There's No Such Thing As East Coast Bias

Just a little over a week ago, my family and I returned from visiting Oahu, Hawaii, for about a week. It was amazing! It was all and more that I ever dreamed Hawaii would be. I'm not sure if it was the palm trees in the skyline that reminded me of my fond months in the Dominican Republic, or the tolerable weather that allowed us to do whatever we wanted, or the shallow waters in the coves and beaches that took you into the native fish inhabitants, or the warm ocean water that you could spend the whole day and night in, or the fine sand that felt like walking in flour on some beaches of the west part of the island, or the breathtaking panoramic views of sheer mountains with green vegetation lying so close to the infinite waters of blue, or the numerous visions of beautiful people - male and female, or the many stops to learn about history and different cultures.

I can't really pinpoint one thing that made our vacation so wonderful, but I feel sorry for all my future vacations because they will never measure up - unless it is a trip back to the islands in the Pacific without children. Only because I'm a guy and have a one-track mind, Hawaii - especially Oahu - had me thinking of one thing and wishing that my kids would be left behind. It's a little embarrassing and difficult to mention on a blog, but I have to admit, the environment in Honolulu gave me a bad desire. Well, it was just... I needed, uh... I had to see the Aloha stadium and buy me a University of Hawaii hat. Every Wednesday and Saturday (when there's not a home game), the Aloha stadium hosts a swap meet with hundreds of vendors selling all sorts of trinkets and clothes and jewelry. I was able to get a great deal on a lei and feel the vibes of football around the stadium. It was so great! I wasn't there just to do some bargain shopping on tourist items, but to be close to a college football stadium with a rich history of some great games. Later, I bought a U of H hat at the Navy Exchange Mall for under ten bucks. My trip was complete! Oh, I suppose the seafood dish at Duke's Canoe Club on Waikiki beach was nice, too.

So, with that Warriors hat on my head and fresh memories of the Samoan at the Polynesian Cultural Center that had me rolling from laughter during the entire presentation, I wondered to myself, "Why don't football teams from the East Coast come play Hawaii in Hawaii?" It seems that Hawaii plays some of the teams on the other side of the Mississippi River, but the Warriors have to do the traveling, usually. For the University of Hawaii to have an away game, they travel by plane for 4-6 hours just to get to the mainland - let alone, to get to their actual destination. What a huge disadvantage for them! There are so many schools in the east that really don't have to travel very far to play quality opponents.

Speaking of quality opponents, I've been looking at the preseason rankings by the AP and the Coaches' polls. It sure seems that voters believe that the only quality opponents are found in the east. I figured with the addition of two more teams in the newly formed Pacific 12 conference, that there may be an increase of one school placed in the preseason polls' top 25. History shows that there will be 3-4 teams from the Pac-10 that would be honored in the top 25 of the preseason; so logically, expecting 4-5 Pac-12 schools to be in it seemed reasonable. Boy was I wrong! In the AP poll, they were generous to put USC in the 25 spot to give the Pac-12 a whopping THREE teams in the top 25. Unfortunately, the Coaches' poll can't vote for USC until they have paid their debt to the sanctions gods, because the coaches seem to think that there are only two teams worthy to be in the top 25 from the Pac-12. Are you kidding me? I looked a little more in depth and found that the ACC, surprisingly, was treated the same with two teams from their 12-school conference made it in the top 25. The Big East made one team. Dang! The Mountain West Conference even got two! What the heck is wrong with the Pac-12, ACC, and Big East? Well, they sure are not the other three major conferences because the 12-teamed Big Ten conference has 4 and 5 teams in the top 25, while the 10-teamed Big XII has 4 and 5 schools in the top 25 (half the conference in the Coaches' poll). However, nobody can out-due the huge representation that the "top conference in the nation" has with 75% of it's 12 members in the top 25 preseason polls. Actually, that's not entirely true. They have 8 of the 12 schools in the top 23! With that many teams in the top 23 and only two of those teams playing competitive teams to open their season, while the unranked SEC schools start their seasons playing teams like; Elon, Western Kentucky, Montana, and BYU, there could potentially be 11 SEC schools in the top 25 polls after week one.

