TCU's massive failure

[SeattleUte]

TCU needed to annihilate Boise to be historically relevant like Utah 2004 or Utah 2008. That was the practical upshot of being paired with the WAC champion whose toughest intraconference game was Nevada or Fresno, and toughest game was at home vs. Oregon and its new coach. Instead they got thumped. How embarrasing.

It seems Waters, Cali, Tex and Arch are still too shocked to comment on this catastrophe.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

TCU needed to annihilate Boise to be historically relevant like Utah 2004 or Utah 2008. That was the practical upshot of being paired with the WAC champion whose toughest intraconference game was Nevada or Fresno, and toughest game was at home vs. Oregon and its new coach. Instead they got thumped. How embarrasing.

It seems Waters, Cali, Tex and Arch are still too shocked to comment on this catastrophe.

I did not see the game in its entirety.

But several surprises. First, TCU looked sluggish. Some credit must be due Boise, but overall, TCU did not appear to be the TCU I watched all season.

TCU did not have quick cuts and got no push from its vaunted Dline.

Andy Dalton looked like Max Hall, zoning in on receivers and not surveying the field.

As to the sluggishness and getting caught on the fake punt, I have no explanation, as the picture did not present a good view of what was happening on field.

But TCU looked like it was working in slow motion. Kudos for Boise for staying in front and for playing tight D. BYU could learn something from Boise. What I did see showed me an ugly game.

[Goatnapper'96]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

TCU needed to annihilate Boise to be historically relevant like Utah 2004 or Utah 2008. That was the practical upshot of being paired with the WAC champion whose toughest intraconference game was Nevada or Fresno, and toughest game was at home vs. Oregon and its new coach. Instead they got thumped. How embarrasing.

It seems Waters, Cali, Tex and Arch are still too shocked to comment on this catastrophe.

Idaho owns the state of Texas. Owns them.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by Goatnapper'96

Idaho owns the state of Texas. Owns them.

I thought you meant Oklahoma. Oh, wait, OU is simply the University of Texas, at Norman. Continue on.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

TCU needed to annihilate Boise to be historically relevant like Utah 2004 or Utah 2008. That was the practical upshot of being paired with the WAC champion whose toughest intraconference game was Nevada or Fresno, and toughest game was at home vs. Oregon and its new coach. Instead they got thumped. How embarrasing.

It seems Waters, Cali, Tex and Arch are still too shocked to comment on this catastrophe.

Why is it embarrassing? Because they lost to a WAC team?

You are stuck in this odd paradigm where you think a team is only good if they play really good competition. Who a team plays has nothing to do with how good a team is. Get it in your head. They are two totally different issues. Strong schedules help us measure a team's quality, but the lack of a strong schedule only means we have less information to guide us in evaluating a team's quality.

As it turns out, Boise is good- very, very good. They beat a solid MWC team which was superior to the Utah team from last year in all respects. Better offense, better defense (ok- I will give Utah the nod on special teams), just better overall. Boise beat them. They would have beaten Utah from last year too. Lucky for Utah they didn't have to play Boise.

Scary thing is, Boise will be even better next year. No shame in losing to them. They may be the best team in the nation this year.

[SeattleUte]

Originally Posted by Cali Coug

Why is it embarrassing? Because they lost to a WAC team?

You are stuck in this odd paradigm where you think a team is only good if they play really good competition. Who a team plays has nothing to do with how good a team is. Get it in your head. They are two totally different issues. Strong schedules help us measure a team's quality, but the lack of a strong schedule only means we have less information to guide us in evaluating a team's quality.

As it turns out, Boise is good- very, very good. They beat a solid MWC team which was superior to the Utah team from last year in all respects. Better offense, better defense (ok- I will give Utah the nod on special teams), just better overall. Boise beat them. They would have beaten Utah from last year too. Lucky for Utah they didn't have to play Boise.

Scary thing is, Boise will be even better next year. No shame in losing to them. They may be the best team in the nation this year.

What do you think this is? The academy awards? I've got news for you. You live in a country that determines truth not based on feelings, not based on superstition, but on empiricism. Your record and who you beat is the sole determinant of who is better.

Why is Boise very good? How do we know? Because TCU is better than 2008 Utah? How so? Because you say so? I've got Utah 31 Alabama 17 that says Utah is certainly better than TCU, and probably better than Boise. Have you hard? TCU finished 12-1, not 13-0, and lost to Boise 17-10. As Arch said, yesterday's game was UGLY.

The sad thing is, the biggest winner is the BCS. Outside the mountain west no one cares that Boise beat TCU. Who cares, a game between mid-majors. This wasn't like beating Bear Bryant's school in the SUGAR BOWL.

[Cali Coug]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

What do you think this is? The academy awards? I've got news for you. You live in a country that determines truth not based on feelings, not based on superstition, but on empiricism. Your record and who you beat is the sole determinant of who is better.

Why is Boise very good? How do we know? Because TCU is better than 2008 Utah? How so? Because you say so? I've got Utah 31 Alabama 17 that says Utah is certainly better than TCU, and probably better than Boise. Have you hard? TCU finished 12-1, not 13-0, and lost to Boise 17-10. As Arch said, yesterday's game was UGLY.

The sad thing is, the biggest winner is the BCS. Outside the mountain west no one cares that Boise beat TCU. Who cares, a game between mid-majors. This wasn't like beating Bear Bryant's school in the SUGAR BOWL.

Haha! SU, you crack me up. BCS standings are now based on "empiricism" and "your record and who you beat is the sole determinant of who is better?" Ha! Good one. I would love for that to be the case. Your second and third paragraphs would have to be rewritten if it were, though.

Yes, TCU finished 12-1. This TCU didn't play Utah 2008 or Utah 2008 would have had one loss too. If Utah 2008 played Boise, they would have had 2 losses. TCU 2008 beat Utah 2008 but for an astonishing lapse in the kicking game. Utah won because TCU missed, not because Utah outplayed TCU 2008. TCU 2009 reminded the Utes of that very fact.

Whenever you get on the topic of the Utes, you lose all capacity to reason. I have to admit, it is fun to sit back and enjoy the transformation.

[SeattleUte]

Can somebody check on Mike? I'm worried. He hasn't even changed his avatar.

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

Can somebody check on Mike? I'm worried. He hasn't even changed his avatar.

Other activities preoccupy him currently.

[ute4ever]

Originally Posted by SeattleUte

The sad thing is, the biggest winner is the BCS. Outside the mountain west no one cares that Boise beat TCU. Who cares, a game between mid-majors. This wasn't like beating Bear Bryant's school in the SUGAR BOWL.

Wrong! Monday's Fiesta had higher ratings than last year's Fiesta, which featured Texas and Ohio State. You may recall the reason why the Fiesta passed on Utah last year and chose two-loss Ohio State over undefeated Boise was because Texas and OSU were two so-called "nationally popular teams" who "everyone wanted to see" and would bring in good advertising dollars.

And lo and behold, this year's game had higher ratings. And also note that both games were played in the same time slot (Monday evening, the first Monday after the conclusion of Monday Night Football) and both games faced no competing bowl viewership; no other games were being played.