The Bobcat Nation

Just a little thing I noticed from this week's Big Sky games.

6 Games
4 Games decided by 3 points
1 Game decided by 7 points
1 Game decided by 9 point

NAU loses to Northern Colorado, did anybody see that coming?
Idaho State puts a scare into EWU.
MSU - what the f*** was that?
UM - what the f*** was that?

4 to 6 defenses suck.
4 to 6 offenses don't suck.

Refs aren't the only thing out of whack in the Big Sky.

nau had 5 turnovers, UNC 0

Rich K wrote:Just a little thing I noticed from this week's Big Sky games.

NAU loses to Northern Colorado, did anybody see that coming?
Idaho State puts a scare into EWU.
MSU - what the f*** was that?
UM - what the f*** was that?

I predicted that loss in the Big Sky Challenge. NoCol, while still not good, seems to be displaying some strength this year. After last week, it seemed like NAU began their annual November slide.

I am not really sure how to make the point that I am trying to make.....BUT is there some type of pattern here. Even last nights unr/Boise game. Are some of these defenses being overwhelmed by a few really outstanding offensive players.

Rich K wrote:Just a little thing I noticed from this week's Big Sky games.

6 Games
4 Games decided by 3 points
1 Game decided by 7 points
1 Game decided by 9 point

NAU loses to Northern Colorado, did anybody see that coming?
Idaho State puts a scare into EWU.
MSU - what the f*** was that?
UM - what the f*** was that?

I am far from a football guru but it sure looks as if there may be a few offenses that can really put up good numbers, OR
there are some defenses that are suspect, OR
are these just flukes.

Sac's receivers put up really good numbers last week and again this week.....

4 to 6 defenses suck.
4 to 6 offenses don't suck.

Refs aren't the only thing out of whack in the Big Sky.

RickRund wrote:I am not really sure how to make the point that I am trying to make.....BUT is there some type of pattern here. Even last nights unr/Boise game. Are some of these defenses being overwhelmed by a few really outstanding offensive players.

Rich K wrote:Just a little thing I noticed from this week's Big Sky games.

6 Games
4 Games decided by 3 points
1 Game decided by 7 points
1 Game decided by 9 point

NAU loses to Northern Colorado, did anybody see that coming?
Idaho State puts a scare into EWU.
MSU - what the f*** was that?
UM - what the f*** was that?

I am far from a football guru but it sure looks as if there may be a few offenses that can really put up good numbers, OR
there are some defenses that are suspect, OR
are these just flukes.

Sac's receivers put up really good numbers last week and again this week.....

4 to 6 defenses suck.
4 to 6 offenses don't suck.

Refs aren't the only thing out of whack in the Big Sky.

I think so. When a QB can run too, it's like having 12 guys on the field rather than 11.

Rich K wrote:Just a little thing I noticed from this week's Big Sky games.

6 Games
4 Games decided by 3 points
1 Game decided by 7 points
1 Game decided by 9 point

NAU loses to Northern Colorado, did anybody see that coming?
Idaho State puts a scare into EWU.
MSU - what the f*** was that?
UM - what the f*** was that?

4 to 6 defenses suck.
4 to 6 offenses don't suck.

Refs aren't the only thing out of whack in the Big Sky.

7 big sky defenses are in the bottom 20 in all FCS (MSU, EWU, SSU, SUU, ISU, PSU). UNC & WSU & Davis look just as bad. UND &UM are really good defensively.

ISU, MSU, SSU, and obviously EWU are top 20 offenses. UM & UND are awful offensively.

Basically, the big sky is great offensively and horrible defensively.

onceacat wrote:

Rich K wrote:Just a little thing I noticed from this week's Big Sky games.

6 Games
4 Games decided by 3 points
1 Game decided by 7 points
1 Game decided by 9 point

NAU loses to Northern Colorado, did anybody see that coming?
Idaho State puts a scare into EWU.
MSU - what the f*** was that?
UM - what the f*** was that?

4 to 6 defenses suck.
4 to 6 offenses don't suck.

Refs aren't the only thing out of whack in the Big Sky.

7 big sky defenses are in the bottom 20 in all FCS (MSU, EWU, SSU, SUU, ISU, PSU). UNC & WSU & Davis look just as bad. UND &UM are really good defensively.

ISU, MSU, SSU, and obviously EWU are top 20 offenses. UM & UND are awful offensively.

Basically, the big sky is great offensively and horrible defensively.

But some of that is skewed by the schedule, or instance MSU has played several up tempo high powered offenses, that makes our defense look worse statistically than say um who have not played any high powered up tempo offenses.

MSU has played 3 of the top 12 scoring offenses in the FCS

the highest (FCS) scoring offense um has faced is NDSU at 39, the next highest is ranked at 80

Rich K wrote:Just a little thing I noticed from this week's Big Sky games.

