What if the BSC flops this week??

[Ursa Major]

Big Sky will go 4-0 tomorrow.

I like it.

Not your post, but the ad in the middle of your post. I could definitely use some coconut & hibiscus curl shampoo.

:lol:

 

[coochorama42]

Cat fan here. I did a playoff write-up over at Bobcat Nation. I think the BSC will be fine. Here is my latest post:


Ok, I've been thinking about posting this for some time now but didn't know where to post it or how to post it. When doing my playoff implications post every week, I started to notice a trend in the big three conferences (depending on the performance of the Southland this weekend, we may need to change this to "big four" conferences). What I noticed is that certain conferences had a lot changing every week and others...didn't. Here are some of my reflections on that and what this makes me think. I'm interested if anyone else has wondered it as well...

The CAA has been very volatile. Six teams controlled their own destiny 2/3 of the way through the season (teams designated with an * made the playoffs): James Madison*, Villanova*, Towson, Stony Brook, Delaware, and Albany*. Moreover, Maine made a late run at the playoffs after starting out very slowly.

The MVFC has been moderately stable. Of the five teams in the position to make the playoffs 2/3 of the way through the season, four made it: North Dakota State*, Northern Iowa*, Youngstown State, Illinois State*. Southern Illinois probably ended the season as one of the last two teams out of the playoff field after starting slowly but finishing strong. What is interesting in the MVFC is that SDSU and Illinois State all had opportunities late in the season to claim a high seed just by not losing games. Instead, Illinois State dropped a game to Youngstown State, and SDSU lost to South Dakota. Northern Iowa could have claimed a seed had they beaten SDSU, but lost 38-7.

The Big Sky has been significantly more stable than all the other conferences. Of the teams controlling their destiny 2/3 of the way through the season, all made the playoffs as seeded teams: Weber State*, Sacramento State*, Montana State*, Montana*. There were a few weeks where MSU didn't look like it would end up with a seed, but their strong finish changed that.

Moreover, look at the FCS teams the playoff teams in each conference lost to during the regular season. All records listed are records in FCS play.

CAA (3 teams) - James Madison* (11-0), Stony Brook (5-6), New Hampshire (5-5), Monmouth* (10-1), Richmond (5-6), Maine (6-4).
MVFC (4 teams) - North Dakota State* - 3 times (12-0), Weber State* (9-1), South Dakota State* (8-3), Illinois State* (8-3), South Dakota (5-6), Northern Iowa* (8-3), Youngstown State (6-6).
Big Sky (4 teams) - Weber State* (9-1), Sacramento State* - 2 times (8-1), Montana* (9-2), Montana State* (9-2), North Dakota* (7-4).

To summarize, the three playoff teams from the CAA had losses to four non-playoff teams. The four playoff teams from the MVFC had losses to two non-playoff teams. The four playoff teams from the Big Sky Conference did not lose to a single non-playoff team.

I think that last statement speaks to the strength at the top of the Big Sky Conference. So what about playoff teams each conference defeated during the regular season? Here are those results:

CAA (3 teams) - Villanova (9-3).
MVFC (4 teams) - North Dakota (7-4), Illinois State - 2 times (8-3), Northern Iowa - 2 times (8-3), South Dakota State - 2 times (8-3).
BIg Sky (4 teams) - Northern Iowa (8-3), Sacramento State (8-1), North Dakota (7-4), Montana State (9-2), Montana - 2 times (9-2), Southeast Missouri State (9-2), Monmouth (10-1).

I guess this all leads me to the same place. Are we sure that the teams from the Big Sky Conference will truly be underdogs if they face James Madison/North Dakota State? I cannot necessarily find fault with either team, and NDSU certainly had a tough road to 12-0, but it feels like it could be a special year for the Big Sky. I hope that the two best teams from the Big Sky get to take their shots at JMU and NDSU. I would not be completely surprised if one (or both) come out standing. FWIW, I believe NDSU deserves to be #1 until someone beats them and that they are the best team in the country, but they are favored by 28 points this weekend against a good Nicholls State team. Would they be 14+ point favorites against each of the four Big Sky teams? That seems crazy.

Thoughts?

