Selection show

[MountainCat]

I think what we learned is how important SOS is. You need a tough non-conference schedule to get seeded highly unless you go undefeated.

Most important thing is wins. SOS high with 4 losses doesn't help ask all those teams that schedule 2 FBS games.

It helped USD who had 8 DI wins and 1 ranked win. Didn't have another win one could even consider a quality win.

Then my question would be how their SOS is high if no top teams other than NDSU and SDSU?

That's a damn good question. Northern State (DII), Northern Iowa, Youngstown, Murray State, Indiana State certainly couldn't have helped. I'd guess Wisconsin and the DSUs pushed it up. Pretty wild you win 1 of 3 games that bumped your SOS way up and somehow that makes you top 4.

How is that different than Davis? Two losses to #1/#2 plus FBS...then a win over barely Top 10 Idaho & playoff bubble dUMb. Besides, Davis played 4 games against SSU, Poly, UNCU, and PSU, teams that are a total of 10-36. Plus East Texas A&M (3-8) and Dixie State (1-11).

Total of 6 wins against teams a combined 13-55.

Thats the state of FCS football.

2 top 15 wins, 1 top 10 win, plus 10 DI wins, not 8. That's a big difference. SOS was 6 spots different between the two. The Southern Utah win was better than any other win USD has as well. Southern Utah was probably the first team out.

I guess if you don't want to give credit for NDSU being in a totally different league than Idaho & you want to punish USD for PSU cancelling a game, then, again, thats a difference of opinion. I personally would have bumped USD to #3 & dropped NDSU to #4...but, again. Reasonable differences of opinion. I also would have punished Davis a little bit for being so overmatched against MSU. But, whatever. Its really a coin flip in my mind.

Totally different than bias, or one team being screwed, or other such hoo-hah.

USD was down 11 with 4 to go. So NDSU dominated the bulk of 2nd half. Many probably just looked at UCD/MSU final.

I don't know what to say. Going into this weekend, the Stats poll, the Coaches poll, the Massey computer rankings ALL put USD above Davis.

Then USD beat NDSU.

Its hard to call it bias when EVERY DATA POINT suggests that USD is better, then they beat the #1 team.

And people here at BN call it 'bias' that Davis doesn't jump ahead in the polls after that.

It really cracks me up.

Knock it off Onceacat…. You’re being all logical and stuff, this is an sensical ci versational about emotional factuations….

[tetoncat]

I think what we learned is how important SOS is. You need a tough non-conference schedule to get seeded highly unless you go undefeated.

Most important thing is wins. SOS high with 4 losses doesn't help ask all those teams that schedule 2 FBS games.

It helped USD who had 8 DI wins and 1 ranked win. Didn't have another win one could even consider a quality win.

Then my question would be how their SOS is high if no top teams other than NDSU and SDSU?

That's a damn good question. Northern State (DII), Northern Iowa, Youngstown, Murray State, Indiana State certainly couldn't have helped. I'd guess Wisconsin and the DSUs pushed it up. Pretty wild you win 1 of 3 games that bumped your SOS way up and somehow that makes you top 4.

How is that different than Davis? Two losses to #1/#2 plus FBS...then a win over barely Top 10 Idaho & playoff bubble dUMb. Besides, Davis played 4 games against SSU, Poly, UNCU, and PSU, teams that are a total of 10-36. Plus East Texas A&M (3-8) and Dixie State (1-11).

Total of 6 wins against teams a combined 13-55.

Thats the state of FCS football.

2 top 15 wins, 1 top 10 win, plus 10 DI wins, not 8. That's a big difference. SOS was 6 spots different between the two. The Southern Utah win was better than any other win USD has as well. Southern Utah was probably the first team out.

I guess if you don't want to give credit for NDSU being in a totally different league than Idaho & you want to punish USD for PSU cancelling a game, then, again, thats a difference of opinion. I personally would have bumped USD to #3 & dropped NDSU to #4...but, again. Reasonable differences of opinion. I also would have punished Davis a little bit for being so overmatched against MSU. But, whatever. Its really a coin flip in my mind.

