The Way Too Early 2017 Big Sky Power Poll

[SoldierGriz]

Good Lord, we are starting to sound like cat fans....you know pre-season champs and all...ridiculous. The returning talent - was responsible for last season. Period. Can they improve? Who knows? How much improvement did we see throughout last season? Can they be coached up? That's the million dollar question.

We lost to the cats at HOME last season...so, how does getting EWU, NAU, and UND at home next season give us a shot at "finishing at the top of the Big Sky?" Griz are not what they once were "at home."

A little melodramatic much? Funny I never claimed pre-season champs, finishing in the top part of the conference (or a playoff team) however is not impossible, not by a long shot. Congrats you highlighted a single bad game last season at home, so what that automatically means we will lose every other in Missoula, seriously? Our track record has vastly proven that we tend to play better at home and I like our chances in WA Griz a hell of a lot better then on the road if last year was an indicator of anything.

No, not melodramatic - just sane.

You believe the Griz have a shot at finishing "at the top of the Big Sky" based on returning talent and a favorable schedule. I assume you also base your projection on returning recruits.

I don't. I don't know what to think of the returning talent based on what we saw last season. I question the home field advantage of Wa Griz; it isn't what it once was. I know the Griz have issues playing on the road. I have absolutely no idea what to think of the returning recruits. Finally, I question the ability of the current coaching staff to propel the Program in the right direction. I don't think they finish "at the top of the Big Sky."

Which is more likely? Middle-of-the-pack finish in the BSC or at the top of the BSC and deep playoff run?

I hope I am wrong. I hope the coaching staff has some super secret third-year formula for success, and they lead the Griz to a BSC Title and deep playoff run. Better find a QB...

 

[dayday]

Good Lord, we are starting to sound like cat fans....you know pre-season champs and all...ridiculous. The returning talent - was responsible for last season. Period. Can they improve? Who knows? How much improvement did we see throughout last season? Can they be coached up? That's the million dollar question.

We lost to the cats at HOME last season...so, how does getting EWU, NAU, and UND at home next season give us a shot at "finishing at the top of the Big Sky?" Griz are not what they once were "at home."

A little melodramatic much? Funny I never claimed pre-season champs, finishing in the top part of the conference (or a playoff team) however is not impossible, not by a long shot. Congrats you highlighted a single bad game last season at home, so what that automatically means we will lose every other in Missoula, seriously? Our track record has vastly proven that we tend to play better at home and I like our chances in WA Griz a hell of a lot better then on the road if last year was an indicator of anything.

No, not melodramatic - just sane.

You believe the Griz have a shot at finishing "at the top of the Big Sky" based on returning talent and a favorable schedule. I assume you also base your projection on returning recruits.

I don't. I don't know what to think of the returning talent based on what we saw last season. I question the home field advantage of Wa Griz; it isn't what it once was. I know the Griz have issues playing on the road. I have absolutely no idea what to think of the returning recruits. Finally, I question the ability of the current coaching staff to propel the Program in the right direction. I don't think they finish "at the top of the Big Sky."

Which is more likely? Middle-of-the-pack finish in the BSC or at the top of the BSC and deep playoff run?

I hope I am wrong. I hope the coaching staff has some super secret third-year formula for success, and they lead the Griz to a BSC Title and deep playoff run. Better find a QB...

I agree if the Griz find the right QB they could be at the top. You don't know if Jensen, Phillips, or Hill is the next Case Cookus or Gage Gabrud. I disagree on your assessment on the talent on the rest of the team. We have the talent that's not the problem. That's why this year was frustrating because you could see the talent.

 

[SoldierGriz]

Good Lord, we are starting to sound like cat fans....you know pre-season champs and all...ridiculous. The returning talent - was responsible for last season. Period. Can they improve? Who knows? How much improvement did we see throughout last season? Can they be coached up? That's the million dollar question.

We lost to the cats at HOME last season...so, how does getting EWU, NAU, and UND at home next season give us a shot at "finishing at the top of the Big Sky?" Griz are not what they once were "at home."

