NDSU Home and Home

[GoldenEagle]

I like these strong schedules. Please, no more Frontier Conference teams.

 

[GoldenEagle]

In the school of thought of "They don't boo nobodies!" our Griz friends are very unhappy with the news. :rofl:

http://www.egriz.com/grizboard/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=66692&sid=9ef8dbd23cbbdb8aecbbf1a242dac0d0

I had to own them with some truth today. I couldn't help myself.

egriz is a very sensitive forum these days.

 

[marceagfan5]

I love it. I know some on this board hate tough nonconference games because they think they hurt our playoff chances, but as a season ticket holder and fan I love the quality home games. And, these type of tough but winnable games season a team for conference and playoff football.

I think the dislike is towards 2 fbs games in one season. Games like these are fantastic and help keep the 2nd fbs game off the schedule...

It is not just 2 FBS games, it is a strong nonconference schedule that some posters dislike. Case in point is playing MSU as a nonconference game in years that we don't get them in conference to keep that rivalry going. I love these tough games as a fan and hate SEC style nonconference games where just getting w's is enough.

I get it, I'm in favor of the tough FCS games, just not 2 FBS games, those are ridiculous and I'm glad we appear to be getting away from them. I believe only 1 non-seeded team has ever won the FCS championship (Richmond) since the seeding began, and I don't know of a team that has more than 2 or 3 losses and won the chipper in recent memory. So winning games, having a good record, and being seeded seems to take some priority.

As far as MSU, we should play them every year. Our record against them is insane, some teams you just beat and that is MSU for us. I have a feeling the conference teams as non-conf games will be outlawed in a couple years, but glad we have MSU on the books. Always a great game and I like their fan base.

 

[Rjones61]

I love it. I know some on this board hate tough nonconference games because they think they hurt our playoff chances, but as a season ticket holder and fan I love the quality home games. And, these type of tough but winnable games season a team for conference and playoff football.

I think the dislike is towards 2 fbs games in one season. Games like these are fantastic and help keep the 2nd fbs game off the schedule...

It is not just 2 FBS games, it is a strong nonconference schedule that some posters dislike. Case in point is playing MSU as a nonconference game in years that we don't get them in conference to keep that rivalry going. I love these tough games as a fan and hate SEC style nonconference games where just getting w's is enough.

I get it, I'm in favor of the tough FCS games, just not 2 FBS games, those are ridiculous and I'm glad we appear to be getting away from them. I believe only 1 non-seeded team has ever won the FCS championship (Richmond) since the seeding began, and I don't know of a team that has more than 2 or 3 losses and won the chipper in recent memory. So winning games, having a good record, and being seeded seems to take some priority.

As far as MSU, we should play them every year. Our record against them is insane, some teams you just beat and that is MSU for us. I have a feeling the conference teams as non-conf games will be outlawed in a couple years, but glad we have MSU on the books. Always a great game and I like their fan base.

Well, there is a simple explanation for only seeded teams winning the national championship... they are seeded, because they are the best teams in the division.

I would be comfortable with two FBS games if I knew that the money procured would go toward the Gateway Project. Really, it should only take the money from one game, right?

 

[marceagfan5]

I love it. I know some on this board hate tough nonconference games because they think they hurt our playoff chances, but as a season ticket holder and fan I love the quality home games. And, these type of tough but winnable games season a team for conference and playoff football.

I think the dislike is towards 2 fbs games in one season. Games like these are fantastic and help keep the 2nd fbs game off the schedule...

It is not just 2 FBS games, it is a strong nonconference schedule that some posters dislike. Case in point is playing MSU as a nonconference game in years that we don't get them in conference to keep that rivalry going. I love these tough games as a fan and hate SEC style nonconference games where just getting w's is enough.

I get it, I'm in favor of the tough FCS games, just not 2 FBS games, those are ridiculous and I'm glad we appear to be getting away from them. I believe only 1 non-seeded team has ever won the FCS championship (Richmond) since the seeding began, and I don't know of a team that has more than 2 or 3 losses and won the chipper in recent memory. So winning games, having a good record, and being seeded seems to take some priority.

As far as MSU, we should play them every year. Our record against them is insane, some teams you just beat and that is MSU for us. I have a feeling the conference teams as non-conf games will be outlawed in a couple years, but glad we have MSU on the books. Always a great game and I like their fan base.

Well, there is a simple explanation for only seeded teams winning the national championship... they are seeded, because they are the best teams in the division.

I would be comfortable with two FBS games if I knew that the money procured would go toward the Gateway Project. Really, it should only take the money from one game, right?

We play the FBS games because we have to, they help fund our athletic department. I think one, against a big school, is great. Its great for the team, fans, school. We only bring in somewhere from $300k-$500k for big time FBS games and $200k for smaller schools, so no way that money is going to fund the gateway project which is anticipated to cost over $40 million.

