• Hi Guest,

    We've updated the site to combine all the forums that were part of the Big Sky Fans Network into one location. This will make it easier to navigate and participate in all the discussions for each school without having to have multiple accounts, etc. We are still working out some tweaks but please let us know if you notice anything.

    With the migration, in some circumstances, your username could have been merged with one of your other usernames from the other forums. If this is the case, you can request to change your username in your account details page of your profile.
  • Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
  • Guest, do want an ad free experience on BigSkyFans.com among other benefits? Upgrade your account today!

    Simply click your profile name > account upgrades > BigSky Club > choose between the year long subscription (two free months) or month to month

    Thanks for the continued support. Cheers!

2011 schedule

93bird said:
Eastern made the playoffs in 2005 with a 7-4 record, and here's what Montana's AD has to say about why the Griz didn't make the playoffs this year:
O'Day, said, "The main reasons the Griz were not selected for the playoffs":

1). UM had only six Division I wins. The victory against Division II Western State College of Colorado did not count in the final information provided to committee members.
Click to expand...


Eastern made the playoffs in 2005 because they won the Big Sky conference auto-bid. There was some talk we may have gotten an at-large had Montana won the auto-bid, but since it worked out that we got the auto-bid, only once has a 7-4 team received an at-large.

Plus, I still don't agree with your assessment of Montana. They only had 6 wins against FCS opponents because they had 4 losses to FCS opponents. Losing to Cal Poly, us, Weber, and MSU did them in. Replace Western State with Iowa- as mentioned earlier- and they are out of the playoff hunt at the end of October and playing for pride against MSU.

Again, look at every FCS team and every FCS playoff bracket going back to the advent of the FCS, and you'll notice that scheduling is very important, and teams that schedule themselves out like whores DON'T go to the playoffs. That is inarguable. It is backed up year after year.
 
Dopa's right on this one. The only scenario that we should ever schedule two FBS teams is during an obvious rebuilidng year - which we hopefully won't be seeing too many more of in the near future.
 
We agree that two FBS teams in the same season isn't a good idea. But what good is a win against a DII program if it doesn't help the chances of a playoff berth?

According to the FCS Championship handbook, the (playoff) selection criteria include:

•The win-loss record is “scrutinized to determine a team’s strength in schedule” and that fewer than seven wins in Division I play “may place a team in jeopardy of being selected.”
•The selection committee “may give more consideration to those teams who have played all Division I opponents.”
•Also, if a conference is guaranteed an automatic bid in the playoffs, and does not receive one, an at-large bid is given

By scheduling and beating another FCS team instead of Western State, the Griz would have received an at-large bid even with the loss to Cal Poly, Eastern, Weber, and MSU. At least we can agree on that?
 
93bird said:
We agree that two FBS teams in the same season isn't a good idea. But what good is a win against a DII program if it doesn't help the chances of a playoff berth?

According to the FCS Championship handbook, the (playoff) selection criteria include:

•The win-loss record is “scrutinized to determine a team’s strength in schedule” and that fewer than seven wins in Division I play “may place a team in jeopardy of being selected.”
•The selection committee “may give more consideration to those teams who have played all Division I opponents.”
•Also, if a conference is guaranteed an automatic bid in the playoffs, and does not receive one, an at-large bid is given

By scheduling and beating another FCS team instead of Western State, the Griz would have received an at-large bid even with the loss to Cal Poly, Eastern, Weber, and MSU. At least we can agree on that?
Click to expand...

And as has been mentioned before, the problem is with the selection criteria. FCS teams from non or partial scholarship conferences count as DI wins. The only one of these schools that's located out west is San Diego so it's tough for BSC teams to schedule cupcakes - even Montana. Jim Oday was on the selection committee and has been the AD at Montana long enough to know this. So we're forced to schedule DII's, some of which (Chadron and CWU) would compete for conference titles in the MEAC, Patrtiot, and NEC. It's simply difficult to fill a favorable schedule out west.
 
Kalm and Doba are absolutely correct....We don't have the chance to schedule many out of conference FCS schools due to location, thus we have to schedule down. We played SUU the past 2 seasons and have Cal Poly in 2011, but those schools are joining the Big Sky in 2012. There are currently 2 western conferences in FCS, the Big Sky and the Great West, after next year, there will only be the Big Sky. The Eastern FCS schools will not come here to play the Big Sky, Montana has tried for years, and I'm sure we would go east, but if we don't get a return home game it is not worth it. Plus the football programs in FCS don't have the money to travel cross country like the programs in FBS, the only way we will do it is for a big pay day against an FBS school.

