"Pure disrespect!"

[George Ferguson]

I have no issue with NAU players and coaches feeling the way they do. It was probably a very close call for the committee. However, directing any of that frustration towards UM's football program and fanbase, as some on BN are doing today, is really unintelligent. Montana had nothing to do with who got seeded where. Those decisions are made by people in Indianapolis last night and this morning. The Griz didn't disrespect ANYBODY.

 

[zirge]

NAU and UM got what they deserved. Bauman doesn't realize that one game doesn't make a season. The committee looks at the entire season and strength of schedule. The committee knew NAU didn't play EWU. Let's see if NAU can take care of business in the first round. Maybe NAU should concentrate on earning its respect, instead of whining about it.

"Pure disrespect" is what the committee did the MV conference.

Not so sure. After NDSU and SDSU I am not sure how good the teams really are. I believe YSU was exposed over the final 3 weeks of the season. Should they or SIU gotten in over TSU? Probably a pretty good argument, but a fail to believe that it was such an outrageous deal. If you actually go to the YSU message board, they do not even seem that surprised they were left out.

a win over sdsu for nau would be a good respectable win....we will see after that if they got no respect when the meet ewu and if they were ranked erroneously compared to the fcs not the bsc

eiu and sela are very good teams besides ndsu and sdsu look for them to be possibly be in the quarters....... with eiu in the semis probably with ewu

 

[WyomingGrizFan]

Coastal is whining about us getting the #8 over them as well.

Now THATS laughable. I can understand why NAU thinks they have a gripe. But CC?

No.

Is that opinion because you know so much about Coastal or because you don't and therefore they could not be that good?

Has there ever been a team from the Big South Conference that has ever made it past the Second Round of the FCS Playoffs? That includes such teams as Virginia Military / Presbyterian / Gardner-Webb / Charleston Southern and Liberty. Coastal Carolina did defeat Bethune-Cookman (24 - 14) last year in the 2012 FCS Playoffs but got defeated by Old Dominion the following game (35 - 63). Other than that?..and some of their fans wanted an eighth seed?..for doing what?

Coastal Carolina didn't even have a football program until their inaugural season of 2003. Their main rivals being Charleston Southern and Liberty. They may be considered the Flag Ship of their conference by being the first team ever from that conference to make it into the FCS Playoffs; this in 2006 when they lost to Appalachian State 28 - 45.

 

[MT Jack]

However, directing any of that frustration towards UM's football program and fanbase, as some on BN are doing today, is really unintelligent.

On a humorous note, it seems there aren't many NAU fans complaining on bobcatnation or championshipsubdivision (haven't checked anygivensaturday yet) about this. King and I, in our ongoing conversation of two, mumbled and grumbled a bit about it on NAU's site but it's mostly MSU, NDSU, EWU and other FCS school fans questioning the seeding.

NAU fan complaints limited because because...there are a limited number of NAU fans.

 

[PlayerRep]

NAU and UM got what they deserved. Bauman doesn't realize that one game doesn't make a season. The committee looks at the entire season and strength of schedule. The committee knew NAU didn't play EWU. Let's see if NAU can take care of business in the first round. Maybe NAU should concentrate on earning its respect, instead of whining about it.

"Pure disrespect" is what the committee did the MV conference.

NAU not playing Eastern is a not a good argument here, because NAU can't do anything about the conference schedule that is given to them by the BSC office. I do agree with NAU. They go 7-1 in a tough league and a team that they beat and who had less conference wins gets a 1st RD bye and they don't...doesn't make a lot of sense and neither does a 13 team football conference.

This is one big reason why Fullerton needs to grow a spine and tell Idaho that they either join the BSC for "ALL SPORTS" or find a new conference. This would make the BSC a 14 team football league and then you split it up into 2 divisions. 1 Division has UM, MSU, NC, UI, ISU, ND and SD. The other has PSU, CP, NAU, Weber, Sac, SU, and EWU. You have 3 games that are cross division games on a rotation every season, this gives everybody 9 conference games and you setup a point system that will determine a league champion.

I don't get the impression Vandal fans enjoy being an indy that gets smacked ever weekend and goes 1-11 or 2-10.

Just my opinion on all this, but I think it make the BSC stronger, more competitive and force current issues of unfairness out the door when it comes to the BSC and its members.

Sorry, but you are wrong. Not playing EWU completely undercuts the argument that NAU finished higher in the conference than UM. Not playing EWU also undercuts the argument you just make, that NAU played in a "tough league" and number of conference wins. NAU didn't play the top team in the "tough" league. UM did. Had NAU played EWU, NAU would have had another conference loss.

