EWU vs Montana Recruiting - Not pretty for Griz

[sammamisheag]

I think LDopaPDX posted that Montana doesn't have the same talent level based on recruiting and the High School talent level in Montana/Idaho vs the rest of the West.

Interesting here at EWU only has three players on the current roster that's from Idaho, none from Montana.

The Griz has 35 from Montana & Idaho.

They definitely have the better facilities, but it hasn't translated into recruiting.

Easy to see why EWU is 7-2 in the last nine games vs Montana.

Wow!

 

[GreatDayToBeAnEagle]

I don't really understand the point of this thread. Sorry. I just don't see the point you're trying to make with the numbers you give.

But I do want to correct you that our starting TE, Jayce Gilder is from Corvalis, Montana.

 

[sammamisheag]

That Montana a good portion of their roster from the states of ID & Montana while EWU's roster is mainly Wash, ORE & Calif kids. Big difference in HS talent in those states vs ID & Mont.

Fact is EWU has had more talent the past 6-7 years and the results have shown that.

 

[LDopaPDX]

When I brought it up earlier, it was in regards to Montana fans being completely enamored with their players. They think us beating them is a coaching issue. And so far as recruiting goes, it is. Because, really, we've been more talented than them consistently over the last ten years. Why they don't address their team speed issues on the defensive perimeter and at the offensive skills positions is beyond me. They put in these good lineman and they always have good linebackers. But you can't win championships with 12 or 13 top-notch kids and leftovers.

I hadn't been to Egriz in a long time, but I was curious what they were thinking when we beat them. The common theme is that the coaches screwed their players. Frankly, I think their coaches did an admirable job of getting lesser players to almost pull an upset. They have a miles-long thread about recruiting in Montana, as if that's the answer. The fact is the 12th best kid in Montana is usually equivalent to the 80th best kid in Washington. That quality of player isn't a D1 recruit most years.

 

[DPEagle83]

I was at the game Saturday night and I was very surprised at the number of Montana starters introduced that were from the state of Washington. I bet it was at least half. That would seem to contradict the Egriz arguments that EWU out recruits UofM in Washington. The outcome of the game adds fuel to their which coaches develop player's better, however.

 

[sammamisheag]

I was at the game Saturday night and I was very surprised at the number of Montana starters introduced that were from the state of Washington. I bet it was at least half. That would seem to contradict the Egriz arguments that EWU out recruits UofM in Washington. The outcome of the game adds fuel to their which coaches develop player's better, however.

http://www.gogriz.com/roster.aspx?path=football

The difference is how many Montana players they have compared to EWU. The Johhny's & Joe's are more important than the X's & O's IMHO.

 

[EWURanger]

That Montana a good portion of their roster from the states of ID & Montana while EWU's roster is mainly Wash, ORE & Calif kids. Big difference in HS talent in those states vs ID & Mont.

Fact is EWU has had more talent the past 6-7 years and the results have shown that.

Don't disagree with the premise of what you're saying, but the real basis for EWU's advantage in recruiting lies in the fact that we fall in a talent-laden HS football state and only really have the UW and WSU to compete with in terms of in-state scholarships. This is also the reason why we are able to have a smaller recruiting budget as well as a smaller football budget overall. If you're able to satisfy 70% of your recruiting goals by recruiting in-state talent that's comparable with the talent that your peers have to go out of state for, it's a huge advantage. With in-state scholarships, you're paying roughly half the amount of an out of state scholarship. This allows us to be more selective with who's being recruited in California, Oregon, etc. It is a big deal.

 

[EWURanger]

I was at the game Saturday night and I was very surprised at the number of Montana starters introduced that were from the state of Washington. I bet it was at least half. That would seem to contradict the Egriz arguments that EWU out recruits UofM in Washington. The outcome of the game adds fuel to their which coaches develop player's better, however.

Both schools win and lose some recruiting battles when it comes to Washington kids. In recent years, I think we've won more of those battles than we've lost...thinking Jayson Williams, Amir Matheney, Chris Shlichting, etc.

Of course, whenever one of those recruits who's being recruited by both schools commits to Eastern, the good folks over at Egriz are quick to claim that said player was never being recruited by UM. :lol:

 

[clawman1]

Washington 7,288,000
Montana 1,043,000

 

[clawman1]

Idaho - 1,683,000
South Dakota 865,452
North Dakota 757,942
Total popultion is not the answer, ND is lowest population but the most nat'l championships.