A little melodramatic much? Funny I never claimed pre-season champs, finishing in the top part of the conference (or a playoff team) however is not impossible, not by a long shot. Congrats you highlighted a single bad game last season at home, so what that automatically means we will lose every other in Missoula, seriously? Our track record has vastly proven that we tend to play better at home and I like our chances in WA Griz a hell of a lot better then on the road if last year was an indicator of anything.

No, not melodramatic - just sane.

You believe the Griz have a shot at finishing "at the top of the Big Sky" based on returning talent and a favorable schedule. I assume you also base your projection on returning recruits.

I don't. I don't know what to think of the returning talent based on what we saw last season. I question the home field advantage of Wa Griz; it isn't what it once was. I know the Griz have issues playing on the road. I have absolutely no idea what to think of the returning recruits. Finally, I question the ability of the current coaching staff to propel the Program in the right direction. I don't think they finish "at the top of the Big Sky."

Which is more likely? Middle-of-the-pack finish in the BSC or at the top of the BSC and deep playoff run?

I hope I am wrong. I hope the coaching staff has some super secret third-year formula for success, and they lead the Griz to a BSC Title and deep playoff run. Better find a QB...

I agree if the Griz find the right QB they could be at the top. You don't know if Jensen, Phillips, or Hill is the next Case Cookus or Gage Gabrud. I disagree on your assessment on the talent on the rest of the team. We have the talent that's not the problem. That's why this year was frustrating because you could see the talent.

Neither do you - which is why projecting the Griz to finish "at the top" is very cat-like...and illogical.

 

[ordigger]

My handicapping...

1. UM - Griz will surprise many here, and win the Big Sky next year. (2:1)
2. EWU - They always reload, so I expect to see them here (3:1)
3. UND - Perhaps the last year in the Big Sky (6:1)
4. SUU - They will bounce back again strong. (10:1)
5. Cal Poly - Weak schedule puts them here (15:1)
6. NAU - They either start strong, and fade - or vice versa (15:1)
7. MSU - Middle of the pack, contender in 2018 (20:1)
8. WSU - Starting to become relevant again (25:1)
9. NCU - Someone has to finish here (50:1)
10. ISU - They seem to have a good year every so often, not this year (60:1)
11. UCD - Hawkins has minor impact (100:1)
12. PSU - Program continues to fade (100:1)
13. SacSt - There is always next year (500:1)

 

[SoldierGriz]

My handicapping...

1. UM - Griz will surprise many here, and win the Big Sky next year. (2:1)
2. EWU - They always reload, so I expect to see them here (3:1)
3. UND - Perhaps the last year in the Big Sky (6:1)
4. SUU - They will bounce back again strong. (10:1)
5. Cal Poly - Weak schedule puts them here (15:1)
6. NAU - They either start strong, and fade - or vice versa (15:1)
7. MSU - Middle of the pack, contender in 2018 (20:1)
8. WSU - Starting to become relevant again (25:1)
9. NCU - Someone has to finish here (50:1)
10. ISU - They seem to have a good year every so often, not this year (60:1)
11. UCD - Hawkins has minor impact (100:1)
12. PSU - Program continues to fade (100:1)
13. SacSt - There is always next year (500:1)

:clap: Wow. I needed this to fire-up my Christmas Spirit!

 

[PlayerRep]

maybe Sanders (he was hurt all year and not at full speed, ankle, I believe; he also was good at calling the secondary signals and get everyone into the right place),

Did you watch the defense? RARELY were they in the right places....

On Ryan Johnson, we agree. Biggest loss of the SR class.
Kidder I would normally agree, but his late season meltdown changes that for me.
We played half the year without Nelson - went 5-1. Played 5 games with him...went 1-4. :| :|
Peevey had 20 tackles total

Obviously, you didn't watch the defense, but yes I did. I also listened and talked to Semore and other defensive coaches multiple times, including about this very subject. Given that you apparently saw only one game in person, how could you possibly know whether the defensive secondary were lined up in the right position at the start of plays? TV and streaming usually focuses on the offensive side and doesn't show the secondary at the start of plays.

Nelson was a terrific player. Like I said, irreplaceable. One player on defense doesn't dictate the record of the team. What a dumb comment. Kidder didn't end up having an MVP season, but he was still a force and very good. Peevey was a force when he got healthy and back on the field. Missed 3 games and didn't play much in several others. Lost his starting position to Simms and then got it back. Simms had 26 tackles and played in 3 more games then Peevey, and started more games. ed d-tackles in TFL.

