Is Boise State a Top 15 program over the last decade?

[BeaverPoke]

I think so, but hardly anyone on the OSU Beaver forums do.
BCS conference fans have no respect for Boise.

Here are some final rankings from the AP and the USA Today polls from the past 10 years.
2012: 18/14
2011: 8/6
2010: 9/7
2009: 4/4
2008: 11/13
2007: 30/29
2006: 5/6
2005: 34/32
2004: 12/13
2003: 16/15

10 years average: 15.3/13.9

Not to mention that they have 2 BCS Bowl wins in the last decade, and are 6-4 in Bowl Games. And the last 3 bowl wins are over current Pac12 teams. And they have a handful of bowl game wins over Big12 teams.
Their 2 worst seasons they were ranked in the upper 20's or low 30's.

Here is their record against current BCS schools in that 10 years.
14-9
Against Pac12: 9-3
Against Big12: 3-2
Against SEC: 1-1
Against Big10: 0-1
Against ACC: 1-1
Against BigEast: 0-1

It seems like everytime Boise St. beats a big time program it is written off as a fluke, or the BCS conferences just say "Well they couldn't do it again".

Some other Beaver fans think they would be LUCKY to get 6 wins a year while in the PAC12. Saying because they play 1 big team at the beginning of the season then a bunch of cupcakes then play a big team at the end of the season doesn't mean they are good.
I understand that Boise would not be winning 10 games a season in the Pac12 but my argument was, if they were in the Pac12 instead of CU, they would still be winning 6-9 games a season pretty consistently.
They mentioned how Boise has the "cupcake conference schedule", okay well if they were in the Pac12 they wouldn't be going out scheduling Oregon, Oregon St., VaTech, and Georgia at the beginning of the season. They would be scheduling Idaho, Wyoming, and UNLV.
Let's just assume that Boise is going to win 3 OOC games a season with the weak OOC slate they WOULD have, because even with the hard OOC schedule they get they still win 3.
So that means they just need 3 more wins to become bowl eligible.
Just because you have "PAC12" on your chest doesn't mean you are good. Boise would have feasted off of Arizona, Arizona St., UCLA, Cal, and WSU. Plus they have Utah's number.
Is it just me thinking "the little guy can" or would Boise actually compete in the Pac12? I don't think they would be winning 10 games a season but anywhere from 6-9 is very do able.
2 arguments going here.
1-Is Boise a Top 15 program? If not, who are the 15 other schools with better resumes over the last decade?
2- Boise would be getting 6-9 wins a year consistently in the PAC12. True/False?

 

[J-Rod]

Really comes down to your opinion of competition. Some think Kellen Moore has no place in any "greatest QB in college football history" conversations because he played in a non-AQ conference.....even if he did go 50-3 in his career. BCS schools think they'd all go 10-2 at worst every year in the MWC......true or not, that's the belief. Its the battle Boise and other non-AQs have been fighting for years......and its only going to get tougher in the coming years with this playoff.

1.) Yes. Over the last decade? Absolutely. BSU was ranked in the Top 5 for a long period of time for 3 seasons or so.
2.) True.

TCU is proof that a non-AQ can succeed in a BCS conference. They are going to be real good this year. Utah has been going backwards ever since Gary Andersen left. It has little to do with their Pac-12 affiliation.

 

[BeaverPoke]

Really comes down to your opinion of competition. Some think Kellen Moore has no place in any "greatest QB in college football history" conversations because he played in a non-AQ conference.....even if he did go 50-3 in his career. BCS schools think they'd all go 10-2 at worst every year in the MWC......true or not, that's the belief. Its the battle Boise and other non-AQs have been fighting for years......and its only going to get tougher in the coming years with this playoff.

1.) Yes. Over the last decade? Absolutely. BSU was ranked in the Top 5 for a long period of time for 3 seasons or so.
2.) True.

TCU is proof that a non-AQ can succeed in a BCS conference. They are going to be real good this year. Utah has been going backwards ever since Gary Andersen left. It has little to do with their Pac-12 affiliation.

Oh man Utah came up on the Beaver board and I said Utah has been struggling because they haven't had a good QB since they arrived in the Pac12.
Then a guy said "Funny that when Utah shows up all of a sudden they don't have a good QB anymore, I think it is more about the Pac12 defenses rathern than a lack of QB".
I laughed and said that is insane because you know that guy named Alex Smith who was the #1 NFL Draft pick? I think he could handle Pac12 defenses considering he handles NFL ones. And Brian Johnson is a perfect example of why the spread works in college not in the NFL. You know that guy who beat Alabama.
The 2 QB's Utah has gone with since they have been in the PAC is Jordan Wynn who was like 170 pounds when he arrived on campus and even MWC defenses rocked him, and their other guy was a guy who transferred from FCS Nebraska-Omaha because they shut down their program so he ended up at Utah. He wasn't good enough for D1 then was starting @ Utah in the Pac12.
Saying those 2 only struggled because of Pac12 defenses is dumb to me. They struggled at all levels. Alex Smith and Brian Johnson would have done just fine in the PAC12.

The guys didn't know anything about Utah though, just saying "Pac12 is harder that's why they suck". That is the mentality for BCS conferences though I guess. They don't feel the need to look up any facts they just assume everyone playing in a non-BCS conference is not as good as anyone in a BCS conference.

 

[J-Rod]

Utah would be a middle of the pack team in the MWC this year. Whittingham has lost key assistants over the years and hasn't been able to replace them with people who know what they are doing. Pretty much the bottom line. 2008 Utah would be a Top 10 team and contending for the Pac-12 title. They are struggling to keep that train moving.

 

[BeaverPoke]

Utah would be a middle of the pack team in the MWC this year. Whittingham has lost key assistants over the years and hasn't been able to replace them with people who know what they are doing. Pretty much the bottom line. 2008 Utah would be a Top 10 team and contending for the Pac-12 title. They are struggling to keep that train moving.

Agreed. Funny how their first year in, had they not choked against CU they would have been in the PAC12 title game. Yes USC was ineligible but still. 1st season in and they took it to the rest of the south.

 

[BeaverPoke]

Not to mention Utah about beat USC in LA that season.