Now we can truly see what a horrible strength of schedule the Pac-12 has with only two ranked teams. What a bunch of cupcakes! The definition of powerhouse IS the SEC. Every week of conference games displays at least two ranked teams for each game - probably three in some instances - to demonstrate the grossly under-rated strength of schedule that each SEC school has. No wonder the non-conference slate has to include schools like Elon, Coastal Carolina, Samford, Southern Illinois, UT Martin, Missouri State, Northwestern State, Western Kentucky, North Texas, Georgia Southern, The Citadel, Furman, Buffalo, Montana, and Jacksonville State. Those are necessities when ALL your conference games are against ranked opponents. That puts a lot of wear and tear on your team week in and week out. No other conference experiences that. Surely, there could never be any talk about playing a nine conference game season like the Pac-12 does and what the Big Ten will start doing in 2013. That would be immediate overload for each SEC team and make it impossible for any team to come out unscathed and undefeated to play for the national title 19 seasons straight. No way! (OK! You may have sensed a little sarcasm in the last paragraph- actually I intended for the whole paragraph to be sarcastic!)

That's right! The major media and poll voters are drinking a lot of that SEC Kool-Aid to give a huge number of schools in the conference the "vote" of confidence that they will all have winning seasons to play in a bowl no matter what the teams are bringing in from the previous year. However, all I see in the polls is the lack of equal distribution and focus on other worthy and deserving teams that have actually shown signs of growth and improvement in the past years that keeps the spotlight shining bright in one area of the country that has definitely earned its recognition in the football world. Although the SEC has been the dominant conference for several years straight, the voters need to focus on their responsibilities as representatives of a national voting process, not just a southern or eastern American voting process. Do some homework BEFORE you vote! Don't just vote trendy and popular!

With the lack of equal distribution of the nation's teams, it is glaringly obvious that the strength of schedule will overwhelmingly be in favor of the SEC. Even if LSU and Georgia lose their openers against Oregon and Boise State, respectively, they won't drop far (if at all) in the polls because they play highly ranked teams while the other ranked SEC schools play easy games and get wins to "justify" the votes. Then you look at the ACC and Pac-12 conferences and will notice the strength of schedule will perceive to be very easy because nobody is ranked in those conferences. How absurd! How do you ignore the fact that Arizona State may have the best defense in its conference and not get enough votes to be in the top 25? I see that Sports Illustrated gets it by having ASU clear up at #17 in their college preview magazine. Unfortunately, I don't think SI gets any say in what the strength of schedule will be for the year.

I implore the voters to do homework before they make their votes! I say this because either the majority of the voters are ignorant about football or they didn't look into the teams' stats and facts very thoroughly before deciding that a team or two may be great. I have some serious question marks regarding several teams and why they would be good enough to be considered in the top 25. My initial question is,"Why is Arkansas ranked so high (or at all)?" Sure they had a great season last year only to fall to Ohio State in the Sugar bowl, but they lost three offensive linemen who protected the departed Ryan Mallett. How do you replace Ryan Mallett? Sure, Tyler Wilson will have all the same top four receivers from a year ago, but he has zero starting experience. Even in mop-up duty for Ryan, Wilson threw 3 interceptions with only 4 TD's. That ratio has to change dramatically for Wilson to be close to Mallett who went 8-5 in '09. Tyler needs to pray now that his three new starters on the line will come together quickly to protect him. All these things come to mind for me and don't tell me, "Yes! Arkansas is definitely number 14 in the nation." C'mon! Really? Only two starting linemen back and no Ryan Mallett? Now to make things worse, the SEC leading rusher, Knile Davis, was lost for the season to put a ton of pressure on Arkansas' other running backs to help block and catch and take the pressure off the first-time starting QB. Hmm. Is Arkansas a questionable call? I think so.

Another questionable call is voting Auburn anywhere in the top 25. This is the defending national champs, yes, but their team was depleted by graduation and the NFL draft. Auburn has recruited supremely well the last couple years; however, when any team returns two or three offensive players and three defensive players, the outlook is very grim. Auburn lost offensive star and Heisman trophy winner, Cam Newton, AND defensive star, Nick Fairly, who basically won the national title for the Tigers in January. You don't just plug in eight new starters on offense and defense, each, and expect to be a top 25 squad. I don't care if you just won the title or not. You will NOT repeat with those statistical challenges. Urban Meyer or Nick Saban can't do it, so Gene Chizik will not be able to do it, either. Auburn will be out of the top 25 after week two when Mississippi State destroys and humiliates them on their home field. (Mississippi State should be ranked higher!) So, why were there so many votes for Auburn? Homework for the voters?