Totally different than bias, or one team being screwed, or other such hoo-hah.

USD was down 11 with 4 to go. So NDSU dominated the bulk of 2nd half. Many probably just looked at UCD/MSU final.

I don't know what to say. Going into this weekend, the Stats poll, the Coaches poll, the Massey computer rankings ALL put USD above Davis.

Then USD beat NDSU.

Its hard to call it bias when EVERY DATA POINT suggests that USD is better, then they beat the #1 team.

And people here at BN call it 'bias' that Davis doesn't jump ahead in the polls after that.

It really cracks me up.

I have never said they should jump ahead. Questioning the DATA POINTS that are used, ALL SEASON, AND IN THE SELECTION PROCESS. Big Sky got 5 teams in. That would indicate it is the top conference. But, MVFC teams started higher and as l9ng as losses were to each other they stayed there. I also felt Cats with 3 top 10 wins and a an FBS win, giving up 0 first half points at home and only 29 on road in FCS all year deserved to be 1, even before NDSU lost. We can have a discussion without you having a superiority complex. We get it. Your opinion is the same as the committee. Good for you.

[MSU01]

The more I look at the bracket the more I think the committee largely did a very good job this year. The Top 5 were exactly how I had them ranked and my only minor gripe with the Top 8 seeds is that I think Idaho should be ahead of Mercer. Idaho didn't do themselves any favors though by playing one score games with the likes of Cal Poly and Weber at home. MSU beats both those teams by 40 points if they had played in Bozeman this year.

I'm not sure if UNH deserved a seed but then again I'm also not sure if any of the unseeded teams really did either! SEMO likely has the best argument since they were an auto-bid team and highly ranked for much of the year. They're definitely my pick as the unseeded team most likely to pull a 2021 SDSU and make a run to the quarters or semis.

[jgrilley406]

Most important thing is wins. SOS high with 4 losses doesn't help ask all those teams that schedule 2 FBS games.

It helped USD who had 8 DI wins and 1 ranked win. Didn't have another win one could even consider a quality win.

Then my question would be how their SOS is high if no top teams other than NDSU and SDSU?

That's a damn good question. Northern State (DII), Northern Iowa, Youngstown, Murray State, Indiana State certainly couldn't have helped. I'd guess Wisconsin and the DSUs pushed it up. Pretty wild you win 1 of 3 games that bumped your SOS way up and somehow that makes you top 4.

How is that different than Davis? Two losses to #1/#2 plus FBS...then a win over barely Top 10 Idaho & playoff bubble dUMb. Besides, Davis played 4 games against SSU, Poly, UNCU, and PSU, teams that are a total of 10-36. Plus East Texas A&M (3-8) and Dixie State (1-11).

Total of 6 wins against teams a combined 13-55.

Thats the state of FCS football.

2 top 15 wins, 1 top 10 win, plus 10 DI wins, not 8. That's a big difference. SOS was 6 spots different between the two. The Southern Utah win was better than any other win USD has as well. Southern Utah was probably the first team out.

I guess if you don't want to give credit for NDSU being in a totally different league than Idaho & you want to punish USD for PSU cancelling a game, then, again, thats a difference of opinion. I personally would have bumped USD to #3 & dropped NDSU to #4...but, again. Reasonable differences of opinion. I also would have punished Davis a little bit for being so overmatched against MSU. But, whatever. Its really a coin flip in my mind.

Totally different than bias, or one team being screwed, or other such hoo-hah.

USD was down 11 with 4 to go. So NDSU dominated the bulk of 2nd half. Many probably just looked at UCD/MSU final.

I don't know what to say. Going into this weekend, the Stats poll, the Coaches poll, the Massey computer rankings ALL put USD above Davis.

Then USD beat NDSU.

Its hard to call it bias when EVERY DATA POINT suggests that USD is better, then they beat the #1 team.

And people here at BN call it 'bias' that Davis doesn't jump ahead in the polls after that.

It really cracks me up.