 

[mtgrizfankb]

Cat fan here. I did a playoff write-up over at Bobcat Nation. I think the BSC will be fine. Here is my latest post:


Ok, I've been thinking about posting this for some time now but didn't know where to post it or how to post it. When doing my playoff implications post every week, I started to notice a trend in the big three conferences (depending on the performance of the Southland this weekend, we may need to change this to "big four" conferences). What I noticed is that certain conferences had a lot changing every week and others...didn't. Here are some of my reflections on that and what this makes me think. I'm interested if anyone else has wondered it as well...

The CAA has been very volatile. Six teams controlled their own destiny 2/3 of the way through the season (teams designated with an * made the playoffs): James Madison*, Villanova*, Towson, Stony Brook, Delaware, and Albany*. Moreover, Maine made a late run at the playoffs after starting out very slowly.

The MVFC has been moderately stable. Of the five teams in the position to make the playoffs 2/3 of the way through the season, four made it: North Dakota State*, Northern Iowa*, Youngstown State, Illinois State*. Southern Illinois probably ended the season as one of the last two teams out of the playoff field after starting slowly but finishing strong. What is interesting in the MVFC is that SDSU and Illinois State all had opportunities late in the season to claim a high seed just by not losing games. Instead, Illinois State dropped a game to Youngstown State, and SDSU lost to South Dakota. Northern Iowa could have claimed a seed had they beaten SDSU, but lost 38-7.

The Big Sky has been significantly more stable than all the other conferences. Of the teams controlling their destiny 2/3 of the way through the season, all made the playoffs as seeded teams: Weber State*, Sacramento State*, Montana State*, Montana*. There were a few weeks where MSU didn't look like it would end up with a seed, but their strong finish changed that.

Moreover, look at the FCS teams the playoff teams in each conference lost to during the regular season. All records listed are records in FCS play.

CAA (3 teams) - James Madison* (11-0), Stony Brook (5-6), New Hampshire (5-5), Monmouth* (10-1), Richmond (5-6), Maine (6-4).
MVFC (4 teams) - North Dakota State* - 3 times (12-0), Weber State* (9-1), South Dakota State* (8-3), Illinois State* (8-3), South Dakota (5-6), Northern Iowa* (8-3), Youngstown State (6-6).
Big Sky (4 teams) - Weber State* (9-1), Sacramento State* - 2 times (8-1), Montana* (9-2), Montana State* (9-2), North Dakota* (7-4).

To summarize, the three playoff teams from the CAA had losses to four non-playoff teams. The four playoff teams from the MVFC had losses to two non-playoff teams. The four playoff teams from the Big Sky Conference did not lose to a single non-playoff team.

I think that last statement speaks to the strength at the top of the Big Sky Conference. So what about playoff teams each conference defeated during the regular season? Here are those results:

CAA (3 teams) - Villanova (9-3).
MVFC (4 teams) - North Dakota (7-4), Illinois State - 2 times (8-3), Northern Iowa - 2 times (8-3), South Dakota State - 2 times (8-3).
BIg Sky (4 teams) - Northern Iowa (8-3), Sacramento State (8-1), North Dakota (7-4), Montana State (9-2), Montana - 2 times (9-2), Southeast Missouri State (9-2), Monmouth (10-1).

I guess this all leads me to the same place. Are we sure that the teams from the Big Sky Conference will truly be underdogs if they face James Madison/North Dakota State? I cannot necessarily find fault with either team, and NDSU certainly had a tough road to 12-0, but it feels like it could be a special year for the Big Sky. I hope that the two best teams from the Big Sky get to take their shots at JMU and NDSU. I would not be completely surprised if one (or both) come out standing. FWIW, I believe NDSU deserves to be #1 until someone beats them and that they are the best team in the country, but they are favored by 28 points this weekend against a good Nicholls State team. Would they be 14+ point favorites against each of the four Big Sky teams? That seems crazy.

Thoughts?

I think they would be between 10-14 pt favs vs anyone from the sky. And I don’t they they are wrong. The thing with NDSU is...you will NOT beat them playing the same style. You have to try and do something different. Ironically I think the only sky team that could do that is Sac. I don’t think sac has the ponies or the experience to but NDSU down. Weber and MSU might hang for most the fame the Q4 is tough to beat the bison...they are just so damn efficient alll game long

 

[coochorama42]

That is fair. I personally see little difference in quality between all four Big Sky teams. They just each have different strengths and limitations. I am NOT sold on JMU. They could just as easily be the 12th best team in the FCS as the 2nd. Their first real FCS test hasn't happened yet. I don't see them in Frisco; better someone show you your flaws before it's win or go home.

