Which this is part of player development. Which goes back to great coaching. Just continuing to support that whether a player is a 2-3 star or a 4-5 star recruit if the right coaching is there, by the time they become a starter they can develop into every bit of a good player. All of which is the coached job. A 4-5 star recruit may have better developed talent when coming out of HS, and get to see the field sooner than a 2-3 star, but with the proper coaching and time the 2-3 star recruit can develop into every bit as good a player as the 4-5 star, and in some cases better.
Yes the star system is overrated at times but show me a national champion this decade that didnt recruit with the top 5 year in and year out. I'll Wait.... Boise St. and Utah are simply products of there enviorment. Put them in a BCS conference week in and week out and you would see what 2 and 3 star players get you.
It would appear over the past two years, only Florida and Bama could "stand up to the grueling SEC schedule"... everyone else but Georgia is .500 or worse. My guess is Utah (soon to be replaced by Boise State) BYU, TCU and Air Force could all play week in and week out against most SEC teams... and they have the wins against quality teams to back it up... hell, even a 4-8 Wyoming was able to go into Knoxville and beat Tennessee. Yes, it is doubtful that Utah or TCU could run the table in the SEC, but there's 10 teams IN the SEC that can't do it either of late. Look at Florida's schedule this year... the back to back games against Bama and LSU are big, real big... the rest of the schedule is no tougher than what goes on in other major conferences. I think the SEC is the deepest most years... don't get me wrong... but I also think under-estimating the quality in other conferences serves no purpose (other than setting yourself set up for getting your butt kicked in some bowl game.)
i think that was his point. And by SEC, I think it is more along the lines of "most BCS conferences" Utah, TCU, & Boise has starters who can definitely compete with the Big Boys in bigger conferences. When you have a 2010 October schedule like Tennessee's @ LSU @ Georgia Bama @ South Carolina the odds of going unbeaten drop considerably vs Boise's 2010 October schedule @ New Mexico St Toledo @ San Jose St La Tech Combined 2009 record of Tennessee's opponents = 38-15 Combined 2009 record of Boise State's opponents = 14-38 All of Tennessee opponents won a minimum of 7 games and went to Bowl games 5-18 was the best record of any of Boise's opponents, and two of those teams lost 10 games apiece. Is it impossible to go unbeaten with UT's schedule? of course not, but it ain't gonna be easy
What I said was the 2-deep isn't good enough to compete every week. Mississippi State may not be Florida or LSU, but Mississippi State is a damned tough "easy week" compared to Boise State or Utah's schedule. Boise State has to go out of conference every year to build their SoS. LSU has to go out of conference to get a break - and we're (Thank God) not doing that as much this season. The SEC is just as deep as it has ever been - there's simply more parity below Florida and Alabama right now, and last season was an off year for some typical powerhouses like LSU and Georgia. Just like last year's preseason predictions were largely incorrect for many teams, this year's will be as well. We'll see how it all works out. Boise State is a well coached, well developed football program. I am not taking anything away from them. But their conference is junk and their SoS should play a big role in their post-season dance card.
My comments were related to the Mountain West Conference (with either Utah or soon Boise State in it)... not the WAC. Yes, Utah has gone outside their conference to bolster their sos... and over the past years have added Pitt and ND, then Oregon, Louisville... Michigan, Oregon State... and UCLA and Oregon State. When you add those teams to playing AF, TCU and BYU each year.... and you beat all of them... my guess is you would fare okay in most any conference... especially when Utah adds in their bowl wins.
ok then Utah's upcoming schedule for October Open Date @ Iowa State @ Wyoming Colorado St. @ Air Force combined 2009 record = 25-26 more difficult than a WAC schedule, without a doubt, but still not on par with most BCS conferences. In conferences like the MWC and WAC, a team like UTAH or Boise can play their worst game of the season against a conference foe (like Colorado St) and still win the game. With a few exceptions, if you play terrible against a BCS opponent, you stand a reasonable chance of losing the game. and that's basically our point about these weaker teams. you can't take a week off in the power conferences. in the MWC or WAC, you have a couple games you can win without your A and sometimes even your B game.
Perhaps we are saying the same thing but different ways.... I am not saying the MWC runs as deep as BCS leagues... that's a given. But when BCS league teams pad their ooc schedules with the UL Monroe's or the Eastern Illinois' while Utah picks up Pitt and ND to help their sos, I tend to credit them with the effort. I also think BYU, TCU and AF (most years) gives them (usually) five contest to test against quality opponents. Most BCS conferences have 5 or 6 truly quality teams in any given year... and the rest play in one big pot of averageness (if that's a word...). I also believe Utah has actually had some of the best teams in the nation in the past decade, only to miss any chance to be in the big game because of the perception we are discussing. It's an argument Utah can never win and an argument the BCS conferences can never prove... at least within the BCS system.