I have never said they should jump ahead. Questioning the DATA POINTS that are used, ALL SEASON, AND IN THE SELECTION PROCESS. Big Sky got 5 teams in. That would indicate it is the top conference. But, MVFC teams started higher and as l9ng as losses were to each other they stayed there. I also felt Cats with 3 top 10 wins and a an FBS win, giving up 0 first half points at home and only 29 on road in FCS all year deserved to be 1, even before NDSU lost. We can have a discussion without you having a superiority complex. We get it. Your opinion is the same as the committee. Good for you.

Have to remember Missouri State and Delaware were ineligible this year but the committee saw those teams as ranked teams in a sense cause they were easily in the playoffs if they weren’t in transition to FBS. So MVFC theoretically would have had 5 teams in and Delaware is in so two teams are out and I’m guessing NAU would’ve been one of those teams with their resume. So Big Sky I would still say overall isn’t better than MVFC. Even when they had the MVFC vs Big Sky challenge (idk if they still doing it or keeping track) MVFC won more challenges too.

[TomCat88]

BSC is the only conference in top 8 with a FBS win and it has two: Idaho over Wyoming and MSU over New Mexico.

[tetoncat]

It helped USD who had 8 DI wins and 1 ranked win. Didn't have another win one could even consider a quality win.

Then my question would be how their SOS is high if no top teams other than NDSU and SDSU?

That's a damn good question. Northern State (DII), Northern Iowa, Youngstown, Murray State, Indiana State certainly couldn't have helped. I'd guess Wisconsin and the DSUs pushed it up. Pretty wild you win 1 of 3 games that bumped your SOS way up and somehow that makes you top 4.

How is that different than Davis? Two losses to #1/#2 plus FBS...then a win over barely Top 10 Idaho & playoff bubble dUMb. Besides, Davis played 4 games against SSU, Poly, UNCU, and PSU, teams that are a total of 10-36. Plus East Texas A&M (3-8) and Dixie State (1-11).

Total of 6 wins against teams a combined 13-55.

Thats the state of FCS football.

2 top 15 wins, 1 top 10 win, plus 10 DI wins, not 8. That's a big difference. SOS was 6 spots different between the two. The Southern Utah win was better than any other win USD has as well. Southern Utah was probably the first team out.

I guess if you don't want to give credit for NDSU being in a totally different league than Idaho & you want to punish USD for PSU cancelling a game, then, again, thats a difference of opinion. I personally would have bumped USD to #3 & dropped NDSU to #4...but, again. Reasonable differences of opinion. I also would have punished Davis a little bit for being so overmatched against MSU. But, whatever. Its really a coin flip in my mind.

Totally different than bias, or one team being screwed, or other such hoo-hah.

USD was down 11 with 4 to go. So NDSU dominated the bulk of 2nd half. Many probably just looked at UCD/MSU final.

I don't know what to say. Going into this weekend, the Stats poll, the Coaches poll, the Massey computer rankings ALL put USD above Davis.

Then USD beat NDSU.

Its hard to call it bias when EVERY DATA POINT suggests that USD is better, then they beat the #1 team.

And people here at BN call it 'bias' that Davis doesn't jump ahead in the polls after that.

It really cracks me up.

I have never said they should jump ahead. Questioning the DATA POINTS that are used, ALL SEASON, AND IN THE SELECTION PROCESS. Big Sky got 5 teams in. That would indicate it is the top conference. But, MVFC teams started higher and as l9ng as losses were to each other they stayed there. I also felt Cats with 3 top 10 wins and a an FBS win, giving up 0 first half points at home and only 29 on road in FCS all year deserved to be 1, even before NDSU lost. We can have a discussion without you having a superiority complex. We get it. Your opinion is the same as the committee. Good for you.

Have to remember Missouri State and Delaware were ineligible this year but the committee saw those teams as ranked teams in a sense cause they were easily in the playoffs if they weren’t in transition to FBS. So MVFC theoretically would have had 5 teams in and Delaware is in so two teams are out and I’m guessing NAU would’ve been one of those teams with their resume. So Big Sky I would still say overall isn’t better than MVFC. Even when they had the MVFC vs Big Sky challenge (idk if they still doing it or keeping track) MVFC won more challenges too.

