That is true, but if they had to play a big10 or sec or pac 10 schedule, that means they would be in one of those conferences.
I think to prove they belong in the national championship they should beat high caliber teams multiple (at least 3-4) time per season. There shouldn't be much doubt about who should be playing. That is the problem with their schedule -- one game could be a fluke. A full slate of BCS conference games is not. I think the current Minnesota team could be Virginia Tech 2 or 3/10 times and then would have a very good shot to go undefeated against the rest of that schedule. We also have a decent chance of knocking off a similarly ranked Iowa/Wisconsin/PSU/NU, but I highly doubt even if we manage that, that we would go undefeated.
This means their non-conference schedule should be all high profile teams, as they will not get that in their conference schedule (I have heard they have difficulty scheduling some of these teams).
My point? If they were in a big time conference, there would be more resources, better recruiting, and even more coverage (although BSU does get an obscene amount of coverage as it is). Yeah, they play a more cupcakey schedule, but don't forget why. And don't forget the natural handicaps that comes with being in a mid-major.
I agree that this would give them a bigger recruiting advantage, but then our argument is moot because any team that can play 8-9 BCS caliber teams and come away unscathed deserves to be there. I don't care if it is UT or if it is Baylor -- if you can run the gauntlet on one of those schedules, you likely deserve to be in the title game.
Not saying they are the best team, and as it is... yeah, they probably would lose a game or two in the SEC or BigTen. But there still is something wrong when you can go undefeated and still not get a share of the title. At least let Alabama or Florida or OSU prove they are better. Play the games.
I don't think there is anything wrong with refusing to recognize an undefeated team as a champion. There is a reason we have a poll -- win/loss only tells you so much.
I don't think the onus should be on the
system to prove that Boise State is better. I think the onus (or the burden of proof, in lawyer speak) should be on the team. Schedule enough games against big time opponents that there isn't much doubt at all in the poll over whether they belong there.
An analogy from high school -- does a student that takes all AP and honors courses and gets A's and A-'s deserve to be ranked ahead of a student that takes all normal classes and completes their work and gets straight A's? You bet they do. That's how I see the BSU situation -- the burden of proof would not be on the school in this situation to rank the "normal" student ahead of the "honors" student. The normal student would need to step up his/her game and take harder classes to justify their claim to a higher class rank. Yeah, I know it's not a perfect analogy but I think it works okay.
All of that said, I would love to see BSU put together a tougher schedule and make a run for the national championship -- I would cheer for them when I'm not cheering for the Gophers. I think they could have given it a decent shot in 2006/2009, but I'm not confident in that. I would want more evidence.
Sorry for the long windedness!