How do you explain that NAU ranks below UM in all computer rankings/ratings and all polls? You seem to think that one win makes a season. It doesn't. The committee considers the entire season. How do you explain NAU's narrow wins? UM had some too, but not as many as NAU. How do you explain NAU's 36-7 loss to MSU, whom UM just beat 28-14?

The Big Sky has invited Idaho multiple times. Idaho doesn't want to come, at least yet. Have you not been paying attention to this?

 

[EverettGriz]

However, directing any of that frustration towards UM's football program and fanbase, as some on BN are doing today, is really unintelligent.

On a humorous note, it seems there aren't many NAU fans complaining on bobcatnation or championshipsubdivision (haven't checked anygivensaturday yet) about this. King and I, in our ongoing conversation of two, mumbled and grumbled a bit about it on NAU's site but it's mostly MSU, NDSU, EWU and other FCS school fans questioning the seeding.

NAU fan complaints limited because because...there are a limited number of NAU fans.

MTJ, you're a quality poster and should post more.

Head over to the BB board. Haven't seen you there yet this year.

 

[clawman]

NAU needed another fcs win. Blame the AD for not putting another fcs game on the schedule. It's his fault.

Do you even know what fcs stands for? NAU has the same number of FCS wins as the Griz. They did not schedule a cupcake like Oklahoma Panhandle State ending up with only 11 games rather than 12. So they did have more FCS wins than you just no cupcakes, and in the mind of some that makes the Griz worthy of being seeded and NAU not.

 

[EverettGriz]

NAU needed another fcs win. Blame the AD for not putting another fcs game on the schedule. It's his fault.

Do you even know what fcs stands for? NAU has the same number of FCS wins as the Griz. They did not schedule a cupcake like Oklahoma Panhandle State ending up with only 11 games rather than 12. So they did have more FCS wins than you just no cupcakes, and in the mind of some that makes the Griz worthy of being seeded and NAU not.

Ummmm...what now?

 

[Savage74]

NAU and UM got what they deserved. Bauman doesn't realize that one game doesn't make a season. The committee looks at the entire season and strength of schedule. The committee knew NAU didn't play EWU. Let's see if NAU can take care of business in the first round. Maybe NAU should concentrate on earning its respect, instead of whining about it.

"Pure disrespect" is what the committee did the MV conference.

NAU not playing Eastern is a not a good argument here, because NAU can't do anything about the conference schedule that is given to them by the BSC office. I do agree with NAU. They go 7-1 in a tough league and a team that they beat and who had less conference wins gets a 1st RD bye and they don't...doesn't make a lot of sense and neither does a 13 team football conference.

This is one big reason why Fullerton needs to grow a spine and tell Idaho that they either join the BSC for "ALL SPORTS" or find a new conference. This would make the BSC a 14 team football league and then you split it up into 2 divisions. 1 Division has UM, MSU, NC, UI, ISU, ND and SD. The other has PSU, CP, NAU, Weber, Sac, SU, and EWU. You have 3 games that are cross division games on a rotation every season, this gives everybody 9 conference games and you setup a point system that will determine a league champion.

I don't get the impression Vandal fans enjoy being an indy that gets smacked ever weekend and goes 1-11 or 2-10.

Just my opinion on all this, but I think it make the BSC stronger, more competitive and force current issues of unfairness out the door when it comes to the BSC and its members.

Sorry, but you are wrong. Not playing EWU completely undercuts the argument that NAU finished higher in the conference than UM. Not playing EWU also undercuts the argument you just make, that NAU played in a "tough league" and number of conference wins. NAU didn't play the top team in the "tough" league. UM did. Had NAU played EWU, NAU would have had another conference loss.

How do you explain that NAU ranks below UM in all computer rankings/ratings and all polls? You seem to think that one win makes a season. It doesn't. The committee considers the entire season. How do you explain NAU's narrow wins? UM had some too, but not as many as NAU. How do you explain NAU's 36-7 loss to MSU, whom UM just beat 28-14?

The Big Sky has invited Idaho multiple times. Idaho doesn't want to come, at least yet. Have you not been paying attention to this?