 

[LDopaPDX]

Idaho - 1,683,000
South Dakota 865,452
North Dakota 757,942
Total popultion is not the answer, ND is lowest population but the most nat'l championships.

The difference is NDSU has completely embraced going out of state to get their kids. Montana- the fans any way- still think their in-state kids are the answer. NDSU benefits from the fact there is only one D1 team in neighboring Minnesota. And they pull a lot of kids from Minnesota.

http://www.espn.com/college-football/team/roster/_/id/2449/north-dakota-state-bison

 

[cats25061]

Interesting take on the Montana (state) recruiting battle, and comparing it to Washington ect.
First I have no doubt that with 8 times the population there are a lot more DI players in WA, however for MSU & um its about more than that, its also about fanbase and booster dollars. There are probably about 8-10 legitimate DI players coming out of MT high schools each year, there are probably another 10-15 that have potential (walkons). The Mt schools need to maintain that core of MT players to keep that booster cash and fan base, however we need to recruit outside our state to have a top level team.

I think MSU has had an edge over the last 6-7 year but it is always close, it has been a difference in opinion of coaching staffs and academics that has given MSU that edge. You probably are not aware that MSU's enrollment is almost 5000 more than um's this year, MSU has been winning the student recruitment battle quite well over the same time frame.

Its an ongoing rivalry that Mt schools deal with that few other schools need to concern themselves with.

 

[LDopaPDX]

Interesting take on the Montana (state) recruiting battle, and comparing it to Washington ect.
First I have no doubt that with 8 times the population there are a lot more DI players in WA, however for MSU & um its about more than that, its also about fanbase and booster dollars. There are probably about 8-10 legitimate DI players coming out of MT high schools each year, there are probably another 10-15 that have potential (walkons). The Mt schools need to maintain that core of MT players to keep that booster cash and fan base, however we need to recruit outside our state to have a top level team.

I think MSU has had an edge over the last 6-7 year but it is always close, it has been a difference in opinion of coaching staffs and academics that has given MSU that edge. You probably are not aware that MSU's enrollment is almost 5000 more than um's this year, MSU has been winning the student recruitment battle quite well over the same time frame.

Its an ongoing rivalry that Mt schools deal with that few other schools need to concern themselves with.

I knew UM was struggling with enrollment while MSU was surging. I didn't realize the difference was that big.

Your point on recruiting is an excellent one. I didn't think of it in those terms.

I can tell you what our team tends to think about the Montana schools... the stereotype is a tough, physical team that can be exploited with skill players because they lack speed. Obviously, stereotypes are made to be broken, but they are typically rooted in truth.

 

[EWU98]

How has no one brought up the off the field issues they had. Lack of institutional control comes to mind almost the death penalty. Why would a parent want to send their kids their ...glory days are behind them.

 

[cats25061]

Interesting take on the Montana (state) recruiting battle, and comparing it to Washington ect.
First I have no doubt that with 8 times the population there are a lot more DI players in WA, however for MSU & um its about more than that, its also about fanbase and booster dollars. There are probably about 8-10 legitimate DI players coming out of MT high schools each year, there are probably another 10-15 that have potential (walkons). The Mt schools need to maintain that core of MT players to keep that booster cash and fan base, however we need to recruit outside our state to have a top level team.

I think MSU has had an edge over the last 6-7 year but it is always close, it has been a difference in opinion of coaching staffs and academics that has given MSU that edge. You probably are not aware that MSU's enrollment is almost 5000 more than um's this year, MSU has been winning the student recruitment battle quite well over the same time frame.

Its an ongoing rivalry that Mt schools deal with that few other schools need to concern themselves with.

I knew UM was struggling with enrollment while MSU was surging. I didn't realize the difference was that big.

Your point on recruiting is an excellent one. I didn't think of it in those terms.

I can tell you what our team tends to think about the Montana schools... the stereotype is a tough, physical team that can be exploited with skill players because they lack speed. Obviously, stereotypes are made to be broken, but they are typically rooted in truth.

Montana is a big state with a lot of small towns. These towns don't always have the systems in high school to fully develop DI players, but there are athletes here, many of them are 2-3 sport athletes.
I wouldn't say your stereotype is completely wrong, I think of it as recruiting MT to find heart and power, but CA, TX ect to get speed.

