Time to Weed the Program

[grizindabox]

The issue, in my opinion is currently we have 51 Montana kids on a roster of 106 which is over the top. I don’t know the reason, but I don’t believe all 51 have the talent to play FCS football. North Dakota State has 18 kids from North Dakota on their roster to compare. I would think a realistic number for the Griz would be 20-25 Montana kids on the roster.

Quite honestly, the Griz roster will always have 40ish Montana kids at minimum. You have to realize that these 40 kids aren't taking up 40 scholarships, and look at the low risk Montana kids that have turned out to be high reward. I think people pointing at Montana kids as the issue are off base.

 

[indiancoyote]

The issue, in my opinion is currently we have 51 Montana kids on a roster of 106 which is over the top. I don’t know the reason, but I don’t believe all 51 have the talent to play FCS football. North Dakota State has 18 kids from North Dakota on their roster to compare. I would think a realistic number for the Griz would be 20-25 Montana kids on the roster.

Quite honestly, the Griz roster will always have 40ish Montana kids at minimum. You have to realize that these 40 kids aren't taking up 40 scholarships, and look at the low risk Montana kids that have turned out to be high reward. I think people pointing at Montana kids as the issue are off base.

And until that changes, Montana will continue to slide backwards. Its one of primary reason people in Nebraska believe they have continued to slide backwards. Their philosophy is the same as Montana regarding homegrown kids.

 

[indiancoyote]

of "Montana" kids and recruit players who can compete against teams like NDSU.

Our immediate and extended family had many outstanding athletes, all from Montana. UM over the years has benefited from having many talented Montana raised kids on the team which has been the case this year. The issue, in my opinion is currently we have 51 Montana kids on a roster of 106 which is over the top. I don’t know the reason, but I don’t believe all 51 have the talent to play FCS football. North Dakota State has 18 kids from North Dakota on their roster to compare. I would think a realistic number for the Griz would be 20-25 Montana kids on the roster.
Now, I’m not blaming anyone for this, not Bobby or his coaches. I’m hoping the number can be adjusted which would allow the recruiters the ability to bring in talented players from states like California, Hawaii, Oregon….even Florida.

Montaa has nowhere near that many D1 players in our state.

 

[grizindabox]

Quite honestly, the Griz roster will always have 40ish Montana kids at minimum. You have to realize that these 40 kids aren't taking up 40 scholarships, and look at the low risk Montana kids that have turned out to be high reward. I think people pointing at Montana kids as the issue are off base.

And until that changes, Montana will continue to slide backwards. Its one of primary reason people in Nebraska believe they have continued to slide backwards. Their philosophy is the same as Montana regarding homegrown kids.

There are 42 kids on the MSU roster that would say your're wrong. Having 40ish Montana kids out of 105 that you can roster isn't the problem, especially when you don't have to invest much, if any, in the way of scholarships and they don't count against the 63 full equivalent scholarship limit. If you want to complain, complain about the scholarship usage on kids that can't seem to beat out all those terrible Montana kids for playing time.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

And until that changes, Montana will continue to slide backwards. Its one of primary reason people in Nebraska believe they have continued to slide backwards. Their philosophy is the same as Montana regarding homegrown kids.

There are 42 kids on the MSU roster that would say your're wrong. Having 40ish Montana kids out of 105 that you can roster isn't the problem, especially when you don't have to invest much, if any, in the way of scholarships and they don't count against the 63 full equivalent scholarship limit. If you want to complain, complain about the scholarship usage on kids that can't seem to beat out all those terrible Montana kids for playing time.

Do you think all 42 have true DI talent? I'm asking honestly, I don't know much about their roster at all.

 

[kurtismichael]

I thought this was gonna be a gardening thread….disappointed.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

This data is from 2017, but it's kind of interesting. One way to look at it is Montana looks pretty good at 3.4%. Another way is to think maybe a lot of them were recruited by the same two schools (or maybe one).
https://twitter.com/NCAAResearch/status/854330443629572097/photo/1

 

[grizindabox]

There are 42 kids on the MSU roster that would say your're wrong. Having 40ish Montana kids out of 105 that you can roster isn't the problem, especially when you don't have to invest much, if any, in the way of scholarships and they don't count against the 63 full equivalent scholarship limit. If you want to complain, complain about the scholarship usage on kids that can't seem to beat out all those terrible Montana kids for playing time.

Do you think all 42 have true DI talent? I'm asking honestly, I don't know much about their roster at all.

Probably not all 42. But when you are talking about 20-25 walk-on kids to fill out the roster, you look for Montana kids that you think you could fill a role. Look for those raw athletes and hope a few hit. In the grand scheme of things, those bottom kids only end up in the program a year or two and get cycled out with a new batch of kids with possible potential. Those kids are completely low risk/high reward types, and not what would should be the backbone of the program. It isn't about the number of Montana kids on the roster each year.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

Do you think all 42 have true DI talent? I'm asking honestly, I don't know much about their roster at all.

Probably not all 42. But when you are talking about 20-25 walk-on kids to fill out the roster, you look for Montana kids that you think you could fill a role. Look for those raw athletes and hope a few hit. In the grand scheme of things, those bottom kids only end up in the program a year or two and get cycled out with a new batch of kids with possible potential. Those kids are completely low risk/high reward types, and not what would should be the backbone of the program. It isn't about the number of Montana kids on the roster each year.

Got it. :thumb:

 

[AZGrizFan]

Probably not all 42. But when you are talking about 20-25 walk-on kids to fill out the roster, you look for Montana kids that you think you could fill a role. Look for those raw athletes and hope a few hit. In the grand scheme of things, those bottom kids only end up in the program a year or two and get cycled out with a new batch of kids with possible potential. Those kids are completely low risk/high reward types, and not what would should be the backbone of the program. It isn't about the number of Montana kids on the roster each year.

