The MWC's 5th team (Boise State) was not better than the SEC's fourth (Tennessee, Alabama, Kentucky-- take your pick). I agree they were much stronger at the top. The conferences should have had 4 each, though.
I'm not trying to trash the MWC, nor prop up the SEC . . . the committee just missed here, and I think gave an already weak SEC too little credit. Missouri and Ole Miss were both underseeded in addition to the committee choosing at least two undeserving teams (MTSU, La Salle, Boise somewhat less so) over a fourth SEC team.
I'm not trying to trash the MWC, nor prop up the SEC . . . the committee just missed here, and I think gave an already weak SEC too little credit. Missouri and Ole Miss were both underseeded in addition to the committee choosing at least two undeserving teams (MTSU, La Salle, Boise somewhat less so) over a fourth SEC team.
I think BSU is a stronger team than you think.... They have one horrendous loss, and that was to my Utes. But they steamrolled Creighton on the road, and have notched wins against UNLV, SDSU, and CSU. They made LSU look like a highschool team. And I watched them play at Michigan State, and they gave the Spartans all they could handle.
I am not saying BSU would beat the three teams you mentioned, but I would not be shocked at all if they did.
With that said, after looking at Tenn's resume, I think it is a bit stronger than BSU and they should have got in.
But I don't think BSU should have been left out. I think Colorado from my Pac-12 should be out before BSU.... Which is why I am not on the comittee as I would have CAL and Oregon both with higher seeding than Colorado... And like I said, I probably would have left Colorado out all together