The Bobcat Nation

I can't remember where I saw someone say the Big Sky is a weak conference this year. So, I thought I'd e-mail Matt Dougherty of the Sports Network to get his thoughts. He has the pleasure of checking out one game a week and sees teams from all over the US. Here's his response:

I think the Big Sky teams are all going to have a tough time getting in the playoffs, and it's not just because the depth of the conference. There are only two poor teams in Sky (NAU and Sac State) and only one or two bad teams in the Great West. All the games the top Big Sky teams play against NDSU, Cal Poly and UC Davis will make winning tough. I think, right now, that's the difference between the West and the East. There are an equal number of contenders in each region, but a lot fewer poor teams in the West. There's quite a few pushovers in the Patriot League and Ivy, and even the SoCon. Big Sky is looking very tough this year, that No. 1 ranking in the Sagarin is justified.

Matt
----- Original Message -----
From: Jason Wiers
To: mdougherty@sportsnetwork.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 05, 2005 2:42 PM
Subject: Big Sky Conference (contenders or pretenders)


Matt,

I’m curious to hear your thoughts at this point in the season on the strength of teams in the Big Sky. With all of the travel you do, you get to see a lot more of the Eastern US teams then I do. So, I’m wondering, what is your analysis when comparing teams from our conference to teams in other parts of the country?



Thanks in advance,

Jason Wiers

Bozeman, MT

Go ‘Cats

Then they should go on the overall power index rankings along with 7 win margin to rank the teams come playoff time. Why is it fair that crappy East Coast teams (see the first 2 griz appetizer games last year of those teams they in the first 2 rounds .. UM/MSU/EW/PSU all would have beaten those 2 teams) get in that haven't played anyone? Make it like the NCAA selection committee where teams that are HOT at the end of the year and have played a tough schedule are the teams that get in! If the Big Sky ends up being the highest rated conference, there should for sure be 3 teams in there if we can get 3 teams that have 7 wins or higher. At the minimum 2!

Thanks for the info Matt! Remember to vote for the Big Sky teams in the polls you are a part of

fROM JACQR1 "I also think the BSC isn't any good this year. OVERRATED. from #4 to #25 and all the #s in the middle. (Playoffs should clear that one up)"

It took an igonorant personality from the Griz side to make such a dumb statement. Thanks for following that up! Nice job and thanks to Matt Dougherty.

I still think the BSC is overrated compared to last year.

By the way isn't one of the crappy pushovers the Griz beat from the East last year ranked #1 so far this year?

And what does Matt know anyway has he got a game correct yet this year? I'm sure I've seen more BSC games this year than he has.

So he is saying although we are good, we all play each other and between the conference schedule and the Great West games even the best Big Sky teams will have enough losses that it will make the playoffs hard to achieve.

jagur1 wrote:I still think the BSC is overrated compared to last year.

By the way isn't one of the crappy pushovers the Griz beat from the East last year ranked #1 so far this year?

And what does Matt know anyway has he got a game correct yet this year? I'm sure I've seen more BSC games this year than he has.

I haven't seen who they have this year, but there were 4 teams in the Big Sky that would have beaten them at home here in the Big Sky. I wasn't impressed with either of those first 2 teams the Griz played. Sam Houston and James Madison were 2 very tough teams though.

Plus a little history lesson last 2-3 years. MSU and GRIZ almost take down #1 Mcneese down there in 2002. 2003 NAU spanked #1 ranked Mcneese down there. 2004 EWU goes to #1 ranked Southern Illinois and pounds them as well. The Big Sky ranks right up there with any 1-AA conference in the nation.

It's the age old arguement are the west teams good or are they good because they play each other? "Look at how the Big 10 beats itself up they must be all good, until bowl season rolls around proves everybody wrong" Insert your choice of Power Conf for overrated, Big 10, Big 12, Pac 10, SEC, ACC ect ect ect. it varies from year to year.


I will agree the Big Sky was very tough last year, but the top 3 teams didn't get any better. Anyone disagree?

jagur1 wrote:It's the age old arguement are the west teams good or are they good because they play each other? "Look at how the Big 10 beats itself up they must be all good, until bowl season rolls around proves everybody wrong" Insert your choice of Power Conf for overrated, Big 10, Big 12, Pac 10, SEC, ACC ect ect ect. it varies from year to year.


I will agree the Big Sky was very tough last year, but the top 3 teams didn't get any better. Anyone disagree?

Until the bowl season comes around and they aren't playing in the friendly confines of their home stadiums (stale atmosphere's ... that is why I hate bowl games and love the 1-AA playoff system). This also applies to the Grizzlies as well. Every NC they have won they have played all their playoff games at home to lead up to the NC. Anytime they have had to go on the road in the earlier rounds ---> LOSS They do help keep that NC spirit alive though as they tend to buy as many home games as they can

Well that is true for all teams that make the playoffs since home teams win about 75% of the time and Marshall, GSU all had the chipper game at home for the exact same reason. If the cats would make the playoff more often you'd realize that fact.

jagur1 wrote:It's the age old arguement are the west teams good or are they good because they play each other? "Look at how the Big 10 beats itself up they must be all good, until bowl season rolls around proves everybody wrong" Insert your choice of Power Conf for overrated, Big 10, Big 12, Pac 10, SEC, ACC ect ect ect. it varies from year to year.


