Football: Is Boise State’s Chris Petersen leaving the door open? Depends what you want to hear

Boise State’s Chris Petersen, the subject of constant coaching job talk, addressed the latest round of rumors Monday during his weekly press conference with local media.

The 20th-ranked Broncos (9-2) close their regular season Saturday against Nevada.

Courtesy of the Idaho Statesman, here is what Petersen had to say related to the coaching rumors, late in his weekly address:

“Twenty-two minutes,” he said, looking at his watch. “That’s better than I thought.”

Asked if it was a distraction, he said, “It is not even kind of. It’s just rumors. That’s all I want really to say about this and I say it every year. It’s just rumors. I don’t even think half the time it’s reporters. Everybody’s a reporter these days. Everybody’s got an opinion on a blog, so they throw it out and oh, it’s going to happen.”

Petersen referenced the Mississippi State rumors from a few years ago, when a television station was reporting the details of his new contract with the Bulldogs.

“It was so far from false. It is what it is, you guys love it. I know it’s great and it sells whatever. It means zero here. We don’t even pay attention to it.”

Asked if there was a downside to his name being mentioned all the time, Petersen said, “The only trouble is in recruiting — 99.9 percent is always completely false, the problem is .1. But there hasn’t even been .1.”

Cal fans will cling to that .1 percent — and perhaps they should. Petersen is as good a candidate as the Bears could covet.

But he’s said no to UCLA and Stanford in recent years, and he won’t be an easy sell. Can Sandy Barbour turn those long-shot odds into something real?

Stay tuned.


Jeff Faraudo

  • daredevilfan

    Doesn’t sound real promising to me. About the same odds as Moron swithing to Wheat thins.

  • The Wisdom Cow

    If he says “.1” and has also told friends that Cal and Oregon are the schools that could get him thinking . . .

    He’ll wait for Kelly to leave and get 6+ mil a year, plus a mil a year for each assistant, from Nike U.

  • ConcordBear

    It’s obvious Petersen loves the idea of coaching at Cal.
    Come on down coach!!!

  • Juancho

    So petersen is just as much of a jerk with the media as tedford ?

  • Steve W

    Sure Petersen has won a bunch of games, but there is a huge difference between having to prepare for and play one or two tough games a year and prepping for games in the PAC 12, where every game is a dogfight. Just ask Kyle Whitingham at Utah. He was winning 10 games a year like clockwork in the Mountain West. What is he doing this off season?

    You heard it here first: Petersen would fall through a trap door if he was hired at Cal. We already have his two predecessors (Dirk Koetter and Dan Hawkins) to prove the case.

  • Dan

    Steve W – your point about 1-2 tough games a season are off base, IMO- with all due respect. It is relative. Boise has a lot less talent than he would have at Cal. Also, the Broncos now have a huge bulls eye on their back- EVERY team gets up for them. And yet, all he does is win. He also took Boise to another level – or three – higher once he took over.

    I think Petersen is unique, I wouldn’t lump him in with Koetter and Hawkins. Also, they both got into bad situations. The predecessors at both ASU and CU have done even worse. Petersen would kill it here. He is the very best option out there, there is not even a close second. Again, IMO.

  • Dan

    Didn’t mean the predecessors, meant the subsequent coaches at ASU and CU. My bad, its too late to be posting coherently.

  • MoreNCsarecoming

    BSU plays Nevada annually.

    You can figure out the rest.

  • Steve W


    No denying that Petersen took over an already wildly successful program, continued it and made it better over the years. But target on his back or no, the guy has only had to prepare for one or two truly tough games a year. Kinda like Kyle Whittingham. He took over a wildly successful program from Urban Meyer, continued it and made it better – all the while winning 10 or more games and all of his bowl games while having to play TCU, BYU and some good Air Force teams with the same target on his back. He is just another sub 500 PAC 12 coach sitting on the sidelines this bowl season.

    I want a guy at Cal who knows how to drain the swamp and start over. Let’s face it, Cal is going to be a reclamation project next year. The implied message from Tedford was do just enough in class to stay eligible and I won’t be too hard on you in the weight room or in running gassers after practice. Someone will need to completely change the culture, and it’s the main reason I favor a McIntyre or Anderson. They have already proved they can do it.

  • jabes

    Petersen needs to prepare the media/donors/recruits more for staying than for leaving. Of course he will say that he’s staying, and it’s very unlikely he would come to Cal after turning down UCLA and Stanford (if true). I love Cal, but it’s hard to see what we have that isn’t also available in some fashion there.

    If you want an overly optimistic view, you would look at how Barbour handled Tedford’s exit (compared to CU/Embree) and say that Barbour is leveraging the Tedford/Petersen relationship.

  • covinared

    Steve: I disagree that the team is a reclamation project. We are not that far away. Also, where do you get your info that Tedford implicitly promised to go easy on the conditioning if the guys went easy on the studies?

  • Steve W

    Cov…just looking at results. The guys were at the bottom of the conference in graduation rates, which means they were doing just enough in the classroom to stay eligible. And the Nevada game proved to me that Tedford ran a soft fall camp. It’s all in the implied contact between coach and players.

  • Will

    Per Pat Forde:

    Bust of the Year: USC. You start the year ranked No. 1 by the AP and end it 7-5, with losses to your two biggest rivals? Yeah, you’re a bust.

  • H8sRed

    Steve W — Are you sure you went to Cal? Your conclusions regarding grades and conditioning have absolutely no foundation in fact — not the kind of critical thinking I was taught. Sure the graduation rate is unacceptable, but does that mean Tedford traded minimum academic performance for easier conditioning??? Then why would he have bothered to bench Maynard for Q1 of the Nevada game?

    A more logical conclusion (which isn’t saying much) is that Tedford’s obsession with secrecy got the best of him. It made no sense that he kept Maynard’s benching a secret from the rest of the team, especially his #2 QB. At the Nevada game, it was if the players were wondering what other surprises were waiting for them and what other secrets were kept from them. The team clearly had talent (as exemplified by the OSU and UCLA games), but their heads were spinning with too many distractions and “what ifs.”

  • BlueNGold

    the sleazy cheaters were definitely a bust this year. Not unlike their biggest booster to never post on one of their sports blogs.

  • Steve W.


    I didn’t go to Cal (just a fan), but spare me the BS about the critical thinking you acquired in Berkeley.

    I never said Tedford made a trade with his players regarding classroom work and conditioning. I think he went soft on everything in his later years of coaching there, and his players picked up on it.

    I can’t explain why he decided to impose that bizarre suspension on Maynard in the first half of the Nevada game. It does not seem consistent with the very harsh fact that so many of his players have failed to graduate. And you surely watched the Nevada game to its conclusion. How else can you explain players gasping for air in a game against a team with less talent other than to conclude that Tedford ran a Club Med style fall camp.

    The program was lacking in discipline in so many phases. Maybe that’s a better way of saying it.

  • BlueNGold

    #4 Juancho- I think most, if not all, coaches (at least the ones in major programs) talk to the media and publicly that way. They all seem to be trained in how to sound like they are being informative and responsive without revealing anything specific or important. Some do it better than others, but they all try to avoid giving specific answers to specific questions. JT was never very good at it, but that might be because he does not do well speaking publicly in general.

  • Juancho

    Touche bng