UM at PSU (Thurs Jan 19th)

[EverettGriz]

The bsc -- as shitty as it is -- will not be a play-in game unless Weber/Montana/Eastern/Nodak doesn't win it. There are always upsets in one-bid tournaments.

Which goes back to my initial statement, that the BSC winner is most likely a 16 seed.

Can't argue that, although I'd predict a 15 if it's Weebs or UM.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

For those of you who think the griz are going to get a 16 seed if we make the tournament, you better throw some hot coffee in your face and take a long look at our schedule. After having very competitive games against tough teams that included #25 USC, #11 Oregon, and a very tough NC State team, all games where we have lost by 15 or less points is pretty f*****g good, not to mention we beat the crap out of mountain west San Jose State. Trust me, if we get to 20 wins this season (which is still very possible for you doubters) I guarantee we can get a 14, maybe even a 13.

A 10 loss Griz team, and I won't be surprised if they lose a couple more, with zero good wins is in no way a 13 or 14 seed.

 

[GrizLA]

The bsc -- as shitty as it is -- will not be a play-in game unless Weber/Montana/Eastern/Nodak doesn't win it. There are always upsets in one-bid tournaments.

Which goes back to my initial statement, that the BSC winner is most likely a 16 seed.

Can't argue that, although I'd predict a 15 if it's Weebs or UM.

If UM or Weber or ND win the tourney, it will be a 16 seed. But, in thinking about seedings, it might be better for UM to be in one of the playoffs because if they win, they do not automatically go to 16 seeds and might get a better matchup in the second round. I believe some team did that last year or the year before. UM or Weber is the kind of team that, if they are "on" would shock some of the big time conference mid placements. But, they simply cannot have anymore games like they did tonight.

 

[Griz til I die]

For those of you who think the griz are going to get a 16 seed if we make the tournament, you better throw some hot coffee in your face and take a long look at our schedule. After having very competitive games against tough teams that included #25 USC, #11 Oregon, and a very tough NC State team, all games where we have lost by 15 or less points is pretty f*****g good, not to mention we beat the crap out of mountain west San Jose State. Trust me, if we get to 20 wins this season (which is still very possible for you doubters) I guarantee we can get a 14, maybe even a 13.

A 10 loss Griz team, and I won't be surprised if they lose a couple more, with zero good wins is in no way a 13 or 14 seed.

It's not all about the wins. It's about strength of schedule and BPI and RPI rank. The griz are fine. If we can win out (except maybe the exception of Weber) the committee will realize that that's only two or three conference losses and will take a look at our non conference schedule and will decide to take a chance on us. Not to mention that 2 conference losses is about 3 less losses than we have had the past few years. We are fine, trust me.

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

For those of you who think the griz are going to get a 16 seed if we make the tournament, you better throw some hot coffee in your face and take a long look at our schedule. After having very competitive games against tough teams that included #25 USC, #11 Oregon, and a very tough NC State team, all games where we have lost by 15 or less points is pretty f*****g good, not to mention we beat the crap out of mountain west San Jose State. Trust me, if we get to 20 wins this season (which is still very possible for you doubters) I guarantee we can get a 14, maybe even a 13.

A 10 loss Griz team, and I won't be surprised if they lose a couple more, with zero good wins is in no way a 13 or 14 seed.

It's not all about the wins. It's about strength of schedule and BPI and RPI rank. The griz are fine. If we can win out (except maybe the exception of Weber) the committee will realize that that's only two or three conference losses and will take a look at our non conference schedule and will decide to take a chance on us. Not to mention that 2 conference losses is about 3 less losses than we have had the past few years. We are fine, trust me.

Good to know wins don't matter.

 

[cmtgrizzly]

I agree with griztilidie. If we play well the rest of the season and win convincingly in the bsc tourney we will be better than a 16 and possibly a 14. Would I be surprised if, despite doing the above, we still only get a 15? No I wouldn't.

 

[rainbear14]

ah..we just got the bejesus kicked out of us .well, hot shooting and a good comeback effort but let's not get into a seeding argument until the Griz at least get to championship game! Way too many games left to go..and anybody can get hot ..anybody can win a tourney..just get 3 good games together...blah blah blah..too early, 16-14? my question is can they win the conf tourney? or better yet can they win in the 2nd game in this high school gyms road trip? gotta play better!

