By Chadd Cripe
ccripe@idahostatesman.com
© 2010 Idaho Statesman
The Boise State football team’s national-best total of returning starters has been reduced by one.
Offensive lineman Kevin Sapien’s career is over because of debilitating neck and shoulder injuries, coach Chris Petersen announced Thursday. Sapien, who would have been a senior, will remain on scholarship and assist the coaching staff.
Sapien started 12 of 14 games last year at right guard. He sat out one game to rest his shoulders to make sure he could get through the season and another because of illness. He also started nine games in 2008 at right guard and right tackle.
“His body is just worn out,” Petersen said. “He’ll be Coach Sapien from here on out.”
With 21 career starts, Sapien would have ranked second on the offensive line behind center Thomas Byrd (26).
The Broncos still will return 22 of their 24 Fiesta Bowl starters (all but Sapien and cornerback Kyle Wilson). They also lost fullback Richie Brockel, who was out for the final four games.
Sapien won’t count against the Broncos’ 85-scholarship limit, which drops their returning total to 79, which gives the team room for the six recruits who were expected to arrive in August.
Other players who won’t participate in spring ball or will be limited because of injuries include kicker Kyle Brotzman (shoulder surgery), linebacker Daron Mackey (torn ACL last season), linebacker Allen Mooney (knee), defensive tackle Chase Baker (surgery), defensive tackle Chuck Hayes (torn ACL last season), defensive tackle J.P. Nisby (knee), center Thomas Byrd (knee), offensive lineman Garrett Pendergast (fractured ankle last season), offensive lineman Cory Yriarte (torn ACL last season), tailback Matt Kaiserman (fractured ankle last season), tailback D.J. Harper (torn ACL last season), wide receiver Kirby Moore (lingering foot injury) and quarterback Mike Tamburo (torn ACL last season). Also, defensive tackle Michael Atkinson is a question mark.
Moore got a new screw inserted into his injured foot because the original one broke during the season last year, Petersen said.
•••
Petersen, whose team begins spring ball Monday, made it clear that complacency won’t be accepted during Thursday’s press conference.
“Everyone needs to be extremely paranoid and have an edge,” he said. “If we do that and get that, then we’ll have a chance. And if we think we’re going to repeat because of the guys we have coming back, because of what we did last year, I promise you we won’t.”
And he doesn’t expect all of those returning starters to hold their spots.
“This is a great situation for coaches to have and I hope the lineup looks much different than it did in the Fiesta Bowl,” Petersen said. “… That’s our goal as coaches, to constantly upgrade talent. If one of our younger guys can beat out an older guy, that’s the way we want it here.”
•••
Wilson said he interviewed with 22 NFL teams during the NFL Scouting Combine.
“The whole interview process was definitely a bonus for me,” Wilson said. “… That was one thing that was exciting for me — because I couldn’t be out there physically — the mental aspect, showing them how smart I am and letting them know what type of person I am.”
Wilson (5-foot-10, 194 pounds) only participated in one physical test — the bench press — because of an injured hamstring. He lifted 225 pounds 25 times — five more reps than any other cornerback and second-most of any defensive back.
“My goal is to be the strongest (defensive back),” he said. “I came pretty close.”
Wilson expects to be full strength for Boise State’s pro day March 26. That’s when he will do all of the testing that he missed in Indianapolis.
“I’m just a little discouraged, as I’m sure he is, that he didn’t get to run back there,” Petersen said, “because I think that could have really set him apart.”
You can follow Bronco Beat on Twitter.
Delicious
Digg
Yahoo
Good luck Kevin ----
we won't forget you!
Coach Sapien
has a good ring to it.
nickname
Does anybody call him Homo?
Probably not more than once.
Probably not more than once. ;-)
But if that were my last name, I don't think I could resist naming a boy Homer.
OK, latest rumor
Bley OK'd the Nebraska deal, they sent it back saying they would not agree until BSU has 45,000 seats.
No idea if it's true, heard it tonight from a fairly high-up booster.
I still think a straight up 2 for 1 deal is bad for BSU, so I hope it's true.