I don't think you paid much attention to what I wrote or my point. NAU not playing EWU this season was not their fault and they shouldn't be penalized for it. And you can't say for certain if they would have lost to EWU, because they never played each other. So you have no point when it comes to that topic. EWU barely beat PSU at home yesterday and the Griz spanked PSU. Thus why the BSC is a tough football conference and why NAU should not be penalized for not having the opportunity to play the best team in the league. The Griz had more than a few nail-biters on the road this season against Sac and SD and CP at home. It is a tough league from top to bottom and if you go 7-1 in it.... that should count for a lot more than what NAU got credit for in my opinion.

As for Idaho, I'm well aware that they have turned down to join the league for football, thus why Fullerton (Commish of the BSC fyi) should not have allowed them to join for all the other sports in 2014 unless they were going to include football in the deal. That was my point, because a 13 team football league that doesn't give room for the all teams to play each other year in and year out creates this current argument with NAU. Think about if the Griz were placed in the same situation as NAU. I'm sure a lot of opinions on here would change.

 

[PlayerRep]

NAU and UM got what they deserved. Bauman doesn't realize that one game doesn't make a season. The committee looks at the entire season and strength of schedule. The committee knew NAU didn't play EWU. Let's see if NAU can take care of business in the first round. Maybe NAU should concentrate on earning its respect, instead of whining about it.

"Pure disrespect" is what the committee did the MV conference.

NAU not playing Eastern is a not a good argument here, because NAU can't do anything about the conference schedule that is given to them by the BSC office. I do agree with NAU. They go 7-1 in a tough league and a team that they beat and who had less conference wins gets a 1st RD bye and they don't...doesn't make a lot of sense and neither does a 13 team football conference.

This is one big reason why Fullerton needs to grow a spine and tell Idaho that they either join the BSC for "ALL SPORTS" or find a new conference. This would make the BSC a 14 team football league and then you split it up into 2 divisions. 1 Division has UM, MSU, NC, UI, ISU, ND and SD. The other has PSU, CP, NAU, Weber, Sac, SU, and EWU. You have 3 games that are cross division games on a rotation every season, this gives everybody 9 conference games and you setup a point system that will determine a league champion.

I don't get the impression Vandal fans enjoy being an indy that gets smacked ever weekend and goes 1-11 or 2-10.

Just my opinion on all this, but I think it make the BSC stronger, more competitive and force current issues of unfairness out the door when it comes to the BSC and its members.

Sorry, but you are wrong. Not playing EWU completely undercuts the argument that NAU finished higher in the conference than UM. Not playing EWU also undercuts the argument you just make, that NAU played in a "tough league" and number of conference wins. NAU didn't play the top team in the "tough" league. UM did. Had NAU played EWU, NAU would have had another conference loss.

How do you explain that NAU ranks below UM in all computer rankings/ratings and all polls? You seem to think that one win makes a season. It doesn't. The committee considers the entire season. How do you explain NAU's narrow wins? UM had some too, but not as many as NAU. How do you explain NAU's 36-7 loss to MSU, whom UM just beat 28-14?

The Big Sky has invited Idaho multiple times. Idaho doesn't want to come, at least yet. Have you not been paying attention to this?

I don't think you paid much attention to what I wrote or my point. NAU not playing EWU this season was not their fault and they shouldn't be penalized for it. And you can't say for certain if they would have lost to EWU, because they never played each other. So you have no point when it comes to that topic. EWU barely beat PSU at home yesterday and the Griz spanked PSU. Thus why the BSC is a tough football conference and why NAU should not be penalized for not having the opportunity to play the best team in the league. The Griz had more than a few nail-biters on the road this season against Sac and SD and CP at home. It is a tough league from top to bottom and if you go 7-1 in it.... that should count for a lot more than what NAU got credit for in my opinion.

As for Idaho, I'm well aware that they have turned down to join the league for football, thus why Fullerton (Commish of the BSC fyi) should not have allowed them to join for all the other sports in 2014 unless they were going to include football in the deal. That was my point, because a 13 team football league that doesn't give room for the all teams to play each other year in and year out creates this current argument with NAU. Think about if the Griz were placed in the same situation as NAU. I'm sure a lot of opinions on here would change.

Actually, you didn't pay attention to my post. The point is that NAU didn't play EWU; no one cares why they didn't play or blames NAU. Again, the fact is that NAU didn't play to EWU. EWU would have beaten NAU. If NAU can beat SDS, then you and I can see who is right on wether NAU can/could beat EWU.

NAU played cupcakes UNC and Idaho St. UM didn't. UM played one cupcake. Weber. NAU didn't play as tough of a conference schedule as UM. The committee, as well as the computer ratings and pollsters, took all of this into account. No fault of NAU; just a fact. You need to face up to facts. The argument that this isn't NAU's fault is meaningless; actually, it's a stupid argument.