 

[AZGrizFan]

maybe Sanders (he was hurt all year and not at full speed, ankle, I believe; he also was good at calling the secondary signals and get everyone into the right place),

Did you watch the defense? RARELY were they in the right places....

On Ryan Johnson, we agree. Biggest loss of the SR class.
Kidder I would normally agree, but his late season meltdown changes that for me.
We played half the year without Nelson - went 5-1. Played 5 games with him...went 1-4. :| :|
Peevey had 20 tackles total

Obviously, you didn't watch the defense, but yes I did. I also listened and talked to Semore and other defensive coaches multiple times, including about this very subject. Given that you apparently saw only one game in person, how could you possibly know whether the defensive secondary were lined up in the right position at the start of plays? TV and streaming usually focuses on the offensive side and doesn't show the secondary at the start of plays.

You have no idea what I watched, but keep assuming. What I SAW was numerous times in numerous games players looking to the sideline, hands in the air, running around like chickens with their heads cut off, out of position, shuffling players on and off the field, and not ready for the snap of the ball. And the one game (yes, ONE game) that I was at, it was a fucking epidemic...especially on the last drive where we couldn't seem to get a stop if our life depended on it. I saw multiple plays (yes, you can still see this shit on TV :roll: :roll: ) during multiple games where some of the defensive backfield thought they were supposed to be in zone, and some thought they were in man-to-man, resulting in long scoring TD's for the opposition. Is that Semore's fault? Sanders'? Don't know, and really don't care. But until it's fixed, we could have players from the Doomsday Defense, The Purple People Eaters defense, or the Fearsome Foursome Defense and it WON'T. FUCKING. MATTER.

 

[getgrizzy]

Getgwenny is a cat fan/troll. She always has been. There should be no surprise why she picked the cats so high.

You do realize I'm not in here bashing Brady, Stitt, Semore, the ST coach, the president, the AD, the OL, the DBs, Kidder, and Strahm on a steady basis.

The point is simple. We don't play the kind of football that wins games in today's world. UND, WSU and MSU do. That's why I'm picking them as the top three teams next year. WSU beat us at WGS last year and ran for around 250 yards. UND ran for 267 last year at WGS. MSU ran for more than 350 yards. I don't think any of those games were flukes. Our coaches and players knew the sCats would run it and we couldn't stop them and we had a good run defense. We went 1-2 in those games and none of those games were against playoff teams that year and all of those games were at home. Add to that the fact that the two best teams we played (EWU and NAU) this year clobbered us.

Stitt does what Stitt does. That's his style and it's what got him this far. I don't dislike him, but I don't think his style of football works in this day and age.

 

[PlayerRep]

maybe Sanders (he was hurt all year and not at full speed, ankle, I believe; he also was good at calling the secondary signals and get everyone into the right place),

Did you watch the defense? RARELY were they in the right places....

On Ryan Johnson, we agree. Biggest loss of the SR class.
Kidder I would normally agree, but his late season meltdown changes that for me.
We played half the year without Nelson - went 5-1. Played 5 games with him...went 1-4. :| :|
Peevey had 20 tackles total

Obviously, you didn't watch the defense, but yes I did. I also listened and talked to Semore and other defensive coaches multiple times, including about this very subject. Given that you apparently saw only one game in person, how could you possibly know whether the defensive secondary were lined up in the right position at the start of plays? TV and streaming usually focuses on the offensive side and doesn't show the secondary at the start of plays.

You have no idea what I watched, but keep assuming. What I SAW was numerous times in numerous games players looking to the sideline, hands in the air, running around like chickens with their heads cut off, out of position, shuffling players on and off the field, and not ready for the snap of the ball. And the one game (yes, ONE game) that I was at, it was a f***[*] epidemic...especially on the last drive where we couldn't seem to get a stop if our life depended on it. I saw multiple plays (yes, you can still see this shit on TV :roll: :roll: ) during multiple games where some of the defensive backfield thought they were supposed to be in zone, and some thought they were in man-to-man, resulting in long scoring TD's for the opposition. Is that Semore's fault? Sanders'? Don't know, and really don't care. But until it's fixed, we could have players from the Doomsday Defense, The Purple People Eaters defense, or the Fearsome Foursome Defense and it WON'T. f***[*]. MATTER.