 

[HelenaHandBasket]

ah..we just got the bejesus kicked out of us .well, hot shooting and a good comeback effort but let's not get into a seeding argument until the Griz at least get to championship game! Way too many games left to go..and anybody can get hot ..anybody can win a tourney..just get 3 good games together...blah blah blah..too early, 16-14? my question is can they win the conf tourney? or better yet can they win in the 2nd game in this high school gyms road trip? gotta play better!

This is not a Griz argument, it is a BSC one. Weak sauce basketball.

 

[rainbear14]

as bad as the BSC is , it is above 4 -6 others. It is just that is has 105 members and some really poor lower teams but the top 5- 6 teams would compete in many other conferences. I say the standard 15 but wasn't Weber once a 12 and Griz once a 13?? but then again not with 10 or more losses either

 

[cmtgrizzly]

I Agree. Ten losses gives a poor impression and you just dont know how the strength of schedule will be viewed by the powers that be but I think we played well against some good out of conference teams which in my opinion says more than winning a few more games against a much weaker schedule.

I think this year the BSC just doesnt have a team that will really have a chance against a 1or 2 seed and will be a one and done. If we win out and crush the bsc tourney and we get a 14 seed we may be able to compete. We need finishers and our guys have not learned to finish games well i.e. make freethrows and layups in close games in crunch time and I think even if we keep it close against a top 3 seed we would have a tough time pulling an upset. We need some more help in the paint so that we can win some of those early season strong RPI games and move ourselves into a 11-12 seed conversation.

 

[Potomac Griz]

as bad as the BSC is , it is above 4 -6 others. It is just that is has 105 members and some really poor lower teams but the top 5- 6 teams would compete in many other conferences. I say the standard 15 but wasn't Weber once a 12 and Griz once a 13?? but then again not with 10 or more losses either

Here are the Big Sky NCAA Tournament seedings going back to 2000 (along with records):

2016 - 15 seed (Weber, 1st in teh Big Sky at 15-3, 26-8 overall, RPI 108)
2015 - 13 seed (EWU, 2nd in the Big Sky at 14-4, 26-8 overall, RPI 78)
2014 - 16 seed (Weber, 1st in the Big Sky at 14-6, 19-11 overall, RPI 149)
2013 - 13 seed (Montana, 1st in the Big Sky at 15-1, 25-7 overall, RPI 76)
2012 - 13 seed (Montana, 1st in the Big Sky at 15-1, 25-6 overall, RPI 78)
2011 - 15 seed (UNC, 1st in the Big Sky at 13-3, 21-10 overall, RPI 137)
2010 - 14 seed (Montana, 4th in the Big Sky at 10-6, 22-9 overall, RPI 97)
2009 - 13 seed (PSU, 2nd in the Big Sky at 11-5, 23-9 overall, RPI 113)
2008 - 16 seed (PSU, 1st in the Big Sky at 14-2, 23-9 overall, RPI 90)
2007 - 15 seed (Weber, 1st in the Big Sky at 11-5, 20-11 overall, RPI 143)
2006 - 12 seed (Montana, 2nd in the Big Sky at 10-4, 23-6 overall, RPI 61)
2005 - 16 seed (Montana, 2nd in the Big Sky at 9-5, 18-13 overall, RPI 158)
2004 - 15 seed (EWU, 1st in the Big Sky at 11-3, 16-13 overall, RPI 127)
2003 - 12 seed (Weber, 1st in the Big Sky at 14-0, 26-6 overall, RPI 41)
2002 - 15 seed (Montana, 4th in the Big Sky at 7-7, 16-14 overall, RPI 186)
2001 - 13 seed (CS-Northridge, 1st in the Big Sky at 13-3, 22-9 overall, RPI 82)
2000 - 15 seed (NAU, 3rd place in the Big Sky at 11-5, 20-10 overall, RPI 78)

Out of those 17 years:
12 seed - 2 times
13 seed - 5 times
14 seed - 1 time
15 seed - 6 times
16 seed - 3 times

The Big Sky is having a down year it looks like, but it's still a little too early to tell not even halfway through conference season. Some of the teams Big Sky teams beat or barely lost to may get hot and if their RPI climbs then the Big Sky teams will have their RPI go up as well.

The selection committee looks at a lot of different factors too including how the teams did towards the end of the season (did they end the season hot?). Also of course if the team has been in the tournament recently that often helps their seeding as it did for the Griz in 2006 and likely in some of the Tinkle years.