Another questionable school that hails from the almighty conference of the SEC would be the Florida Gators. This is a team that went 8-5 last year under Urban Meyer. They struggled at running back and quarterback and the decent defense loses 7 of the top 9 tacklers from a year ago. Although Florida has recruited amazingly at defense, they still return only four starters from last year. This will force these young freshmen and sophomores to go through some serious growing pains to gain experience. The best scenario, the young guys will gel by the end of the season and be really good, but I see it more like next year for a full season working together to make a defensive impact in the SEC. This year? Nope! Plus, Urban Meyer, arguably the best young coach ever, has left the university and Florida replaced his head coaching resume for a stellar defensive coordinator of a different program, who doesn't have a head coaching resume. More growing pains? Yes! Will Muschamp's defense may fair better than the head coach this year. It's not easy to jump from D-coordinator to Head Coach (and that's merely mentioning those that were already in the system, not to mention a completely different conference entirely)! So, to statistically and logically consider Florida a top 25 team in the nation, is pure ignorance of the sport. If Urban Meyer was still at the helm, then it makes sense to have Florida at #22, but a brand new head coach? Dumb!

I must mention another questionable call on the highly touted top 25 list from the SEC. As much as I love Georgia and Mark Richt, they did not have a good season at all. Only because they won a home game against Idaho State were they able to participate in a bowl game and lost to Central Florida. Mark Richt was among the top five coaches mentioned with "hot seat" throughout the entire off season. However, the Bulldogs are not falling any farther! Last year was definitely the cellar of where Georgia will go. They go up from there. How far up is still to be determined. So, to put an unknown team, that went 6-7 last year, into the preseason top 25 for this year makes me wonder what the heck people are thinking. I would LOVE to see Coach Richt take his Bulldogs to the SEC championship game this year, but he is returning five offensive starters and seven defensive starters and replacing most of the departed starters with freshmen and sophomores and junior college (JUCO) transfers. How can a voter put that much confidence into that knowledge and place that team in the top 25? I don't get it! Speaking of sophomores for Georgia, Aaron Murray will be the bright spot on the offense by being the best QB in the conference this year. He will need a ton of help losing his top two targets (including AJ Green) and will rely on true freshman, Isaiah Crowell, to take over the rushing duties and the three new starters on the line will have to step up rapidly! What does this recipe smell like? It's not a preseason top 25 voting, but it is potential. Potential doesn't equal one of the best teams in the nation, though.

So, I mentioned four SEC teams that "earned" a place among the preseason top 25 that I feel the voters have done them a disservice by placing them somewhere they don't belong. Then again, who does? It's all relative and speculative and based on future expectations because we haven't seen anybody on the field against an opponent yet. However, if you have the responsibility to vote for the nation's best football teams, then you have the responsibility to do it right and research the topic at hand to most accurately represent the universities that actually have a chance at staying within the top 25 - not who is currently trendy and cool. There are too many teams from the SEC that are in the 2011 preseason top 25 AP and Coaches' polls. It is ridiculous!

I've mentioned four schools that shouldn't be in the preseason polls, so now I will call on a few teams that were maybe mentioned with a couple votes or less that I feel should get more national attention due to what they've done and what they are bringing back to start a new season. I've already mentioned one: Arizona State. They have gradually been building a stout defense around the nasty, Vontaze Burfict, who is now a junior that has a knack for the location of the ball. The quarterback has plenty of experience and standing at 6'8", he'll be able to see well over the four returning starting linemen. The receiving corps got a boost with Oregon transfer, Aaron Pflugrad. Arizona State lost by 1 point against both Wisconsin and USC last year. Dennis Erickson is not new to head coaching with some impressive wins during his time at Miami. This squad should be in the top half of the league this year.