Yes, I know what you saw--obviously very little. You said on the board you went to one game. You can't see where the defensive secondary is lined up on tv or streaming most of the time. You exaggerate the waiving stuff. And, that has nothing to do with Sanders not calling the right secondary signal and getting the secondary in the right position at the start of the play anyway. Waiving indicates that a signal has not come from the coaches. And, in my view, you don't have a clue about secondary play, nor do you know how the Griz secondary plays. And again, Semore told me that Sanders was good at making the secondary calls and getting the secondary lined up in the right place, which is based in large part on the formation of the offense. Sanders was better at this than Sandry.

But feel free to keep running off and ranting and raving about whatever you want. It's somewhat amusing.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Did you watch the defense? RARELY were they in the right places....

On Ryan Johnson, we agree. Biggest loss of the SR class.
Kidder I would normally agree, but his late season meltdown changes that for me.
We played half the year without Nelson - went 5-1. Played 5 games with him...went 1-4. :| :|
Peevey had 20 tackles total

Obviously, you didn't watch the defense, but yes I did. I also listened and talked to Semore and other defensive coaches multiple times, including about this very subject. Given that you apparently saw only one game in person, how could you possibly know whether the defensive secondary were lined up in the right position at the start of plays? TV and streaming usually focuses on the offensive side and doesn't show the secondary at the start of plays.

You have no idea what I watched, but keep assuming. What I SAW was numerous times in numerous games players looking to the sideline, hands in the air, running around like chickens with their heads cut off, out of position, shuffling players on and off the field, and not ready for the snap of the ball. And the one game (yes, ONE game) that I was at, it was a f***[*] epidemic...especially on the last drive where we couldn't seem to get a stop if our life depended on it. I saw multiple plays (yes, you can still see this shit on TV :roll: :roll: ) during multiple games where some of the defensive backfield thought they were supposed to be in zone, and some thought they were in man-to-man, resulting in long scoring TD's for the opposition. Is that Semore's fault? Sanders'? Don't know, and really don't care. But until it's fixed, we could have players from the Doomsday Defense, The Purple People Eaters defense, or the Fearsome Foursome Defense and it WON'T. f***[*]. MATTER.

Yes, I know what you saw--obviously very little. You said on the board you went to one game. You can't see where the defensive secondary is lined up on tv or streaming most of the time. You exaggerate the waiving stuff. And, that has nothing to do with Sanders not calling the right secondary signal and getting the secondary in the right position at the start of the play anyway. Waiving indicates that a signal has not come from the coaches. And, in my view, you don't have a clue about secondary play, nor do you know how the Griz secondary plays. And again, Semore told me that Sanders was good at making the secondary calls and getting the secondary lined up in the right place, which is based in large part on the formation of the offense. Sanders was better at this than Sandry.

But feel free to keep running off and ranting and raving about whatever you want. It's somewhat amusing.

Jesus you're a retard. Sounds like Semore is covering his ass... :lol: If you can't see the histrionics and waiving and panic from your seat in the Canyon Club then I can't help you....tens of thousands of OTHER fans see it tho...but keep spinning....

 

[PlayerRep]

Obviously, you didn't watch the defense, but yes I did. I also listened and talked to Semore and other defensive coaches multiple times, including about this very subject. Given that you apparently saw only one game in person, how could you possibly know whether the defensive secondary were lined up in the right position at the start of plays? TV and streaming usually focuses on the offensive side and doesn't show the secondary at the start of plays.

You have no idea what I watched, but keep assuming. What I SAW was numerous times in numerous games players looking to the sideline, hands in the air, running around like chickens with their heads cut off, out of position, shuffling players on and off the field, and not ready for the snap of the ball. And the one game (yes, ONE game) that I was at, it was a f***[*] epidemic...especially on the last drive where we couldn't seem to get a stop if our life depended on it. I saw multiple plays (yes, you can still see this shit on TV :roll: :roll: ) during multiple games where some of the defensive backfield thought they were supposed to be in zone, and some thought they were in man-to-man, resulting in long scoring TD's for the opposition. Is that Semore's fault? Sanders'? Don't know, and really don't care. But until it's fixed, we could have players from the Doomsday Defense, The Purple People Eaters defense, or the Fearsome Foursome Defense and it WON'T. f***[*]. MATTER.

