Boise State football still No. 5 in AP, No. 6 in USA Today; Air Force preparing to leave Mountain West for Big East

By Chadd Cripe
© 2011 Idaho Statesman

The Boise State football team held its positions in The Associated Press Top 25 and USA Today Coaches’ Poll on Sunday.

The Broncos are No. 5 in AP and No. 6 in USA Today.

The Broncos lost 26 points in AP. They lost 16 points in USA Today and now lead Oklahoma State by just two.

Houston joined the USA Today poll at No. 22 and the AP poll at No. 25, giving the non-BCS conferences a second representative.


The first Harris Poll was released Sunday. The Harris and USA Today are part of the BCS standings, which will be released for the first time next week.

Boise State is No. 5 in the Harris with one first-place vote.

Houston is No. 24.


Air Force has turned down overtures from the Big 12 and is planning to move its football program to the Big East and other sports to the Missouri Valley Conference, The Denver Post reported Sunday.

"Our interest is high in the Big East. That's fair to say," Air Force athletic director Hans Mueh told the Post on Saturday. "This stuff is moving fast."


TCU’s win Saturday night at San Diego State means the Horned Frogs almost certainly will be playing for the outright Mountain West title on Nov. 12 in Boise. The Horned Frogs already have beaten San Diego State and Air Force, the only teams considered title contenders besides the Broncos and Frogs.


Houston quarterback Case Keenum threw three touchdown passes Saturday and has 124 in his career, an eight-TD lead on Boise State’s Kellen Moore (116). Keenum has played one more game than Moore this season but that likely will continue because the Cougars are favored to play in the Conference USA championship game.

Both are expected to break the FBS record of 134 set by Graham Harrell of Texas Tech.

Baylor’s Robert Griffin III (19 TDs in five games) is the only player with more touchdowns per game this season than Moore (17 in five games). Keenum has thrown 17 in six games.


Here’s the AP Top 25:

Record Pts Pv
1. LSU (40) 6-0 1,450 1
2. Alabama (10) 6-0 1,405 2
3. Oklahoma (8) 5-0 1,382 3
4. Wisconsin 5-0 1,243 4
5. Boise St. (1) 5-0 1,222 5
6. Oklahoma St. 5-0 1,176 6
7. Stanford 5-0 1,164 7
8. Clemson 6-0 1,080 8
9. Oregon 4-1 1,000 9
10. Arkansas 5-1 921 10
11. Michigan 6-0 868 12
12. Georgia Tech 6-0 741 13
13. West Virginia 5-1 659 16
14. Nebraska 5-1 642 14
15. South Carolina 5-1 608 18
16. Illinois 6-0 594 19
17. Kansas St. 5-0 580 20
18. Arizona St. 5-1 414 22
19. Virginia Tech 5-1 410 21
20. Baylor 4-1 308 25
21. Texas A&M 3-2 251 24
22. Texas 4-1 216 11
23. Michigan St. 4-1 181 NR
24. Auburn 4-2 156 15
25. Houston 6-0 142 NR
Others receiving votes: Florida 86, Washington 71, Notre Dame 64, Georgia 61, Penn St. 22, Southern Cal 17, North Carolina 13, South Florida 11, Wake Forest 7, Southern Miss. 4, SMU 3, Texas Tech 2, Cincinnati 1.


Here’s the USA Today Coaches’ Poll:

Rank Team (first-place votes) Record Points Last week's poll
1. Oklahoma (32) 5-0 1,434 1
2. LSU (15) 6-0 1,409 2
3. Alabama (11) 6-0 1,399 3
4. Wisconsin (1) 5-0 1,244 5
5. Stanford 5-0 1,232 4
6. Boise State 5-0 1,170 6
7. Oklahoma State 5-0 1,168 7
8. Clemson 6-0 1,046 8
9. Oregon 4-1 995 9
10. Michigan 6-0 891 11
11. Arkansas 5-1 871 12
12. Georgia Tech 6-0 805 13
13. South Carolina 5-1 678 14
14. Nebraska 5-1 671 15
15. Illinois 6-0 634 16
16. West Virginia 5-1 528 19
17. Virginia Tech 5-1 523 17
18. Kansas State 5-0 462 21
19. Michigan State 4-1 431 20
20. Arizona State 5-1 343 24
21. Texas 4-1 243 10
22. Houston 6-0 200 NR
23. Texas A&M 3-2 198 25
24. Baylor 4-1 185 NR
25. Penn State 5-1 77 NR