It seems we have this conversation after a loss damn near every year where it's doom and gloom about how the Big Sky is definitely a play-in or 16 seed at best...yet more often than not the Big Sky ends up with a 13-15 seed in the end

 

[citygriz]

Down 22 points, I turned to my brother and said, "Now we'll see Montana's character." And what I saw pleased me greatly. We fought back, and but for missed free throws and two agonizing misses by Michael Oguine at the rim--one on a breakaway, another on a short put back--we could have pulled this one out. We had a shot at overcoming a 22-point deficit on the road against a very good team.

As for how we got to 22 down, well, Portland State is a good team, and at the beginning of the second half they inserted a sixth player that nobody saw enter the game--ole 'mo. Suddenly they were like the Warriors, just blistering hot. Every single teetering shot on the rim, every bounce, every shot from three--bingo! They couldn't miss. Their momentum was just insane. Did to us what they did to North Dakota a while back, 99-62. So be it. That happens in basketball.

I still say, we're playing with only half a team--the other half shows up next year, when four guys 6'7" join the fray. You can only go so far with one bona fide post player and one freshman as your only true bigs.

Other than that, very impressed with:
--Rorie. Best player on the floor, not close. Super smooth with incredible hops. Can get his shot any time, and it's reliable. Made one perfect left-handed pass on the break to a streaking Walter Wright that was pure beauty. Very impressive player.
--Krslovic: Wow! Has he improved. Now a solid low post player with a nice array of post-up moves, a good hands guy who doesn't flub quick sharp passes from the guard line. PSU really had no answer for him.
--Oguine: Wonderful player. Great hops, wonderful rebounder. Wish he'd take it to the hoop more. Those near-misses were heartbreaking, but if he continues to work on his game, he'll be even more special than he is now.

Much encouraged. But same mantra: Wait till next year!

 

[rocklobster]

Down 22 points, I turned to my brother and said, "Now we'll see Montana's character." And what I saw pleased me greatly. We fought back, and but for missed free throws and two agonizing misses by Michael Oguine at the rim--one on a breakaway, another on a short put back--we could have pulled this one out. We had a shot at overcoming a 22-point deficit on the road against a very good team.

As for how we got to 22 down, well, Portland State is a good team, and at the beginning of the second half they inserted a sixth player that nobody saw enter the game--ole 'mo. Suddenly they were like the Warriors, just blistering hot. Every single teetering shot on the rim, every bounce, every shot from three--bingo! They couldn't miss. Their momentum was just insane. Did to us what they did to North Dakota a while back, 99-62. So be it. That happens in basketball.

I still say, we're playing with only half a team--the other half shows up next year, when four guys 6'7" join the fray. You can only go so far with one bona fide post player and one freshman as your only true bigs.

Other than that, very impressed with:
--Rorie. Best player on the floor, not close. Super smooth with incredible hops. Can get his shot any time, and it's reliable. Made one perfect left-handed pass on the break to a streaking Walter Wright that was pure beauty. Very impressive player.
--Krslovic: Wow! Has he improved. Now a solid low post player with a nice array of post-up moves, a good hands guy who doesn't flub quick sharp passes from the guard line. PSU really had no answer for him.
--Oguine: Wonderful player. Great hops, wonderful rebounder. Wish he'd take it to the hoop more. Those near-misses were heartbreaking, but if he continues to work on his game, he'll be even more special than he is now.

Much encouraged. But same mantra: Wait till next year!

Thanks Citay!

 

[Jaredkuehn]

as bad as the BSC is , it is above 4 -6 others. It is just that is has 105 members and some really poor lower teams but the top 5- 6 teams would compete in many other conferences. I say the standard 15 but wasn't Weber once a 12 and Griz once a 13?? but then again not with 10 or more losses either

Here are the Big Sky NCAA Tournament seedings going back to 2000 (along with records):

