Time to Weed the Program

[grizindabox]

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.

I am a proponent of recruiting the best, but this generalization is misleading and quite frankly wrong. I suggest counting fulltime equivalent scholarships if you really want the percentages that matter. I would surmise that the 50% of the roster made up of Montana kids doesn't equal 50% of the scholarship money. People are too focused on those 20-30 Montana kids that walkon as the reason the Griz can't compete. For example, if I can sign 50 Montana kids with 25% of my scholarships (16 FTE) and use the other 75% (47 FTE) on the other 60 kids, and out of those 50 Montana kids, I get 12 that can play some role in any season, how is that bad? People have to realize that no FCS program has 106 kids that make an impact during there playing career. The ones that can't are cycled out and replaced with new kids every year. People like to see instate kids and are happy when they are successful, but they are far from the big problem. Quite honestly, it is lazy.

 

[grizindabox]

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

No.

 

[indiancoyote]

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.

I am a proponent of recruiting the best, but this generalization is misleading and quite frankly wrong. I suggest counting fulltime equivalent scholarships if you really want the percentages that matter. I would surmise that the 50% of the roster made up of Montana kids doesn't equal 50% of the scholarship money. People are too focused on those 20-30 Montana kids that walkon as the reason the Griz can't compete. For example, if I can sign 50 Montana kids with 25% of my scholarships (16 FTE) and use the other 75% (47 FTE) on the other 60 kids, and out of those 50 Montana kids, I get 12 that can play some role in any season, how is that bad? People have to realize that no FCS program has 106 kids that make an impact during there playing career. The ones that can't are cycled out and replaced with new kids every year. People like to see instate kids and are happy when they are successful, but they are far from the big problem. Quite honestly, it is lazy.

People like to see the Griz competing at the highest levels regardless of where the kids come from.

 

[Allezchat]

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.

Don't forget the 3-3-5!

I've heard Brooks Nuanez say pn their pod that um had the most talent in the Big Sky. Talent isn't the issue.

 

[grizindabox]

I am a proponent of recruiting the best, but this generalization is misleading and quite frankly wrong. I suggest counting fulltime equivalent scholarships if you really want the percentages that matter. I would surmise that the 50% of the roster made up of Montana kids doesn't equal 50% of the scholarship money. People are too focused on those 20-30 Montana kids that walkon as the reason the Griz can't compete. For example, if I can sign 50 Montana kids with 25% of my scholarships (16 FTE) and use the other 75% (47 FTE) on the other 60 kids, and out of those 50 Montana kids, I get 12 that can play some role in any season, how is that bad? People have to realize that no FCS program has 106 kids that make an impact during there playing career. The ones that can't are cycled out and replaced with new kids every year. People like to see instate kids and are happy when they are successful, but they are far from the big problem. Quite honestly, it is lazy.

People like to see the Griz competing at the highest levels regardless of where the kids come from.

I agree, and didn't post to the contrary. Sometimes reading comprehension isn't for everyone.

 

[Allezchat]

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

Was the center supposed to take up the south end zone? I thought it was but went to a game for the fist time since it was built, this year, and was surprised it was the sw side.

 

[Spanky2]

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.

I am a proponent of recruiting the best, but this generalization is misleading and quite frankly wrong. I suggest counting fulltime equivalent scholarships if you really want the percentages that matter. I would surmise that the 50% of the roster made up of Montana kids doesn't equal 50% of the scholarship money. People are too focused on those 20-30 Montana kids that walkon as the reason the Griz can't compete. For example, if I can sign 50 Montana kids with 25% of my scholarships (16 FTE) and use the other 75% (47 FTE) on the other 60 kids, and out of those 50 Montana kids, I get 12 that can play some role in any season, how is that bad? People have to realize that no FCS program has 106 kids that make an impact during there playing career. The ones that can't are cycled out and replaced with new kids every year. People like to see instate kids and are happy when they are successful, but they are far from the big problem. Quite honestly, it is lazy.

You don’t seem to understand that there are 106 spots on the roster and each of the 51 Montana kids on the roster takes up one of those spots. Some of those spots could be given to more talented players from another state. Further, I don’t think you know how the scholarship money was actually divided this year. Do you? If you do, please provide a list of the players and the amount of money each received.

