[Cowboy Junky]

Why do the SEC fans and visitors of their board think Utah and TCU have a chance to bust the BCS, but Fresno and Boise don't?

Maybe you Wac-offs are the only ones that think national perception is the same for both of our conferences.

Who has the best shot of busting the BCS poll located at.....

http://www.dawgsports.com/

So far the results are 61 % for Utah, 32 % for TCU, 1 % for Boise, and 0 % for Fresno. Maybe they should have included Nevada in the poll.

[modestobulldog]

It wouldn't be that Fresno is breaking in a new QB or that BSU has a new head coach and possibly other reasons? Duh!

[Cowboy Junky]

Boise and Fresno hardly lost anyone from last years teams. You guys were both young last year, and return the majority of your starters. Everyone has to replace coaches and quarterbacks, but with the amount of seniors both of your teams have, you should be better than last year.

That sounds like an excuse to me.

[modestobulldog]

Granted. both teams return a lot of starters and both teams may have outstanding seasons, but turnover at HC & QB rightfully cause uncertainty in polling. What am I missing? I am neither a statistician or a rocket scientist.

Thankfully, there is more meaning in how a team finishes the season, not how they are initially placed in polls. For that reason, Utah, TCU, BSU and Fresno all have significant accomplishments to be proud of over the last 5 years.

[Celeritas]

Who cares what a bunch of SEC-focused fans think - be it Pro-WAC or Pro-MWC?

They are out of touch with us. We just need to keep beating them - and do it more frequently (GG Wyo sweeping Ole Miss).

I'm glad football season is coming, but all the arguing of late is lame.

Past performance is no guarantee of future performance...no matter how many yellowed box scores we shake at each other.

All we have right now is '06.

Let the games begin.

[Cowboy Junky]

The reason why I brought it up is the constant argument from Wac fans that say our conferences are basically the same, that national perception of the two is the same, and that the top of the Wac is as good as the top of the MWC. This is just more evidence that none of those arguments are valid.

[easybronc]

They're SEC fans so they think football gets weaker the further west you go. They don't think the PAC-10 belongs in the BCS.

[EvilVodka]

Cowboy Junky, on Jun 30 2006, 01:03 PM, said:

Why do the SEC fans and visitors of their board think Utah and TCU have a chance to bust the BCS, but Fresno and Boise don't?

Maybe you Wac-offs are the only ones that think national perception is the same for both of our conferences.

Who has the best shot of busting the BCS poll located at.....

http://www.dawgsports.com/

So far the results are 61 % for Utah, 32 % for TCU, 1 % for Boise, and 0 % for Fresno. Maybe they should have included Nevada in the poll.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

So how many votes do you think Wyoming would garner in that poll? Do you ever think before you post this crap?

[EvilVodka]

easybronc, on Jun 30 2006, 01:41 PM, said:

They're SEC fans so they think football gets weaker the further west you go.  They don't think the PAC-10 belongs in the BCS.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Actually, they're Georgia fans...and I'm not suprised they didn't vote for Boise State...after all, they obliterated you just last year

Here's a preview of a BCS buster from a more reputable source:
http://collegefootba...ate_preview.htm

[Cowboy Junky]

EvilVodka, on Jun 30 2006, 02:46 PM, said:

So how many votes do you think Wyoming would garner in that poll? Do you ever think before you post this crap?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Go away little stalker. The post is about the national perception of the top of both conferences. It's not about Wyoming.

[modestobulldog]

Cowboy Junky, on Jun 30 2006, 01:35 PM, said:

The reason why I brought it up is the constant argument from Wac fans that say our conferences are basically the same, that national perception of the two is the same, and that the top of the Wac is as good as the top of the MWC. This is just more evidence that none of those arguments are valid.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Cowboy Junky -

What is bothering you so much?

Most posts I remember have given due credit to Boise, Fresno, Utah and TCU based on accomplishments over the last 5 years.


My take-
Boise - Consistency, end of year rankings
Fresno - Big wins against BCS teams
Utah - only MM to a BCS bowl
TCU - a premier team among mid-majors (off my personal radar when they left the WAC for C-USA)
Every team has it's setbacks

Of course, there are always axe-grinders and those who think they can elevate themselves / teams by tearing others down.

