-
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!
Preseason Bengal All-Americans
- Thread starter votb
- Start date
pocabengal
Active member
Not trying to be a smart ass here, but I don't know why you wouldn't already be included in that group. If you are going to be 1-10 with out of state recruits, why not put more home grown players on the field. Not much to lose, and they might even build a winning tradition.biobengal said:
Bengal Roar
Active member
pocabengal said:
Well said my friend, well said. I will leave it at that.........pocabengal
Active member
It would be nice if you actually knew what you were talking about. Who said only recruit and play idaho boys? If we drop down a division, it won't be because of who we have or have not recruited. Should we be pissed at all the out of state players from the past for not winning enough games to keep us out of this conversation?spartan said:
sure - lets be mad at everybody all around - if it weren't for those out of state players... idaho state would... well - they never would have won that national title all those years ago (the one most bengal sports fans keep hanging their dying hopes for athletics on) - and they wouldn't have all those other problems either...
in state/out of state - who cares and it don't matter if your team don't win
in state/out of state - who cares and it don't matter if your team don't win
pocabengal
Active member
Of course, we could just keep doing the same things over and over and over ... I would rather take a chance on football players from Idaho. This approach hasn't hurt Monatana has it?
This article quotes Jim O'Day, Montana's A.D. ...
http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/log/index.php/2010/03/05/montana-athletic-department-considering?blog=2
I'll cut and paste the relevant passage...
“I can get two in-states for the cost of one out-of-state,” O’Day said. “Instead of going to a coach and saying ‘You have 63 football scholarships.’ I can go to him and say, ‘OK you have 50 in-state kids and 13 out-of-state kids.’”
Although this would save money, O’Day said that proposal would factor into Montana’s competitiveness.
“What’s going to happen if we do that?” O’Day said. “We’re not going to win.”
Just an interesting counterpoint to the in-state argument...
ISUSID
http://www.championshipsubdivisionnews.com/log/index.php/2010/03/05/montana-athletic-department-considering?blog=2
I'll cut and paste the relevant passage...
“I can get two in-states for the cost of one out-of-state,” O’Day said. “Instead of going to a coach and saying ‘You have 63 football scholarships.’ I can go to him and say, ‘OK you have 50 in-state kids and 13 out-of-state kids.’”
Although this would save money, O’Day said that proposal would factor into Montana’s competitiveness.
“What’s going to happen if we do that?” O’Day said. “We’re not going to win.”
Just an interesting counterpoint to the in-state argument...
ISUSID
pocabengal
Active member
I agree that you cannot have a mandatory split for in-state and out-of- state scholarships. The pool of players changes every year. I just hate the argument that favoring in-state football recruits is a bad idea. I think that having a loose goal of 60% idaho player roster would change the culture of the football program. Traditionally, Montana has had a majority of in-state players. They don't right now, but they have had in the last 15 years or so. I think that most people would agree that during this period Montana has won without having the most talented players.
I certainly would NOT agree that Montana has won without having the most talented players. In the past 15 years, the Griz have had 17 players who have been at least TWO-TIME first-team all Big Sky players, four of whom were THREE-TIME first-team all league. And that doesn't include players like Scott Gragg, who was first-team only once, then had a long and successful NFL career.
I will buy the argument that you want to focus your recruiting in Idaho and surrounding areas, because you want players who "fit in" -- culturally, socially and academically, as well as on the football field. But I've said it before and I'll say it again -- I've never seen as small a state as Montana produce so damn many good football players. All-Americans like Dave Dickenson, Marc Mariani, Chase Reynolds, Dane Fletcher (MSU), Lex Hilliard, Kroy Bierman and on and on the list goes.
Idaho does produce some good players, but the best go to BSU, Idaho, BYU, Utah and Utah State, and the Bengals get to scrap over the remainder. The best Montana players, year-in and year-out, stay in state. There are some occasional exceptions (like the QB at ASU or the WR who signed with BSU this year), but the two Montana schools keep 95 percent of their talent in-state.
Again, you want to get all the Idaho players who can help you. But there aren't as many in Idaho as there are in Montana, and it's a helluva lot tougher to keep the best ones here.
I will buy the argument that you want to focus your recruiting in Idaho and surrounding areas, because you want players who "fit in" -- culturally, socially and academically, as well as on the football field. But I've said it before and I'll say it again -- I've never seen as small a state as Montana produce so damn many good football players. All-Americans like Dave Dickenson, Marc Mariani, Chase Reynolds, Dane Fletcher (MSU), Lex Hilliard, Kroy Bierman and on and on the list goes.
Idaho does produce some good players, but the best go to BSU, Idaho, BYU, Utah and Utah State, and the Bengals get to scrap over the remainder. The best Montana players, year-in and year-out, stay in state. There are some occasional exceptions (like the QB at ASU or the WR who signed with BSU this year), but the two Montana schools keep 95 percent of their talent in-state.
