• Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!

Uniforms vs Idaho

BrownBear9501 said:
Anyone notice how there new practice facility looks like a 4H barn on steroids? It’s taller than their actual stadium…..total eye sore. The bubble looks much better in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Never seen it, and don't particularly care to. I think the last time I was on campus there was the Griz/cat game in 1983.
We did have a full thread with a title that referenced the bubble where some of the scat trolls came on and told us what an amazing thing this structure is, so just to summarize and update that conversation quickly:
They only have an 80 yard field, but they have full endzones and a full regulation track (we came to learn is actually only 300 meters and so what are you to do if you run the 400, 800, 1500 or 3000 meter events). They also have plenty of area to work all of their drills, including throwing (up) areas for track.
Someone did point out that the thing is an eyesore, but they didn't care, but when you are used to having a bunch of ag buildings around, I don't suppose you would notice it if it. It all smells like feedlot anyway.
 
Mr-Potato-Head-PNG-Photo.png

WANTED: BAKED OR PEELED BOILED AND MASHED
 
From the Udaho website:

I know, as an assistant, it was pretty awesome getting that thing and taking it back to Moscow. I know, also as an assistant, it hurt pretty bad seeing them leave with it here in Moscow back in 2023. Very excited for the matchup, it's going to be a big time game. ESPN game, Big Sky Game of the Week, all these things. At the end of the day, it's our first Big Sky Conference game and that what matters the most." Head Coach Thomas Ford Jr.

The No. 8 Idaho Vandals (2-2) head east for a primetime matchup on ESPN 2, where they will open the Big Sky Conference season against the No. 4 Montana Grizzlies (3-0) for The Battle of the Little Brown Stein. Clayton Matvick and Chase Daniel will have the call on the Worldwide Leader in Sports, while Dennis Patchin and Trent Cowan can be heard over the airwaves on the Vandal Football Radio Network.

The Battle for the Little Brown Stein is one of the most storied rivalries and unique trophies in the nation. Idaho takes on Montana for the 90th time in program history in a series that dates back to 1903 – a game the Vandals won 28-0. In 1938, The Little Brown Stein was introduced as the traveling trophy which goes with the winner of the matchup. Idaho won the inaugural Battle for the Little Brown Stein 19-6 in Missoula that season. The Vandals lead the overall series 56-31-2, and left Missoula with the Stein after a 30-23 victory in 2022. The Vandals have a 23-16 record against Montana in Missoula.

Idaho has played Montana the second-most out of any other school in program history, only behind Washington State.

The top-10 showdown fit for national TV has been labeled as the Big Sky Conference's Game of the Week. It is the only top-10 matchup in FCS this week.

This is Idaho's second of three games on national TV this season. As part of its TV deal, the Big Sky Conference gets four games on ESPN this season, Idaho is taking part in two of them – the other coming on Halloween night against Northern Arizona.

QUESTIONS.
I have two of them, first they list themselves as number 8, which they are in the stats poll and 10th in the coaches poll. They have us at number 4, which we are in the coaches poll and 5th in stats. Just wondering if anyone else sees that as a little bit of a hype ploy on their part.

Also, they claim this is their second of three games on national television. So what was the first one they are claiming, Wazzu on the CW or San Jose on the MW network? I don't see that either of those qualify, but not much has changed with the Moscovites over hyping themselves. Da!
 
Griz in Texas said:
I'm seeing that Bohannon is in this week's 2 deep.
Based on what happened when they left Wortham off for North Dakota, are we buying that he is starting?
Anyone heard anything on his status?
Click to expand...
If he can play good for Griz. But even bigger for that kid. It looked bad.
 
kemajic said:
Our best approach to prime time is to just be the Griz and that includes the minor issue of uniforms. Playing good football and winning trumps all other details.
Click to expand...
I agree with Kem, Alabama 1 uniform combo Several Championships. Oregon 2000 uniform combos 0 championships. Just be Montana ,people remember a win in a boring uniform more then a loss in shiny new uniform.
 
