The reason I am so depressed about BYU

[Judge Smails]

I'm guessing we just disagree on the definition of "vastly superior". I think we are, again, not that that's saying much.

Your Utah St claim reflects some bias as well. I think you'll find the WAC has done their fair share of beating up on UNLV. Plus Boise St is 13-0 (or whatever) against nothing but MWC also-rans (late 90s Utah being the only exception) including BYU in 03 and 04. 13-0 is impressive but it's not like they're beating our best.

Bottom line, if your team (or conference in this case) finishes behind another team 9 STRAIGHT YEARS, any claim of non-inferiority is just....well, dumb.

[Judge Smails]

The top half of the WAC appears (perhaps is) on par with the top of the MWC because they get to play the bottom of the WAC.

At the least they give off the appearance of quality. At the most, they can focus on the 1 or 2 "big" games they play every year.

[Judge Smails]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

YOU said the WAC was "far worse" than the MWC. The sagarin rankings that you posted (if you think that is the best measure) are not "far worse" than the MWC. They are worse buy not by the margin that you would have us believe. The WAC is getting better and better and closing the gap.

Again, not that I think Sagarin is the end all be all, but using Sagarin's Central mean as raw data the MWC more closely resembles the Big 10 than the MWC. It'd be heresy on this board to suggest the Big 10 isn't vastly superior to the MWC and I'd agree - they are vastly superior.

That said, the "Sagarin Gap" is larger between the MWC and the WAC thus far this year. And with a 0-14 record against BCS schools, one would hope it would be.

I don't know why you are so WAC indoctrinated, but the gap is not closing. Again according to Sagarin, there has only been a larger spread between the 2 conferences twice ever - in 2005 and 2003.

I'm sorry, but I just don't think you're all that when it comes to reading the tea leaves.

But you keep on believin'.

If I haven't been clear already, I am not necessarily a Sagarinist. He just provides the most accessible data for comparing conferences.

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by Judge Smails

Again, not that I think Sagarin is the end all be all, but using Sagarin's Central mean as raw data the MWC more closely resembles the Big 10 than the MWC. It'd be heresy on this board to suggest the Big 10 isn't vastly superior to the MWC and I'd agree - they are vastly superior.

That said, the "Sagarin Gap" is larger between the MWC and the WAC thus far this year. And with a 0-14 record against BCS schools, one would hope it would be.

I don't know why you are so WAC indoctrinated, but the gap is not closing. Again according to Sagarin, there has only been a larger spread between the 2 conferences twice ever - in 2005 and 2003.

I'm sorry, but I just don't think you're all that when it comes to reading the tea leaves.

But you keep on believin'.

If I haven't been clear already, I am not necessarily a Sagarinist. He just provides the most accessible data for comparing conferences.

You make some good points I am not so proud as to dig in my heals in the face of some of the arguements you present. The WAC perhaps is not as good as my perception of them. I still don't think gap is as wide as you are preaching though. so you win...sort of

[BYU71]

Originally Posted by Judge Smails

I live in Boise and I can't name a year in which BSU has scheduled 2, let alone 3 BCS opponents. Add that to a conference that is far worse than the MWC, dominate it for a few years, win ONE big game, and wala - national recognition.

Follow up - one year later lose to the only BCS team on your schedule, slip completely off the radar, with no opportunity remaining to impress anyone.

Now, I agree with your scheduling plan. And I agree it is a viable path to some national recognition, if that's what you crave (this whole quest for "national respect" seems to me like some kind of insecure pride, but that's another conversation), but to cite Boise St as evidence of your plan is foolhardy at best.

No offense, but they can't schedule like BYU could.

[Ace Tomato Co.]

Originally Posted by BYU71

No offense, but they can't schedule like BYU could.

I don't necessarily dislike BSU, but I do believe they have purposely put together a weak schedule in order to game the system. It's true that they can't schedule like BYU, but they could schedule like Fresno State if they wanted.

Now BSU fans are saying it was smart scheduling because of the BCS game they went to. Again, I don't believe that playing OK is worth years of sucky regular season games. If BroncoFan enjoys going to watch 50 point blowouts against terrible competition, then more power to them.

[Judge Smails]

I'll take 'sort of'

That sound you hear is me beating my chest

[ute4ever]

From BYU's very own Deseret News this morning:

With its seven wins against non-conference BCS opponents, the MWC is not only better than four fellow non-BCS conferences, the MAC, Sun Belt, C-USA and WAC, but nearly has as many wins those four have combined (eight).

[jay santos]

Originally Posted by ute4ever

From BYU's very own Deseret News this morning:

Stats like this don't mean much to me as they can cherry pick. Use the Sagarin ratings.

[ute4ever]

Sagarin Conference ratings:

1 SOUTHEASTERN (A) = 80.83
2 BIG EAST (A) = 79.20
3 PAC-10 (A) = 78.21
4 BIG 12 (A) = 78.20
5 ATLANTIC COAST (A) = 77.34
6 BIG TEN (A) = 75.36
7 MOUNTAIN WEST (A) = 69.09
8 I-A INDEPENDENTS (A) = 65.12
9 WESTERN ATHLETIC (A) = 62.51
10 MID-AMERICAN (A) = 61.02
11 SOUTHERN (AA)= 58.85
12 CONFERENCE USA (A) = 58.69

Tulsa plays in a conference that is rated lower than a Division I-AA conference.
What was the opening argument again?