We would love to schedule another FCS out of conference game, but look at the 120 or so FCS teams and tell me if it is reasonable? Besides the big sky, there are no FCS teams out of conference that make geographical sense to schedule, thus the drop down game we, and all the other schools, play ever year. It has worked for the Griz every year and it has worked for us the past 10-15 years. None of us love to schedule D2 cupcakes, nor do the Griz or Bobcats, but with our location and the way the FCS playoffs are setup, it only makes sense to play the drop down game because we can't schedule another FCS school and it is not worth playing 2 FBS schools in one year.
 
The NCAA should not allow Division I schools that field non-scholarship football teams to be classified as FCS. How the committee counts wins against those schools, but not against Division II schools with 30+ more scholarships is beyond me.

But back to the point. Besides a guaranteed home game, what good is there in playing an NAIA or Division II school? We've already established that it won't count towards the 7 win requirement. It's different for FBS schools, because they can count one win against an FCS school towards bowl eligibility.

We don't make a ton of money from home games like Montana does, so in years where we already have 5 guaranteed home games, I don't see why we wouldn't schedule another money game. I don't buy that our boys get more beat up playing BCS schools. If we had a 25k stadium that we were filling every game, I'd say that it makes sense to schedule down for the guaranteed home game, but I'm not so sure now with our situation. Playing those money games provides funds not just for the football program, but the entire athletics department.
 
It seems like the board is pretty split on what we would like to see schedule wise...so hear is my take on our 2010 schedule compared to what everyone is saying.

After 4 games this year we were 2 and 2, we played an FBS school and a drop down game. If we had played a 2nd FBS school this year instead of central washington, we would have been 1 and 3 after the MSU game (most likely). Yes, 2 of those losses would have been to FBS schools, but we most likely would not have been ranked in the top 20 or 25 after our MSU loss. If we would have been 1 and 3 instead of 2 and 2, the likelihood of us climbing all the way to #1 like we did this year would have been a lot more difficult as we would have had to jump a lot more teams. I know losing to an FBS school isn't suppose to drop you in the rankings, but if you look at the ranked FCS teams who lost to FBS schools this year, it affected their ranking the following week. We would have then finished the season with an 8 and 3 record instead of 9 and 2 had we played another FBS school this year. Instead, we finished 9 and 2, ranked #1 in the nation, and we received the 5 seed, if we had finished 8 and 3 and were not ranked #1, do you think we would have been seeded? Probably not...and if we were not seeded, we would have been on the road every game in the playoffs, making it a lot more difficult to be where we are right now. That is just my take...but I am open to hear everyone else's opinions.

Bottom line for 2011 is that we need a 5th home game next year so I am sure we will schedule the drop down game. After 2011, we will be in the Mega Big Sky conference and will most likely only have 2 out of conference games (one FBS, one drop down) unless we schedule 12 regular season games as we will most likely have more conference games after 2011.
 
marceagfan5 said:
It seems like the board is pretty split on what we would like to see schedule wise...so hear is my take on our 2010 schedule compared to what everyone is saying.

After 4 games this year we were 2 and 2, we played an FBS school and a drop down game. If we had played a 2nd FBS school this year instead of central washington, we would have been 1 and 3 after the MSU game (most likely). Yes, 2 of those losses would have been to FBS schools, but we most likely would not have been ranked in the top 20 or 25 after our MSU loss. If we would have been 1 and 3 instead of 2 and 2, the likelihood of us climbing all the way to #1 like we did this year would have been a lot more difficult as we would have had to jump a lot more teams. I know losing to an FBS school isn't suppose to drop you in the rankings, but if you look at the ranked FCS teams who lost to FBS schools this year, it affected their ranking the following week. We would have then finished the season with an 8 and 3 record instead of 9 and 2 had we played another FBS school this year. Instead, we finished 9 and 2, ranked #1 in the nation, and we received the 5 seed, if we had finished 8 and 3 and were not ranked #1, do you think we would have been seeded? Probably not...and if we were not seeded, we would have been on the road every game in the playoffs, making it a lot more difficult to be where we are right now. That is just my take...but I am open to hear everyone else's opinions.

Bottom line for 2011 is that we need a 5th home game next year so I am sure we will schedule the drop down game. After 2011, we will be in the Mega Big Sky conference and will most likely only have 2 out of conference games (one FBS, one drop down) unless we schedule 12 regular season games as we will most likely have more conference games after 2011.
Click to expand...

Good point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top