Dropped out
No. 18 Florida (4-2, lost to No. 2 LSU 41-11), No. 22 Florida State (2-3, lost to Wake Forest 35-30), No. 23 Auburn (4-2, lost to then-No. 12 Arkansas 38-14).

Others receiving votes
Florida (4-2) 72; Washington (4-1) 52; North Carolina (5-1) 43; Auburn (4-2) 33; Notre Dame (4-2) 31; South Florida (4-1) 30; Wake Forest (4-1) 22; Georgia (4-2) 15; Southern Methodist (4-1) 11; Texas Tech (4-1) 9; Rutgers (4-1) 8; Southern Mississippi (5-1) 7; TCU (4-2) 4; Hawaii (3-2) 1.


Here’s my AP ballot:

2 Alabama
3 Clemson
4 Oklahoma
5 Boise State
6 Okla State
7 Wisconsin
8 Stanford
9 Oregon
10 Arkansas
11 Georgia Tech
12 Kansas St
13 Illinois
14 S. Carolina
15 West Virginia
16 Baylor
17 Michigan
18 Arizona St
19 Nebraska
20 Auburn
21 Texas
22 Virginia Tech
23 Texas A&M
24 Georgia
25 Houston

Dropped out: Florida, Florida State
Also considered: USC, Notre Dame, North Carolina, Rutgers

1318196745 Boise State football still No. 5 in AP, No. 6 in USA Today; Air Force preparing to leave Mountain West for Big East Idaho Statesman Copyright 2014 Idaho Statesman . All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.


Chad-I understand you are from the west coast so you are not familiar with Clemson football. They are the employee with all the potential in the world but never finishes anything on time or correctly. They constantly fail!
#3 is way out of line for them. The ACC is very weak this year and other teams and leagues are much stronger. Time to re-evaluate that one.


And if they repeat history, I will drop them. But beating Auburn, Florida State and Virginia Tech in a row is pretty impressive.


I rarely comment on the polls because they are so subjective, but my jaw dropped when I saw Clemson. Freaking Clemson? Third?
You should lose your ballot for that. Top 10, sure. 3rd? No way. You're supposed to know what you are doing.

Clemson's beat 3 ranked teams in a row

and they've got 2 more down the stretch. They're legit

Yeah and Boise has beaten

no ranked teams as of week #6.....

Cripes polls are correct....yes, I think BSU would clobber Clemson, but that is not point....Clemson has played 3 top 25 teams and has one or two to end of season, Georgia may be in top 25, but doubt it....


what about Stanford?

Or Oregon?

BSU4342....True thus

far....but at seasons end....

Stanford, Oregon, Arizona State, USC, and Washington will be in top 25....

On Boise side, Georgia a maybe, and Toledo a outside maybe-maybe....


Name the last year the PAC2 had 5 teams in the top 25.......


BSU has played as tough a schedule as Clemson to date according to Sagarin and the other computers.. Thanks for supporting BSU!

BSU SOS = 18

Clemson SOS = 44

Nice that you are so willing to put BSU under Clemson, who has proven in past years to not be as good. It would be nice to see you stick with BSU through think and thin. But, I imagine with sMurphy and prHater close by, you are getting the peer pressure to change you vote.


Not a fan of those computer strength-of-schedule numbers. Clemson has beaten two teams in today's coaches' top 30. Boise State's best win is slightly out of the top 30. ... I have rewarded Boise State for big wins (had the Broncos No. 2 after beating Georgia). Only fair for me to do the same for other programs.