Another team that is barely on the list of vote receivers, is Northwestern. This is NOT a trendy pick! They are not flashy and popular. They are just outright getting better! They return an amazing QB in Dan Persa who touted a ridiculous 73.5% completion last year and rushed for over 500 yards. The top tailback returns along with seven other starters from a year ago. The sacks leader, Vince Browne, returns at his defensive end spot. They went to a bowl each of the last three years and went 7-6 and are just getting started and will improve.

Tulsa is another team that should be considered with a very potent offense that ranked #5 in total offense last year. They went 10-3 and if the defense improves, they will easily get to 10 wins again this year. The QB-receiver combo of G.J. Kinne to Damaris Johnson will be something to watch. We'll get a taste of what they can do when they open up their season at Norman, OK, September 3rd. The Sooners will start the tough road of non-conference games for Tulsa.

You can't rule out June Jones and what he's done at SMU. They have improved dramatically winning at least 7 games in each of the last two years and return 10 offensive starters and eight defensive starters. SMU had their first 8-win season since the mid-'80's before the "Death Penalty" was enforced. Watch for them to take off!

The Orange from Syracuse have seemingly become significant out of the blue. The defense has become very stout over the course of last season and they return eight of their offensive starters. This could very well be a team that went 8-5 last year to a 10-win season this year. Last year's winning record was the first since 2001 for Syracuse.

As great as it would be to have your entire favorite conference in the preseason top 25 polls, it sure doesn't make any sense because it shuts out the rest of the nation when there's more parity in D-IA football now than there ever has been. I think that I have reasonably explained why at least four of the SEC teams should not be ranked in the top 25; although, the 2010 season ended with six SEC schools finishing in the top 25 spots in the AP poll (but still, eight? Before a game has been played yet?). I'm really and generally concerned about the voters of these polls and makes me wonder about the integrity of their responsibility to the college football fans out there that take the polls so literally. I'm sure it evens out (mostly) as the season progresses; however, it gives a clear advantage over a particular conference or area of the country when it comes to strength of schedule which is based on pure speculation when all teams have a 0-0 record. So, I'll just sit here quiet and contemplate those beaches of Oahu, feeling the energy from the Aloha stadium, while the season passes on and the SEC schools trickle out of the polls slowly while the Pac-12 and ACC teams have to actually earn their way slowly into the polls.

Bashing the Polls - Again

You know exactly why I love this time of year, and it's not because of the beautiful oranges and yellows that appear on the leaves of trees that drop onto the green lawns with the cool, brisk air whipping through your hair as you stake out the high profile homes that will be bombarded by trick-or-treaters. Even though those are wonderful things, nothing can compare to college football and the tradition, competition, and opposition; however, there is something that always spoils football every other year - the campaigning of political figures that pollute the airways, highways, and mail. I don't know what makes me more disgusted, the filth I learn about a person on a commercial or knowing that the opponent has paid to say those things about someone else. The attack-ads have become the norm and I find it a complete turn off - as in, turn off the TV. They are horrible! You can always tell, without the volume on, if the commercial is favorable of the person who has their picture on the television or not by how heinous the photos are. If the ad is an attack-ad, the person it is attacking has pictures that look like they were caught at the grocery store checking out labels on the back of a soup can. You know that look. Don't say you've never seen that look before! Of course, the favorable ads have professionally taken photos and nice props and little children being loved and stuff. It's repulsive! Why can't they just state their opinions and their stand on the topics and hope that the American people can be smart enough to vote for who they think is best suited for that particular position? I guess it's because we can't trust the majority of Americans to do the proper investigation into their own beliefs and the beliefs of the candidates and weigh out each one with full knowledge of the topics that are important to the individual and exercise their right to vote. We are just too busy! Too busy with college football, right? So, what do you believe? The attack-ads? The people who make them? How do you sort out the garbage from people that try to make someone else look bad? Both candidates attack each other, so who is the least trashy? Frankly, I don't really know. I need to do a better job, as an American, to exercise my right to dig into the stands for all of the candidates for each political position and vote my conscious. I love people and I always try to find the good in each one I encounter and I wish that the political candidates would show me the good they have in themselves to help me know. I don't want to know the bad - I have enough bad things about myself that I need to worry about, let alone each political figure. Politicians need to help things make sense for people to understand so we don't go to the polls and vote as a confused American with no reason for our decisions on the ballots.

