BYU is 2-6 vs BCS teams under Bronco

[Indy Coug]

and 25-4 against non-BCS teams.

[K-dog]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

and 25-4 against non-BCS teams.

Next two items on Bronco's schedule

1) Learn to win games in September
2) Learn to win games against better athletes

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

and 25-4 against non-BCS teams.

Do you think 2-6 is a good predictor of Bronco's future record? If yes, then do you think that performing at a 2-6 clip is a good reason to not schedule more BCS teams?

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

Do you think 2-6 is a good predictor of Bronco's future record? If yes, then do you think that performing at a 2-6 clip is a good reason to not schedule more BCS teams?

Well, we've had back-to-back 10+ win seasons in 2006 and 2007 and still only mustered a 2-3 record against BCS teams during that time, including losing to two teams that didn't finish over 0.500. You tell me.

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Well, we've had back-to-back 10+ win seasons in 2006 and 2007 and still only mustered a 2-3 record against BCS teams during that time, including losing to two teams that didn't finish over 0.500. You tell me.

I don't think BYU should be afraid to fill up its OOC with BCS teams. If we are not a fraud, we will win more then we lose. If we are a fraud at least we learn the truth.

I don't think 8 games at the beginning of a coach's tenure is a good predictor of future results. However, even if the past records against BCS teams is a good predictor for future results against BCS teams, I don't think we should hide behind a weak OOC schedule.

[Tex]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

Well, we've had back-to-back 10+ win seasons in 2006 and 2007 and still only mustered a 2-3 record against BCS teams during that time, including losing to two teams that didn't finish over 0.500. You tell me.

I suspect this has more to do with the timing in the season than with the BCS/non-BCS nature of the teams. I've got this suspicion that had we played AZ 2006, BC 2006 and UCLA 2007 at the end instead of the beginning, those would've been wins. It's quite possible that Tulsa 2007 might've gone that way too.

Conversely, which MWC might we have lost to if they were first on the schedule? TCU? Utah? New Mexico?

The changing nature of a season (injuries, experience, etc.) is one of the most underrated statistics in football, IMO.

[Indy Coug]

BYU vs BCS teams:

1980-1989: 15-13-0
1990-2000: 12-22-1

[Flystripper]

Originally Posted by Indy Coug

BYU vs BCS teams:

1980-1989: 15-13-0
1990-2000: 12-22-1

ok

Was that supposed to pursuade me to feel good about scheduling less BCS schools?

I know BYU's record against BCS schools has not been great in the past but I fail to see how that is relevant in how BYU should schedule in the future.

[Insensitive PAP]

Originally Posted by K-dog

Next two items on Bronco's schedule

1) Learn to win games in September
2) Learn to win games against better athletes

3) Learn to win with PAC 10 refs.

[Indy Coug]

Originally Posted by Flystripper

ok

Was that supposed to pursuade me to feel good about scheduling less BCS schools?

I know BYU's record against BCS schools has not been great in the past but I fail to see how that is relevant in how BYU should schedule in the future.

I'm just trying to point out that there is a trade-off involved and I think too much of one or the other (all BCS or all non-BCS) is not a good thing. If you think that the fanbase will philosophically accept the trade-off of 4 BCS opponents each year for finishing 7-5 or 8-4, you're kidding yourself.

I can still remember 1991 and 2000 well enough to know that.