Toughest start ever?

El_Gato · Post by **El_Gato** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 3:42 am

According to this poll:

http://www.mratings.com/cf/compare1aa.htm

We trounced #47 (SFA), lost to #6(Cal Poly), and have #4(NDSU) coming to our house this Saturday. On October 1, we get #40 (ISU). So, in our first 5 games of the year, we will have played a Big XII team, 2 top 10 teams, and 2 others in the top 50.

As a reminder, the Griz trounced a DII, got trounced by a Pac 10, beat #46 (SDSU) 7-0, and in 2 weeks get #63 (Weber).

griz fans, don't get your panties in a wad; this is not smack. They're simply facts FYI.

Cat-theotherwhitemeat · Post by **Cat-theotherwhitemeat** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 8:22 am

El_Gato wrote:griz fans, don't get your panties in a wad; this is not smack. They're simply facts FYI.

I'm not wearing any underwear.

CelticCat · Post by **CelticCat** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 8:29 am

Cat-theotherwhitemeat wrote:
El_Gato wrote:griz fans, don't get your panties in a wad; this is not smack. They're simply facts FYI.
I'm not wearing any underwear.

Grizlaw · Post by **Grizlaw** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 8:45 am

El_Gato wrote:griz fans, don't get your panties in a wad; this is not smack. They're simply facts FYI.

This isn't smack either, Gato, but any significance that I might have otherwise attached to this particular ranking pretty much ended when I noticed that they have Harvard ranked #2 in the country.

Bozgriz · Post by **Bozgriz** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 9:20 am

So what is your point?

A tough schedule is often a good thing. Last year at UM, the Griz played a rugged non-conference schedule and made it to Chatty. Cats have the same opportunity with this one...

El_Gato · Post by **El_Gato** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 10:04 am

My point?

My point is to offer you some info & let YOU decide what the point is.

All I know is that's a damn tough schedule; if we get better because of it, BULLY! If we miss the playoffs by one or two losses, I'm pretty sure I won't be as fond of it...

jagur1 · Post by **jagur1** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 10:18 am

Maybe the tought sched is showing you the cats can't compete at that level yet? Much will be told on Saturday. I see no reason why the cats can't win at home against a good team.

Platinumcat · Post by **Platinumcat** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 10:33 am

I think both jagur1 and El Gato have valid points on this.
Tough pre-season schedules can either validate the type of team you think you cheer for. Or, it can prove disastrous when it comes to post season selection (assuming no automatic bid).

The fact is if we have more then three losses at the end of our 11 game regular season we will not be playing in the playoffs; no matter how well we're playing at that time.

It's a real fine line when trying to figure out how tough of a schedule to play prior to conference games. Due to timing, the Griz have scheduled some easier opponents on the ranking system in the midst of a "not-as-strong-as-usual" year. This may put them in position to have a better looking record at year's end then perhaps we may.

Hopefully, we on this site are the only ones concerning ourselves with this and the team is focusing in on just winning every weekend!

VictorG · Post by **VictorG** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 7:21 pm

Seems to me, if you have a "reloading" year, you would want an easier schedule so the team can learn and improve. If you're going to have a veteran team, a harder schedule would be good to push the team and show them exactly where they are at!

jagur1 · Post by **jagur1** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 7:24 pm

Can you reload for 20 years?

SteelheadBum · Post by **SteelheadBum** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 8:37 pm

JAG,

It is easy to talk trash regarding 20 years ect... but you & I both know that the griz are living in the past. The griz cupcake schedule this year (any bets UO doesn't even come close to winning the PAC 10?!!?) has hiddened the griz's problems. Oh, Weber State?? Bet me they finish better than .500 this year. Fort Lewis? Is that the U.S. Army base in Tacoma, WA (God Bless our Troops)?? Come on now.

MSU might not be ready to consistantly beat top 10 programs this year but the griz sure as heck can't either. Tell President Dennison that Uncle Denny owes him a raise.

The final conference game in November will determine who is right. GO CATS!!

jagur1 · Post by **jagur1** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 8:51 pm

I was talking about the Griz.

DaGriz · Post by **DaGriz** » Tue Sep 20, 2005 11:38 pm

(any bets UO doesn't even come close to winning the PAC 10?!!?) has hiddened the griz's problems. Oh, Weber State??

Any bets OSU doesn't come close to winning the Big 12? What difference does that make? We both played I-A schools and lost. Weber? Isn't Weber still part of the Big Sky and both schools play them every year? Oh yeah, that Cal Poly team that whooped you, we play them in a few weeks and they will probably do the same to us. I love how Cat fans keep pointing out our weak schedule, this is the first time in 3 years the Cats haven't had a D-II game to start. If it isn't trash talk, why isn't anybody talking about EWU's schedule? They start with one of the worst I-A schools out there and get beat and then play W.Wash. then have a bye and then start league.

For us a weaker schedule was good, we have a young team. For the Cats, with the schedule you have, if you went 3-1 to start you would be a top 3-5 team in the nation. I think a tough schedule with an experienced team is a benefit. But to me the most important thing is the playoffs, who cares how tough your schedule is when you are sitting at home in Dec?

tetoncat · Post by **tetoncat** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 8:19 am

The selection committee does. Obviously becaused of the Griz history, they can schedule easy win games, maybe lose one, lose two in conference and still make the playoffs. In 02 and 03 the Cats won the at large auto bid only to travel while the Griz played in the comforts of home. Not based on what they did in conference but because of the better overall record. Even when they lost to the Cats the week before. And you think its not important.