Yes, I know what you saw--obviously very little. You said on the board you went to one game. You can't see where the defensive secondary is lined up on tv or streaming most of the time. You exaggerate the waiving stuff. And, that has nothing to do with Sanders not calling the right secondary signal and getting the secondary in the right position at the start of the play anyway. Waiving indicates that a signal has not come from the coaches. And, in my view, you don't have a clue about secondary play, nor do you know how the Griz secondary plays. And again, Semore told me that Sanders was good at making the secondary calls and getting the secondary lined up in the right place, which is based in large part on the formation of the offense. Sanders was better at this than Sandry.

But feel free to keep running off and ranting and raving about whatever you want. It's somewhat amusing.

Jesus you're a retard. Sounds like Semore is covering his ass... :lol: If you can't see the histrionics and waiving and panic from your seat in the Canyon Club then I can't help you....tens of thousands of OTHER fans see it tho...but keep spinning....

You need your computer fixed so the streaming is more clear. Watching how the secondary is lined up, or whether they are waving, via streaming is pretty funny. When I'm not watching from the sideline, I do drink beer in the Canyon Club, or the Suite. The second check is a great place for watching secondary play.

 

[sdk.catfish]

And again, Semore told me that Sanders was good at making the secondary calls and getting the secondary lined up in the right place,

If Player Rep could perhaps expand on this I think it might help me and possibly others understand. If the defense (allow me to assume this is generally the case for the linebackers and defensive line as well as the secondary) is lined up in the right place then there must be other reasons why they gave up so many big plays, too many points in the losses, and things like 360 yards rushing to the Cats. I can think of a couple possible things but I acknowledge that I am not an expert.

1. If they are in the right place, then is it a talent issue? In other words are they just getting steamrolled by bigger, faster more athletic offenses?

2. Is it a coaching thing? That is are they not taught proper tackling and pass defense techniques?

I'm sure there are other reasons but being in the right position but not making the plays would seem to be problematic if it is ongoing.

 

[Diesel]

And again, Semore told me that Sanders was good at making the secondary calls and getting the secondary lined up in the right place,

If Player Rep could perhaps expand on this I think it might help me and possibly others understand. If the defense (allow me to assume this is generally the case for the linebackers and defensive line as well as the secondary) is lined up in the right place then there must be other reasons why they gave up so many big plays, too many points in the losses, and things like 360 yards rushing to the Cats. I can think of a couple possible things but I acknowledge that I am not an expert.

1. If they are in the right place, then is it a talent issue? In other words are they just getting steamrolled by bigger, faster more athletic offenses?

2. Is it a coaching thing? That is are they not taught proper tackling and pass defense techniques?

I'm sure there are other reasons but being in the right position but not making the plays would seem to be problematic if it is ongoing.

From this spectator's view at home games and also watching TV coverage, there seemed to be a disconnect with two senior defensive players(due to injury or mentally not engaging) Sanders and Nelson evident in play on the field. Starting at CP Y Sanders got steam rolled by a smaller Garcia on the sidelines where Sanders had a open lane to light him up and of course the TD he gave up for the go ahead score at the end of the game. M Sanders being a sophomore I gave him some passes on a few of the scores he gave up, he seemed to compete well on several plays where he was one on one with some good WRs. Nelson did not play up to his normal level and when he was playing the other underclassmen did not play better. Y Sanders against MSU was pitiful. He did everything in his power to get out of camera view when the QB would run. Hard to play defense when only ten guys are willing to tackle.
Did not seem to be enough depth at DL, end of the game the O-lines would give clean pocket and opposing QBs would look like NFL caliber players. Don't think two point stances hurt as was brought up by Choate, think that was a PR ploy or pot shot at Seymore. Kidder playing injured and having to play too many snaps due to other DL injuries (if memory serves me correctly two DL did not dress for MSU game) or lack of DL depth was a problem all year and got worse as the season progressed with the usual attrition of interior play. Buss seemed to miss some tackles toward the end of the season due to playing with injuries. Hats off to the guys that gave all they could with injuries and played. Lack of depth in experienced defenders to back up the starters seemed to grow at the end of the season.
The seniors are gone now and we will see if the coaching staff has filled the voids with enough quality recruits and underclassmen.