Valid points. My beef is Idaho. Lost to Oregon, Cats, and UCD. Feel like better than 8 seed. SoS seems so subjective. New Mexico would beat 90% of FCS teams. Top 1-8 are 1 level, 9-16 another, Teams 16-30 are similar, below that top should always win. If you are squeaking by those lower levels and losing to all in top the SoS shouldn't help you.

[Montanabob]

again the NCAA did a bait and switch. says no regionalization and then publishes a regionalized bracket. 3 best BSC teams on one side and 2 best MvFC on the other.
in their actual selection post they say regionalization for 9 to 24. surprised they didnt make NAU go to wash-gris stadium.

[jgrilley406]

Ya agree about Idaho. Easily should’ve been ahead of Mercer…FBS win and good wins against playoff teams ACU NAU. While Mercer no wins against playoff teams and an ugly loss against Samford.

[MSU01]

again the NCAA did a bait and switch. says no regionalization and then publishes a regionalized bracket. 3 best BSC teams on one side and 2 best MvFC on the other.
in their actual selection post they say regionalization for 9 to 24. surprised they didnt make NAU go to wash-gris stadium.

I'm not sure how it's possible to make a bracket that doesn't seem somewhat regionalized when the top 5 seeds overall and 6 of the top 8 seeds all come from the Dakotas or the Big Sky. Could they have put Idaho at 6 or 7 on the other side of the bracket? Sure, but where the new process was intended to avoid regionalization is in the second round and the matchups if the higher seeded teams win would be:

#1 MSU vs #16 New Hampshire
#2 NDSU vs #15 Abilene Christian
#3 SDSU vs #14 Montana
#4 USD vs #13 Tarleton State
#5 UC Davis vs #12 Illinois State
#6 UIW vs #11 Villanova
#7 Mercer vs #10 Rhode Island
#8 Idaho vs #9 Richmond

Under last year's format it seems highly likely that the Griz would've been sent to Idaho in the second round instead of to SDSU, UIW would've been matched up with one of the two Texas teams instead of Villanova, and Illinois State would've been sent to one of the MVFC schools that are a lot closer than California. If the goal of the new format was to create more balanced second round matchups and not punish the higher seeds or reward the lower seeds due to simple geography, then they definitely appear to have succeeded.

[4KornerKat]

I think seeding through 16 is a huge improvement.

They even found a way to "seed" SEMO by pairing them up with the Illinois State team that can't host the game due to stadium conflict.

I really think this ends up being a pretty good bracket.

[Prodigal Cat]

Then my question would be how their SOS is high if no top teams other than NDSU and SDSU?

That's a damn good question. Northern State (DII), Northern Iowa, Youngstown, Murray State, Indiana State certainly couldn't have helped. I'd guess Wisconsin and the DSUs pushed it up. Pretty wild you win 1 of 3 games that bumped your SOS way up and somehow that makes you top 4.

How is that different than Davis? Two losses to #1/#2 plus FBS...then a win over barely Top 10 Idaho & playoff bubble dUMb. Besides, Davis played 4 games against SSU, Poly, UNCU, and PSU, teams that are a total of 10-36. Plus East Texas A&M (3-8) and Dixie State (1-11).

Total of 6 wins against teams a combined 13-55.

Thats the state of FCS football.

2 top 15 wins, 1 top 10 win, plus 10 DI wins, not 8. That's a big difference. SOS was 6 spots different between the two. The Southern Utah win was better than any other win USD has as well. Southern Utah was probably the first team out.

I guess if you don't want to give credit for NDSU being in a totally different league than Idaho & you want to punish USD for PSU cancelling a game, then, again, thats a difference of opinion. I personally would have bumped USD to #3 & dropped NDSU to #4...but, again. Reasonable differences of opinion. I also would have punished Davis a little bit for being so overmatched against MSU. But, whatever. Its really a coin flip in my mind.