 

[EverettGriz]

I don't know your age or how often you could/do attend yoga but please don't get discouraged. Your final goal will happen, the only question left will be a personal decision to spit or swallow.

A bit harsh perhaps? Not sure why all the vitriol on a post that really did not ask an unreasonable question.

Ya not sure where that came from. Must be more to the story.

There isn't really any more to the story and my reaction may have been overblown. I'm not going to challenge GlacierGrizX to a fist fight but I thought the post was worthlessly inflamatory. "the BSC has really flopped during the play-offs" ????? EWU made it to the Natty last year and gave the Bisons about all they could handle. "How much carnage will the conference endure" ??? Well at the time of this the BSC is undefeated in the play-offs because we were the only Conference in America to have 4 seated teams. "It just seems like the BSC may have been given a little too much credibility."??? Based on what, does this poster have a Delorean and access to 1.21 jiggawatts? It was a Chinese style spam post designed to invoke a reaction and that was mine.

FWIW, Sask, I read the OP’s post in the same tenor you did.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

Big Sky will go 4-0 tomorrow.

I like it.

Not your post, but the ad in the middle of your post. I could definitely use some coconut & hibiscus curl shampoo.

Me too! Loving the monster ads in the middle of everyone’s posts! Really giving me some good Christmas ideas.

Is that why you posted the gigantic Casio G-Shock available at Jared ad before your text?

 

[GlacierGrizX]

Here are the results of the Big Sky over the past years. *** I only used games in rounds 1 & 2, being each team's first game in the playoffs, also omitted when a Big Sky vs Big Sky in round 2. If not for EWU in those years, the Big Sky fell flat "flopped." In most of those years the BSC just had at-large bids other than EWU. So if I am the selection committee, and all the "seeded" Big Sky teams don't produce, I might tend to shy away from the Big Sky with future seeding; especially if all four were seeded teams!


2012 2-1
2013 1-3
2014 1-1 -excluded EWU win over MT in round 2
2015 1-2
2016 1-3
2017 1-1
2018 4-0

 

[SaskGriz]

Here are the results of the Big Sky over the past years. *** I only used games in rounds 1 & 2, being each team's first game in the playoffs, also omitted when a Big Sky vs Big Sky in round 2. If not for EWU in those years, the Big Sky fell flat "flopped." In most of those years the BSC just had at-large bids other than EWU. So if I am the selection committee, and all the "seeded" Big Sky teams don't produce, I might tend to shy away from the Big Sky with future seeding; especially if all four were seeded teams!


2012 2-1
2013 1-3
2014 1-1 -excluded EWU win over MT in round 2
2015 1-2
2016 1-3
2017 1-1
2018 4-0

So you've picked a random sample and all it shows is the BSC being 11 up and 11 down. "Flopped" "Carnage" "over valued"? These are all demonstrated by these numbers?

 

[GlacierGrizX]

Here are the results of the Big Sky over the past years. *** I only used games in rounds 1 & 2, being each team's first game in the playoffs, also omitted when a Big Sky vs Big Sky in round 2. If not for EWU in those years, the Big Sky fell flat "flopped." In most of those years the BSC just had at-large bids other than EWU. So if I am the selection committee, and all the "seeded" Big Sky teams don't produce, I might tend to shy away from the Big Sky with future seeding; especially if all four were seeded teams!


2012 2-1
2013 1-3
2014 1-1 -excluded EWU win over MT in round 2
2015 1-2
2016 1-3
2017 1-1
2018 4-0

So you've picked a random sample and all it shows is the BSC being 11 up and 11 down. "Flopped" "Carnage" "over valued"? These are all demonstrated by these numbers?

If it were not for EWU and 2018, those numbers would even worse than .500%. Does that warrant the Big Sky to become SEC of the FCS? The entire notion of this topic/thread is to entertain the idea if Big Sky warrants high-seeding of all its teams after presenting the committee at best a .500% first/second round performance over the course of the last six years? In was not intended to enrage the masses?

 

[SaskGriz]

Here are the results of the Big Sky over the past years. *** I only used games in rounds 1 & 2, being each team's first game in the playoffs, also omitted when a Big Sky vs Big Sky in round 2. If not for EWU in those years, the Big Sky fell flat "flopped." In most of those years the BSC just had at-large bids other than EWU. So if I am the selection committee, and all the "seeded" Big Sky teams don't produce, I might tend to shy away from the Big Sky with future seeding; especially if all four were seeded teams!