 

[MT Jack]

For years, NAU was punished for scheduling schools like Western New Mexico and Fort Lewis. A few years they had the requisite number of wins for playoff consideratin but because one was against lower level competition, they were left out of the conversation. NAU decided this year to not schedule down and look what happened. No good deed goes unpunished. :roll:

EverettGriz - Thank you. I do my best not to be a snarky arsehole here on the internets... it's tough sometimes.

 

[dupuyer griz]

NAU and UM got what they deserved. Bauman doesn't realize that one game doesn't make a season. The committee looks at the entire season and strength of schedule. The committee knew NAU didn't play EWU. Let's see if NAU can take care of business in the first round. Maybe NAU should concentrate on earning its respect, instead of whining about it.

"Pure disrespect" is what the committee did the MV conference.

NAU not playing Eastern is a not a good argument here, because NAU can't do anything about the conference schedule that is given to them by the BSC office. I do agree with NAU. They go 7-1 in a tough league and a team that they beat and who had less conference wins gets a 1st RD bye and they don't...doesn't make a lot of sense and neither does a 13 team football conference.

This is one big reason why Fullerton needs to grow a spine and tell Idaho that they either join the BSC for "ALL SPORTS" or find a new conference. This would make the BSC a 14 team football league and then you split it up into 2 divisions. 1 Division has UM, MSU, NC, UI, ISU, ND and SD. The other has PSU, CP, NAU, Weber, Sac, SU, and EWU. You have 3 games that are cross division games on a rotation every season, this gives everybody 9 conference games and you setup a point system that will determine a league champion.

I don't get the impression Vandal fans enjoy being an indy that gets smacked ever weekend and goes 1-11 or 2-10.

Just my opinion on all this, but I think it make the BSC stronger, more competitive and force current issues of unfairness out the door when it comes to the BSC and its members.

Sorry, but you are wrong. Not playing EWU completely undercuts the argument that NAU finished higher in the conference than UM. Not playing EWU also undercuts the argument you just make, that NAU played in a "tough league" and number of conference wins. NAU didn't play the top team in the "tough" league. UM did. Had NAU played EWU, NAU would have had another conference loss.

How do you explain that NAU ranks below UM in all computer rankings/ratings and all polls? You seem to think that one win makes a season. It doesn't. The committee considers the entire season. How do you explain NAU's narrow wins? UM had some too, but not as many as NAU. How do you explain NAU's 36-7 loss to MSU, whom UM just beat 28-14?

The Big Sky has invited Idaho multiple times. Idaho doesn't want to come, at least yet. Have you not been paying attention to this?

I don't think you paid much attention to what I wrote or my point. NAU not playing EWU this season was not their fault and they shouldn't be penalized for it. And you can't say for certain if they would have lost to EWU, because they never played each other. So you have no point when it comes to that topic. EWU barely beat PSU at home yesterday and the Griz spanked PSU. Thus why the BSC is a tough football conference and why NAU should not be penalized for not having the opportunity to play the best team in the league. The Griz had more than a few nail-biters on the road this season against Sac and SD and CP at home. It is a tough league from top to bottom and if you go 7-1 in it.... that should count for a lot more than what NAU got credit for in my opinion.

As for Idaho, I'm well aware that they have turned down to join the league for football, thus why Fullerton (Commish of the BSC fyi) should not have allowed them to join for all the other sports in 2014 unless they were going to include football in the deal. That was my point, because a 13 team football league that doesn't give room for the all teams to play each other year in and year out creates this current argument with NAU. Think about if the Griz were placed in the same situation as NAU. I'm sure a lot of opinions on here would change.

NAU isn't being punished, they're being given the opportunity to have the 3 seed in the playoffs when they play the "best" team in the conference. Honestly, Idaho State, Northern Colorado and UND.

 

[PlayerRep]

NAU needed another fcs win. Blame the AD for not putting another fcs game on the schedule. It's his fault.

Do you even know what fcs stands for? NAU has the same number of FCS wins as the Griz. They did not schedule a cupcake like Oklahoma Panhandle State ending up with only 11 games rather than 12. So they did have more FCS wins than you just no cupcakes, and in the mind of some that makes the Griz worthy of being seeded and NAU not.

NAU didn't have more FBS wins than UM.

