The Bobcat Nation

so it happens around this time every year. the smack (although pretty weak this year) starts flowing between the cats and griz. they mention how they've owned us the last two decades, and we mention the national championships. 3-2. now, i need to admit i cringe a little when people brag about that 0-0 tie. however, we went down as co-champs. seems to me the griz should no all about sharing championships. how many of their big sky titles have been shared? yet they always beat their chest about being conference champs the last 10 plus years? seems to me, like many things the griz want to have it both ways. if we get no credit for a shared championship, i can't for the life of me figure out why they'd give themselves credit for a shared championship. can the cats really help it that they were good at a time where stupid rules allowed you to tie? can they really help the fact that their football program started before 1990? hell, some dude on egriz is throwing out records like 3-20 and 0-23! i honestly think that some people over there really think football started in 1990. either way it's weak. griz suck. they're going down tomorrow. cats win by 10+. ESG...GCG!!!!

lets talk about fcs champs. not little guy football, naia ,WHATEVER.Its about D1AA football now. Move on,get over it, let go of the pain.

notacatfan wrote:lets talk about fcs champs. not little guy football, naia ,WHATEVER.Its about D1AA football now. Move on,get over it, let go of the pain.

oh i see, so 1AA is man football huh? the rest is little guy football? what do you think FBS teams call the griz?

study hall is over. get to class.

were not in the the fbs lets talk fcs

I do find it somewhat ironic that Cat fans so highly trumpet their three national titles, two of which came at lower levels, but then say that the dominating record the Griz have in the series shouldn't be considered because the cats were playing at a lower level much of the time. Seems to be some both-sided-mouth-talking going on there.

Also there is not a bsc champ game so that is the way it is.

notacatfan wrote:were not in the the fbs lets talk fcs

you're missing the point. i said it's all annoying. i even said i don't like hearing about the '56 championship team. but it doesn't change the fact that we tied for the championship just as the griz have tied for theirs. your points are stupid for three reasons, and i'll try to dumb them down so you understand. 1. it's not like we were playing inferior competition. we were playing teams in our same division. do high school state championships not mean anything because they are not college? and d2 championships mean nothing because they are not 1AA? and i suppose using that logic 1AA championships mean nothing because they are not FBS? pretty lame attempt. 2. your point that wew were playing little kid football is as gay is the day is long. one of the stupidest things i have ever heard. to the rest of the country, FCS is little kid football too. even if your beloved griz win a chipper, apparently it won't mean anything because you are playing little kid football. and 3, you are an idiot so your points will be taken as such. now get to class so your parents don't have to call and excuse you little man.

Did not tie for NC. Tied for bcs no champ game. two diff things.I thought iwas stupid.I have to get back to class.

So just to be clear I need to understand this. We won the 1956 National Championship in NAIA but it doesn't count because we were in a lower division than the Griz, but when we played UM that year we won 33 to 14? Seems to me that the Griz should have been playing at the same level if they got beat 33 to 14 right?

notacatfan wrote:Did not tie for NC. Tied for bcs no champ game. two diff things.I thought iwas stupid.I have to get back to class.

And to clarify more, ties for conference championships do count, whereas ties for national championships do not

cats2506 wrote:

notacatfan wrote:Did not tie for NC. Tied for bcs no champ game. two diff things.I thought iwas stupid.I have to get back to class.

And to clarify more, ties for conference championships do count, whereas ties for national championships do not

??? Didnt you tie for one of your national titles?? Something about a coin flip to win???

Eastcoastgriz wrote:

cats2506 wrote:

notacatfan wrote:Did not tie for NC. Tied for bcs no champ game. two diff things.I thought iwas stupid.I have to get back to class.

And to clarify more, ties for conference championships do count, whereas ties for national championships do not

??? Didnt you tie for one of your national titles?? Something about a coin flip to win???

That's exactly what we are trying to clarify with notacatfan. He is saying a tie doesn't count, but doesn't seem to discount anytime the Griz have tied for the BSC title. Can't have it both ways. Also, I notice people seem to not want to talk about if 1956 counts at the NAIA level since we pounded the Griz that year.

Weren't the Griz in the Pac-10 when the Cats won their NAIA championship?

I'm just sayin'.....

rtb wrote:

Eastcoastgriz wrote:

cats2506 wrote:

notacatfan wrote:Did not tie for NC. Tied for bcs no champ game. two diff things.I thought iwas stupid.I have to get back to class.

And to clarify more, ties for conference championships do count, whereas ties for national championships do not

??? Didnt you tie for one of your national titles?? Something about a coin flip to win???

That's exactly what we are trying to clarify with notacatfan. He is saying a tie doesn't count, but doesn't seem to discount anytime the Griz have tied for the BSC title. Can't have it both ways. Also, I notice people seem to not want to talk about if 1956 counts at the NAIA level since we pounded the Griz that year.

Sure 1956 counts. As an NAIA championship. So, are you then agreeing that the Griz have completely dominated the series against the Cats? As you said, can't have it both ways.

Cat-theotherwhitemeat wrote:Weren't the Griz in the Pac-10 when the Cats won their NAIA championship?

I'm just sayin'.....

And we beat you that year 33 to 14.

I'm just sayin'

GrizinWashington wrote:So, are you then agreeing that the Griz have completely dominated the series against the Cats? As you said, can't have it both ways.

I agree with that statement that overall the series is slanted to the Griz. That is also why I hate you bastards so much!

rtb wrote:

GrizinWashington wrote:So, are you then agreeing that the Griz have completely dominated the series against the Cats? As you said, can't have it both ways.

I agree with that statement that overall the series is slanted to the Griz. That is also why I hate you bastards so much!

Aaaahhhhhaaaa....


Hey, wait a minute.....

My point was u cant compare big sky titles to NC s

notacatfan wrote:My point was u cant compare big sky titles to NC s

That's weird. This doesn't seem like you were talking about anything about National Championships.

lets talk about fcs champs. not little guy football, naia ,WHATEVER.Its about D1AA football now. Move on,get over it, let go of the pain.

So, back to your original point. Does it bother you that when we won our National Championship in NAIA we also beat you 33 to 14 that year? You're mighty team got beat by a team that you claim was playing little guy football.

what i am saying is u cant compare the big sky title to the NC. thier is no game to decide the out right champ if it is shared.