 

[grizindabox]

I am a proponent of recruiting the best, but this generalization is misleading and quite frankly wrong. I suggest counting fulltime equivalent scholarships if you really want the percentages that matter. I would surmise that the 50% of the roster made up of Montana kids doesn't equal 50% of the scholarship money. People are too focused on those 20-30 Montana kids that walkon as the reason the Griz can't compete. For example, if I can sign 50 Montana kids with 25% of my scholarships (16 FTE) and use the other 75% (47 FTE) on the other 60 kids, and out of those 50 Montana kids, I get 12 that can play some role in any season, how is that bad? People have to realize that no FCS program has 106 kids that make an impact during there playing career. The ones that can't are cycled out and replaced with new kids every year. People like to see instate kids and are happy when they are successful, but they are far from the big problem. Quite honestly, it is lazy.

You don’t seem to understand that there are 106 spots on the roster and each of the 51 Montana kids on the roster takes up one of those spots. Some of those spots could be given to more talented players from another state. Further, I don’t think you know how the scholarship money was actually divided this year. Do you? If you do, please provide a list of the players and the amount of money each received.

You don't seem to understand. It is impossible to recruit 106 top notch FCS football players with the limit of 63 FTE scholarships. Even if you give 75% of a FTE to the top 84 guys, you still have 22 spots to fill with walk-ons. So lets say there are 4 in-state FCS level kids in each recruiting class, that is 20 kids over 5 years. Lets assume those kids get some type of scholarship, so they fall in the 84 from previous. That leaves you with the 22 spots to fill with walk-ons. So with variables from year to year, this is why you can see 40-50 Montana kids on the roster. This still leaves 55-65 other spots for those talented out-of-state kids you so badly want to make the team better each season. I know, you don't like math.

 

[Spanky2]

You don’t seem to understand that there are 106 spots on the roster and each of the 51 Montana kids on the roster takes up one of those spots. Some of those spots could be given to more talented players from another state. Further, I don’t think you know how the scholarship money was actually divided this year. Do you? If you do, please provide a list of the players and the amount of money each received.

You don't seem to understand. It is impossible to recruit 106 top notch FCS football players with the limit of 63 FTE scholarships. Even if you give 75% of a FTE to the top 84 guys, you still have 22 spots to fill with walk-ons. So lets say there are 4 in-state FCS level kids in each recruiting class, that is 20 kids over 5 years. Lets assume those kids get some type of scholarship, so they fall in the 84 from previous. That leaves you with the 22 spots to fill with walk-ons. So with variables from year to year, this is why you can see 40-50 Montana kids on the roster. This still leaves 55-65 other spots for those talented out-of-state kids you so badly want to make the team better each season. I know, you don't like math.

Aren’t you in agreement that we should concentrate our recruiting in states that have the most talent assuming the recruiting budget will allow it? Do we continue to accept kids and place them on the roster just because they’re from Montana? Actually, we could fill the roster of 106 with Montana kids and eliminate the recruiting budget. I’m in favor of having Montana kids on the roster….if they have the talent. Just not 51.

 

[grizindabox]

You don't seem to understand. It is impossible to recruit 106 top notch FCS football players with the limit of 63 FTE scholarships. Even if you give 75% of a FTE to the top 84 guys, you still have 22 spots to fill with walk-ons. So lets say there are 4 in-state FCS level kids in each recruiting class, that is 20 kids over 5 years. Lets assume those kids get some type of scholarship, so they fall in the 84 from previous. That leaves you with the 22 spots to fill with walk-ons. So with variables from year to year, this is why you can see 40-50 Montana kids on the roster. This still leaves 55-65 other spots for those talented out-of-state kids you so badly want to make the team better each season. I know, you don't like math.

Aren’t you in agreement that we should concentrate our recruiting in states that have the most talent assuming the recruiting budget will allow it? Do we continue to accept kids and place them on the roster just because they’re from Montana? Actually, we could fill the roster of 106 with Montana kids and eliminate the recruiting budget. I’m in favor of having Montana kids on the roster….if they have the talent. Just not 51.

Spanky, no one, including the coaches are putting kids on the roster just because they are from Montana. You just fail to understand the reality of it. Let me ask you this, why aren't there 70-80 out of state kids on the roster?