Speaking of voting and being an informed voter, not only Americans who determine the leadership of this state or nation should perform their American duties, but the voters who participate in the leadership of rankings in college football should vote as an informed pollster with all the information available by digging into the subject matter to help make sense for the fans who scour the polls for justice of their successful team. As many "fanatics" of college football, debates break out all the time to legitimize certain rankings and try to justify, with their own particular biases, why certain teams are located conveniently where they are. Sometimes, like myself, "fanatics" are very critical and skeptical of who is ranked where and start to formulate theories of why the order of the top 25 teams is such as it is. So, much like an earlier topic, "Harris Poll Bias", I have found the current poll to be unchanging from its erroneous course since its inception.

I still don't understand how a poll can start near mid-season and determine a top 25 list that is always near-identical to the AP and Coaches' polls when the Harris poll confidently states that there is not a bias in its voting. Well, if there is not a bias, then they should be trying to explain their votes each week so the fans can understand the rankings and not start the week confused over and over again. Now the BCS is just another animal and nobody will ever be able to understand the computer aspect of that, but the two-thirds of the overall outcome of the BCS is human and should try much harder to get their votes correct and accurate.

Let me explain a little of my frustration by giving one example: my particular belief, when two teams have the same record and they played each other, the team that wins the head-to-head should be the team ranked higher - with Arizona at 4-1 and Iowa at 4-1 in the Harris poll's first week of votes, the voters put Iowa at #15 and Arizona at #21 while Iowa's only loss was to Arizona. I am trying to figure out the logic to an "unbiased" voting panel that proves to me that certain laws of nature aren't really laws... or... nature? So, the team that lost the head-to-head match-up is actually the better team - is what I get from the "unbiased" voting panel. It makes total sense, right? This explains why the Harris poll voters had Texas (3-2) receiving 30 points after losing two straight games to unranked UCLA and top 10 Oklahoma (5-0); however, that UCLA team that beat Texas in Austin that had the same 3-2 record did not receive a single point from the Harris poll voters. Please inform me of the logic in this one. I don't know how to twist this one. Shouldn't Texas' loss to UCLA at home look worse than a UCLA home loss to a ranked, undefeated team? Who knows?

So far, after eight weeks, we have seen some changes at the top, starting with the #1 ranked Alabama losing to South Carolina. The very next week, the #1 ranked Ohio State lost to Wisconsin. The very next week, the BCS #1 ranked Oklahoma lost to Missouri. Now, the new BCS #1 ranked team is Auburn who doesn't play anybody in the next two games (Ole Miss and Chattanooga), so I predict that there won't be any more changes of #1 until Auburn actually plays a real opponent with a home game against Georgia November 13th and then the Iron Bowl at Alabama on November 26th. Can I just mention something? Of course I can - it's my flippin' blog! When Alabama was #1 before losing, Oregon and Boise State were #'s 3 and 4, respectively. So, Ohio State moves in from #2 after 'Bama loses and Oregon and BSU bump up as well; however, the BCS starts up after Ohio State loses and there's not glimpse of Oregon or Boise State at the top. Hmmm. That's okay because Oklahoma loses to start another bump toward the top, right? Wrong! Oregon and Boise stay in place and an SEC team sneaks right in there. Have we seen this before? Either a Big XII or SEC school rises out of nowhere and grabs a #1 spot when the voters don't even have them at #1 OR #2 in the AP, Coaches, or Harris polls. Now if you are following my blog, you know that I'm not a fan of the Harris poll due to its obscure ranking techniques by making sure half of the SEC and Big XII are represented each week, no matter who they've lost to or who they have actually beaten on the field. That one (flawed) poll gives 1/3 of the information needed in the BCS formula in determining who plays for the coveted national title. One-third! These people who cannot vote as an individual with only one week in mind of who the teams have just played and their record of the previous games and who those opponents were and where they were played at. The failure of the BCS begins right there - without a playoff! A playoff is the only solution to resolve the mistake-prone BCS formula.

