Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Sorry, I had too.

It'd be legit coming from a CAA fan........However history shows that Montana owns UNI........


Please resume kicking your own ass.

DuckDuckGriz wrote:It'd be legit coming from a CAA fan........However history shows that Montana owns UNI........


Please resume kicking your own ass.

clenz wrote:


Sorry, I had too.

And SDSU owned UNI and we owned SDSU.

U R STUPID.

AZGrizFan wrote:

clenz wrote:


Sorry, I had too.

And SDSU owned UNI and we owned SDSU.

U R STUPID.

I know you understand why I started this...but damn...Montana fans are pissy

clenz wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
And SDSU owned UNI and we owned SDSU.

U R STUPID.

I know you understand why I started this...but damn...Montana fans are pissy

I know why you started it, but Montana just lost for the 4th time in 6 tries at the NC. Do we not have a LITTLE right to be just a tad pissy right now?
We don't need to be piled on by a fan of a team that couldn't get INTO the playoffs...

AZGrizFan wrote:

clenz wrote: I know you understand why I started this...but damn...Montana fans are pissy

I know why you started it, but Montana just lost for the 4th time in 6 tries at the NC. Do we not have a LITTLE right to be just a tad pissy right now?
We don't need to be piled on by a fan of a team that couldn't get INTO the playoffs...

I got a text from Catfish saying that he missed me and had another dream about me last night. He also said there were a bunch of pissed off Griz fans in the airport in ATL.

bobbythekidd wrote:I got a text from Catfish saying that he missed me and had another dream about me last night. He also said there were a bunch of pissed off Griz fans in the airport in ATL.

Interesting. I was in the ATL airport for about 4 hours today...never saw a SINGLE pissed off fan....lots of "consoling" going on in the form of alcoholic consumption though...

Trying to understand how "ownership" of UNI in the distant past becomes rationalization (and something much more important) than losing three NC's under Hauck, including two in a row in which they were favored?

Lashing out? Can't figure it.

Cap'n Cat wrote:Trying to understand how "ownership" of UNI in the distant past becomes rationalization (and something much more important) than losing three NC's under Hauck, including two in a row in which they were favored?

Lashing out? Can't figure it.

We weren't favored this year, or last year.

Willie wrote:We weren't favored this year, or last year.

Having the higher seed isn't being "favored"?

JayJ79 wrote:

Willie wrote:We weren't favored this year, or last year.

Having the higher seed isn't being "favored"?

Look at the spreads. We were underdogs going into the games. We had the #1 seed, but Nova was the #1 overall, we were 3.

Willie wrote:

JayJ79 wrote:
Having the higher seed isn't being "favored"?

Look at the spreads. We were underdogs going into the games. We had the #1 seed, but Nova was the #1 overall, we were 3.

Montana was the favorite. Having the #1 seed is being the favorite.

Betting lines are set simply to make the most money from the bets, not to pick a winner.

DJH wrote:

Willie wrote: Look at the spreads. We were underdogs going into the games. We had the #1 seed, but Nova was the #1 overall, we were 3.

Montana was the favorite. Having the #1 seed is being the favorite.

Betting lines are set simply to make the most money from the bets, not to pick a winner.

No, no we weren't. And no, no it doesn't.

Willie wrote:

DJH wrote:
Montana was the favorite. Having the #1 seed is being the favorite.

Betting lines are set simply to make the most money from the bets, not to pick a winner.

No, no we weren't. And no, no it doesn't.

No revisionist history here...

#1 seed is the highest ranked...thus, the favorite...Montana was the highest seed two years in a row going into the NC game...and we all know the results...

Col Hogan wrote:

Willie wrote: No, no we weren't. And no, no it doesn't.

No revisionist history here...

#1 seed is the highest ranked...thus, the favorite...Montana was the highest seed two years in a row going into the NC game...and we all know the results...

If we were the highest seed last year, why did we have to go on the road to take out JMU?

DuckDuckGriz wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:
No revisionist history here...

#1 seed is the highest ranked...thus, the favorite...Montana was the highest seed two years in a row going into the NC game...and we all know the results...

If we were the highest seed last year, why did we have to go on the road to take out JMU?

Oops...

DuckDuckGriz wrote:

Col Hogan wrote:
No revisionist history here...

#1 seed is the highest ranked...thus, the favorite...Montana was the highest seed two years in a row going into the NC game...and we all know the results...

If we were the highest seed last year, why did we have to go on the road to take out JMU?

They were the only seeded team in the championship game last year.

DJH wrote:

DuckDuckGriz wrote:
If we were the highest seed last year, why did we have to go on the road to take out JMU?

They were the only seeded team in the championship game last year.

Yes but they weren't the HIGHEST seed.

Ok, you guys are right. Montana overcame the huge odds, but just weren't able to pull off huge upsets in the last two seasons' title games...

DJH wrote:Ok, you guys are right. Montana overcame the huge odds, but just weren't able to pull off huge upsets in the last two seasons' title games...

Putting words in our mouth now? Only pointing out the correlation, or lack thereof, of favored and higher seedings........I'm curious as to what the UNI hard-on for Montana is still after all these years.

DuckDuckGriz wrote:

DJH wrote:Ok, you guys are right. Montana overcame the huge odds, but just weren't able to pull off huge upsets in the last two seasons' title games...

Putting words in our mouth now? Only pointing out the correlation, or lack thereof, of favored and higher seedings........I'm curious as to what the UNI hard-on for Montana is still after all these years.

Lack of anything else to focus on in mid December.

DJH wrote:Ok, you guys are right. Montana overcame the huge odds, but just weren't able to pull off huge upsets in the last two seasons' title games...

DJH wrote:

Willie wrote: Look at the spreads. We were underdogs going into the games. We had the #1 seed, but Nova was the #1 overall, we were 3.

Montana was the favorite. Having the #1 seed is being the favorite.

Betting lines are set simply to make the most money from the bets, not to pick a winner.

My observation is that the favorite is usually determined by the betting line, not the rankings (or seeding). I've seen many NCAA hoops results where, at least according to ESPN, a higher ranked team pulled the "upset" by beating the lower ranked team.

I guess you could argue it either way, we are kind of splitting hairs here.