 

[Spanky2]

Aren’t you in agreement that we should concentrate our recruiting in states that have the most talent assuming the recruiting budget will allow it? Do we continue to accept kids and place them on the roster just because they’re from Montana? Actually, we could fill the roster of 106 with Montana kids and eliminate the recruiting budget. I’m in favor of having Montana kids on the roster….if they have the talent. Just not 51.

Spanky, no one, including the coaches are putting kids on the roster just because they are from Montana. You just fail to understand the reality of it. Let me ask you this, why aren't there 70-80 out of state kids on the roster?

I don’t know the answer to that. I suspect it’s because Bobby hasn’t been given a budget which will allow him and his staff to recruit them.

 

[hubcap]

Very difficult to convince an out of state kid to walk on and pay the non-resident tuition bill. This is why most out of state players come in on full scholarship. MT kids can afford to walk on and will take even a partial scholarship unless they have a better offer.

 

[grizindabox]

Spanky, no one, including the coaches are putting kids on the roster just because they are from Montana. You just fail to understand the reality of it. Let me ask you this, why aren't there 70-80 out of state kids on the roster?

I don’t know the answer to that. I suspect it’s because Bobby hasn’t been given a budget which will allow him and his staff to recruit them.

Like I said, you fail to understand the reality, but continue to complain about it. For example, how do you convince 70-80 out of state kids to play football at UM when you are limited to 63 FTE scholarships? This isn't about limits imposed by UM or Bobby on how the process works. Even if you gave 63 out of state kids full scholarships, you are looking to fill 46 spots with a walkon.

 

[AZGrizFan]

I don’t know the answer to that. I suspect it’s because Bobby hasn’t been given a budget which will allow him and his staff to recruit them.

Like I said, you fail to understand the reality, but continue to complain about it. For example, how do you convince 70-80 out of state kids to play football at UM when you are limited to 63 FTE scholarships? This isn't about limits imposed by UM or Bobby on how the process works. Even if you gave 63 out of state kids full scholarships, you are looking to fill 46 spots with a walkon.

How does NDSU do it?

 

[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.

Don't forget the 3-3-5!

I've heard Brooks Nuanez say pn their pod that um had the most talent in the Big Sky. Talent isn't the issue.

The 3-3-5 was not the problem. Statistically we were the second best defense in the conference. Yes, we got burned against MSU and NDSU but every team did. We needed to adjust our defense for those games not throw out the 3-3-5. We recruit to it and it works great for our base D.

 

[grizindabox]

Like I said, you fail to understand the reality, but continue to complain about it. For example, how do you convince 70-80 out of state kids to play football at UM when you are limited to 63 FTE scholarships? This isn't about limits imposed by UM or Bobby on how the process works. Even if you gave 63 out of state kids full scholarships, you are looking to fill 46 spots with a walkon.

How does NDSU do it?

For starters, I would suggest looking at the cost of tuition at UM compared to NDSU. Also notice how they give a tuition break to Minnesota students.

 

[AZGrizFan]

How does NDSU do it?

For starters, I would suggest looking at the cost of tuition at UM compared to NDSU. Also notice how they give a tuition break to Minnesota students.

Isnt Montana in some sort of Tuition agreement program with neighboring states as well?

 

[grizindabox]

For starters, I would suggest looking at the cost of tuition at UM compared to NDSU. Also notice how they give a tuition break to Minnesota students.

Isnt Montana in some sort of Tuition agreement program with neighboring states as well?

Montana has WUE that means you have to apply for merit based scholarships to reduce tuition. NDSU just flat out gives Minnesota kids a tuition break. NDSU has it figured out, recruit a state like Minnesota with 1 fbs school and give all those kids a tuition break.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Isnt Montana in some sort of Tuition agreement program with neighboring states as well?

Montana has WUE that means you have to apply for merit based scholarships to reduce tuition. NDSU just flat out gives Minnesota kids a tuition break. NDSU has it figured out, recruit a state like Minnesota with 1 fbs school and give all those kids a tuition break.

Oh, I’m not that versed on all that crap (what with my kids being out of college now), but I didn’t realize there were that big of differences between the various intrastate programs.

 

[grizindabox]

I just looked, and a Minnesota student can attend NDSU for around $12,000 per academic year for tuition. Out of state tuition at Montana is $27,000.