Strength of Schedule

But the numbers are accurate. You have to consider both the strength of schedule and the resulting scores against those teams. Clemson had a great game this week against BC and also last week against VT. But I don't see how you can put the Tigers ahead of Oklahoma, particularly with the Sooners' drubbing of Texas yesterday and in comparison with each teams' play against the Seminoles.

But then again, the rankings are opinions and everyone has one.

Wisconsin best win...

Nebraska, who almost lost at Home to tOSU. but you are giving them credit for UNLV? South Dakota State?

Seriously...double standard ChadD!

Sick of this from you IS media folks. BSU has been the most consistent team in 5 years....and you still don't phrikin bleieve in them!

Idiotic really. But not unusual from the mistakesman.


Are you saying Chadd should have BSU ranked higher than 5th?

It is absolutely hil-ar-ious

It is absolutely hil-ar-ious to read BSU fans complaining about someone else's schedule. BSU beats an average Georgia team that struggled against crappy Tennessee and Ole Miss. The rest of BSU's schedule is embarrassing: Toledo, Tulsa, Nevada, Fresno, Col St, Air Force, UNLV, TCU, SD State, Wyoming and fricking New Mexico. Glass houses, idiots.


Why are you hammering me on Wisconsin? I have them seventh, two spots behind Boise State. ... Anyone who thinks I vote Boise State low hasn't been paying attention over the years. I have them ranked No. 5 — right in the thick of the title race. ... I vote based on what teams have accomplished. In a perfect world, I would watch all these teams play and evaluate them, but that's not the situation. I work/travel all day most Saturdays and rarely get to watch anyone other than Boise State play full games... As for the rises and falls in my ballot, I evaluate it piece by piece every week. I don't mindlessly push teams up when someone ahead of them loses. Yes, there's inconsistency from week to week, but there should be — I have more information every week. If Florida State and Va. Tech and Auburn aren't good wins a month from now, Clemson won't be No. 3. But if you ignore preseason expectations, there is absolutely no doubt that they deserve it right now (and I had them there last week, too).

Sorry it took me a couple days to get to this. I spent a good chunk of the past couple days replacing a water heater.


Mr Cripe....

You are appealing to Rome....

In order to appease Ceasar and keep Pontius Pilate happy, maybe place Boise State at number 1....

PS....Ugly thinks your poll is spot-on....


You're not a fan of the computer SoS ratings but you believe wholeheartedly in the subjectivity of human polls, huh? You say Clemson beat 3 ranked teams in a row but at the end of the season will ANY of those teams even be ranked by the human polls, much less decent football teams at all? Florida State has already proven to be a wash and overhyped... did you miss that game last week? And I'm troubled as to why you have an unranked Auburn jump all the way to 15 then lose and only move to 20. Your ranking system is pure madness and no method. It's what we call a "knee-jerk reaction". Florida State is no longer even above .500 while Auburn shouldn't be ranked at all. Will VaTech follow suit?

Glad the pollsters have SOOOOO much sense in their voting. I'd hate to see what the homer writers of the AQ conferences think compared to one of Boise's own. If I had any faith in the system, I would have lost it all after seeing your ballots. Good thing I never had any faith in it to begin with.


If I voted based on SOS, what would be the point in having human voters? The computers have their place. I do give a lot of weight to schedules, but in a different way. I put most of the weight on who the best teams you beat are. That evens the playing field a bit between teams like Boise State and Alabama, and it's also a better way to determine a team's potential. ... I addressed some of your other points in another comment on here — I'm not married to Clemson at No. 3 if their wins don't hold up long term. I would drop them just like I did Boise State, who I had at No. 2 and then moved back as other teams developed more impressive resumes.

A lot of people seem to think there's some kind of right answer for this voting. I put a lot of thought and time into it but it is by nature guesswork. That's why these polls are made up of large panels of voters, to balance it all out.



The ACC has had a pretty nice year so far. 29-11 overall out of conference record, 6-9 vs top 25 opponents, 5 teams with 1 or 0 losses. Clemson also had three straight quality win over top 25 (at the the time) teams. They may turn out to be that employee of yours, but for now they deserve the employee of the month parking space (at least one of them).

