Started By
Message
Boise State vs SEC
Posted on 9/4/09 at 10:32 am
Posted on 9/4/09 at 10:32 am
I'm really not sold on Boise State but maybe I'm just a hater. I don't think they could beat any more than 4 SEC teams. Am I wrong?
The only possible victims I see from the SEC are:
Vandy, MSU, Aubies, KYjellies.
If they played all four I don't think they would win them all either.
Also, that God awful blue turf and those all blue uniforms have to be an unfair advantage. I don't know how the visiting team's QB can see the BSU DBs? That's cheating.
The only possible victims I see from the SEC are:
Vandy, MSU, Aubies, KYjellies.
If they played all four I don't think they would win them all either.
Also, that God awful blue turf and those all blue uniforms have to be an unfair advantage. I don't know how the visiting team's QB can see the BSU DBs? That's cheating.
6
Posted on 9/4/09 at 10:35 am to roadGator
their turf is REALLY menacing to the eyes. i'd definitely say from all the hype, they better be able to compete with MSU, KY, Vandy, USC and the normal Ole Miss.
Posted on 9/4/09 at 10:35 am to roadGator
I'll say this is not Houston Nutt's Boise State team...I think they looked pretty solid for the part of the game I saw...
They could beat UT, USC-E and probably OM
They could beat UT, USC-E and probably OM
Posted on 9/4/09 at 10:39 am to sugatowng
They are a good team, but they wouldn't last in the SEC week in and week out.
Posted on 9/4/09 at 10:40 am to roadGator
I think they could go 5-3 in the SEC on a consistent basis. They would be an upper-tier team.
Posted on 9/4/09 at 10:42 am to LSUtoOmaha
They would be on par with UK and Arky.
Posted on 9/4/09 at 10:45 am to gatorprincess815
They'd never make the BCS in the SEC. As it stands, they're looking to make their SECOND fricking BCS bowl and that's just wrong.
I remember we used to play Boise quite a bit back a few years ago, and one year we were their only loss. We beat them in LR and we weren't that great.
I remember we used to play Boise quite a bit back a few years ago, and one year we were their only loss. We beat them in LR and we weren't that great.
Posted on 9/4/09 at 10:48 am to wmr
quote:
and we weren't that great.
we already know this
Posted on 9/4/09 at 10:50 am to BDD16
Pot calling kettle.
Posted on 9/4/09 at 11:13 am to LSUtoOmaha
quote:No.
I think they could go 5-3 in the SEC on a consistent basis. They would be an upper-tier team.
Let's put this in perspective:
1: Vandy would dominate the WAC-Fact.
2: Oregon played retarded on offense, moreso than Boise played well on defense.
3: Vandy would have beaten Oregon last night. . .by alot.
Just some things to keep in mind when making posts like this.
Posted on 9/4/09 at 11:14 am to roadGator
You guys are such haters.. 
They will play in a BCS bowl this year and win yet again....Then you will cry saying it was a fluke just like Utah....They are good and they will keep on winning....live with it.
They will play in a BCS bowl this year and win yet again....Then you will cry saying it was a fluke just like Utah....They are good and they will keep on winning....live with it.Posted on 9/4/09 at 11:16 am to Tompy45
quote:Meh, you just weren't worth "getting up for", is all.
Then you will cry saying it was a fluke just like Utah
You caught Bama napping. Nobody cares about Utah.
Really.
Posted on 9/4/09 at 11:25 am to Roaad
quote:
No.
Let's put this in perspective:
1: Vandy would dominate the WAC-Fact.
3: Vandy would have beaten Oregon last night. . .by alot.
Just some things to keep in mind when making posts like this.
These two statements are retarded on so many levels, and I'm a Vanderbilt fan for Christ's sake.
Posted on 9/4/09 at 11:25 am to Roaad
I said this on the rant... there was a bunch of pity pat going on all over the field. Both defenses are not good. Not nearly enough speed to play in the sec. Plus the physicality is just not there. I fell asleep in the 3rd quarter. I never fall asleep for college football I know it was the first game, but man there was no real hitting going on at all. I think State even if it would have lost, would have left them beat down and not right for a couple of weeks. They could not handle the sec schedule.
I know it was the first game, but man there was no real hitting going on at all. I think State even if it would have lost, would have left them beat down and not right for a couple of weeks. They could not handle the sec schedule.Posted on 9/4/09 at 11:25 am to Roaad
quote:
Meh, you just weren't worth "getting up for", is all.
You caught Bama napping. Nobody cares about Utah.
Really.
Utah was a top 5 team last year.
Posted on 9/4/09 at 11:26 am to LSUtoOmaha
quote:because they beat Bama. . .
Utah was a top 5 team last year.
Who didn't care. . .
Posted on 9/4/09 at 11:30 am to LSUtoOmaha
quote:I'm not a Vandy fan, but I stand by both statements. Most teams in NCAA football would have beaten Oregon last night.
These two statements are retarded on so many levels, and I'm a Vanderbilt fan for Christ's sake.
Boise
Fresno
Hawaii
La Tech
Idaho
Idaho State
Nevada
New Mexico
San Jose
Vandy would dominate the conference, were they to replace BSU.
Posted on 9/4/09 at 11:33 am to Roaad
I respectfully disagree. Remember how inconsistent Vanderbilt was before last year? They would get up for one or two big games a year, such as UF or Tennessee, and then proceed to lay an egg for the rest of the entire season.
Posted on 9/4/09 at 11:38 am to LSUtoOmaha
quote:I thought we were talking about teams today.
Remember how inconsistent Vanderbilt was before last year?
Even the Vandy of old would be a top tier Wac team, though.
Vandy looks bad most times because they have to play guys like:
UT
LSU
UF
Bama
Auburn
USCE
Georgia
Kentucky
Miss St
Arkansas
(I'm probably forgetting some irrelevant team somewhere)
Posted on 9/4/09 at 11:40 am to roadGator
Boise State couldn't take the beating of the week to week SEC schedule. Their lack of depth would hurt them toward the end of the schedule. They could beat 2 or 3 teams, but that's about it.
Page 1 of 3
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News