There is only one group that trumps the worthlessness of the Harris poll voters - the PEOPLE who plug in the decisive information into the computers that helps calculate another 1/3 of the BCS formula. Most of these calculations, I would presume, come from a strength of schedule and how many ranked teams are played and what the record of their opponents are, etc. Opponents' records are important, especially with non-conference competition; however, there should be other factors to take into consideration with conference competition - for example, the Apple Cup between Washington and Washington State and all the awful years of the Cougars football program and how they base their success of the entire season on that one game (whether a coach should stay or go), even if it's their only win; to beat a good Husky squad is great for the Washington State program, but terrible for the good Washington program - the point being, this has happened over and over again and is very common for rivals who loath one another to go back and forth with the underdog winning most match-ups. Another factor is what I keep saying and I'll continue saying it until my last breath on this beautiful planet, that there are a couple conferences, as a whole, that get so much love from the voters and the media to assure those particular conferences great rankings throughout the entire conferences which bolsters up the "appearance" of their "difficult" strength of schedule. This is a serious issue that is NEVER addressed which spins the world around the axis of the Southeastern part of the country. It is ridiculous! Now, if I'm a Southeasterner and a huge fan of... say... the Gators, I would not understand anything I just said because the media and voters have given my team and my conference so much love and I've partaken of this super-conference "Kool-Ade" that it has left my thirst more-than quenched. I've gotten my pockets stuffed and overflowing with the fact that the SEC can't be touched by any other conference when it comes to talent, quickness, speed, strength, and down-right dominance; and anything spoken of or even thought of that might mysteriously reach the lips (or fingers) of another soul are out-right profanities, blasphemous, and against all Holy writ of God, Himself. How is it that every year the SEC is the top conference in "everyone's" eye? Even on a down year, they still reign supreme without any doubt - meaning, top to bottom, the most complete and perfect of any conference existing or imaginable. It is absurd! They have their heads so far up their... well, I have to be careful here... way up in the clouds so far, that they actually think that eight conference games in the SEC are so difficult that each school HAS TO schedule much easier competition for the non-conference portion of the season. Really?!? So, cupcake city has to exist amongst the nation's elite? Shouldn't the elite be out there trying to exploit their dominance and overwhelming power over all the nation? Or, is the Strawberry Shortcake University scheduling a secret way of telling the nation that they fear taking on real challenges from real, legitimate teams from other automatic qualifying conferences? My personal feeling is the latter - they are afraid to come to terms with reality because reality is hard to deal with when you're a teenager and young adult with tender feelings. It's better to believe you are much better than anybody at any cost. Let's take a look at some of competition that boosts the strength of schedule for these powerhouses. Might as well start at the top of the BCS with Auburn because I'm sure they are proud to display their non-conference foes with pride and a feeling of accomplishment. The mighty Auburn Tigers have to take on four non-conference teams this year (like all years - except when there were only 11 games allowed to play each year). Those teams are: Arkansas State 3-5 (who, arguably played better than the then #12-ranked Arkansas when ASU gave up only 52 points to the Tigers while the Razorbacks gave up 65 to Auburn - sad, because Arkansas was ranked so high? or because Arkansas State is not?), Clemson 4-3 (who hasn't beat a ranked team out of two tries), Louisiana-Monroe 3-4 (who still gets to play LSU in November - plus, another team to give up less points than Arkansas with 52), and coming up, Chattanooga 5-2 (who will be 6-2 when they come to Jordan-Hare Stadium as a team that's not even Division I - FCS school that has a 0-20 record against Auburn). Good thing the computers will recognize the 6-2 record of Chattanooga or maybe that home game for Auburn might not look so good, otherwise. (sarcasm) Let's look at Florida: Miami, OH 4-4, South Florida 4-3 (who hails from the conference that nobody gives any credit to and finally won their first conference game on 10/23), Appalachian State 7-0 (again, we see another FCS school with a great record that will boost the strength of schedule for the SEC, but Appy State is NOT a Division I - there's a HUGE gap in talent and amount of scholarships), and then Florida State 6-1 (which will finally be a competitive game for the first time in 5-6 years, but FSU is in the "down" conference of the ACC, so may be misleading competition). Let's look at South Carolina: Southern Miss 5-2 (Conference USA that has one real win over Kansas 2-5), Furman 4-3 (yet, another FCS school - crazy!), Troy 4-2 (Sun Belt powerhouse (sarcasm)), and ending the season with a huge rivalry game against Clemson 4-3 (Pac-10 would call this game a "conference" game - but the Gamecocks have the luxury, like Florida/Florida State, to have an in-state rival in a different conference and call it a "non-conference" opponent). Finally, the one-loss team that the media is itching to put in the national title game two years straight, Alabama and their amazing non-conference slate: San Jose State 1-7 (that home game must have taken the Tide 4 hours minimum to prepare for this massive battle (sarcasm)), Penn State 4-3 (ranked #18 at the time of play, but since hasn't faired too well with a loss to Illinois and only one win so far in conference to Minnesota 1-7 and finds itself way outside the top 25 - not much of an Alabama win now), Duke 1-6 (they even lost to Army - and it wasn't even close), and finally Georgia State 5-3 (another FCS school that doesn't have a chance). This non-conference schedule has a win total of 11 games between the four team. Isn't Alabama the defending national champion? These games were not scheduled after the fact it won the title, right? If you are a team that recruits better than anyone else in the nation and plays in a conference better than anyone else in the nation and has a head coach getting paid more than anyone else in the nation and has assistant coaches getting paid more than anyone else in the nation and touts the Heisman trophy winner from last year and probably a couple more in the near future, this schedule is the best you can do? Really? Penn State is the only respectable opponent on the list and that turned out to be a dud in the end. Duke? That's the best you can shoot for in the ACC? The bottom feeder of the conference over the last 2-3 DECADES? Really? Do you really have to play an FCS school? Can't you stand up to the plate like a big boy and prove your worth by now? Can't you play legitimate teams from legitimate conferences by now? Can't you prove your #1 status GIVEN to you by playing competition that helps measure what kind of team you have on the field? Or are you afraid? Are you one of those politicians that sits in a corner and points out the flaws and make fun of the mistakes of the other teams in the nation while you make yourself look really good smearing the guts of unworthy competition all over the turf like a professional photo shoot with deliberate props? Anyway, these are the teams that are getting the kudos from the PEOPLE who plug in information into computers to tell the computers to adjust the calculations in such a way to make these teams look extraordinary in terms of greatness and athleticism and dominance in NCAA Division I football.