That doesn't make any sense tfunk!
If wouldn't matter at all how many seats BSU has. A home and home matters zero. A 2 for 1? Nebraska makes a ton on the two and who cares about the 1 then? Just doesn't hold any water at all.
I notice my Tom Osborne email has been taken down....odd? Well....you'll remember that he clearly stated that he would be very interested in a home and home with BSU but it would have to be down the road a few years. So I don't get the 'sudden change' of heart just based on number of seats. Doesn't make any sense.
Which deal did Bley 'okay'? The two for one? Home and home down the road? It just doesn't meet the muster. No way Nebraska says no based on stadium size. If stadium size at BSU was a deal breaker why on earth did Nebraska even enter into a discussion?
No offense to your 'fairly high up booster' but he's drinking Bley's kool aid if he was told that and believes it.
I agree truth
It makes no sense and I doubt it has legs.
My sources tell me there no interest in the offer
2 for 1, or home and home, and that we're going to see more MWC games added.
It looks, like they're going to try to align themselves with the MWC as much as possible, and if the MWC games we already have scheduled do become conference games at one point and we're left with holes in our schedule, we're going to fill them with cupcakes.
Not sure what turning down the offer will do to our national cred, after we claimed we couldn't get anyone to play us, but time will tell, I guess
As I have mentioned before .....
....Nebraska and most other BCS 'elite' programs are looking for ONE top opponent each year for the non conference slate. That's it. Nebraska has one top opponent for 2011 and almost every year for the next few years. Thus, BSU being a 'top opponent' now, they are not going to get these games easily UNLESS they start booking them in future years (in other words, 2015-2020). Bley is LATE to schedule and seems to have no urgency about scheduling good programs into the mid to far future. Again, BSU will be left scrambling (like they are now for 2011). I just don't get it.
Truth, you need to read some
of my posts.
*There are many many teams that have yet to schedule a game past 2015
*If Nebraska won't schedule us in 2011 with Washington why are they offering to schedule BSU when they already have Tennessee and Miami(fl) (in my opinion, they never expected us to take the deal)
I firmly believe that BSU should not do bad deals just to do deals. Ask yourself truth, would "Bley" turn down $60K in bonuses if the deal was even close to being for BSU?
Nebraska has Tennessee in 2016 & 2017 ...
...so that's their "one top opponent" through 2017 and their 2018 schedule is not printed yet so who knows if they have someone out that far too. So.....that means Nebraska IS scheduling out at least 8 years. Osborne said he would do the home and home with BSU (per his email that I printed) so we are talking at least 2018 and maybe out even further. Again, why sit on a possible deal? Why not lock it down even if it's 8+ years out? Home and home is a bad deal?? Also, Bley gets no bonus until the year a BCS scheduled team plays BSU. In other words, The Bley gets no bonus for scheduling Nebraska until the year BSU plays them.
Let me ask you this question: How many BCS games does Bley have schedule in future years at this point? WSU. That's it. Right? How many BCS teams do others in the WAC have scheduled into the future?? Many.
The offer from Nebraska
has the series starting in 2015, thus Miami (2015), Tennessee (2016-2017)
So again, if they can't schedule BSU with "Washington" on the schedule, why offer years that already have even better teams scheduled?
I really don't equate the rest of the WAC with BSU. I believe BYU and Utah are better examples (highly ranked, Non-AQ, regional) that match BSU. Beyond 2013 Utah has Washington State (2013) and Colorado (2013) and nothing more. BYU has no BCS games scheduled after 2013 (although I do know they have a Texas game landing somewhere in the future).
also tfunk......where is the Statesman on this?
......if this was true, I would think the Statesman might have run at least something on it. I know, I know....it's the Statesman. But good God, this would be news and since they've already printed stories about a potential Nebraska deal why wouldn't they have followed up? I know, I know. It's because BSU has Cripe shaking in his tennis shoes and he's afraid to call the Bley and get a response. But come on.....if this were true (not about Cripe being terrified of the Bley) I would think that any responsible journalist would be on this one.
asleep at the wheel, where else?
they only report press releases yanno?