[EvilVodka]

Cowboy Junky, on Jun 30 2006, 02:01 PM, said:

Go away little stalker. The post is about the national perception of the top of both conferences. It's not about Wyoming.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Well then, the fact that Boise & Fresno made the list says enough...I don't see any C-USA or MAC teams on the list....

Who cares what a bunch of dumb Georgia fans think anyways

[Yoda]

Cowboy Junky, on Jun 30 2006, 01:16 PM, said:

Boise and Fresno hardly lost anyone from last years teams. You guys were both young last year, and return the majority of your starters. Everyone has to replace coaches and quarterbacks, but with the amount of seniors both of your teams have, you should be better than last year.

That sounds like an excuse to me.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Excuse me but "hardly lost anyone"? We had three players drafted -- highest of any non-BCS school -- and had five more players sign free agent contracts within 24 hours of the draft. And I think we had a couple more sign later.

In other words, we lost more than you had to begin with.

Yoda out...

[Cowboy Junky]

I don't know how long you've been reading this board. I've been reading it for a while. Wac fans constantly pimp their conference and teams on this board and talk about how national perception is the same, the top teams are the same, and that the bottom feeders are bringing the Wac down.

This is evidence that national perception is not the same. Two top ten teams in a row is evidence our top teams are better.

Why is it when a MWC fan posts evidence you immediately try to change the subject?

The thread title is pretty obvious. If you aren't a part of the ongoing debate between MWC and Wac fans about who's top teams are better and national perception of the two conferences, then read a different thread.

Don't try to turn this into a what's wrong with CJ or what's wrong with Wyoming thread. If you want one of those, post it.

This is a thread comparing the top Wac teams to the top MWC teams and the national perception of the two conferences. Is that so hard to understand?

Since you asked, I'm bothered by sweet potatoes, fat girls, and questions about infinity.

[Cowboy Junky]

EvilVodka, on Jun 30 2006, 02:46 PM, said:

So how many votes do you think Wyoming would garner in that poll? Do you ever think before you post this crap?

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Arguing with you is impossible. You ask the question about the national perception and the strength of two conferences top teams, and you respond with something completely unrelated.

Question: "how does the MWC compare to the Big East?"

Evil Vodkas response: "My neighbors dog has a four inch clit."

Thread title: "Does the MWC top teams compare to the Wac's top teams"

EV's brilliant retort: "Cowboy Junky is retarded. I've got a snake. One time I fed him some beer, he was slithering this way and that. He was all f'd up."

Get it off your chest EV because it's getting kind of weird. Do you have something to say to me? Please, clear it up and move on with your life. The only time you post is in response to me, and usually it's the intellectual equivalent of a third grader finger painting with his own shi+.

[jag]

Read the blog notes for his explanation of the sky high MWC numbers. Doesn't sound like SEC fans voted in this poll.

The SportsBlogs Nation stable of college sports webloggers includes supporters of two teams from the Big Ten, one team from the Big 12, three teams from the Pac-10, and four teams from the S.E.C. . . . plus one booster from the aforementioned Mountain West: Block U, who is following in the footsteps of Sunday Morning Quarterback along the path to becoming a major blogger for a mid-major team. Block U makes no concessions to the so-called B.C.S. conferences, giving no deference to U.C.L.A., declaring the Utes worthy of invitations to join the Pac-10 and play in a B.C.S. bowl game, and calling his readers' attention to the latest poll question here at Dawg Sports. How seriously should we take this mid-major . . . I'm sorry; out of respect for Block U, I will use his preferred term, non-B.C.S. . . . team? Well, less than seven hours after the new poll question was posted, Utah had received over 100 votes as this year's B.C.S. buster. If Utah's football players and coaches are as hardworking as their bloggers . . . watch out, world!

Cowboy Junky, on Jun 30 2006, 01:03 PM, said:

Why do the SEC fans and visitors of their board think Utah and TCU have a chance to bust the BCS, but Fresno and Boise don't?

Maybe you Wac-offs are the only ones that think national perception is the same for both of our conferences.

