The Bobcat Nation

Here's the 1st in a series of weekly previews leading up to fall camp, on MSUBobcats.com:

http://www.msubobcats.com/news.php?sid=fb&nid=540

(Don't know how to make it an actual link...?)[/url]

You know since the athletic department over hauled the website (a year ago I think) the site has really been remarckably improved in just about every aspect. Hats off to Bill Lamberty and crew.

Can I call a football play if I give out really good compliments!?

Hmmm...

"They have no bearing on what transpires on the field," Kramer said. "Absolutely none. Yet, they capture peoples' imagination during a time of the year that the appetite is building. People are starving for football information, and the enthusiasm in Bobcat Nation is at an all-time high. It's rolling at high tide. And our people are interested in (preseason polls)."

Kramer must be lurking around here. Hey Coach, msla wants to call a play next season in case you missed it!

"They have no bearing on what transpires on the field," Kramer said. "Absolutely none"

Unfortunately, this is simply not the case. I'll use an example from basketball. Duke started off with a higher rank than Stanford/St. Joe's/Gonzaga, and as a result kept a higher rank, even after it lost a game while Stanford/St.Joe's remained unbeaten. In fact, Zaga had a very difficult time moving up, despite only having two losses.
Let me give you an example from the mess that is I-A football. Michigan started the season with a high rank in 2003. Although the two schools played comprable teams to get 3-0 records, Michigan was still ranked ahead of the University of Oregon despite losing to them in week 4.
I do not think that polls should matter. I think polls tend to favor big time programs and things should be decided on the field. But, polls determine who gets playoff spots in I-AA, and polls don't reflect what happens on the field (they tend to be sticky), so they are an important part of football, even though they shouldn't be.

theblackgecko wrote:

"They have no bearing on what transpires on the field," Kramer said. "Absolutely none"

Unfortunately, this is simply not the case. I'll use an example from basketball. Duke started off with a higher rank than Stanford/St. Joe's/Gonzaga, and as a result kept a higher rank, even after it lost a game while Stanford/St.Joe's remained unbeaten. In fact, Zaga had a very difficult time moving up, despite only having two losses.
Let me give you an example from the mess that is I-A football. Michigan started the season with a high rank in 2003. Although the two schools played comprable teams to get 3-0 records, Michigan was still ranked ahead of the University of Oregon despite losing to them in week 4.
I do not think that polls should matter. I think polls tend to favor big time programs and things should be decided on the field. But, polls determine who gets playoff spots in I-AA, and polls don't reflect what happens on the field (they tend to be sticky), so they are an important part of football, even though they shouldn't be.

I agree with both you and Kramer The polls decide the 1-AA playoffs and the play on the field decides the polls during the course of the year. So I'm just glad we are further up in the polls this year which should help us out if we play well on the field this year. Did I confuse anyone besides myself?

There are things about the polls that Kramer and ourselves can not control, but I personally enjoy it when the powers that inderestimate the Cat's (and they do every year). Another thing we can not contraol. If the Cats and Griz (or even Mcnese State) had the same record and and pulled off a great win I gaurente you the Griz (or Mcnese St.) will jump in the polls a lot farther than the Cats, likewise a lose and the Cats will fall a lot farther.

If the Cats and Griz (or even Mcnese State) had the same record and and pulled off a great win I gaurente you the Griz (or Mcnese St.) will jump in the polls a lot farther than the Cats, likewise a lose and the Cats will fall a lot farther.

I don't think this is entirely true mslacat. If you look at how high MSU was in the polls last season after all of the early losses one might wonder why they were even ranked as high as they were.


Wyoming 10-21 L
Gardner-Webb 38-3 W
Cal Poly 21-24 L
Northern Colorado 10-14 L
St. Mary's 40-0 W
Idaho State 17-23 L

You can't start out a season like this and expect the polls to be kind. The only credence to the statement is that teams that are consistantly powerhouses are probably ranked a bit higher early because there is more expected from them and since they consitantly do well they probably will continue to do so. Polls aren't an exact science, and I don't think there is a conspiracy against MSU in the polls.

mslacat wrote:If the Cats and Griz (or even Mcnese State) had the same record and and pulled off a great win I gaurente you the Griz (or Mcnese St.) will jump in the polls a lot farther than the Cats, likewise a lose and the Cats will fall a lot farther.

Actually, that is one problem with polls, that teams don't jump as much as they should after quality wins. It seems like teams need others to lose, rather than their own wins, to get ahead in the polls, especially near the top.

It's called respect and you've to earn it. They don't give it to you for 7-6 records. On the other had you do end up getting ranked higher, than you should be, by beating the Griz 2 years in a row. I'm not sure about the effect of getting smacked in the playoffs 2 years in a row.

Maybe we are earning respect by winning back-to-back Big Sky titles and improving our team every year. I will admit to a spanking in the playoffs last year, although most of the 3 TD win margin was poured on late, but I think the year before we gave McNeese State everything they could handle. I think, in a moment of honesty, you could get Cowboy fans to admit that we outplayed them that game and they were lucky to get out alive. Could it possibly be that not everything in this I-AA world revolves around how you play against the frizzlies? I wonder why Western Illinois isn't ranked #1 preseason since they beat you in the playoffs last year?!?! Amazing, the pathetic high-and-mightiness! (is that a word?! )

Bozo, can you explain how you're 'improving' every year? Your record doesn't indicate that and you got crushed in the first game of the playoffs last year. To the casual outside observer it would appear that the Scats have stagnated at best.