LOL
Again we agree
I spent some time yesterday looking into these 2 for 1 deals and specifically this Nebraska thing.
This is what I dug up on Nebraska/BSU (Remember I'm not saying this stuff is true or false)
* BSU contacted Nebraska first about the open 2011 date. BSU was asking for $1M, Nebraska countered with $700K, BSU came back at $850K, Nebraska wouldn't budge. ESPN then stepped in and agreed to make up the difference (the $300K) For the broadcast right, but they also wanted the right to move the game to Fri, or Thur. if they needed to. Nebraska turned the deal down (they did not want it moved).
I have no idea how close the above is to what actually took place, it could be completely off, but its what I pieced together.
* The 2-1 deal offered BSU is the same deal that Fresno State and S. Miss. signed and I could find nothing that gave any indication that there was any money changing hands. If Nebraska is not paying these schools travel expenses, these are break even deals at best. I mentioned last nights rumor, which I don't believe holds water.
I looked at TCU, Utah, and BYU. None have done any 2-1 deals (They do have 10K+ more seats)
I did find an interesting formula
(based on average attendance)
More fans ; less fans
1:1 to 3:2 warrants a home and away
3:2 to 5:2 warrants a two for one
5:2 to 1:0 warrants a one and done
As a basis, this is not a bad formula. (although BYU/BSU fall in the 2-1 category and we of course have a H/H)
Couple of other notables
Nebraska was ranked 4th on Forbes most valuable college football programs. ($39M profit)
TCU has home and homes with Texas Tech, LSU, Arkansas, and Oklahoma. None are more than 480 miles from Fort Worth!
(The combined travel distance for these four games is roughly the same as BSU for ONE game at Nebraska)
Anyway, don't blow me up on this stuff, just passing it along.
Pretty interesting info
I just wish that the athletic department would chime in on this and officially set the record straight, but perhaps they're still in negotiations, who knows? Anyway my sources tell me that there isn't going to be deal at all and that we walked away from it, but what's crazy and kind of frustrating, is that there seems to be more info circulating throughout the reader contributed posts on the Statesman, than there is IN the Statesman itself, but I'm sure they'll print something as soon as the BSU Athletic Department issues a press release ;-)
As far as how this whole Nebraska thing got started. I'm under the impression that the catalyst was actually a Facebook Group started by a Husker fan and it put pressure on the Husker athletic department to respond, but there seems to be a whole lot of rumors circulating around about the Nebraska offer and I'm sure that this is probably one of them, but I do know the FB group exists because I joined it!
Anyway, it sure would be great to see such a match up wouldn't it?
Statesman won't print a thing until ....
...the Bley tells them to run it. That's the way it works with the Statesman. They are nothing more than a direct extension of the BSU athletic department. Journalism? Not when it comes to BSU athletics. The Bley has struck fear in the hearts of the Statesman sports writers.
The interesting thing about a home and home with Nebraska is....
In my current issue of Athletic Management, there's a Q&A with Bleymaier, and in it, he's asked the following question.
Q- It's no secret that you have trouble finding teams willing to play you in football. How do you address that?
Bley's answer was - "We will play anybody home and home-in a second. We are also looking for guarantee games as long as we can balance our schedule with home and away games like anyone else"
So, with Bley's statement, coupled with the presumed legitimacy of the reports that Osborne has in fact, offered BSU a Home & Home deal, then there's no reason as to why Nebraska isn't on our schedule in the very near future, but yeah, you'd think that any responsible journalist would indeed be all over this.
But kid
Nebraska has never offered a home and home! they said they would (see the "truth e-mail) but all they have offered is a 2 for 1. If you have some kind proof Nebraska has offered a home and home, throw it on here.
After everything I have read I believe Nebraska has hood-winked us. I do not believe they ever intended to schedule BSU period and all of this was a way to save face for some idiot politician.
Just my 2 cents.......
I'm confused tfunk.......
....can't either team "offer" a home and home??? Where's BSU's "offer" to Nebraska?