Totally different than bias, or one team being screwed, or other such hoo-hah.

USD was down 11 with 4 to go. So NDSU dominated the bulk of 2nd half. Many probably just looked at UCD/MSU final.

I don't know what to say. Going into this weekend, the Stats poll, the Coaches poll, the Massey computer rankings ALL put USD above Davis.

Then USD beat NDSU.

Its hard to call it bias when EVERY DATA POINT suggests that USD is better, then they beat the #1 team.

And people here at BN call it 'bias' that Davis doesn't jump ahead in the polls after that.

It really cracks me up.

I have never said they should jump ahead. Questioning the DATA POINTS that are used, ALL SEASON, AND IN THE SELECTION PROCESS. Big Sky got 5 teams in. That would indicate it is the top conference. But, MVFC teams started higher and as l9ng as losses were to each other they stayed there. I also felt Cats with 3 top 10 wins and a an FBS win, giving up 0 first half points at home and only 29 on road in FCS all year deserved to be 1, even before NDSU lost. We can have a discussion without you having a superiority complex. We get it. Your opinion is the same as the committee. Good for you.

Have to remember Missouri State and Delaware were ineligible this year but the committee saw those teams as ranked teams in a sense cause they were easily in the playoffs if they weren’t in transition to FBS. So MVFC theoretically would have had 5 teams in and Delaware is in so two teams are out and I’m guessing NAU would’ve been one of those teams with their resume. So Big Sky I would still say overall isn’t better than MVFC. Even when they had the MVFC vs Big Sky challenge (idk if they still doing it or keeping track) MVFC won more challenges too.

Valid points. My beef is Idaho. Lost to Oregon, Cats, and UCD. Feel like better than 8 seed. SoS seems so subjective. New Mexico would beat 90% of FCS teams. Top 1-8 are 1 level, 9-16 another, Teams 16-30 are similar, below that top should always win. If you are squeaking by those lower levels and losing to all in top the SoS shouldn't help you.

Listening to the Idaho Tubs at the Club guys and they are pissed. But they are optimistic for the MSU rematch because they, and stop me if you've heard this before, fixed their offense the last 5 weeks. *checks notes their last five games, Cal Poly, EWU, PSU, Weber, ISU.

[MSU01]

Listening to the Idaho Tubs at the Club guys and they are pissed. But they are optimistic for the MSU rematch because they, and stop me if you've heard this before, fixed their offense the last 5 weeks. *checks notes their last five games, Cal Poly, EWU, PSU, Weber, ISU.

Idaho's five straight wins since losing to MSU:

34-29 vs Cal Poly
38-28 vs EWU
39-30 at PSU
31-24 vs Weber
40-17 at ISU

Idaho should've been blowing out those teams, particularly Cal Poly and Weber, if they wanted to be able to make a stronger argument for the 6 or 7 seed. I still think they should've been #7 above Mercer but I also think it's entirely reasonable to put them at 8 or even drop them down to 9 or 10 based on how they finished the year as opposed to how they started it.

[Camo_Cat]

Listening to the Idaho Tubs at the Club guys and they are pissed. But they are optimistic for the MSU rematch because they, and stop me if you've heard this before, fixed their offense the last 5 weeks. *checks notes their last five games, Cal Poly, EWU, PSU, Weber, ISU.

You mean compared to the fact that 3 of our last 5 last games were against top 10 ranked teams? Sounds the same.........

[CodyCat]

That's a damn good question. Northern State (DII), Northern Iowa, Youngstown, Murray State, Indiana State certainly couldn't have helped. I'd guess Wisconsin and the DSUs pushed it up. Pretty wild you win 1 of 3 games that bumped your SOS way up and somehow that makes you top 4.

How is that different than Davis? Two losses to #1/#2 plus FBS...then a win over barely Top 10 Idaho & playoff bubble dUMb. Besides, Davis played 4 games against SSU, Poly, UNCU, and PSU, teams that are a total of 10-36. Plus East Texas A&M (3-8) and Dixie State (1-11).