I thought what Kem said was pretty straight to the point and easy to comprehend, but for the younger generations, let's try this.
I honestly like Deion Sanders, he's always seemed to back up most of the things he said. If I don't care to hear his trash talk, I tend to turn down the volume or change the channel. Let's breakdown his words of wisdom that I hear repeated by so many lately, not unlike the one about having a plan and getting punched in the mouth or missing every shot you don't take. Any way...

If you look good, you feel good; now there is some truth to that, if you look good, you're more confident, so before you go out to the stadium tomorrow, remember also to follow mom's best advice and wear clean underwear too.

If you feel good, you play good; okay, I can dig it, if you're not feeling well, it makes sense that you might not be at your peak performance. Know when to say when at the tail gate and this will help you along.

If you play good, they pay good; wrong department. We aren't worried about anything but winning against Idaho and it doesn't matter what rack the equipment department pulls the uniform from, the team's mission is to win this game. Your only concern is not that they aren't in the color combination you want them in, it's to make as much noise and be as disruptive to the other team as you can be and do your best to try to help the team on the field representing the University of Montana achieve the goal of the day.
 
I don't mind talk about uniforms, because I have many complaints about our current ones. What's the deal with all the colors? We debate the maroon/silver versus the original colors versus alternate colors ad infinitum. I'm here to say we don't need all these soft-nosed, weak-necked colors. If you look at photographs of any uniforms from the hardest-nosed teams in football history, you'll see that they all wore a combination of black, white, and different shades of sepia. No microfiber, no dri-fit, and the only wicking going on was down at Penhaligon's Candle Shop.

As we all know, around the late 1960s, more and more teams started getting spray fart soft. This coincided with the addition of colors to jerseys, helmets, and even socks. We can debate correlation versus causation, but you can see evidence of the color shift in period photographs. I don't think it's a coincidence.

Many of you may ask questions like, "How do you know players were tougher pre-1960-ish, when colors became more common on uniforms?" or "Do fundamental particles, including the graviton that carries the gravitational force, truly act like one-dimensional vibrating strings?" I know those players were tougher because if you look at historical data, a player from that era could play offensive line at a mere 185 lbs. Nowadays, those same players tip the scales at some 100 lbs.+ heavier. Clearly, a 185-lb player who can effectively block is much tougher than one who needs to weigh 100 pounds more to effectively block. Basic science.

In closing, all tough teams in history wore a nice black/white/sepia color scheme. So, by flawless logic, if we wear a nice black/white/sepia color scheme, we will be tough.
 
CDAGRIZ said:
I don't mind talk about uniforms, because I have many complaints about our current ones. What's the deal with all the colors? We debate the maroon/silver versus the original colors versus alternate colors ad infinitum. I'm here to say we don't need all these soft-nosed, weak-necked colors. If you look at photographs of any uniforms from the hardest-nosed teams in football history, you'll see that they all wore a combination of black, white, and different shades of sepia. No microfiber, no dri-fit, and the only wicking going on was down at Penhaligon's Candle Shop.

Around the late 1960s, more and more teams started getting spray fart soft. This coincided with the addition of colors to jerseys, helmets, and even socks. We can debate correlation versus causation, but you can see evidence of the color shift in period photographs. I don't think it's a coincidence.

Many of you may ask questions like, "How do you know players were tougher pre-1960-ish, when colors became more common on uniforms?" or "Do fundamental particles, including the graviton that carries the gravitational force, truly act like one-dimensional vibrating strings?" I know those players were tougher because if you look at historical data, a player from that era could play offensive line at a mere 185 lbs. Nowadays, those same players tip the scales at some 100 lbs.+ heavier. Clearly, a 185-lb player who can effectively block is much tougher than one who needs to weigh 100 pounds more to effectively block. Basic science.

In closing, all tough teams in history wore a nice black/white/sepia color scheme. So, by flawless logic, if we wear a nice black/white/sepia color scheme, we will be tough.
Click to expand...
The only thing missing is a cuttlefish reference.
 
CDAGRIZ said:
We debate the maroon/silver versus the original colors versus alternate colors ad infinitum.
Click to expand...
You have that backwards, the original colors were maroon and silver. They are classy unlike the cartoon colors used from '69-'95. Maroon and silver is Montana.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top