The PEOPLE who vote in the polls and the PEOPLE who insert information into computers have not seen what Boise State fans see, or what Pac-10 fans see, or what Mountain West fans see, or even what the Big East fans see in terms of individual accomplishment and a season as a whole and not just key wins at convenient places at convenient times. Too many times has the Pac-10 taken a back seat to inferior competition so a "more popular" team can take the crown. Now Boise State is feeling it way too much with the longest win streak in the nation, currently at 21 after the win against Louisiana Tech, and is already getting slighted by voters and computers and the #3 ranking will likely be as close as they get to playing for the national title because they will probably get passed over by a one-loss Alabama team who beat Duke, Georgia State, and San Jose State (by less than Boise State, by the way).

Boise State Versus the Nation

This is the title of a post that I was thinking about back in May of this year and forgot that I had wanted to start it - and now I find it in the "draft" phase of my list of posts.

An adventure I recommend all should take, is one that my wife and I took with a good friend in search of hidden treasures and trinkets, which is world-wide known as "geocaching". If you've never heard of the term, it is where you need a GPS (Global Positioning System) to help you find the exact latitude and longitude coordinates of where a small container has been hidden that may contain many little obscure things or just a piece of paper to write down your geocaching "code" name. Once discovered, you check the contents of the container and may "swap" an item for something left behind and write your name on the log, and then place the container back to its exact location in the same manner as you found it. There are people who actually maintain these containers that could be located anywhere in the world in cities, parks, rural sites, and many public areas of towns that are common place where most non-geocaching people would not even know of the existence of such things. All the information can be found online at geocaching.com for a free membership, so it is available as you travel for work or vacation or for sporting events.

A few things I learned from my friend while geocaching that may help you in your first time at going: 1) you never know what kind of container you will find and how it will be hidden, 2) you can never assume the type of booty that will be left behind in larger containers, 3) you have to have actual positional sense when finding your location and shifting positions, 4) an accurate GPS is the most valuable tool you could have with you for accuracy, and 5) nothing appears as it seems until you look closely to the details of the overall picture. I hope that you either have fun continuing in your cache hunting, or finally go out and try it with these helpful hints, or have learned something new to try and plan an outing. It's fun!