I will agree the Big Sky was very tough last year, but the top 3 teams didn't get any better. Anyone disagree?

Yes, I disagree. The Bobcats have improved, especially on the defensive side of the ball. The offense is ahead of where it was at this same time last year. UM, obviously has gotten much worse, especially on the offensive side. Eastern, I think has gotten a little worse, mainly on the defensive side of the ball. I think PSU has stayed about the same, and will be very tough. ISU has improved the most of any Big Sky team, and Weber has also improved a lot. Tough to say with Suc State and NAU, but I don't think either will play into the conference race.

I'll agree cat except I don't think the cats are much better on D.

jagur1 wrote:I will agree the Big Sky was very tough last year, but the top 3 teams didn't get any better. Anyone disagree?

I absolutely disagree and I know you are trying to goat me into saying the Cats were in the top three. Actually they were tied for third, and beat the team they tied with. I would say from what I've seen both the Cats and the Vikings are better than last year, EWU, well, that is yet to be seen. They had an early season melt down in a game last year as well. As for the Griz, well...

jagur1 wrote:And what does Matt know anyway has he got a game correct yet this year? I'm sure I've seen more BSC games this year than he has.

Ponycat, Ok the top 4 teams in the BSC last year aren't as good as last year. Maybe 0-3-1 with the cats just as good as last year, but no better. Portland can't throw the ball this year. (you just wait and see. They'll lose to Boise mark my words. )

jagur1 wrote:I'll agree cat except I don't think the cats are much better on D.

They are playing a new system 3-4 and bend but don't break style right now. They just need to hold the fort for another 2 weeks and we will get our full corp of players back and I think you will start seeing a lot more wrinkles on what this D can do. The Bobcats can score so fast I know why they are using more of a bland style right now. It is by far better though as I am not constantly waiting this year for the big busted play to happen. We will be much improved this year on defense for the last 3 games and playoff time. Our secondary guys are studs and HARD hitters. We just need to put a few more blitz wrinkles in and get our corp front 7 back and we'll be a great D by the end of the year.

Jag,
I think it depends on which defense from last year you are talking about. The first half of the season "d" was pretty good. The second half of the season was not.

Also, I think the arguement could be made that we are better this year due to the depth of good athletes we have at many positions. Secondary, six very good players. D-line, five big physical players. LB, another six solid players to fill in those four positions.

We do have some injuries right now in those positions. But, we should be back to full strength after our bye week heading into November.

CARDIAC_CATS wrote:I haven't seen who they have this year, but there were 4 teams in the Big Sky that would have beaten them at home here in the Big Sky. I wasn't impressed with either of those first 2 teams the Griz played. Sam Houston and James Madison were 2 very tough teams though.

New Hampshire played horribly against the Griz (a product of the "Wa Griz" factor?), but they are for real, and were last year as well. Aside from their game in Missoula, they won at Georgia Southern in the playoffs and beat Rutgers pretty soundly as well (the week after Rutgers beat Michigan State). Our team peaked at the right time and whipped them, but I'm not so sure that all of the top four teams in the BSC would have done the same.

--GL

Grizlaw wrote:

CARDIAC_CATS wrote:I haven't seen who they have this year, but there were 4 teams in the Big Sky that would have beaten them at home here in the Big Sky. I wasn't impressed with either of those first 2 teams the Griz played. Sam Houston and James Madison were 2 very tough teams though.

New Hampshire played horribly against the Griz (a product of the "Wa Griz" factor?), but they are for real, and were last year as well. Aside from their game in Missoula, they won at Georgia Southern in the playoffs and beat Rutgers pretty soundly as well (the week after Rutgers beat Michigan State). Our team peaked at the right time and whipped them, but I'm not so sure that all of the top four teams in the BSC would have done the same.

--GL

If New Hampshire might have had their stud WR I would maybe agree with you. W/O him all they could do was run the ball and be very vanilla. They were not a very good team at the end of the year (especially w/o that WR). Average defense (1-2 great players but that was it) and a wounded offense. But hey, I wouldn't have been complaining either if the Cats played them and they lost their stud WR as well too .

One way to determine conference strength would be to have more non-conference games with East Coast teams. The cost is probably prohibitive but it would be great to play Georgia Southern, NH, Delaware, Western Kentucky, etc. in Bozeman.

NDSU plays GSU this year, I believe. That will be worth watching.

Overall, the BSC is better this year than last. You can see that by watching last week's conference games.