Again, you want to get all the Idaho players who can help you. But there aren't as many in Idaho as there are in Montana, and it's a helluva lot tougher to keep the best ones here.
pocabengal
Active member
Skippy, I appreciate your argument about the talent level of the Montana players vs our players in the past; however, athlete by athlete we have recruited better athletes than Montana has as a rule. If you look at all-american honors, of course you will see more from a winning team (statistics are better). The team with the best athletes does not usually make the best team. The winning culture is better in Missoula - not the individual athletes as a rule. Second, yes it seems that Montana has an array of talented football players that come out of the high school level and there are just the two in-state division 1 programs vying for that talent, but the population to choose from is roughly half in Montana.
"...athlete by athlete we have recruited better athletes than Montana has as a rule." We'll just have to agree to disagree on that one, pocabengal. There was a brief window in the early 2000s where ISU may have recruited as many good athletes as Montana, but it was a very brief window.
If you look at the past 15 years, Montana has led the league in scoring defense two-thirds of the time. Idaho State has finished near the bottom of the league in scoring defense the vast majority of that time period. Great defense is about dominating physical ability, and Montana has had that for the past decade. Idaho State, by contrast, has not.
If you look at the past 15 years, Montana has led the league in scoring defense two-thirds of the time. Idaho State has finished near the bottom of the league in scoring defense the vast majority of that time period. Great defense is about dominating physical ability, and Montana has had that for the past decade. Idaho State, by contrast, has not.
pocabengal
Active member
Yes, great defense is about speed etc... All three phases of football are about talent, heart, culture, teamwork, and an overall feeling of the team not dissappointing itself, its school, and its supporters. It helps if a majority of your players see the broader sense of representing the community and institution. In the past, we have recruited great athletes. Most of them wished that they were offered from a PAC-10 or equivalent program. They settled for ISU and it shows. Pick players (in-state) and most of them have a sense of apprectiation for the opportunity. We will always need to fill positions with athletes from other regions that just are not available in Idaho every year.
pocabengal
Active member
I am sure it does. I don't expect very many people to understand. Hopefully, some of you have actually played the game.spartan said:
wow - let us all bow down to the internet all conference/all pro and his all knowing perspective on what idaho state needs to be a winner
jeez - can we skip the who has the biggest d*** on the internet/vastly more knowledge than anyone 'who has never played' bs...? can we?
jeez - can we skip the who has the biggest d*** on the internet/vastly more knowledge than anyone 'who has never played' bs...? can we?
pocabengal
Active member
I have no problem with your request Spartan. I don't know much, but I do Know enough about the game to not be "incredibly naive." I think we all want a winner soon. I'm just suggesting a different approach.spartan said:
Last season, in all of the Football Bowl Subdivision (FBS), there were 2 (count 'em, TWO) players from all of Montana. As mentioned earlier, Brock Osweiler of Kalispell played at Arizona State, and Jay Wisner of Bozeman played at Auburn.
How many players from the state of Idaho were participating in the FBS? There were at least two from Pocatello itself. There's probably 20 to 25 on Boise State's and Idaho's roster. There are some on Oregon's roster. There are some on the Utah FBS rosters.
To believe that Idaho State can sign these players is naive. Further, those of us who HAVE played the game know full well that recruiting out of state is essential to being competitive and successful. Whenever somebody throws that excuse that he "knows more than anybody else because he played the game," usually doesn't. Smart players never do throw that one out there.
I posted on another thread how ISU has signed and is playing more Idaho players than ever before; however, the winning has decreased AND the attendance has experienced a downward spiral since more local players have been signed.
Do you have ANY factual information that can at least offer a reason why a 60% roster of Idaho kids would be more successful? Is Taysom Hill not giving his all at Stanford because he's not from California? Could Boise State have won the national title last year if they had a majority of Idahoans on the roster? Maybe the Bronco's QB, Kellen Moore, just doesn't give it that extra fight when he's out there playing, because he doesn't have enough pride since he's not from Idaho. Pretty stupid, yeah?
How many players from the state of Idaho were participating in the FBS? There were at least two from Pocatello itself. There's probably 20 to 25 on Boise State's and Idaho's roster. There are some on Oregon's roster. There are some on the Utah FBS rosters.
To believe that Idaho State can sign these players is naive. Further, those of us who HAVE played the game know full well that recruiting out of state is essential to being competitive and successful. Whenever somebody throws that excuse that he "knows more than anybody else because he played the game," usually doesn't. Smart players never do throw that one out there.
I posted on another thread how ISU has signed and is playing more Idaho players than ever before; however, the winning has decreased AND the attendance has experienced a downward spiral since more local players have been signed.
Do you have ANY factual information that can at least offer a reason why a 60% roster of Idaho kids would be more successful? Is Taysom Hill not giving his all at Stanford because he's not from California? Could Boise State have won the national title last year if they had a majority of Idahoans on the roster? Maybe the Bronco's QB, Kellen Moore, just doesn't give it that extra fight when he's out there playing, because he doesn't have enough pride since he's not from Idaho. Pretty stupid, yeah?