2016 - 15 seed (Weber, 1st in teh Big Sky at 15-3, 26-8 overall, RPI 108)
2015 - 13 seed (EWU, 2nd in the Big Sky at 14-4, 26-8 overall, RPI 78)
2014 - 16 seed (Weber, 1st in the Big Sky at 14-6, 19-11 overall, RPI 149)
2013 - 13 seed (Montana, 1st in the Big Sky at 15-1, 25-7 overall, RPI 76)
2012 - 13 seed (Montana, 1st in the Big Sky at 15-1, 25-6 overall, RPI 78)
2011 - 15 seed (UNC, 1st in the Big Sky at 13-3, 21-10 overall, RPI 137)
2010 - 14 seed (Montana, 4th in the Big Sky at 10-6, 22-9 overall, RPI 97)
2009 - 13 seed (PSU, 2nd in the Big Sky at 11-5, 23-9 overall, RPI 113)
2008 - 16 seed (PSU, 1st in the Big Sky at 14-2, 23-9 overall, RPI 90)
2007 - 15 seed (Weber, 1st in the Big Sky at 11-5, 20-11 overall, RPI 143)
2006 - 12 seed (Montana, 2nd in the Big Sky at 10-4, 23-6 overall, RPI 61)
2005 - 16 seed (Montana, 2nd in the Big Sky at 9-5, 18-13 overall, RPI 158)
2004 - 15 seed (EWU, 1st in the Big Sky at 11-3, 16-13 overall, RPI 127)
2003 - 12 seed (Weber, 1st in the Big Sky at 14-0, 26-6 overall, RPI 41)
2002 - 15 seed (Montana, 4th in the Big Sky at 7-7, 16-14 overall, RPI 186)
2001 - 13 seed (CS-Northridge, 1st in the Big Sky at 13-3, 22-9 overall, RPI 82)
2000 - 15 seed (NAU, 3rd place in the Big Sky at 11-5, 20-10 overall, RPI 78)

Out of those 17 years:
12 seed - 2 times
13 seed - 5 times
14 seed - 1 time
15 seed - 6 times
16 seed - 3 times

The Big Sky is having a down year it looks like, but it's still a little too early to tell not even halfway through conference season. Some of the teams Big Sky teams beat or barely lost to may get hot and if their RPI climbs then the Big Sky teams will have their RPI go up as well.

The selection committee looks at a lot of different factors too including how the teams did towards the end of the season (did they end the season hot?). Also of course if the team has been in the tournament recently that often helps their seeding as it did for the Griz in 2006 and likely in some of the Tinkle years.

It seems we have this conversation after a loss damn near every year where it's doom and gloom about how the Big Sky is definitely a play-in or 16 seed at best...yet more often than not the Big Sky ends up with a 13-15 seed in the end

I was thinking the same thing. Thanks for posting the actual seeds for the past 15 years. It seems that there is always talk of 16 seeds or play-in games. The BSC has yet to be seeded in a playoff game, and generally only gets a 16 in down year. We'd all like to see a stronger conference, but enough with the doom and gloom! If Griz win the conference and win the tournament, they go to the NCAA's as a 14 or 15.

 

[WILDCATFAN]

That one's going to leave a mark.


And this f***[*] conference is a f***[*] joke. And if you're a Griz fan and don't want us out of it, there's something seriously wrong with you. We deserve SOOOOOOO much better.

You lose a game and you deserve better?

Do you even hear yourself sometimes?

You have been so blinded by the maroon colored glasses you wear that everytime something bad happens to Montana you go straight to belittling the conference like it's to blame for all of Montana's troubles. Are you aware of how silly that sounds?

 

[EverettGriz]

That one's going to leave a mark.


And this f***[*] conference is a f***[*] joke. And if you're a Griz fan and don't want us out of it, there's something seriously wrong with you. We deserve SOOOOOOO much better.

You lose a game and you deserve better?

Do you even hear yourself sometimes?

You have been so blinded by the maroon colored glasses you wear that everytime something bad happens to Montana you go straight to belittling the conference like it's to blame for all of Montana's troubles. Are you aware of how silly that sounds?

Dude, it isn't now nor has it EVER been about winning. It's about playing at a level commiserate with Montana's facilities, fan base, support, tradition, and position as a state's flagship university. I understand why fans from the other programs in this conference don't understand that. They can't. They aren't at Montana's level in all of those areas, so it's impossible. I don't hold that against them, certainly. I just ask them to understand why Montana is frustrated with this conference.

So really, the only thing silly is that Montana remains in the bsc.

 

[putter]

That one's going to leave a mark.


And this f***[*] conference is a f***[*] joke. And if you're a Griz fan and don't want us out of it, there's something seriously wrong with you. We deserve SOOOOOOO much better.

You lose a game and you deserve better?

Do you even hear yourself sometimes?

You have been so blinded by the maroon colored glasses you wear that everytime something bad happens to Montana you go straight to belittling the conference like it's to blame for all of Montana's troubles. Are you aware of how silly that sounds?

Dude, it isn't now nor has it EVER been about winning. It's about playing at a level commiserate with Montana's facilities, fan base, support, tradition, and position as a state's flagship university. I understand why fans from the other programs in this conference don't understand that. They can't. They aren't at Montana's level in all of those areas, so it's impossible. I don't hold that against them, certainly. I just ask them to understand why Montana is frustrated with this conference.