 

[putter]

For years, NAU was punished for scheduling schools like Western New Mexico and Fort Lewis. A few years they had the requisite number of wins for playoff consideratin but because one was against lower level competition, they were left out of the conversation. NAU decided this year to not schedule down and look what happened. No good deed goes unpunished. :roll:

EverettGriz - Thank you. I do my best not to be a snarky arsehole here on the internets... it's tough sometimes.

IMO MSU screwed you. They finished the season with 3 losses and they beat you pretty good in Bozeman. Montana's two losses were to 2 teams ranked high and playing very good ball at the end of the year and Montana won handily on the road in Bozo. Head to head in your favor but I think the MSU loss hurt you in the end because they played poorly to finish the year.

 

[dupuyer griz]

For years, NAU was punished for scheduling schools like Western New Mexico and Fort Lewis. A few years they had the requisite number of wins for playoff consideratin but because one was against lower level competition, they were left out of the conversation. NAU decided this year to not schedule down and look what happened. No good deed goes unpunished. :roll:

EverettGriz - Thank you. I do my best not to be a snarky arsehole here on the internets... it's tough sometimes.

Punished and in the playoffs beats the shit out of sitting at home like last year when you easily could have been in the playoffs. Be grateful for the opportunity and show you belong then you don't have to worry about it, right?

 

[fencer24]

For years, NAU was punished for scheduling schools like Western New Mexico and Fort Lewis. A few years they had the requisite number of wins for playoff consideratin but because one was against lower level competition, they were left out of the conversation. NAU decided this year to not schedule down and look what happened. No good deed goes unpunished. :roll:

EverettGriz - Thank you. I do my best not to be a snarky arsehole here on the internets... it's tough sometimes.

Punished and in the playoffs beats the shit out of sitting at home like last year when you easily could have been in the playoffs. Be grateful for the opportunity and show you belong then you don't have to worry about it, right?

Build the reputation. Don't just demand it.

 

[EverettGriz]

For years, NAU was punished for scheduling schools like Western New Mexico and Fort Lewis. A few years they had the requisite number of wins for playoff consideratin but because one was against lower level competition, they were left out of the conversation. NAU decided this year to not schedule down and look what happened. No good deed goes unpunished. :roll:

EverettGriz - Thank you. I do my best not to be a snarky arsehole here on the internets... it's tough sometimes.

:lol:

Yes, yes it is.

 

[IdaGriz01]

... No good deed goes unpunished. :roll:
..

IMO MSU screwed you. They finished the season with 3 losses and they beat you pretty good in Bozeman. Montana's two losses were to 2 teams ranked high and playing very good ball at the end of the year and Montana won handily on the road in Bozo. Head to head in your favor but I think the MSU loss hurt you in the end because they played poorly to finish the year.

I think this is a fair statement. When the opponent(s) you faced when they were playing well go in the dumper later, it drags your numbers down. Of course, it works both ways: Teams can grow and improve over the course of the season. You just hope it all evens out. (But that's where an unbalanced conference schedule can really mess things up.)

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

... No good deed goes unpunished. :roll:
..

IMO MSU screwed you. They finished the season with 3 losses and they beat you pretty good in Bozeman. Montana's two losses were to 2 teams ranked high and playing very good ball at the end of the year and Montana won handily on the road in Bozo. Head to head in your favor but I think the MSU loss hurt you in the end because they played poorly to finish the year.

I think this is a fair statement. When the opponent(s) you faced when they were playing well go in the dumper later, it drags your numbers down. Of course, it works both ways: Teams can grow and improve over the course of the season. You just hope it all evens out. (But that's where an unbalanced conference schedule can really mess things up.)

To play devils advocate, MSU is the best win for the Griz.

 

[mtgrizrule]

... No good deed goes unpunished. :roll:
..

IMO MSU screwed you. They finished the season with 3 losses and they beat you pretty good in Bozeman. Montana's two losses were to 2 teams ranked high and playing very good ball at the end of the year and Montana won handily on the road in Bozo. Head to head in your favor but I think the MSU loss hurt you in the end because they played poorly to finish the year.

I think this is a fair statement. When the opponent(s) you faced when they were playing well go in the dumper later, it drags your numbers down. Of course, it works both ways: Teams can grow and improve over the course of the season. You just hope it all evens out. (But that's where an unbalanced conference schedule can really mess things up.)

To play devils advocate, MSU is the best win for the Griz.

So in turn, is that NAU's worse loss? This would not even be debated if NAU had taken care of business wit the Cats.