Got it. :thumb:

I would agree, and look at the Montana kids on our roster in the same vein.

 

[Spanky2]

The issue, in my opinion is currently we have 51 Montana kids on a roster of 106 which is over the top. I don’t know the reason, but I don’t believe all 51 have the talent to play FCS football. North Dakota State has 18 kids from North Dakota on their roster to compare. I would think a realistic number for the Griz would be 20-25 Montana kids on the roster.

Quite honestly, the Griz roster will always have 40ish Montana kids at minimum. You have to realize that these 40 kids aren't taking up 40 scholarships, and look at the low risk Montana kids that have turned out to be high reward. I think people pointing at Montana kids as the issue are off base.

There aren’t 40ish on the roster, there are 51. Are you suggesting that 40 of the 51 receive no scholarship money? Are you also suggesting that there aren’t costs involved even if they aren’t receiving any scholarship money. In another post, you seemed to agree that they all might not be Division 1 material. Then why should they be on our roster? Isn’t UM a Division 1 school? Why do you think North Dakota State only has 18 North Dakota kids on their roster?

 

[grizindabox]

Quite honestly, the Griz roster will always have 40ish Montana kids at minimum. You have to realize that these 40 kids aren't taking up 40 scholarships, and look at the low risk Montana kids that have turned out to be high reward. I think people pointing at Montana kids as the issue are off base.

There aren’t 40ish on the roster, there are 51. Are you suggesting that 40 of the 51 receive no scholarship money? Are you also suggesting that there aren’t costs involved even if they aren’t receiving any scholarship money. In another post, you seemed to agree that they all might not be Division 1 material. Then why should they be on our roster? Isn’t UM a Division 1 school? Why do you think North Dakota State only has 18 North Dakota kids on their roster?

Right over Spanky's head.

 

[uofmman1122]

Quite honestly, the Griz roster will always have 40ish Montana kids at minimum. You have to realize that these 40 kids aren't taking up 40 scholarships, and look at the low risk Montana kids that have turned out to be high reward. I think people pointing at Montana kids as the issue are off base.

There aren’t 40ish on the roster, there are 51. Are you suggesting that 40 of the 51 receive no scholarship money? Are you also suggesting that there aren’t costs involved even if they aren’t receiving any scholarship money. In another post, you seemed to agree that they all might not be Division 1 material. Then why should they be on our roster? Isn’t UM a Division 1 school? Why do you think North Dakota State only has 18 North Dakota kids on their roster?

Did you even read what grizindabox said?

 

[indiancoyote]

There aren’t 40ish on the roster, there are 51. Are you suggesting that 40 of the 51 receive no scholarship money? Are you also suggesting that there aren’t costs involved even if they aren’t receiving any scholarship money. In another post, you seemed to agree that they all might not be Division 1 material. Then why should they be on our roster? Isn’t UM a Division 1 school? Why do you think North Dakota State only has 18 North Dakota kids on their roster?

Did you even read what grizindabox said?

North Dakota only has 18 players from their state on their roster because their goal is to win national championships not tour around their state golfing at remote courses in the off season.

 

[indian-outlaw]

I don't think lack of talent on the roster was the issue this year. Didn't we lead the league in all conference players? Were we not picked to win the league by both the media and the coaches. We were the #2 team in the nation to start the season. Coach Hauck implied that this was our year. We didn't lack player talent. We lacked an OC that is competent and a HC that can function outside his ego, nepotism and good ol'boy club.

 

[grizindabox]

Did you even read what grizindabox said?

North Dakota only has 18 players from their state on their roster because their goal is to win national championships not tour around their state golfing at remote courses in the off season.

First, I assume you mean NDSU. Second, do you understand population and geography?

 

[kemajic]

Does giving-up 1000 rushing yards in two games mean anything to you??? Can you name another football team, at ANY LEVEL, which has given-up 1000 rushing yards in TWO GAMES???

I guess it would but since you have a consistent history of embellishing facts and using hyperbole to try to support your narrative, I thought it might be good to fact-check this claim to see whether Montana was a candidate.

In the 13 games, Montana allowed 36,90,101,96,82,52,180,192,42,102,439,142,453 net yards rushing. An average of 154. While I tend to be good with numbers, for the life of me I cannot find two games in which Montana gave up 1000 yards rushing. So I guess it remains an open question unless you can help us with the answer.

 

[indiancoyote]

Does giving-up 1000 rushing yards in two games mean anything to you??? Can you name another football team, at ANY LEVEL, which has given-up 1000 rushing yards in TWO GAMES???

I guess it would but since you have a consistent history of embellishing facts and using hyperbole to try to support your narrative, I thought it might be good to fact-check this claim to see whether Montana was a candidate.

In the 13 games, Montana allowed 36,90,101,96,82,52,180,192,42,102,439,142,453 net yards rushing. An average of 154. While I tend to be good with numbers, for the life of me I cannot find two games in which Montana gave up 1000 yards rushing. So I guess it remains an open question unless you can help us with the answer.

Yep its an embellishment 439, 453. Total yards 511 and 516 and 419 for SEMO

 

[grizingatorland]

of "Montana" kids and recruit players who can compete against teams like NDSU.

While that's an unpopular view I belive you are 100% correct the focus on recruiting montana kids holds the griz back. There are some good players in montana just not nearly enough of them.

 

[mtgriz]

Wasn’t the whole point of the Champions Center was to be able to recruit elite FCS athletes from far off places?