So really, the only thing silly is that Montana remains in the bsc.

Home run post right there.

 

[WILDCATFAN]

That one's going to leave a mark.


And this f***[*] conference is a f***[*] joke. And if you're a Griz fan and don't want us out of it, there's something seriously wrong with you. We deserve SOOOOOOO much better.

You lose a game and you deserve better?

Do you even hear yourself sometimes?

You have been so blinded by the maroon colored glasses you wear that everytime something bad happens to Montana you go straight to belittling the conference like it's to blame for all of Montana's troubles. Are you aware of how silly that sounds?

Dude, it isn't now nor has it EVER been about winning. It's about playing at a level commiserate with Montana's facilities, fan base, support, tradition, and position as a state's flagship university. I understand why fans from the other programs in this conference don't understand that. They can't. They aren't at Montana's level in all of those areas, so it's impossible. I don't hold that against them, certainly. I just ask them to understand why Montana is frustrated with this conference.

So really, the only thing silly is that Montana remains in the bsc.

And I don't now nor ever will believe that.

Montana has a great Football Stadium true, Average basketball arena.

Fan base- Football

Tradition- Football

There are plenty of high level Universities in the Big Sky (Idaho, Idaho State, NAU, the Cali schools, North Dakota). Heck even Weber State is a higher level University than Boise State, A school you want to be associated with. So yes I do think Athletics and winning have every thing to do with it especially since you only post #hatetheBSC posts after Montana loses or when Montana isn't involved in the post season. I've been on here long enough to notice.

You mean Montana's fans are upset with the Big Sky, cause if The University of Montana wanted to leave because of their pure hatred or poor level of satisfaction with it they would have by now. It has been over 50 years after all.

You hate the Big Sky, that much is obvious (and has been for a while) and your hatred for it fuels most of your posts. Whether or not you want to believe it, Montana is right where they belong, hence why they are still here.

 

[EverettGriz]

OFFS.

Montana's "average" basketball arena is as good as any (e.g. Gonzaga's) in the WCC, and would be in the top couple in the MWC, and on par with many in the P12.

And Montana has no basketball tradition? Or fan base? See, with those insanely idiotic comments you've proven yourself to be little more than a know-nothing troll.

And whether you care to admit it or not (because I know you know it), Montana is NOT where they belong, and more importantly, certainly not where they deserve to be. Sorry that the rest of you just aren't up to speed. But you're not. And neither is the league. And that ain't Montana's fault.

 

[GoldenEagle]

That one's going to leave a mark.


And this f***[*] conference is a f***[*] joke. And if you're a Griz fan and don't want us out of it, there's something seriously wrong with you. We deserve SOOOOOOO much better.

You lose a game and you deserve better?

Do you even hear yourself sometimes?

You have been so blinded by the maroon colored glasses you wear that everytime something bad happens to Montana you go straight to belittling the conference like it's to blame for all of Montana's troubles. Are you aware of how silly that sounds?

Dude, it isn't now nor has it EVER been about winning. It's about playing at a level commiserate with Montana's facilities, fan base, support, tradition, and position as a state's flagship university. I understand why fans from the other programs in this conference don't understand that. They can't. They aren't at Montana's level in all of those areas, so it's impossible. I don't hold that against them, certainly. I just ask them to understand why Montana is frustrated with this conference.

So really, the only thing silly is that Montana remains in the bsc.

And I don't now nor ever will believe that.

Montana has a great Football Stadium true, Average basketball arena.

Fan base- Football

Tradition- Football

There are plenty of high level Universities in the Big Sky (Idaho, Idaho State, NAU, the Cali schools, North Dakota). Heck even Weber State is a higher level University than Boise State, A school you want to be associated with. So yes I do think Athletics and winning have every thing to do with it especially since you only post #hatetheBSC posts after Montana loses or when Montana isn't involved in the post season. I've been on here long enough to notice.

You mean Montana's fans are upset with the Big Sky, cause if The University of Montana wanted to leave because of their pure hatred or poor level of satisfaction with it they would have by now. It has been over 50 years after all.

You hate the Big Sky, that much is obvious (and has been for a while) and your hatred for it fuels most of your posts. Whether or not you want to believe it, Montana is right where they belong, hence why they are still here.

WILDCATFAN,
You will never understand where EverettGriz is coming from because you weren't steeped in tradition and excellence like he was at UM.