The way I hear it
BSU approached Nebraska first about a one and done, when Nebraska squashed it they offered a 2-1. I would imagine any home and home offer from BSU would be returned unopened.
So tfunk.....
....if the Bley called Osborne and proposed a home and home in 2018 and 2019 (give or take a year) what you are suggesting is that Osborne would do a deal? That's not what his email indicated.
Truth,
The e-mail is meaningless for two reasons
They did NOT offer BSU a home and home, they offered a 2 for 1.
The 2011 reason for not scheduling BSU (in the email) was made meaningless when they offered us years with Miami and Tennessee on them.
This is very clear truth, I really can't believe you want to argue this.
Here's Nebraska's scheduling philosophy
Jeff Jamrog, NU’s assistant athletic director for football, has said the Huskers’ overall scheduling philosophy essentially follows these guidelines:
1. Play a team from one of six Bowl Championship Series conferences every year. It’s usually a home-and-home series.
2. Find quality Football Bowl Subdivision (Division I-A) teams, preferably for a three-game series (two games in Lincoln, one away).
3. Fill in holes in the schedule with FBS teams willing to play on a one-time basis in Lincoln only. New Mexico State and San Jose State are recent examples.
4. “If all else fails, we’ll play a I-AA opponent, by default,” Jamrog said.
http://www.huskerextra.com/articles/2010/01/17/football/doc4b525e997772a459155338.txt
This doesn't differ from the email by Osborne....
...at all. Exactly what we've been talking about for weeks (months) now. So, once again I'll ask the question: Where's the follow up with the Bley by the Statesman??
I know
I don't know about you, but as a Bronco fan, I'm pretty embarrassed that when our football program is criticized by the national sports media in regards to our cupcake scheduling, our AD is quick to defend himself by proclaiming "nobody will play us" but when a team like Nebraska steps up to the plate and wants to schedule BSU, our AD runs and hides and refuses to make himself available for comment.
As I understand it, Nebraska made the offer sometime in or around October of last year, and five months later they've been unable to get any type of response from Bleymaier.
What's up with that?
Oh BK we DID get a response from the Bley....remember?
"We haven't talked terms (money)" -- Gene "the Bley" in an "interview" that was printed in the Statesman concerning the Nebraska series.
So......he HAS stated publically something about NU and a possible match-up. I think that was in December during a basketball game or the Fiesta party -- not sure.
So again ... he comes out and makes that statement and then runs for the hills. Something is very fishy about this ... and even the Funk will have to admit it!
The Bley could make a simple statement (since he already did) and say "the money just wasn't right" --or-- "we're still talking" -- or -- "I don't know where the rumor about me not returning the calls to Nebraska came from because we've been talking since _____ (fill in the blank). -- or -- "The two for one idea doesn't fit into our plans but we are discussing a potential home and home down the road" -- or -- "I hate Tom Osborne for going on the Boise radio without my expressed written permission!"
Now, with the exception of the last one, which of these would be difficult to answer WITHOUT giving the specifics?
Thanks Truth
Did I not say the AD's say one of two things "we're talking" or "no we're not talking" and no NOT get into specifics about deals until they are signed. What is "fishy" about Bley doing the same thing?
Other than Osborne, find a quote from an AD, any AD, where they go to the press specifically to discuss details of a deal that has not been signed!
Truth, answer me this why did a Michigan v BSU not happen? Feel free to email the Michigan AD (his response will be "we talked, but we couldn't make it work, have a nice day!)
As far as Michigan is concerned..
why should be have to ask their AD? Can we not trust our AD or something?
That's up to you
because our AD would reply exactly the same as the Michigan AD.
Uhhhh ...yeah......
just like our AD's replies have been exactly the same as Nebraska's AD??
C'mon now funk....
Hey, if you've got the scoop on why the Michigan deal fell through, then spill them thar beans whydoncha?
Kid you haven't
been paying attention
You are making my point for me now tfunk!!
So....let me understand your point of view here....if we want to find out what is happening with Michigan, Nebraska, whatever --- we need to call the OTHER AD? Wow. That says it all right there!