Something I speculated back in May, months before the 2010 season began, regarding Boise State and their uphill climb for perfection and a BCS (Bowl Championship Series) National Championship bowl game bid was confirmed by a recent article written by the well known, ex-Sports Illustrated writer, Rick Reilly titled, "Broncos Can't Buck This Trend". It all started at the end of the '08 season when Boise State lost a tight game to TCU (Texas Christian University) in the Poinsettia Bowl by 1 point. This would be, as of today and for a few more days (at least), the last time that the Broncos would lose. They began their '09 campaign beating an Oregon Ducks team that would end up winning the Pacific-10 (Pac-10) Conference and earning a berth to the Rose Bowl. Boise State would go on the rest of the season undefeated and deserving a shot for the national title, but was left out because two automatic qualifying teams went undefeated, as well (Alabama and Texas). So as a consolation prize and getting to play in a BCS bowl, they were paired up with TCU, again. To me, that was a huge slap in the face - not to downplay the strength of a very good TCU squad (who got the slap too), but in reference to these two non-automatic qualifying teams that went undefeated to earn a BCS bowl bid never got the shot at playing one of the "big boys" in the nation. It's like the BCS didn't want any problems, so they simply "swept" these two teams under the rug by pinning them together for the second time in one year. Lame! The BCS is lame! So, Boise beats TCU by seven to end a perfect season.

Before the start of the 2010 season, media writers gave Boise State a lot of love and had them ranked in the top 10, all the way up to #3 by some. Given huge expectations and the SI curse by being on the cover and tons of national attention and scrutiny, the Broncos have done nothing but prove to the country who they are and where they want to be - they are undefeated and want to play for the national title. Boise is #2 in all the polls except the BCS - which, unfortunately, is the one that counts at the end of the season - where they find themselves at #3, currently. In order to get to #1 or #2, they need some help from other teams while they dominate and win out the rest of the year. Currently, it is Auburn and Oregon at #1 and #2, respectively, and there is no guarantee that either of those two will win out (especially Oregon with the toughest stretch of their schedule ahead of them starting with their visit to USC). Auburn is favored by the computers while being #3 in all the other polls. The good thing about the computers for Boise State is that they love the Broncos more than Oregon. Unless the computers begin to like Oregon some time soon, Boise may maintain this particular lead and hope that Oregon and Auburn lose a game or two apiece, along with Missouri, TCU, and Michigan State in order to keep them from sneaking up from behind on BSU. If those teams lose and Boise State wins out, that might bring them up to the #2 ranking in the BCS, which is good enough to play for the title in Glendale, AZ, on January 10th.

So, Rick Reilly brings up some really good points on the legitimacy of the Boise State program and the consistency it plays with week in and week out with its 21 game win streak (longest in the nation). Mr. Reilly mentions that the head coach, Chris Peterson, is 56-4 at Boise. His program, under his direction, has lost only FOUR games! Are you kidding me? However, we have this wonderful system called the BCS that tells Boise that they are at the zenith of their BCS progression and can't go any further and will not play for the national championship until they join the Southeastern Conference (SEC) and go undefeated there - then, and only then, will Boise get their day in the sun to prove to the whole country that they belong. Well, Boise should never try to join the Pac-10 because they never get the respect they deserve and wouldn't change Boise's predicament, so they may consider making a run to the Big XII Conference and continue beating Oklahoma each year... then maybe... Anyway, some comparisons with opponents of Boise State this year that Mr. Reilly states in his article were: 1) the Broncos smashed San Jose State 48-0, and the Spartans have lost a lot of games, but one was to Wisconsin, in Madison, where the Badgers beat them by only 13 points - the same Wisconsin that beat #1 Ohio State and #15 Iowa; 2) the Broncos pounded Wyoming 51-6, and Wyoming nearly beat Air Force who nearly beat Oklahoma who we know Boise State CAN beat; and 3) the Broncos beat Virginia Tech on the road, who is currently undefeated in the Atlantic Coast Conference (ACC), so why wouldn't Boise State perform just as well in that conference? Interesting, no? Rick Reilly, who writes for ESPN.com now, says that "the BCS computers TKO Boise State. Why keep punching when it's not a fair fight?"