as he started to charge at some of the fans sitting near the players tunnel.
I think that new head coach Chip Kelly has to have a long, long conversation with Blount. Considering that Blount was kicked out of practice earlier this year, I think Blount might be sitting out some more.
Because the behavior that Blount exhibited Thursday night was immature and unconscionable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)