We need one FBS game a year for funding, I think we are at a point where we generate at least something for our home games to where we don't need 2. Success brings in more $$$ than a 2nd FBS game.

As far as the seeded teams are concerned, you are right. Up until last year, where the seeding system was changed, it was rare to see a 7-4 or 8-3 team seeded. Seeding means home playoffs games. 2 FBS games typically mean 2 losses, so you hurt yourself from the jump on those years. It worked in our favor last year, but if we didn't beat OSU last year it may have been a different story come seeding as we definitely would not have been in the top 4...

 

[Rjones61]

I love it. I know some on this board hate tough nonconference games because they think they hurt our playoff chances, but as a season ticket holder and fan I love the quality home games. And, these type of tough but winnable games season a team for conference and playoff football.

I think the dislike is towards 2 fbs games in one season. Games like these are fantastic and help keep the 2nd fbs game off the schedule...

It is not just 2 FBS games, it is a strong nonconference schedule that some posters dislike. Case in point is playing MSU as a nonconference game in years that we don't get them in conference to keep that rivalry going. I love these tough games as a fan and hate SEC style nonconference games where just getting w's is enough.

I get it, I'm in favor of the tough FCS games, just not 2 FBS games, those are ridiculous and I'm glad we appear to be getting away from them. I believe only 1 non-seeded team has ever won the FCS championship (Richmond) since the seeding began, and I don't know of a team that has more than 2 or 3 losses and won the chipper in recent memory. So winning games, having a good record, and being seeded seems to take some priority.

As far as MSU, we should play them every year. Our record against them is insane, some teams you just beat and that is MSU for us. I have a feeling the conference teams as non-conf games will be outlawed in a couple years, but glad we have MSU on the books. Always a great game and I like their fan base.

Well, there is a simple explanation for only seeded teams winning the national championship... they are seeded, because they are the best teams in the division.

I would be comfortable with two FBS games if I knew that the money procured would go toward the Gateway Project. Really, it should only take the money from one game, right?

We play the FBS games because we have to, they help fund our athletic department. I think one, against a big school, is great. Its great for the team and players. We only bring in somewhere from $300k-$500k for big time FBS games and $200k for smaller schools, so no way that money is going to fund the gateway project which is anticipated to cost over $40 million.

We need one FBS game a year for funding, I think we are at a point where we generate at least something for our home games to where we don't need 2. Success brings in more $$$ than a 2nd FBS game.

As far as the seeded teams are concerned, you are right. But you also don't see a 7-4 and most 8-3 teams arent' seeded. Seeding means home playoffs games. 2 FBS games typically mean 2 losses, so you hurt yourself from the jump on those years. It worked in our favor last year, but if we didn't beat OSU last year it may have been a different story come seeding...

Haha, the last part about just needing one was a badly laid joke. But still, a few hundred thousand toward that budget can't be a bad thing, right? I mean, if that large of a donation came from a private donor, I would be astounded.

If you are worthy of winning a championship, you can pull off 9 wins, even if you lost to two FBS teams. And don't forget that we have twelve games a year now, so if you lost three games, you would still be 9-3.

 

[marceagfan5]

Haha, the last part about just needing one was a badly laid joke. But still, a few hundred thousand toward that budget can't be a bad thing, right?

If you are worthy of winning a championship, you can pull off 9 wins, even if you lost to two FBS teams. And don't forget that we have twelve games a year now, so if you lost three games, you would still be 9-3.

True, true. Now that I know it was a joke, it made me laugh pretty good. Looks like our schedules moving forward only have 1 FBS game anyway, and I love the games with the MVFC, they are a tough games against good teams in a good conference. I bet more games between the two leagues are scheduled in coming years.

Is it 8/23 yet? I think we are all just ready for the season to start. Tons of buildup but still 2 weeks away!

 

[Rjones61]

Haha, the last part about just needing one was a badly laid joke. But still, a few hundred thousand toward that budget can't be a bad thing, right?

If you are worthy of winning a championship, you can pull off 9 wins, even if you lost to two FBS teams. And don't forget that we have twelve games a year now, so if you lost three games, you would still be 9-3.

True, true. Now that I know it was a joke, it made me laugh pretty good. Looks like our schedules moving forward only have 1 FBS game anyway, and I love the games with the MVFC, they are a tough games against good teams in a good conference. I bet more games between the two leagues are scheduled in coming years.

Is it 8/23 yet? I think we are all just ready for the season to start. Tons of buildup but still 2 weeks away!

My coworkers who aren't really EWU football fans are getting sick of me counting down the days to them. I can't get it off my mind. This season should be magical!