Who has the best shot of busting the BCS poll located at.....

http://www.dawgsports.com/

So far the results are 61 % for Utah, 32 % for TCU, 1 % for Boise, and 0 % for Fresno. Maybe they should have included Nevada in the poll.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[erdaaggie]

So because of one fan poll the MWC now has the greatest recognition in the world. I'm actually one that has always said that out of all the non-BCS leagues, the MWC has had the best football performance since 2000. But you know what, you are still non-BCS, just like the WAC, just like C-USA, just like the MAC, and just like the SBC. That right there should let you know about your national recgonition.

Secondly I find it funny that suddenly you have proven your point through an internet fan poll, or a haphazard sample that cannot be considered an accurate sample, but when StanfordAggie showed an article by a sportswriter from San Francisco saying that Alex Smith played in the WAC, it is irrelevant. (And I might add that there have been other writers that have made the same mistake.) Which is it? Should we trust this poll and the articles or shall we reject both? You can't have it both ways. Neither can truly be considered an accurate sample.

[RaisinsofWrath]

Cowboy Junky, on Jun 30 2006, 01:03 PM, said:

Why do the SEC fans and visitors of their board think Utah and TCU have a chance to bust the BCS, but Fresno and Boise don't?

Maybe you Wac-offs are the only ones that think national perception is the same for both of our conferences.

Who has the best shot of busting the BCS poll located at.....

http://www.dawgsports.com/

So far the results are 61 % for Utah, 32 % for TCU, 1 % for Boise, and 0 % for Fresno. Maybe they should have included Nevada in the poll.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why don't you post that same poll on the on every conference board available.... your premise, that the DAwg board poll is valididation of your own bias... is about as screwy as me saying that global warming is the reason for Laramie's population growth spurt.

What do a bunch of Southern Crackers know bout anything anyways....

[EvilVodka]

Cowboy Junky, on Jun 30 2006, 02:35 PM, said:

...and usually it's the intellectual equivalent of a third grader finger painting with his own shi+.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

kinda like trying to compare two conferences by referencing a slanted poll on a Georgia Bulldogs blog??

What you just described eerily resembles this thread lol

[Cowboy Junky]

Georgia is pretty far away from the west if you ask me. It's not the end-all-be-all of football opinion, but it's a pretty good sample on the perception of the MWC compared to the perception of the Wac. For whatever reason, fans of Georgia believe the MWC is capable of breaking the BCS this year and the Wac isn't. This is the opinion of 300+ people that visit the Georgia board. It's a lot broader than the ignorant San Fransisco sports writer. Most of the Georgia posters couldn't list all of the teams in either the Wac or the MWC, yet they do know TCU and Utah could bust the BCS, when Boise is returning 26 seniors.

[jag]

Let me repost this again.

Read the blog notes for his explanation of the sky high MWC numbers. Doesn't sound like SEC fans voted in this poll.

The SportsBlogs Nation stable of college sports webloggers includes supporters of two teams from the Big Ten, one team from the Big 12, three teams from the Pac-10, and four teams from the S.E.C. . . . plus one booster from the aforementioned Mountain West: Block U, who is following in the footsteps of Sunday Morning Quarterback along the path to becoming a major blogger for a mid-major team. Block U makes no concessions to the so-called B.C.S. conferences, giving no deference to U.C.L.A., declaring the Utes worthy of invitations to join the Pac-10 and play in a B.C.S. bowl game, and calling his readers' attention to the latest poll question here at Dawg Sports. How seriously should we take this mid-major . . . I'm sorry; out of respect for Block U, I will use his preferred term, non-B.C.S. . . . team? Well, less than seven hours after the new poll question was posted, Utah had received over 100 votes as this year's B.C.S. buster. If Utah's football players and coaches are as hardworking as their bloggers . . . watch out, world!

Cowboy Junky, on Jun 30 2006, 03:19 PM, said:

Georgia is pretty far away from the west if you ask me. It's not the end-all-be-all of football opinion, but it's a pretty good sample on the perception of the MWC compared to the perception of the Wac. For whatever reason, fans of Georgia believe the MWC is capable of breaking the BCS this year and the Wac isn't. This is the opinion of 300+ people that visit the Georgia board. It's a lot broader than the ignorant San Fransisco sports writer. Most of the Georgia posters couldn't list all of the teams in either the Wac or the MWC, yet they do know TCU and Utah could bust the BCS, when Boise is returning 26 seniors.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