My point truth
was that the answer you get from the other AD's is the same you will get from our AD. You only need to call the other AD because you don't trust our AD.
Which begs the question. If the Michigan AD says "we're talking, have a nice day" and the BSU AD says "we're talking, have a nice day", what are you going to do?
Our AD is silent!
I think you're avoiding the obvious here funk. Has anyone called OUR AD on this? Like the Statesman?
It's elementary--it's Silent Gene?
----------
Stop whining about the stupid signature and think for yourself.
DUDE!!!!
Call the Statesman! Call the Michigan paper!
Call Bley, Call the Alabama AD
YOU WILL GET THE SAME ANSWER!
To whom may I direct your call?
----------
Stop whining about the stupid signature and think for yourself.
So whatever you do don't call the Bley?
.....that's what you are suggesting, right?
Dosen't differ??? what are you smoking!
The email states:
"We would be willing to play Boise State home and home"
The AAD states:
"1. Play a team from one of six Bowl Championship Series conferences every year. It’s usually a home-and-home series."
Truth? when did we become a team "from one of six Bowl Championship Series conferences"?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The email also states
"as our one major nonconference opponent"
They offered to schedule BSU in years they already have TENNESSEE and MIAMI
Truth? when did Miami and Tennessee become "non-major" opponents?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'd really like to see the answers to the above questions!
oh boy funk.......
....I've carefully outlined this all before. WE DON'T KNOW What years they were discussing do we? "One major opponent each year" is what Osborne said in the email. Am I right? The other stuff is from the sports editor that you trashed yesterday as not knowing what he was talking about!! You cherry pick the quotes that serve your purpose, then diss the guy on everything else. Can't do that Funky!
Also....do you think it possible that Osborne could be looking to juggle his schedule and move Miami and/or Tennessee?
Not only that, but ...
in the quote I provided. Nebraska's AAD, Jeff Jamrog said was that Nebraska essentially follows a scheduling philosophy guideline and listed what those guidelines are.
Funk on the other hand, evidently interpreted that as guidlines set in stone in which Nebraska doesn't deviate from when it comes to scheduling.
Yes we do,
They offered 2015 at Omaha, 2016 at Boise, and 2017 at OMAHA
WOW, first we're lucky to have Nebraska even want to schedule us, now you have them moving BCS scheduled games just to fit us in.
Amazing!
so, who have we committed to in 2015,16, and 17?
Is BSU's OOC schedule full? Nope!
BTW- Teams do shift their schedules around and drop out of OOC contracts. It happens all the time
Indeed.....schedule juggling is very common.
Every team does it and more than most people understand. Lots of reasons for it too.
at Omaha?
had not heard that Nebraska wanted to play in Omaha when they pack out every single game in Lincoln. Strange.
It must be a side effect of the kool-aid
LOL
I was replying to
your post:
"This doesn't differ from the email by Osborne...."
which followed you post:
"Here's Nebraska's scheduling philosophy"
So tell us again how they don't differ?
Osborne clearly gave the indication he would do a home and home.
.....at least the email I posted made if fairly clear. Wheather he has "offered" a home and home may be a different matter (I don't know if he has) but the simple fact that he expressed an interest should have been enough for the Bley to get off his fanny and get a deal done REGARDLESS of how far down the road it would be....I just don't get it. Also, I don't think the man is believable. He's says what he wants you to hear and not what is fact. "Home and home in a second" is bull. He's got one (Nebraska) just sitting there yet he clearly is waiting far, far more than a "second" to do anything.
That is why I think we
have been hood-winked.
1.) The letter clearly states Nebraska would do a home and home with BSU, yet Osborne is on-record of only offering a 2 for 1 deal.
2.) The letter also states that 2011 is out of the question because they don't want to overload the schedule (Washington, Fresno State, Wyoming. Yet the 2 for 1 deal is for years they already have Tennessee and Miami(fl) on their schedule.
I have tried to put some reason to the above contradictions, the only answer I come with is that we have been played.