MSU - what the f*** was that?

That was MSU winning what was basically a loser-out game for the playoffs, on the road, against a very experienced Sac State team with their version of McGhee at QB.

Bobcats won the game. Survive and advance.

PapaG wrote:

Rich K wrote:Just a little thing I noticed from this week's Big Sky games.

MSU - what the f*** was that?

That was MSU winning what was basically a loser-out game for the playoffs, on the road, against a very experienced Sac State team with their version of McGhee at QB.

Bobcats won the game. Survive and advance.

Yep. Never ever apologize for getting a road win in college football. It is not an easy thing to do. Take them no matter how ugly they are.

cats2506 wrote:

onceacat wrote:

Rich K wrote:Just a little thing I noticed from this week's Big Sky games.

6 Games
4 Games decided by 3 points
1 Game decided by 7 points
1 Game decided by 9 point

NAU loses to Northern Colorado, did anybody see that coming?
Idaho State puts a scare into EWU.
MSU - what the f*** was that?
UM - what the f*** was that?

4 to 6 defenses suck.
4 to 6 offenses don't suck.

Refs aren't the only thing out of whack in the Big Sky.

7 big sky defenses are in the bottom 20 in all FCS (MSU, EWU, SSU, SUU, ISU, PSU). UNC & WSU & Davis look just as bad. UND &UM are really good defensively.

ISU, MSU, SSU, and obviously EWU are top 20 offenses. UM & UND are awful offensively.

Basically, the big sky is great offensively and horrible defensively.

But some of that is skewed by the schedule, or instance MSU has played several up tempo high powered offenses, that makes our defense look worse statistically than say um who have not played any high powered up tempo offenses.

MSU has played 3 of the top 12 scoring offenses in the FCS

the highest (FCS) scoring offense um has faced is NDSU at 39, the next highest is ranked at 80

You know how I hate to give credit to um even when it's due...BUT, um passes the eyeball test. Certain other teams who shall remain unnamed (rhyme with beagles, schmornets, and globcats) haven't looked remotely impressive on defense. You could argue that um just looks that bad on offense because thev've played great defenses, but that's equally absurd.

onceacat wrote:

cats2506 wrote:

onceacat wrote:

Rich K wrote:Just a little thing I noticed from this week's Big Sky games.

6 Games
4 Games decided by 3 points
1 Game decided by 7 points
1 Game decided by 9 point

NAU loses to Northern Colorado, did anybody see that coming?
Idaho State puts a scare into EWU.
MSU - what the f*** was that?
UM - what the f*** was that?

4 to 6 defenses suck.
4 to 6 offenses don't suck.

Refs aren't the only thing out of whack in the Big Sky.

7 big sky defenses are in the bottom 20 in all FCS (MSU, EWU, SSU, SUU, ISU, PSU). UNC & WSU & Davis look just as bad. UND &UM are really good defensively.

ISU, MSU, SSU, and obviously EWU are top 20 offenses. UM & UND are awful offensively.

Basically, the big sky is great offensively and horrible defensively.

But some of that is skewed by the schedule, or instance MSU has played several up tempo high powered offenses, that makes our defense look worse statistically than say um who have not played any high powered up tempo offenses.

MSU has played 3 of the top 12 scoring offenses in the FCS

the highest (FCS) scoring offense um has faced is NDSU at 39, the next highest is ranked at 80

You know how I hate to give credit to um even when it's due...BUT, um passes the eyeball test. Certain other teams who shall remain unnamed (rhyme with beagles, schmornets, and globcats) haven't looked remotely impressive on defense. You could argue that um just looks that bad on offense because thev've played great defenses, but that's equally absurd.

Wow, you are taking my point to extremes but at least I provided some information to back my hypothesis.

I am not trying to say that um's D and the Cats D are the equal, just that based on the schedules, um stats will likely digress when they play higher powered offenses, and conversely MSU's stats will likely improve when we play weaker offenses.

Do you really believe that Um will be able to hold EWU, MSU and SAC under their (UM's) current average of 17 ppg?

How about do you think that WSU, UCD and PSU will have an average score over 35 ppg against MSU?

I agree that it is possible, but think they are both unlikely to happen.

And I do think that UM offense is better than they statistically look right now, for the exact reason you state, they have played some good defenses to date, they have some weaker defenses on the schedule in the future and will improve statistically as those games are played.

At this rate the Cat Griz game is going to be billed as the battle between the anemic offense vs the open gate defense. Definitely two different styles of stinking it up, but we'll have to see which style can stink it up worse in November.

The best option may be to only watch when the Cats have the ball. It is going to be nothing but ugly football when the Griz are on offense.