Total of 6 wins against teams a combined 13-55.

Thats the state of FCS football.

2 top 15 wins, 1 top 10 win, plus 10 DI wins, not 8. That's a big difference. SOS was 6 spots different between the two. The Southern Utah win was better than any other win USD has as well. Southern Utah was probably the first team out.

I guess if you don't want to give credit for NDSU being in a totally different league than Idaho & you want to punish USD for PSU cancelling a game, then, again, thats a difference of opinion. I personally would have bumped USD to #3 & dropped NDSU to #4...but, again. Reasonable differences of opinion. I also would have punished Davis a little bit for being so overmatched against MSU. But, whatever. Its really a coin flip in my mind.

Totally different than bias, or one team being screwed, or other such hoo-hah.

USD was down 11 with 4 to go. So NDSU dominated the bulk of 2nd half. Many probably just looked at UCD/MSU final.

I don't know what to say. Going into this weekend, the Stats poll, the Coaches poll, the Massey computer rankings ALL put USD above Davis.

Then USD beat NDSU.

Its hard to call it bias when EVERY DATA POINT suggests that USD is better, then they beat the #1 team.

And people here at BN call it 'bias' that Davis doesn't jump ahead in the polls after that.

It really cracks me up.

I have never said they should jump ahead. Questioning the DATA POINTS that are used, ALL SEASON, AND IN THE SELECTION PROCESS. Big Sky got 5 teams in. That would indicate it is the top conference. But, MVFC teams started higher and as l9ng as losses were to each other they stayed there. I also felt Cats with 3 top 10 wins and a an FBS win, giving up 0 first half points at home and only 29 on road in FCS all year deserved to be 1, even before NDSU lost. We can have a discussion without you having a superiority complex. We get it. Your opinion is the same as the committee. Good for you.

Have to remember Missouri State and Delaware were ineligible this year but the committee saw those teams as ranked teams in a sense cause they were easily in the playoffs if they weren’t in transition to FBS. So MVFC theoretically would have had 5 teams in and Delaware is in so two teams are out and I’m guessing NAU would’ve been one of those teams with their resume. So Big Sky I would still say overall isn’t better than MVFC. Even when they had the MVFC vs Big Sky challenge (idk if they still doing it or keeping track) MVFC won more challenges too.

Valid points. My beef is Idaho. Lost to Oregon, Cats, and UCD. Feel like better than 8 seed. SoS seems so subjective. New Mexico would beat 90% of FCS teams. Top 1-8 are 1 level, 9-16 another, Teams 16-30 are similar, below that top should always win. If you are squeaking by those lower levels and losing to all in top the SoS shouldn't help you.

Listening to the Idaho Tubs at the Club guys and they are pissed. But they are optimistic for the MSU rematch because they, and stop me if you've heard this before, fixed their offense the last 5 weeks. *checks notes their last five games, Cal Poly, EWU, PSU, Weber, ISU.

For some reason I've thought all season we would see Idaho again in the playoffs. But, I think Richmond will beat them. However, I'd LOVE to smoke them again. FTV!!!

[Prodigal Cat]

Listening to the Idaho Tubs at the Club guys and they are pissed. But they are optimistic for the MSU rematch because they, and stop me if you've heard this before, fixed their offense the last 5 weeks. *checks notes their last five games, Cal Poly, EWU, PSU, Weber, ISU.

Idaho's five straight wins since losing to MSU:

34-29 vs Cal Poly
38-28 vs EWU
39-30 at PSU
31-24 vs Weber
40-17 at ISU

Idaho should've been blowing out those teams, particularly Cal Poly and Weber, if they wanted to be able to make a stronger argument for the 6 or 7 seed. I still think they should've been #7 above Mercer but I also think it's entirely reasonable to put them at 8 or even drop them down to 9 or 10 based on how they finished the year as opposed to how they started it.

The 8 was entirely due to the first month of games. Otherwise they are not a top 8 team.