Nice post! Argument well

Nice post! Argument well done. 6-9 though is the scary part. They are AQ conference. That should be flipped?
I think when things are said and done, the ACC will have proven to have had a very bad year. IMO, this is the worst the league has ever looked. VaTech loses to Clemson. FSU keeps losing. Miami is bad. Maryland awful. UNC is doing an admirable job with the situation they are in. NC State should be a heck of a lot better by now. Very disappointing.
Cripe's point is well made. He is doing a "what have you done lately!" approach which is fair.

You would think,

"6-9 though is the scary part. They are AQ conference. That should be flipped?"

Not the case though

SEC 11-13
B12 5-9
B10 1-8
BE 2-2
PAC 1-13

The one I'm having

reservations about is Stanford.

San Jose State may beat their best win.

Ω Last week ...

... BSU was #4 in the BCS rankings (minus the Harris, and with Wolfe not reporting until 10/16).

In the five computer services, BSU averaged 5.2. Oklahoma 7.4, Clemson 3.4.

Barring the Harris being way off from the Coaches, or Wolfe skewing the computer portion, BSU should sit at 4-6 in the first official BCS rankings.

Stanford came in at 11.6 ... means you think like a computer, tfunk!

Well dang

Was looking forward to a great game in Colorado Springs. Couldnt wait to visit the Academy. Looks like that wont happen now.

Hold that thought


The Big Least is a long way from surviving........

There is no way

The Big East is an AQ conference with the 3 Military Academies.

There is no way?.....

Remember this has nothing to do with teams wins and losses and rankings -- its all about number of alums, size of stadium, TV markets, and big donors exchanging $ under the tables. I wouldn't rule anything out.....except BSU getting into a BCS conference.

Actually tet

A conference gaining and or keeping AQ status has everything to do with wins and losses.

I still think, to understand how all this works, we need to ....

follow the money.

Air Force athletic director Hans Mueh stated,

"Loyalty is dead in college football, and television contracts for football have gone insane. Greed rules.

"There are terrible, terrible hard feelings in college athletics," Mueh said. "I'm so disappointed with my fellow athletic directors. I think we have put the student-athlete in second place while chasing the dollar."

Here's the real bottom line for Air Force: It is better to break the hearts of old friends on the field before they dump you."

Those are some pretty strong words.


And in a sense we do, every time we turn on the TV and watch college football, we are following the money.

At this relatively early stage

with 13 undefeated teams, biases usually prevail particularly among the coaches. Wisconsin benefitted hugely for its only "good" win, and that was against a shaky Husker team. Bielema then took a bye week to hit the shows and pimp for his team. Oklahoma State ran up 70 on an awful Kansas team which the voters obviously construed better than Boise State's total shutdown of Fresno--go figure.

Well said charlie...



A quick analysis of the polls.


Of the top 10, all but #10 Arkansas lost points (which gained 61).

The most lost: Oregon -28
BSU: -26
The least lost: Wis/Clem. -13


The top 10 is a little more diverse.

Losers: BSU (-16), LSU (-1), Bama (-9), Stanford (-5)

Gainers: Clemson (18), OK (13), Wisky (8), OSU (6)

(interesting to note that Wisconsin did not play)

The coaches were obviously impressed with Oklahoma's win over Texas, which is understandable. The Clemson boost is a little more interesting since that beat a very bad BC but didn't ruts them.

Anyway, as always, for the record.

Air Force?

Didn't see that coming. They turned down the Big 12 to join the train wreck that is the Big East? I guess I can kind of understand it if they go with the other service academies, but it still seems strange to me.

So does this mean the MWC picks up Utah State?

So much for BSU's conference upgrade.


I bet the Big 12 wanted all sports. The Big East offered football only. AFA has been looking very hard at that split solution.