2012 2-1
2013 1-3
2014 1-1 -excluded EWU win over MT in round 2
2015 1-2
2016 1-3
2017 1-1
2018 4-0

So you've picked a random sample and all it shows is the BSC being 11 up and 11 down. "Flopped" "Carnage" "over valued"? These are all demonstrated by these numbers?

If it were not for EWU and 2018, those numbers would even worse than .500%. Does that warrant the Big Sky to become SEC of the FCS? The entire notion of this topic/thread is to entertain the idea if Big Sky warrants high-seeding of all its teams after presenting the committee at best a .500% first/second round performance over the course of the last six years? In was not intended to enrage the masses?

Fair enough and once again please accept my apologies for last nights post, it was classless and frankly I'm embarrassed that I sent it. That being said, taking EWU out of the equation makes no sense but then take NDSU out of the MVC numbers, how would that change the SEC of the BCS?

 

[AZGrizFan]

Well, we’re going to be 3-0 and awaiting the Sac game, so I guess this whole thread is moot.

 

[grizpsych]

Good thing we don't have to worry about this.

 

[IdaGriz01]

Well, we’re going to be 3-0 and awaiting the Sac game, so I guess this whole thread is moot.

I'd say so. Austin Peay is a good team, but unless the Hornies take them lightly that should be a Big Sky win too. Even if they don't win, 3 of 4 looks pretty damn good.

 

[AZGrizFan]

It would appear the conference you were referring to in the OP should have been the Southland.
That conference had no business having three teams in the tourney.

 

[coochorama42]

It would appear the conference you were referring to in the OP should have been the Southland.
That conference had no business having three teams in the tourney.

Both the Southland and CAA (save JMU) are overmatched this year. I hope this starts to mean the MVFC and Big Sky get more bids going forward.

 

[SaskGriz]

Here are the results of the Big Sky over the past years. *** I only used games in rounds 1 & 2, being each team's first game in the playoffs, also omitted when a Big Sky vs Big Sky in round 2. If not for EWU in those years, the Big Sky fell flat "flopped." In most of those years the BSC just had at-large bids other than EWU. So if I am the selection committee, and all the "seeded" Big Sky teams don't produce, I might tend to shy away from the Big Sky with future seeding; especially if all four were seeded teams!


2012 2-1
2013 1-3
2014 1-1 -excluded EWU win over MT in round 2
2015 1-2
2016 1-3
2017 1-1
2018 4-0

So you've picked a random sample and all it shows is the BSC being 11 up and 11 down. "Flopped" "Carnage" "over valued"? These are all demonstrated by these numbers?

If it were not for EWU and 2018, those numbers would even worse than .500%. Does that warrant the Big Sky to become SEC of the FCS? The entire notion of this topic/thread is to entertain the idea if Big Sky warrants high-seeding of all its teams after presenting the committee at best a .500% first/second round performance over the course of the last six years? In was not intended to enrage the masses?

If you're gonna play in Texas, you gotta have a fiddle in the band. Night, Night. The grown ups are going to talk football now.

 

[cclarkblues]

This thread might be up for membership in the Wrong Way Corrigan Hall Of Fame.

 

[grizbymarriage]

Wait. Wait.

Is this real? Have I died and gone to heaven? Have my nightly prayers been answered?

A respectful, intelligent discussion of football between Cat and Griz fans?

Oh, please, Almighty One, let this be the Christmas Miracle we have all hoped for for so long.

In spite of all that, FTC. Go Griz!!

But, as God is my witness, if only one Montana team winds up in the finals, I will root for them because I cannot root against Montana kids when they are playing anyone else. So, sorry, Griz fanatics. Go Griz first! Go Montana second!

 

[SoldierGriz]

It would appear the conference you were referring to in the OP should have been the Southland.
That conference had no business having three teams in the tourney.

Fact.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Well, we’re going to be 3-0 and awaiting the Sac game, so I guess this whole thread is moot.

I'd say so. Austin Peay is a good team, but unless the Hornies take them lightly that should be a Big Sky win too. Even if they don't win, 3 of 4 looks pretty damn good.

Welp.