[jgrilley406]

Listening to the Idaho Tubs at the Club guys and they are pissed. But they are optimistic for the MSU rematch because they, and stop me if you've heard this before, fixed their offense the last 5 weeks. *checks notes their last five games, Cal Poly, EWU, PSU, Weber, ISU.

Idaho's five straight wins since losing to MSU:

34-29 vs Cal Poly
38-28 vs EWU
39-30 at PSU
31-24 vs Weber
40-17 at ISU

Idaho should've been blowing out those teams, particularly Cal Poly and Weber, if they wanted to be able to make a stronger argument for the 6 or 7 seed. I still think they should've been #7 above Mercer but I also think it's entirely reasonable to put them at 8 or even drop them down to 9 or 10 based on how they finished the year as opposed to how they started it.

The 8 was entirely due to the first month of games. Otherwise they are not a top 8 team.

Gotta remember too, Idaho was hit with the injury, as are all teams, but losing your starting qb and at times their first two QBs is a huge loss. Think the starting qb finally got back for their last game.

[Prodigal Cat]

Listening to the Idaho Tubs at the Club guys and they are pissed. But they are optimistic for the MSU rematch because they, and stop me if you've heard this before, fixed their offense the last 5 weeks. *checks notes their last five games, Cal Poly, EWU, PSU, Weber, ISU.

Idaho's five straight wins since losing to MSU:

34-29 vs Cal Poly
38-28 vs EWU
39-30 at PSU
31-24 vs Weber
40-17 at ISU

Idaho should've been blowing out those teams, particularly Cal Poly and Weber, if they wanted to be able to make a stronger argument for the 6 or 7 seed. I still think they should've been #7 above Mercer but I also think it's entirely reasonable to put them at 8 or even drop them down to 9 or 10 based on how they finished the year as opposed to how they started it.

The 8 was entirely due to the first month of games. Otherwise they are not a top 8 team.

Gotta remember too, Idaho was hit with the injury, as are all teams, but losing your starting qb and at times their first two QBs is a huge loss. Think the starting qb finally got back for their last game.

Wagner has started the overwhelming majority of Idahos games. Josevick or what his name was only started against the Cats because he was playing a bit better than Wagner. Cats knock him out of the game and they go back to Wagner. What I’ve seen of Layne isn’t really a major step up from Wagner. The Qb thing is a poor excuse because none of those guys are game changers and there isn’t a massive difference between them. Idaho will lucky to win 1 game in the playoffs but that’s all they can realistically expect.

[91catAlum]

Listening to the Idaho Tubs at the Club guys and they are pissed. But they are optimistic for the MSU rematch because they, and stop me if you've heard this before, fixed their offense the last 5 weeks. *checks notes their last five games, Cal Poly, EWU, PSU, Weber, ISU.

Idaho's five straight wins since losing to MSU:

34-29 vs Cal Poly
38-28 vs EWU
39-30 at PSU
31-24 vs Weber
40-17 at ISU

Idaho should've been blowing out those teams, particularly Cal Poly and Weber, if they wanted to be able to make a stronger argument for the 6 or 7 seed. I still think they should've been #7 above Mercer but I also think it's entirely reasonable to put them at 8 or even drop them down to 9 or 10 based on how they finished the year as opposed to how they started it.

The 8 was entirely due to the first month of games. Otherwise they are not a top 8 team.

Gotta remember too, Idaho was hit with the injury, as are all teams, but losing your starting qb and at times their first two QBs is a huge loss. Think the starting qb finally got back for their last game.

Wagner has started the overwhelming majority of Idahos games. Josevick or what his name was only started against the Cats because he was playing a bit better than Wagner. Cats knock him out of the game and they go back to Wagner. What I’ve seen of Layne isn’t really a major step up from Wagner. The Qb thing is a poor excuse because none of those guys are game changers and there isn’t a massive difference between them. Idaho will lucky to win 1 game in the playoffs but that’s all they can realistically expect.

Idaho beat Wyoming and their only losses are to 12-0 MSU, 11-0 Oregon, and 10-2 UC Davis. I think they should've been seeded a spot or 2 higher. I think they'll get by Richmond pretty easily before losing in Bozeman again.