 

[PlayerRep]

And again, Semore told me that Sanders was good at making the secondary calls and getting the secondary lined up in the right place,

If Player Rep could perhaps expand on this I think it might help me and possibly others understand. If the defense (allow me to assume this is generally the case for the linebackers and defensive line as well as the secondary) is lined up in the right place then there must be other reasons why they gave up so many big plays, too many points in the losses, and things like 360 yards rushing to the Cats. I can think of a couple possible things but I acknowledge that I am not an expert.

1. If they are in the right place, then is it a talent issue? In other words are they just getting steamrolled by bigger, faster more athletic offenses?

2. Is it a coaching thing? That is are they not taught proper tackling and pass defense techniques?

I'm sure there are other reasons but being in the right position but not making the plays would seem to be problematic if it is ongoing.

For secondary only. Lining up correctly at the start of a play, while important, is only one part of what has to be done, as I'm sure you know. Then, it's knowing the defense you're in, as well as making the right reactions, reads and decisions, not making any mistake, not getting caught looking the wrong way or turning the wrong way, not getting juked out or beat, not making the wrong decision at the end (e.g. not going for the pick or knockdown, and being off by a few inches or a foot), not thinking you have help over-the-top when you don't, not slipping or stumbling, not getting brushed off in a crossing/mesh situation, not getting out jumped, etc. Also, the secondary wasn't always lined up in the right place.

Note that being in the right position at the start of the play (which is part of what the d-back calling the secondary signals is doing) is not the same as being in the right position at the end of the play. The first helps the second, but there was many more factors in the second.

Have no clue on 1. and 2, other than I thought all season that the defensive scheme put too much pressure on the secondary, and comments in the paper indicated that the secondary was not prepared enough to play top level zone coverage. Not many FCS corners, or safeties, are capable of playing consistent and top level man coverage, in my view. A few are, and more in the FBS are, but that's what NFL corners do, in my view. Nelson was terrific in man coverage, but even he got beat on occasion. In the EWU game, which was only Nelson's second game back I think, Kupp beat Nelson a few times. Kupp is probably better than Nelson, I assume, but Nelson was a very good coverage guy and a very good player. Too bad he lost over half of his season. I didn't see the Cat game (was over the Pacific ocean).

 

[sdk.catfish]

Thanks Player Rep for expanded version which makes it way more complex that just starting out in the right position. I totally concur that a team that doesn't appear to really know how to play multiple zone schemes at the FCS level is a team that is ripe for getting beat over the top and plenty of teams have the arsenals to do it.

I understand that many posters really wan't to see Stitt's wide open offense succeed, I suppose primarily because they find that more entertaining and football is supposed to be entertainment. Personally I'm just as happy with a defense that just kicks the crap out of the opponent physically, leading to the opponent's team morale eventually breaking down. 10-7 or 14-10 games are fine with me are as long as we win. No difference in my opinion if we lose 41-40 or 10-9. I really hope more attention will be paid to the defense next year or Semore's defense, and not any quarterback conundrum that Stitt has to deal with offensively, may ultimately prove the reason for a middle of the of the pack finish next year.

Thanks again for taking the time to elaborate.

 

[PlayerRep]

Thanks Player Rep for expanded version which makes it way more complex that just starting out in the right position. I totally concur that a team that doesn't appear to really know how to play multiple zone schemes at the FCS level is a team that is ripe for getting beat over the top and plenty of teams have the arsenals to do it.

I understand that many posters really wan't to see Stitt's wide open offense succeed, I suppose primarily because they find that more entertaining and football is supposed to be entertainment. Personally I'm just as happy with a defense that just kicks the crap out of the opponent physically, leading to the opponent's team morale eventually breaking down. 10-7 or 14-10 games are fine with me are as long as we win. No difference in my opinion if we lose 41-40 or 10-9. I really hope more attention will be paid to the defense next year or Semore's defense, and not any quarterback conundrum that Stitt has to deal with offensively, may ultimately prove the reason for a middle of the of the pack finish next year.

