Did Cats win "first" championship?

[Griznationalist]

Is this really true? I would appreciate it if someone could disprove it so we can move on.


Bobcats didn't WIN 3 nat'l championships
by LakGriz on Tue Dec 02, 2008 10:39 pm

How many times have you heard that the bobcats have "won" three national championships?

How many times have you heard that the bobcats have "won" national championships at three levels?

Guess what: the bobcats never "won" an NAIA championship in 1956.

That was the first year the NAIA proclaimed a national championship game, Dec. 22, 1956, in Little Rock, Arkansas, the so-called Aluminum Bowl.

There was a game played that day between Montana State and St. Joseph's.

Ask the bobcats who won, and what was the score.

The fact is: NOBODY WON. NOBODY scored.

How can you "win" something if you don't beat somebody?

The NAIA looked at that 0-0 final score, with nobody winning, and DECLARED co-champions.

And that, my friends, is how the bobcats "won" their first national championship. Scored nothing, beat nobody, and they're national champs.

You could look it up at NAIA National Football Championship at Wikipedia.

[GOKATS]

You have really worn out your welcome..............

Take a hike............

[Hawks86]

Thanks for posting.This kinda puts a wrinkle into the whole Grizzly Big Sky Championship streak, doesn't it?

[Griznationalist]

All I asked was whether it was true.

I happen to agree that the Griz did not win any Big Sky Championships in any years they tied in conference records with teams they lost to in the regular season.

That cuts both ways, by the way. I've seen the Cats claim conference titles the same way (1982, and so on).

But the question I asked was, is it really true that the score of the Bobcats' first national championship game was 0-0.

[Eastcoastgriz]

All I asked was whether it was true.

I happen to agree that the Griz did not win any Big Sky Championships in any years they tied in conference records with teams they lost to in the regular season.

That cuts both ways, by the way. I've seen the Cats claim conference titles the same way (1982, and so on).

But the question I asked was, is it really true that the score of the Bobcats' first national championship game was 0-0.

Yes it was 0-0. So the post is correct, they did not win the national championship, it was awarded to them.

[TomCat88]

All I asked was whether it was true.

I happen to agree that the Griz did not win any Big Sky Championships in any years they tied in conference records with teams they lost to in the regular season.

That cuts both ways, by the way. I've seen the Cats claim conference titles the same way (1982, and so on).

But the question I asked was, is it really true that the score of the Bobcats' first national championship game was 0-0.

Yes it was 0-0. So the post is correct, they did not win the national championship, it was awarded to them.

Of course they did. They didn't win the championship game they played, but they won all year long to earn the right to play in that game. Since the game ended in a tie, they and St. Francis were declared national champions. Kind of like UM has won 11 straight Big Sky championships. They didn't even beat the team they were tied with a bunch of times, but still won enough games to be called champion.

MSU, by tying with the team they shared the national championship with, did more to earn that title than UM did in the years it lost to the team it tied with.

MSU can also make a claim for the 1964 Division II championship. That year the Division was split into four regions and each region played a championship game. MSU won its game and thus tied three other schools for the national championship. Since they never lost to any of those other three teams during the season, they should have a share of that championship as well if using the BSC logic on giving a share of a title to a team even though it got beat by the team it is tied with.

MSU actually had the 1964 year listed on its reader board outside the stadium. I think Sonny Holland had it taken down because he thought the case for calling that team a national champ was too flimsy.

[Griznationalist]

All I asked was whether it was true.

I happen to agree that the Griz did not win any Big Sky Championships in any years they tied in conference records with teams they lost to in the regular season.

That cuts both ways, by the way. I've seen the Cats claim conference titles the same way (1982, and so on).

But the question I asked was, is it really true that the score of the Bobcats' first national championship game was 0-0.

Yes it was 0-0. So the post is correct, they did not win the national championship, it was awarded to them.

Of course they did. They didn't win the championship game they played, but they won all year long to earn the right to play in that game. Since the game ended in a tie, they and St. Francis were declared national champions. Kind of like UM has won 11 straight Big Sky championships. They didn't even beat the team they were tied with a bunch of times, but still won enough games to be called champion.

MSU, by tying with the team they shared the national championship with, did more to earn that title than UM did in the years it lost to the team it tied with.

MSU can also make a claim for the 1964 Division II championship. That year the Division was split into four regions and each region played a championship game. MSU won its game and thus tied three other schools for the national championship. Since they never lost to any of those other three teams during the season, they should have a share of that championship as well if using the BSC logic on giving a share of a title to a team even though it got beat by the team it is tied with.

MSU actually had the 1964 year listed on its reader board outside the stadium. I think Sonny Holland had it taken down because he thought the case for calling that team a national champ was too flimsy.

Oh my god, there's some logic for you. I don't buy the Grizzlies' bogus claim to a string of 11 straight conference championships. If the Grizzlies claim to "win" the conference just because they happen to at the end of the season tie in conference win-loss records with a team (or teams, in a three-way tie) they lost to during the regular season, then they didn't win conference. Same for the cats. The Cats' supposed "win" in the zero-to-zero (0-0) championship game of 1956 is bad enough, but to claim a championship in 1964 under the logic presented above? Surreal. LOL

[WeedKillinCat]

You can tell that since the Griz are on the cusp of a possible 3rd championship, the fans are trying to minimize our first one. Yes it was awarded to MSU, get over it. Not much different than the writers picking football champions prior to the BS BSC.

[Griznationalist]

Oh my. 0-0 in '56.

Whatever.

But good for Sonny for taking down the '64 sign board.

[TIrwin24]

We've got 3 NC's b!tch. Get over it.

[Griznationalist]

Hmmmmmmmm. LOL (0-0)

[KittieKop]

Is it ever tiring being such a tool? I think the last pretense of being an "objective" griz fan is gone.

[Hell's Bells]

Since I live in mother's basement I have no other pasttime then to go on a rivals messageboard and talk smack on a athletics board....

[GOKATS]

Since I live in mother's basement I have no other pasttime then to go on a rivals messageboard and talk smack on a athletics board....

[bozbobcat]

You can tell that since the Griz are on the cusp of a possible 3rd championship, the fans are trying to minimize our first one. Yes it was awarded to MSU, get over it. Not much different than the writers picking football champions prior to the BS BSC.

That's what I thought. We were declared national champions, much like USC was declared the AP national champion in 2004. It seems to me like that should count. So MSU has three national championships...that's not a bad thing.

[CapitalCityCat]

and this is reason 36,879 I hate the griz

[cats2506]

This guy really seems to have a problem.

[tampa_griz]

You've gotta be shi**ing me. One of the Cats' vaunted championships came from a fuc*ing 0-0 decsion? I don't believe it. There's no way in hell anyone would brag about that. Impossible.

[WiZaRdOfOz]

You've gotta be shi**ing me. One of the Cats' vaunted championships came from a fuc*ing 0-0 decsion? I don't believe it. There's no way in hell anyone would brag about that. Impossible.

Hahaha what a joker. If a national championship was awarded to MSU then I'm pretty sure it still stands today as a national championship. Are you just discounting that entire season? No team was labeled as the national champion in your eyes? Lol ridiculous. I just read this post and chuckle. Awful long time ago to bring up and try to hate on...seems fairly immature. To use the popular acronym...JMO.

[hokeyfine]

if the roles were reversed and it was the griz who won in '56, they would be crowing like no other. the fact that the cats have more national championships in all sports just grates griz fans.