Where would Boise St. finish in the Big 10?
- Thread starter troy
- Start date
SheagleHawk
Well-Known Member
I don't know about 5th, but I would bet a hefty sum it wouldn't be 1st. I'd say 3rd, maybe 4th depending on the year. With the upper tier Big 10 D's stuffing the run, Kellen Moore would absolutely NOT have close to the stats he has now; making Young and Pettis pretty average. Who knows? Could be worse given they only play 2 real football teams this year with 10 cupcakes. They nearly lost to both decent teams they've played, and likely would have lost one had the games been back to back. They're schedule is an absolute joke and NO way should they be considered for the NC game.
DexterMorgan
Well-Known Member
they'd have 1-2 loses.
tweeterhawk
Well-Known Member
They'd finish in 4th or 5th place. They are very beatable.
glacierhawk
Active Member
Just like when Dan Hawkins went to Colorado, he would get better players to run his already hard to stop system that would result in NC's for years to come.
Or is this more like how Todd Lickliter's system would succeed so much more than at Butler because being in a major conference would give him better players to work with?
Or is this like how Gene Chizik would fall on his face at Auburn because he did at ISU?
Success and failure doesn't always follow along with change. Just ask PSU how joining a conference helped them. Not saying it will happen but I would be really anxious if I'm a Nebraska fan.
okeefe4prez
Well-Known Member
Probably a game behind Northwestern. Northwestern plays without the top tier recruits and relies on a quick strike passing game on O, but often has a few pretty good players on their squads. They took Auburn down to the wire last year in their bowl game and a few years ago was one Jeremy Maclin punt return for a TD away from beating Missouri. I'd say over the course of a season, they'd be right on par with NU. Probably 4-0 non-con and 4 or 5 wins in conference.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
Peterson is an excellent coach, and Boise already has plenty of notoriety thanks to their success (which BTW, didn't get much attention until after Hawkins left). The 4 and 5-star guys will not go to Boise, Idaho right now. Why would they? Boise is good, but they play in the WAC. You put Boise in the Big 10, Pac-10, etc. and the better recruits will see more upside in playing on the blue turf.
I really don't see how the Nebraska and Penn State analogies fit, though. Those are two established programs, they've been around FOREVER, long before they joined the Big Ten. PSU isn't winning titles like they expected, but what benefit were they going to gain in recruiting by joining? They were/are PENN STATE. They didn't really need any help in the recruiting department. And the same goes for Nebraska.
glacierhawk
Active Member
tm3308-
You just proved my point and you have a short memory or are young. Hawkins got the job at Colorado because of his success at Boise. They were very good before Peterson took over.
Change can really hurt a program or coach's momentum. You assume Boise State's level of talent would continue. Recent examples suggest otherwise.
You just proved my point and you have a short memory or are young. Hawkins got the job at Colorado because of his success at Boise. They were very good before Peterson took over.
Change can really hurt a program or coach's momentum. You assume Boise State's level of talent would continue. Recent examples suggest otherwise.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
I'm 20 years old, been paying attention to college football since 2002.
Boise was good when Hawkins was there. They are either better now, or just getting more attention for doing the same thing. But Hawkins left for Colorado, a Big 12 doormat. We're not talking about Peterson taking over Minnesota or Illinois. We're talking about putting a non-AQ team with a lot of national recognition into a BCS conference. That's totally different than Hawkins' situation.
latrans
Well-Known Member
This.
I think that if you look at Hawkins you see what would most likely happen if you put B St. in the B10.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
They aren't comparable situations. Boise State right now? Compared to jobs at Colorado, Minnesota, Illinois, Boise State is on much better standing. Boise State is better than programs like that now.
Like I said, we aren't talking about putting PETERSON in a BCS conference for one of the conference doormats. We're talking about implanting Boise State into a BCS conference. That's totally different.
hawkfaninTX
Well-Known Member
I think they get top tier talent now telling them, "hey why NOT come to Boise? we are guaranteed 10-12 wins every year, and a BCS Bowl every other year?"
BECAUSE they are not in a BCS conference is why they get talent, it's smart on the behalf of the players: Boise and the WAC = Less injuries and more guady numbers.
You may have a point, i think they are willing to wait and see how UTAH does with their move first. Many smart people make the first move, but typically successful people observe and make the best move.
glacierhawk
Active Member
Ok, I get it. You are really young. Pre-Hawkins, Colorado was a top-20 program to coach at. Legal issues within the program led to Hawkins moving in.
If you want to talk about a school moving conference I guess you do want to talk about PSU, which you previously said doesn't apply. PSU went from a NC contender as an ind. to a team that finds themselves in the middle of the conference as much as they even challenge for a conference title, let alone win one. Success doesn't always translate from one situation to another. Go ahead and ask Marshall about that. Ask Notre Dame why they don't join a conference.
tm3308
Well-Known Member
I never said that Boise wouldn't take a step back. I said, depending on their schedule, they could go from 9-3 to 12-0 this year. But we get better recruits than they currently do, and we have our down cycles, too. JoePa has lost his touch a little bit, and they are currently a very young team dealing with injuries. They've had some good teams the last 10 years, but JoePa is in his twilight. But by going 9-3 in the Big Ten, you are still a top 20 team. Go 9-3 in the WAC, and you're toast.
I know that Colorado used to be a pretty solid program, particularly in the '90s. But they were on their way down before the legal problems. And there are a lot of things that make a coaching change fail. You have to get the team to buy into what you're selling. Hawkins has not been able to do that. But in the scenario, Peterson wouldn't have that problem.
woodyk1
Well-Known Member
Do you think the Hawkins-Peterson situation is similar to the Monson-Few situation at Gonzaga in basketball? The successor sees the struggles of the 1st coach who left to coach a larger program so he decides to stay put? Just throwing it out there.
bws258
Well-Known Member
one spot ahead of us