Thanks again for taking the time to elaborate.

I'm with you on liking an offense that is tough and physical. Same with D. Winning is more important than entertainment. My entertainment comes from the stuff off the playing field, as well as winning. Talked to a fairly recent ex-defensive player this week. He agreed with your views on offensive style. Thought Hauck should have been a no-brainer higher. I'm still hopeful with what we have, but I can understand the views on the other side too. I have had similar negatives thoughts from the get-go, but thought Stitt et al would probably do just fine. Winning the last 2 games this fall, especially the last one, would have made a huge difference in how Stitt et al were viewed and the level of complaining. I really don't understand those 2 losses, and certainly both of them. Just seems inexcusable. But I'm still completely fine and happy to be a Griz fan. It's just sport, and all good to me.

 

[grizcountry420]

Thanks Player Rep for expanded version which makes it way more complex that just starting out in the right position. I totally concur that a team that doesn't appear to really know how to play multiple zone schemes at the FCS level is a team that is ripe for getting beat over the top and plenty of teams have the arsenals to do it.

I understand that many posters really wan't to see Stitt's wide open offense succeed, I suppose primarily because they find that more entertaining and football is supposed to be entertainment. Personally I'm just as happy with a defense that just kicks the crap out of the opponent physically, leading to the opponent's team morale eventually breaking down. 10-7 or 14-10 games are fine with me are as long as we win. No difference in my opinion if we lose 41-40 or 10-9. I really hope more attention will be paid to the defense next year or Semore's defense, and not any quarterback conundrum that Stitt has to deal with offensively, may ultimately prove the reason for a middle of the of the pack finish next year.

Thanks again for taking the time to elaborate.

I'm with you on liking an offense that is tough and physical. Same with D. Winning is more important than entertainment. My entertainment comes from the stuff off the playing field, as well as winning. Talked to a fairly recent ex-defensive player this week. He agreed with your views on offensive style. Thought Hauck should have been a no-brainer higher. I'm still hopeful with what we have, but I can understand the views on the other side too. I have had similar negatives thoughts from the get-go, but thought Stitt et al would probably do just fine. Winning the last 2 games this fall, especially the last one, would have made a huge difference in how Stitt et al were viewed and the level of complaining. I really don't understand those 2 losses, and certainly both of them. Just seems inexcusable. But I'm still completely fine and happy to be a Griz fan. It's just sport, and all good to me.

well said.. I agree!

 

[Grizbeer]

I really don't care if they are great on offense, or bruising on defense, I just want a team where you believe no matter who they are playing, where they are playing, or what the situation is, at the end of the game the team is in a position to win, and you believe they will win. That's not the case now. Great post PR.

 

[PlayerRep]

I really don't care if they are great on offense, or bruising on defense, I just want a team where you believe no matter who they are playing, where they are playing, or what the situation is, at the end of the game the team is in a position to win, and you believe they will win. That's not the case now. Great post PR.

Good point on being position to win. Under Hauck, the team and the fans always thought they could and would find a way to win. Perhaps Pflu's 2d year team was that way. Teams that always find a way to win, or comeback, and almost always do are very special.

 

[UMGriz75]

Good point on being position to win. Under Hauck, the team and the fans always thought they could and would find a way to win.

With current coaches that seem ambivalent about motivating the team, or even antithetical to it (Niekamp), it is useful to recall what motivated teams can do.

In 2009, the last time the Grizzlies and Jackrabbits met, Montana trailed by 27 points, 48-21, with 5:40 left in the third quarter of another first-round playoff game in Missoula. Sparked by a Marc Mariani kickoff return touchdown, the Griz stormed back with 41 unanswered points in perhaps the greatest comeback victory in program history.

The only one that might rival it: Montana's 52-48 thriller back in 1993 when UM scored an FCS-record 39 fourth-quarter points at home. That day's opponent just happened to be South Dakota State too.

In those days, the coaches did not publicly blame the teams for lack of "fire."