• 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!

What does the next decade hold?

[/quote]

Why Carroll? I would respect your opinion a little more if you chose to support say Tech or Western, two teams that aren't currently NAIA powers.
Time for you to tell me how you have ties to Carroll because they recruit so many Montana boys and how you're a native, hahaha. Please don't hesitate to make that jump. Griz Nation will be better off without idiots like you.[/quote]



1.my wife went to carroll
2.born n raised in MT
3. why move to the WAC (poor conference)
4. BSU will never accomplish anything else (maybe in 30 yrs)
5.why play in some irrelevant toilet bowl.
6.maybe they should hire you as the next UM pres. since your so uckfn loyal.[/quote]

Blah, blah, blah. There you go again talking like you're the only person born and raised in MT. We're going to move up at some point, so I suggest you look into getting some Carroll season tickets. Disco, that type of language and behavior will not be accepted at Carroll.

Me as the next UM President... Now we are talking! Seriously though, if the next President loves UM and MT even remotely close to as much as Dennison I will be happy with the hire.

You do know they're are other UM sports that will benefit from a move, specifically basketball, right?

Enjoy Carroll!!!
 
How will Boise State not accomplish anything else for 30 years? They will return 21 starters next year and most likely be ranked 6th or higher in the pre-season. If they win out, there's a good chance they are one of the top two teams in the nation.
 
PeauxRouge said:
How will Boise State not accomplish anything else for 30 years? They will return 21 starters next year and most likely be ranked 6th or higher in the pre-season. If they win out, there's a good chance they are one of the top two teams in the nation.
Click to expand...

talkn NC
 
Hammer said:
mtgrizrule said:
Good analogy. I know I could not stop being a GRIZ fan or change my loyalty.
Click to expand...

Me either. it's maroon and silver FOREVER for me.

The Griz have always been accused of having a fanbase of bandwagon fans and by some of the comments in this thread it may be true.

Thats fine, but not me. I was there getting slivers in my a$$ at Dornblazer in the late 70's early 80's and will be in my seats in the NEZ until the day I die. But thats just me.
Click to expand...
The real Dornblazer had a Student Union Building sitting on it by the 70's and 80's.
 
..and I enjoyed watching games there in the 50's and 60's when we actually played credible opponents. Oh, I'm aware that we didn't always win nor did we know we would win before the game started.
 
No, the Griz virtually never won -- and, although I never missed a game in four years of college, I don't recall many of them falling into the category of "fun" or "a good game." Sorry -- I know we don't look at this issue in the same way....
 
Spanky, if you look up the records from the mid '60s (when the Griz won a total of 15 games in the four years I was in school), you'll see they were playing many of the same teams they play today. For instance, in 1967, which was their best season in years and years, the Griz had only four home games (can you imagine Griz fans settling for four home games per season?!?) and won three of them ... over ISU, NAU and Pacific (who they played on virtually a yearly basis and doesn't even play football anymore)...they lost at home to Idaho. The Griz also played North Dakota, South Dakota, Weber, MSU, Portland State -- sounds like pretty familiar candidates to me. The only "big schools" the Griz played were New Mexico, Utah and Utah State (including a 41-point loss at home).
 
68....first of all, I'm pulling your chain as I know your views concerning our current affiliation. I respect your views, just don't agree as I believe our program today is much stronger than it was in the 50's & early 60's when I was at UM. When I was there, before you, we were a member of the Skyline Conference and played much different teams than those you observed. In any event, I still have hope that we will leave the Big Sky soon and begin scheduling teams that will be improved competition as opposed to the community college conference Big Sky.
 
Oh, Spanky, I know you're mostly giving me a hard time. But, be honest, are you really advocating returning to something like existed in the '50s, when the Griz won a TOTAL of 22 football games in the entire decade (that's a little more than 2 games per season -- can you imagine Griz Nation dealing with that today?)?? You say the Griz have a much better program than they did back then, and I totally agree. BUT, so do most of the teams we played at that time. I've certainly not advocating for the Div. II games -- I hate them as much as you do -- but I honestly believe FCS is where Montana belongs for now. When all of NCAA gets reorganized, I'm pretty sure UM will end up "somewhere else," but, you know, most of the folks we play now could be in that same "somewhere." We'll all just have to wait and see what shakes out.
 
68....when we move to an improved conference such as the WAC, I believe we will win most of our games from the beginning and after two or three years, maybe a championship. In my view, there isn't any reason we can't be very competitive in a Division 1 conference as we will be able to recruit more talented athletes and play against better teams. Now that there will soon be a change in administration, hopefully, we will schedule Division 1 teams such as Wyoming, Washington State, Utah State, Idaho as non conference opponents which will be interesting and not hurt our chances for the play offs. Since you are such a young fella, you don't seem to have the desire to return to play our traditional opponents as do I.
 
FWIW, I'm not sure I consider the WAC an "improved" conference. You know I want the Griz to be able to contend for a national championship, one that's legitimately played on a football field, and that simply would never happen in the WAC. Thus....
 
Doesn't have to be the WAC..could be the Mountain West. One of my concerns is if we don't begin to change our conference affiliation prior to the upcoming NCAA changes, they will just mandate UM to stay with the current community college group since we appear to be content and the young folks like you, 68 think we can't do any better.
 
General Disarray said:
I think if the Pac-10 were to expand, it would be a no brainer on their part and it would be BYU + Utah. They like their pair thing. Washington/Washington State, Oregon/Oregon State, Cal/Stanford, USC/UCLA, Arizona/Arizona State. Utah/BYU just makes sense.
Click to expand...

seems to make sense, except for these thoughts:
1. Boise State already competes in the Pac-10*
2. Boise State and Utah compete more with Pac-10 schools in recruiting than BYU does (LDS demographics, honor code & all)
3. Boise & Utah would rather hitch their wagon west it seems, while BYU seems to move south (Oklahoma & now Texas are on their schedule)
4. BYU is just too, well, LDS, for the Pac-10, but their religious fervour fits right in down south, in a strange way

* good trivia:
"Boise State Cruises to Pac-10 Wrestling Championship"
http://www.pac-10.org/sports/m-wrestl/recaps/030309aae.html

anyway you look at it, conference realignments will likely happen -- and those pesky schools like Utah, TCU, Boise, BYU, will be welcomed into a BCS conference in order to keep the peasants down, away from the real money
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top