[Prodigal Cat]

Listening to the Idaho Tubs at the Club guys and they are pissed. But they are optimistic for the MSU rematch because they, and stop me if you've heard this before, fixed their offense the last 5 weeks. *checks notes their last five games, Cal Poly, EWU, PSU, Weber, ISU.

Idaho's five straight wins since losing to MSU:

34-29 vs Cal Poly
38-28 vs EWU
39-30 at PSU
31-24 vs Weber
40-17 at ISU

Idaho should've been blowing out those teams, particularly Cal Poly and Weber, if they wanted to be able to make a stronger argument for the 6 or 7 seed. I still think they should've been #7 above Mercer but I also think it's entirely reasonable to put them at 8 or even drop them down to 9 or 10 based on how they finished the year as opposed to how they started it.

The 8 was entirely due to the first month of games. Otherwise they are not a top 8 team.

Gotta remember too, Idaho was hit with the injury, as are all teams, but losing your starting qb and at times their first two QBs is a huge loss. Think the starting qb finally got back for their last game.

Wagner has started the overwhelming majority of Idahos games. Josevick or what his name was only started against the Cats because he was playing a bit better than Wagner. Cats knock him out of the game and they go back to Wagner. What I’ve seen of Layne isn’t really a major step up from Wagner. The Qb thing is a poor excuse because none of those guys are game changers and there isn’t a massive difference between them. Idaho will lucky to win 1 game in the playoffs but that’s all they can realistically expect.

Idaho beat Wyoming and their only losses are to 12-0 MSU, 11-0 Oregon, and 10-2 UC Davis. I think they should've been seeded a spot or 2 higher. I think they'll get by Richmond pretty easily before losing in Bozeman again.

Maybe, but they should have absolutely rolled their last five matchups if they are really a top tier team. Instead they were trailing Cal Poly and Weber at the halves and really only won convincing over ISU last week. The rest of the matchups were very much in doubt in the 4th qtr.

[catatac]

Listening to the Idaho Tubs at the Club guys and they are pissed. But they are optimistic for the MSU rematch because they, and stop me if you've heard this before, fixed their offense the last 5 weeks. *checks notes their last five games, Cal Poly, EWU, PSU, Weber, ISU.

Idaho's five straight wins since losing to MSU:

34-29 vs Cal Poly
38-28 vs EWU
39-30 at PSU
31-24 vs Weber
40-17 at ISU

Idaho should've been blowing out those teams, particularly Cal Poly and Weber, if they wanted to be able to make a stronger argument for the 6 or 7 seed. I still think they should've been #7 above Mercer but I also think it's entirely reasonable to put them at 8 or even drop them down to 9 or 10 based on how they finished the year as opposed to how they started it.

The 8 was entirely due to the first month of games. Otherwise they are not a top 8 team.

Gotta remember too, Idaho was hit with the injury, as are all teams, but losing your starting qb and at times their first two QBs is a huge loss. Think the starting qb finally got back for their last game.

Wagner has started the overwhelming majority of Idahos games. Josevick or what his name was only started against the Cats because he was playing a bit better than Wagner. Cats knock him out of the game and they go back to Wagner. What I’ve seen of Layne isn’t really a major step up from Wagner. The Qb thing is a poor excuse because none of those guys are game changers and there isn’t a massive difference between them. Idaho will lucky to win 1 game in the playoffs but that’s all they can realistically expect.

Idaho beat Wyoming and their only losses are to 12-0 MSU, 11-0 Oregon, and 10-2 UC Davis. I think they should've been seeded a spot or 2 higher. I think they'll get by Richmond pretty easily before losing in Bozeman again.

Maybe, but they should have absolutely rolled their last five matchups if they are really a top tier team. Instead they were trailing Cal Poly and Weber at the halves and really only won convincing over ISU last week. The rest of the matchups were very much in doubt in the 4th qtr.

Agree. I think the Cats are a WAY better team across the board, in all phases. Idaho and the Griz are probably somewhat comparable.