[bluerules]

Cowboy Junky, on Jun 30 2006, 04:19 PM, said:

Georgia is pretty far away from the west if you ask me. It's not the end-all-be-all of football opinion, but it's a pretty good sample on the perception of the MWC compared to the perception of the Wac. For whatever reason, fans of Georgia believe the MWC is capable of breaking the BCS this year and the Wac isn't. This is the opinion of 300+ people that visit the Georgia board. It's a lot broader than the ignorant San Fransisco sports writer. Most of the Georgia posters couldn't list all of the teams in either the Wac or the MWC, yet they do know TCU and Utah could bust the BCS, when Boise is returning 26 seniors.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Why dont you post a poll. Ask which WAC school has a better chance of breaking the BCS and list BYU, Utah, BSU, Fresno.

I bet it goes a page before those know it all east coasters figure out half those schools arent in the wac.

[sportsfan]

Cowboy Junky, on Jun 30 2006, 02:35 PM, said:

Arguing with you is impossible. You ask the question about the national perception and the strength of two conferences top teams, and you respond with something completely unrelated.

Unrelated is the what a Georgia Bulldog fan poll has to do with reality. Phil Steele, who I believe is the the pick of the lot relative to pre-season prognosticators, ranks the following teams in his national "top 40":

Boise St. #19
Utah #23
TCU #32
Fresno St. #37
Hawaii #40
San Diego St. #44

The average national ranking of the top 3 teams in each conference according to Steele:

WAC - #32
MWC - #33

What does all of this prove? Nada.

Here's another way of looking at it. Noted below are how the conferences stacked up as to 2005 season composite rankings of their top teams:

http://masseyratings.../cf/compare.htm

Top Team average comparison (TCU and BSU):
WAC 40
MWC 12

Top 2-teams comparison (add Fresno St. and Utah)
WAC 40.5
MWC 31.5

Top 3-teams comparison (add Nevada and BYU)
WAC 44.3
MWC 40.0

Top 4-teams comparison (add La Tech and CSU)
WAC 49.0
MWC 47.0

Top 5-teams comparison (add Hawaii and New Mexico)
WAC 56.2
MWC 51.8

Top 6-teams comparison (add USU and San Diego St.)
WAC 64.5
MWC 55.5

Top 7-teams comparison (add SJS and Air Force)
WAC 71.0
MWC 60.0

Top 8-teams comparison (add Idaho and Wyoming)
WAC 76.4
MWC 66.0

Top 9-team comparison (add New Mexico St. and UNLV)
WAC 81.1
MWC 68.6

There's not much to choose between the strength of the top 2, 3, 4, and marginally even the 5 top teams from last year. Where the separation begins to develop is with the 4 "bottom feeders" in each league. USU, San Jose St., Idaho, and New Mexico St. were just horrible while only UNLV was horrible in the MWC.

It ain't the WAC fans that seem to have a bone to pick about the "top teams" of the conference. It's the guy that starts about 50% of the threads on this board that seems to have the problem.

[Cowboy Junky]

Then stop arguing that the WAC's top teams are as good as the MWC top teams and this subject will die.

This is the only stat you need to look at.

2004 MWC champion 4th
2004 Wac champion 12th?

2005 MWC champion 9th
2005 Wac champion 30th?

[sportsfan]

Cowboy Junky, on Jun 30 2006, 03:59 PM, said:

Then stop arguing that the WAC's top teams are as good as the MWC top teams and this subject will die.

Hey Skippy----you are the one that pulled the pin out of the grenade and rolled it on the table. The title of your thread consisted of the following:

Quote

If our top teams are the same....

Your premise was top "TEAMS" not "THE" top team.

Here are Sagarin's ranking of the top 3 teams in years past:

2005
MWC - 40.3 (thanks TCU!)
WAC - 55.7

2004
MWC - 29.3 (thanks Utah!)
WAC - 24.0 (thanks BSU and FSU!)

2003
MWC - 38.0
WAC - 45.3

2002
MWC - 49.0
WAC - 49.0

2001
MWC - 40.0
WAC- 41.3

5-year average:
MWC - 39.3
WAC - 43.1

Allow me to interpret. There is very little difference between the top teams of the two conferences over the past 5 years. Game.....set.....match.