Maybe we are earning respect by winning back-to-back Big Sky titles and improving our team every year.

At what point did you feel the cats could handle the cowboys? Was it right before half when you lost your starting center and had to have a try out for a new one? All the respect the cats have earned the last 2 years revolves from beating the Griz. Period.

Keep telling yourself that, jagur.

jagur1 wrote:At what point did you feel the cats could handle the cowboys? Was it right before half when you lost your starting center and had to have a try out for a new one? All the respect the cats have earned the last 2 years revolves from beating the Griz. Period.

Fact is, we were in both playoff games until late. You're right though during the McNeese game, having to insert a center that didn't play the position definitely hurt - and the fumbled snaps showed it... but notice that we didn't cry about it and claim that "injuries... if only...' that's more of a grizzly thing. Regarding the respect the cats have garnered though, hop off your grizzly high-horse, you're not the gods of everything football. We did more than just beat you the past 2 years, we WON THE BIG SKY CONFERENCE, THE TOUGHEST CONFERENCE IN 1-AA FOOTBALL (in 03 and possibly 02?) Last I checked, we had to beat several other good teams in order to do that. And no, the BSC is not just the best because you're in it... That determination is made by the folks who study it and it measures ALL teams in the conference, their W\L, stats, schedule strength, etc. Nobody in Bobcatville is content at 7-6. Several things just didn't go our way last year and I think we all know the record could have been much much better. Oh well, we're still bettter than we'ver been since 1984 and getting better. This could be the season we've been buliding towards, when the O gels as the D already has. If not , maybe the year after. One thing's for sure though... don't kid yourself - Kramer has rebuild the PROGRAM and we're not going anywhere any time soon.

It is very nice to see Cat fans who mention other accomplishments other than victories over the Grizzlies.
That being said, I wish I could find more Cat fans (considering where I live, it shouldn't be hard) who know more about the team other than those two victories. Obviously, people on this board know that Bobcat football has other accomplishments, but people in Bozeman should know more about the team.

catatac wrote:Regarding the respect the cats have garnered though, hop off your grizzly high-horse, you're not the gods of everything football.

While the Griz are not the gods of everything football, they have had a target on their back in the BSC for a long time now. Every team guns for them at the beginning of the year. Attendence at PSU/EWU jumps by 10,000 when they play the Griz and the Bobcats sell out when they play the Griz. Fans want to see the Griz (some home, some travelling).
So, the Griz aren't the dieties of football, but they are the biggest show in the BSC.

catatac wrote:And no, the BSC is not just the best because you're in it... That determination is made by the folks who study it and it measures ALL teams in the conference, their W\L, stats, schedule strength, etc.

I have to disagree with that statement. Even as a Grizzly hater, you have to admit that the conference would be substantially weaker if the Griz were to switch conferences or move to 1-A. The BSC rating would go down. Just as it would if MSU left and was replaced with an unknown Div. II team moving up.

the conferance as a whole is down since the big three left. i think most of the griz conference titles have been since they left. i'll take a conference title regardless.

2003 Final Gridiron Power Index

I-AA.org

The Gridiron Power Index (GPI), the BCS-style ranking for I-AA and a top indicator of playoff selection, through the end of the 2003 season has national champion Delaware ranked #1. The Conferences (including Independents) finished:

1. BSC (Big Sky Conference) - 25.85
2. GFC (Gateway Football Conference) - 27.91
3. A10 (Atlantic 10 Conference) - 35.53
4. SLC (Southland Football Conference) - 43.46
5. Ivy (Ivy League) – 50.73
6. PL (Patriot League) – 52.23
7. SoCon (Southern Conference) – 53.18
8. Indep (I-AA Independents) – 57.72
9. OVC (Ohio Valley Conference) – 62.86
10. MEAC (Mid-Eastern Athletic Conference) – 74.23
11. SWAC (Southwestern Athletic Conference) – 75.9
12. BSouth (Big South Conference) – 82.26
13. PFL (Pioneer Football League) – 88-8
14. NEC (Northeastern Conference) – 94.46
15. MAAC (Metro-Atlantic Athletic Conference) – 102.55

Gridiron Power Index Formula
Losses+Quartile+CR

Column Definitions
Sched = Actual Massey Schedule Strength Rating (Best Rank is assigned a value of 1)
Quartile = Sched divided by 25
ARC= Sum of 6 computer ranking numbers (removing the max and min number from the 8 used)
CR = (ARC + 2 polls used)/8
Computer rankings:
MAS = Massey, MAT = Matthews, SAG = Sagarin, CPA = Wrathell, RTH = Rothman, SEL = Self, ASH = Ashburn, SAU = Sauceda.
Polls:
SNW = Sports Network, UAA = ESPN/USA Today

And whitemeat, of course the conference would be much weaker without you in it, that's not my arguement. My arguement is that you are not THE ONLY reason why the BSC is the strongest. Now if you'll excuse me... I hear a big trout calling my name...

rainbow, cuttthrout, or brownie???

I caught a nice 23 inch, 4 pound rainbow a couple of weeks ago.

Cat-theotherwhitemeat wrote:rainbow, cuttthrout, or brownie???

I caught a nice 23 inch, 4 pound rainbow a couple of weeks ago.

Sweet - that's a nice fish. I caught a few, but nothing over 16" last night. Browns and bows...