Quote Originally Posted by MaineRoad:
Unless they've changed the rules, Boise wold have to beat someone in the title game before anyone crowned them anything.
Recruiting class rankings are a bit of a joke. If TCU signs a kid whose a "2-star," he's a 2-star. If that same kid gets interest from Texas or Bama, he's a 3-star, maybe higher - even if that same kid eventually signs with TCU. Silly. I don't think Boise's ever had a top-50 recruiting class, and that seems to be working out ok for them.
Oddly, I'm usually on the other side of this arguement. I don't think going undefeated means squat, in and of itself. At some point, though, you have recognize that maybe the other guys just aren't that much better. I would have though Utah's disembowling of Alabama in New Orleans would have shown you something. I can only say this, going into last weekend, my top two teams were Alabama and Oregon, and Boise would have fared better in Columbia and Pullman, respectively, than either of those two did. Bama was probably a victim of scheduling. Oregon may be a victim of not being that good.
No rankings are infallible, and recruiting rankings are no exception. There are walkons who end up playing in the NFL. There are 5* recruits that never see the field. There are players drafted in the first round of the NFL draft that don't pan out. Some kids coming out of high school are just late bloomers. But when you view the totality of the statistics, national recruiting rankings are very accurate.
One way we see this is by looking at the last 7 BCS champions: Alabama, Florida (twice), Texas, USC and LSU (twice) . What do all of these teams have in common? They all consistently have top 5 and top 10 recruiting classes. That's another way of saying they have the best players.
Reagardless of recruiting rankings, everyone knows that talent doesn't necessarily determine the outcome of football games. There are many, many examples of this. Therefore, we know that it is possible for Boise to beat any team in the country on any given day. But the same could be said for almost any other team in the country too. But over the long haul it is beyond dispute that the teams with the best players rise to the top. Colin Cowterd harps on this all the time.
Let's look at it from a conference standpoint. What conference has the best recruiting rankings? Predictably the answer is the SEC. So if the SEC has more good players than any other conference, is it surprising that they are widely considered to be the best conference in college football? No, of course not.
Now you bring up the old Bama/Utah game. Thanks buddy!!! That hurt!!! Ouch!!! Hittin' below the belt now are we??? LOL!!!
First of all Utah is a team that recruits very well (usually in the 30-50 range) particularly since the days of Urban Meyer. Secondly, as I said repeatedly throughout the 2008 season, Bama's roster was anorexically thin and not overly talented. They were playing almost exclusively with Shula players, and Shula was an abysmal recruiter. When Shula did pull a highly ranked recruit (which was rare), most almost never made it into school.
The 2008 team also was comprised of sanction depleted recruiting classes (which explains why they were anorexically thin). In 2007 Bama team had zero players drafted by the NFL, and only 2 off of that 2008 team. I don't know how many Utah had, but I'll bet their 2008 team put just as many or more players in the NFL that year as Bama did. The bottom line is that there was not a huge disparity in talent between Utah and Bama in 2008. Now after consecutive Bama recruiting classes of #1, #1, #5 and likely another #1 this year, that has obviously changed dramatically.
Lastly, if Boise had to play at Arkansas, Florida, and at USC on consecutive weeks, I don't have the slightest doubt that they would have gone 0 & 3 in that stretch. Throw in Ole Miss and Tennessee after that and Boise is at best 1 & 4. They are simply not talented enough or deep enough to win those games.
As I said before, Boise is an outstanding team. Their best assets are they have a community that is 100% behind them, they have a very experienced roster, and experience in many cases is a great talent equalizer, and they have a great coaching staff. For those reasons Boise has achieved far beyond their level of talent. But in the end, where the rubber meets the road, Boise cannot consistently compete with top tier teams like you would expect a national championship caliber team to do.
*Here is Alabama's national championship resume from last season. How does this compare with Boise?
*** Alabama became the first team in major college football history to defeat the last three previous national champions in the same season (24-15 vs '07 champion LSU, 32-13 vs '08 & '06 champion Florida and 37-21 vs '05 champion Texas ).
*** Alabama became the first team in major college football history to defeat two straight opponents with at least a 12-0 record (defeated 12-0 Florida in SEC title game and 13-0 Texas in BCS title game).
*** Alabama placed six players on the Associated Press All-American first team. That's the most ever selected from one team (previously five by Oklahoma in '87 & '03).
*** Alabama defeated 10 bowl opponents in 2009. That's the most ever recorded in major college football history.
That is what a national championship resume is suppose to look like. Boise's resume, such as it is, is a far cry from that.