Air Force and the MWC

I have to admit that I'm puzzled by Air Force's intentions. The service academies all play each other every year anyway, so it's not like being in a conference will change those relationships all that much. They may get a bump up in revenue - for the short term. Army, Navy, and Air Force aren't additions which increase the football "power" of the conference. Playing all other sports in the Missouri Valley Conference doesn't make much sense, either. It would make more sense to approach the WAC, WCC, or Big Sky.

The MWC hasn't turned out to be the conference BSU thought it was joining, but it's still a far better conference than the WAC. The upside and potential is far greater than the WAC. If USU is invited, I think Idaho is in for more hurt. Being in a south/southwestern weighted conference will put them back into the Sun Belt days. Could it be much worse if they at least looked at independence?

I can't believe anyone CARES about the A.P. poll

What are you nitwits getting all hot and bothered about about Chadd Cripe's voting in the ABSOLUTELY POINTLESS poll. It has ZERO meaning or relevance and doesn't mean ANYTHING - so why bother complaining about his voting on it? It is senseless and absurd.

Look, it's

"panty wad" dude.

Aren't we lucky.........

Ω brackish754PantyWadDude scores!

Closes the gap on weislobber. Goes for 2 and fails again! Can you believe it?

La LameLedger

lamesched - 1,586
weislobber - 12
brackish754PantyWadDude - 11
ForeignOnlurkian - 4
rodneyTheChickenScatRunFromTheBlogs - 3
lynn60MainPageRejectWouldGetRoastedOnBlogs - 2
blueturfsucksButScaredOfTheBlogs - 1

For the record: AP

Has been selecting a college football national champion since 1936. In the BCS era there has been one "split" championship, 2003 (LSU=BCS, USC=AP). The AP championship trophy is still coveted by all FBS institutions.

There is a line of thinking that BSU actually has a better shot at being selected AP national champion than they do being selected to play in a BCS NC game, given the BCS rules. You don't have to think long to come up with very viable scenario's where BSU could win an AP NC.


Forget Kellen breaking any TD record if he gets pulled early in the 3rd quarter in most of the remaining games. All the others are playing the WHOLE games.It'll like he sets about 3 or 4 games total.It also hurts his Heisman chances.

Asterisk *

BroncoNation should lobby the ncaa to place an asterisk beside each of Kellen's records

Let me guess....




This has been disproved

so many times.............

It's not worth an answer


how can it be disproved how many TD's Kellen "could" have had by now, had be played all 4 quarters of each and every game of his career until the clock expired at 00:00?

Is that question not worth an answer?

Sure, it's pretty easy

Back up QB's have thrown 10 pa$$es this year. Moore throws a TD every 9.8 pa$$es, that means Moore would have 1 more TD than he does now.

Did the same thing for the last 3 years (in the past), it's comes out to 2.3 TD's per year (that's from memory).

It's fairly simple to disprove in other ways as well. Case doesn't sit out as much as Kellen because they are in games in the 4th qtr. The 2 games they had 30+ on their opponent, Case came out in the 3rd and start of the 4th. As for RGIII, He has thrown 149 pa$$es this year, Kellen, 186. Who has the advantage there?

Does that help?

I appreciate your response

however I don't appreciate the sarcasm. No. That doesn't help anything except your ego. You and I both know that if Coach Pete wanted to let Kellen break the ncaa record for TD's, Kellen could have shattered the record and set the bar so high that it may never be broken. That's all that some fans are saying. Some of us fans are into records and would like to see Kellen sit at the top of the all-time list for TD's. What's your problem with that?

No sarcasm intended


There is so much wrong with leaving star football players in games that are out of reach, for any reason, let alone records fans may want. If you are going to leave Kellen in for records then you must leave your first unit Oline in, right? Then if you really are going to risk Kellen for the records, you must leave your first unit receivers in, right? and if your going to do all that for records, you need to leave your first Defensive unit in, to get the ball back, right. And then after all that, you have to throw the ball with a 50 point lead.

Now if, you as fans, really want this, then the only other thing left is to fire coach Pete, he's way too much of a football coach to be any part of something like this.

Mike Leach is your guy......

Not sayin, just sayin