Cat Grad · Post by **Cat Grad** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 9:06 am

Hogan is no longer on the selection committee either (for what it's worth

) I believe I've read somewhere that Fields is, however

Perhaps this year the A-10 or Gateway won't get four teams selected and the Big Sky will be a little better represented. And no, I can't do the search right now to verify and give a link as to who comprises the committee because I'm much too busy (should be working instead of spending so much time in Bobcat Nation

Platinumcat · Post by **Platinumcat** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 9:32 am

There is an interesting discussion along these paramters on anygivensaturday.com going on right now. Yesterday someone on that site said that this year there will be teams getting into the playoffs with four losses. He said the system was revised and strength of schedule and quality wins were more important then just records.

First off, does anyone know anything about this. Is it true?

Second, if it is, I hope we don't use it as a crutch. We need to go out and win every game the rest of the season.

Platinumcat · Post by **Platinumcat** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 9:59 am

Here's the two comments made:

"These days the conference play is what matters most. Prepare yourself with tough OOC play to win your conference autobid. Folks have caught on to gaudy records against weak opponents. A team is not going to get an at-large bid with weak OOC wins over a team that has strong OOC opponents, including respectable losses."

"Seven D-I wins gets you considered for an at-large bid this year."

Again, this was made by someone on the previously mentioned site. I don't know the validity. But, thought it was interesting none-the-less.

Wolfman · Post by **Wolfman** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 9:59 am

First of all, you Griz fans who are pounding your chests about this year's team better stifle theyselves. This isn't a "down year". We will have the same team again next year. What makes you think that things will be any better then? J. Washington is not capable of providing any offense, no matter how many games he starts. He has never completed 60% of his passes in high school, junior college, ot here. It ain't gonna get any better. The kid just can't throw the ball accurately.

Regarding the prospects of the playoffs, the Griz are treated differently by the committee than all other IAA schools, because of the 20,000+ fans they put into the stadium for every playoff game. The stark fact is that IAA football needs the revenue from the Griz in order to break even on the expenses of the playoffs. This is the reason that UM always gets to play home games in the playoffs.

So, Montana may still get into the playoffs with 4 losses, though it would be a joke to give them a home game with that many losses. But, i'm sure the committee will try to find a way to do that due to the bucks involved.

I'm not sure the Griz will be able to lose only four games, however. So, this may be a moot point.

Post by **kmax** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:06 am

barechestcat wrote:There is an interesting discussion along these paramters on anygivensaturday.com going on right now. Yesterday someone on that site said that this year there will be teams getting into the playoffs with four losses. He said the system was revised and strength of schedule and quality wins were more important then just records.

First off, does anyone know anything about this. Is it true?

Second, if it is, I hope we don't use it as a crutch. We need to go out and win every game the rest of the season.

First off, the wins/losses thing for making an at large spot in the playoffs has always been and remains a guideline, not a rule. Just happens that there were always more teams that fit inside the guideline than at large spots and none outside it that could necessarily be considered "better" teams to make it.

Second, there was definately one change which I have noted several times here as people get worked up about getting our third loss. In previous years, the guideline read something to the effect of "teams with more than three losses risk not being considered for an at large berth." This year the guideline was change to effectively read "teams with less than 7 Division I wins risk not being considered for an at large berth." This was done to better reward teams for playing all D-I schedules and reward wins as opposed to punishing losses. This is why it is so nice that the Cats did not schedule a D-II this year. Going in it was assumed we would lose to OK St. so that meant we had 10 games to win 7 to still be considered, as opposed to 10 games to win 8 as before. This change also somewhat hurts teams like the Griz who had an almost sure I-A loss and a D-II on their schedule. For them coming in they essentially had 9 games to win 7 for at large consideration.

However, with the parity that is being shown across I-AA football this year, it is somewhat questionable whether there will be 8 strong contenders for at-large after all the autobids are gone. Because of this, if things keep going the way they have the first three weeks with all the upsets, I could see an at-large coming from a team that doesn't quite meet the "guideline" set forth by the NCAA.

El_Gato · Post by **El_Gato** » Wed Sep 21, 2005 10:49 am

kmax,

you hit the nail right on the head about scheduling DII schools; I have no problem with teams playing DI for the "payday". But at this point, MSU should NEVER schedule a DII school. As you pointed out, the Griz have made their task a bit tougher due to the fact that they only have 9 IAA games to win 7, whereas we have 10. Scheduling IAA OOC opponents simply increases your margin for error.

I don't understand why the Griz didn't end up with a bottom 40-ish IAA team where they slated Ft. Lewis; they wouldn't have won 55-0 but what did they gain from that versus playing a lower-echelon IAA team? They still should beat a team like Valpo or Southern Utah at WaGriz, but the difference is THE WIN WOULD COUNT.

Look at it this way: If you were on the committee right now and your decision was to rank the Cats & Griz for playoff consideration, who would you place ahead of the other? Honestly, I'd say the Cats 1-2 record puts them as a "toss-up" with the Griz AT WORST. Both played IA's on the road and lost; all of us can agree that the Cats loss was "more impressive" than the Griz'. The Griz defeat of Ft Lewis doesn't count in the least. SO, are the Griz better because they BARELY beat a 40-something IAA team at home versus the Cats who blew out a 40-something IAA team at home & lost to a top 20 (maybe even top 10) team on the road?

If your decision was to pick the "better" team right now, would it be Cats or Griz? Based strictly on W's & L's, obviously you take the Griz who are 1-0 to the Cats 1-1. I know that most folks will side with their team, but I honestly think an unbiased obvserver would pick the Cats, supporting the whole idea of ANALYZING team results (strength of schedule, margin of victory, etc.) in addition to simple wins & losses.

Toughest start ever?

Toughest start ever?

Re: Toughest start ever?

Re: Toughest start ever?

Re: Toughest start ever?