People say that Montana is just a small town with really long roads and it is true, fans like me have seen a lot of these MT recruits (both schools) play sports and compete for several years before they become a Cat or a fizz. Just an example current DT Yates, I have watched him wrestle since he was in grade school, even though his town is 200 miles away from mine.

 

[cats25061]

How has no one brought up the off the field issues they had. Lack of institutional control comes to mind almost the death penalty. Why would a parent want to send their kids their ...glory days are behind them.

The off field issues have been a partial cause in both student recruiting and athletics.

I cant find it now but a BN thread had a 2-deep comparison of MT kids, there are only a handful on um's 2-deep, while MSU is almost half.

Edit: found the thread, um has 7 (1 offense, 6 defense) montana kids on their 2-deep beginning of season, MSU has 21 (11 offense, 10 defense) mt kids on their 2 -deep. Doesn't count 2 kickers from Montana

 

[clawman1]

How has no one brought up the off the field issues they had. Lack of institutional control comes to mind almost the death penalty. Why would a parent want to send their kids their ...glory days are behind them.

The off field issues have been a partial cause in both student recruiting and athletics.

I cant find it now but a BN thread had a 2-deep comparison of MT kids, there are only a handful on um's 2-deep, while MSU is almost half.

Edit: found the thread, um has 7 (1 offense, 6 defense) montana kids on their 2-deep beginning of season, MSU has 21 (11 offense, 10 defense) mt kids on their 2 -deep. Doesn't count 2 kickers from Montana

What's your point? Is MSU that poor at recruiting that Montana kids can make their two deep?

 

[cats25061]

How has no one brought up the off the field issues they had. Lack of institutional control comes to mind almost the death penalty. Why would a parent want to send their kids their ...glory days are behind them.

The off field issues have been a partial cause in both student recruiting and athletics.

I cant find it now but a BN thread had a 2-deep comparison of MT kids, there are only a handful on um's 2-deep, while MSU is almost half.

Edit: found the thread, um has 7 (1 offense, 6 defense) montana kids on their 2-deep beginning of season, MSU has 21 (11 offense, 10 defense) mt kids on their 2 -deep. Doesn't count 2 kickers from Montana

What's your point? Is MSU that poor at recruiting that Montana kids can make their two deep?

MSU has been winning the MT recruiting battles in recent years. More kids are going for a STEM degree rather than a degree in dance interpertation.

"Montana kids should be just happy to walk on, we need scholarships for out of state kids" --Bob Stitt

 

[clawman1]

How has no one brought up the off the field issues they had. Lack of institutional control comes to mind almost the death penalty. Why would a parent want to send their kids their ...glory days are behind them.

The off field issues have been a partial cause in both student recruiting and athletics.

I cant find it now but a BN thread had a 2-deep comparison of MT kids, there are only a handful on um's 2-deep, while MSU is almost half.

Edit: found the thread, um has 7 (1 offense, 6 defense) montana kids on their 2-deep beginning of season, MSU has 21 (11 offense, 10 defense) mt kids on their 2 -deep. Doesn't count 2 kickers from Montana

What's your point? Is MSU that poor at recruiting that Montana kids can make their two deep?

MSU has been winning the MT recruiting battles in recent years. More kids are going for a STEM degree rather than a degree in dance interpertation.

"Montana kids should be just happy to walk on, we need scholarships for out of state kids" --Bob Stitt

My point is, what are you winning?

 

[SeattleBobcat]

How has no one brought up the off the field issues they had. Lack of institutional control comes to mind almost the death penalty. Why would a parent want to send their kids their ...glory days are behind them.

The off field issues have been a partial cause in both student recruiting and athletics.

I cant find it now but a BN thread had a 2-deep comparison of MT kids, there are only a handful on um's 2-deep, while MSU is almost half.

Edit: found the thread, um has 7 (1 offense, 6 defense) montana kids on their 2-deep beginning of season, MSU has 21 (11 offense, 10 defense) mt kids on their 2 -deep. Doesn't count 2 kickers from Montana

What's your point? Is MSU that poor at recruiting that Montana kids can make their two deep?

MSU has been winning the MT recruiting battles in recent years. More kids are going for a STEM degree rather than a degree in dance interpertation.

"Montana kids should be just happy to walk on, we need scholarships for out of state kids" --Bob Stitt

My point is, what are you winning?

We're looking pretty god damn good this year, with a butt load of Montana kids... I'd call that a win.