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

I posted this on e-griz as a response to a Griz fan insisting we need to play an FBS school to "prepare" for the playoffs. Apparently Talley credited the tough schedule and their FBS game for preparing his team. I wonder what happened in his FIRST 24 years as the head coach?

2009 - Temple; National Champions
2008 - West Virginia; 2nd round loss
2007 - Maryland; home for Thanksgiving
2006 - Central Florida; home for Thanksgiving
2005 - Rutgers; home for Thanksgiving
2004 - None; home for Thanksgiving
2003 - Temple; home for Thanksgiving
2002 - Rutgers; Semifinals loss
2001 - None; home for Thanksgiving
2000 - Rutgers; home for Thanksgiving
1999 - Air Force; home for Thanksgiving
1998 - Pitt; Home for Thanksgiving
1997 - None; 2nd round loss
1996 - Rutgers; 1st round loss
1995 - Navy; Home for Thanksgiving
1994 - None; home for Thanksgiving
1993 - None; home for Thanksgiving

By my count that's TWELVE FBS games they've played since Montana started our 17 year stretch of playoffs. All that preparation has gotten them a total of FOUR playoff appearances, and before this year they'd made it to the semi's exactly ONCE. In that same timeframe the Griz have 17 straight playoff appearances, 7 NC game appearances, 2 National Titles and a slew of semi-final appearances.

I don't know about you, but I DEFINITELY see a connection.

In the interview he credited the tough CAA schedule as a reason they were prepared to make the playoff run they did.

I don't remember him saying the FBS game specifically.

What I keep wondering, is how your first game of the year has any real impact on your year end performance. I could see midseason, but does playing an FBS team first thing in the season really give much lasting feedback? Especially one you beat?

Playing FBS game can give you an advantage in 2 respects IMO:

1. Funding for your program (most FCS teams will not get an instant infusion of capital in that large an amount from anywhere else); and

2. Recruiting (most FCS teams use FBS games as a selling point in recruiting, e.g. You'll play in front of 60,000 fans at Florida if you come here, etc....).

Montana doesn't need the money and doesn't need to sell a big crowd at an FBS game as they get that every week at home. Thus, Montana is in the envious position of not having to play FBS games.

However. Playing Western State does little to help you.

dbackjon wrote:However. Playing Western State does little to help you.

Doesn't seem to hurt either though. And I would imagine they make more $$$$ off that Western State game then a lot of FCS schools make on FBS games.

dbackjon wrote:However. Playing Western State does little to help you.

Well, you do get to play your scrubs.

AZGrizFan wrote:I posted this on e-griz as a response to a Griz fan insisting we need to play an FBS school to "prepare" for the playoffs. Apparently Talley credited the tough schedule and their FBS game for preparing his team. I wonder what happened in his FIRST 24 years as the head coach?

2009 - Temple; National Champions
2008 - West Virginia; 2nd round loss
2007 - Maryland; home for Thanksgiving
2006 - Central Florida; home for Thanksgiving
2005 - Rutgers; home for Thanksgiving
2004 - None; home for Thanksgiving
2003 - Temple; home for Thanksgiving
2002 - Rutgers; Semifinals loss
2001 - None; home for Thanksgiving
2000 - Rutgers; home for Thanksgiving
1999 - Air Force; home for Thanksgiving
1998 - Pitt; Home for Thanksgiving
1997 - None; 2nd round loss
1996 - Rutgers; 1st round loss
1995 - Navy; Home for Thanksgiving
1994 - None; home for Thanksgiving
1993 - None; home for Thanksgiving

By my count that's TWELVE FBS games they've played since Montana started our 17 year stretch of playoffs. All that preparation has gotten them a total of FOUR playoff appearances, and before this year they'd made it to the semi's exactly ONCE. In that same timeframe the Griz have 17 straight playoff appearances, 7 NC game appearances, 2 National Titles and a slew of semi-final appearances.

I don't know about you, but I DEFINITELY see a connection.

You are being really ridiculous.

dbackjon wrote:However. Playing Western State does little to help you.

For every negative to the Western State game, there's a positive.

I don't LIKE the games, but I understand why they're scheduled.

DJH wrote: You are being really ridiculous.

How so?

I'm quickly becoming convinced that it's not so much the "competition" aspect as finding good opponents who play offensive and defensive systems similar to what you're likely to play against in the playoffs.

It was that Single Wing trash that did in Montana. Had they played a school, FBS or otherwise, that featured that Single Wing then Montana would probably have done better in the second half.

Of course, as the old saw goes, you still have to play the game. Superior personnel typically beats scheme. 'Nova's OL blocked their Single Wing plays REALLY well, and for some reason, Griz defenders could not tackle that unique athlete Matt Szczur.

FBS games dont do squat. Heck, look at Montana's 2004 OOC schedule. Played Maine, Hofstra and Sam Houston and guess what, got beat in the NC game. I am 100% convinced that what decided that game was the lack of our DC and OC to keep Montana going. Option teams ran all over Montana many times. I was taught in high school that you have to string it out and hit the QB immediately so they have to pitch it. Montana's DE played a poor game. Phen abandoned the running game for the second year in a row and Montana still had a chance to win it. Playing a FBS game would have done nothing to help/hurt the situation.

AZGrizFan wrote:

DJH wrote: You are being really ridiculous.

How so?

You are pulling random stats from the last 20 years, and relating them to things that don't necessarily even correlate, just to further your own opinion.

In this perticular year, nova's coach felt that it helped them prepare for the playoffs. Just because they have never won a title before this year has nothing to do with it.

I just checked montana schedules from their two title years, and in both cases, they played an FBS team. So, in other words, Montana has NEVER won a national title in a year that they did not play an FBS team.

DJH wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
How so?

You are pulling random stats from the last 20 years, and relating them to things that don't necessarily even correlate, just to further your own opinion.

In this perticular year, nova's coach felt that it helped them prepare for the playoffs. Just because they have never won a title before this year has nothing to do with it.

I just checked montana schedules from their two title years, and in both cases, they played an FBS team. So, in other words, Montana has NEVER won a national title in a year that they did not play an FBS team.

And Montana didn't play a FBS the same season as their last three NC losses....just sayin'...

When was the last time a team won the NC without playing an FBS team?

Gotta be at least a decade...

Not saying it can't be done... but, I think the benefits outweigh the negatives.

putter wrote:FBS games dont do squat. Heck, look at Montana's 2004 OOC schedule. Played Maine, Hofstra and Sam Houston and guess what, got beat in the NC game. I am 100% convinced that what decided that game was the lack of our DC and OC to keep Montana going. Option teams ran all over Montana many times. I was taught in high school that you have to string it out and hit the QB immediately so they have to pitch it. Montana's DE played a poor game. Phen abandoned the running game for the second year in a row and Montana still had a chance to win it. Playing a FBS game would have done nothing to help/hurt the situation.

As an outsider looking in, I agree with putter on every point...both on the schedule in general and this years NC game in particular...Quite a change for me because I use to be one of those arguing that Montana needed to play an FBS team...I now understand the financial decisions and feel, what ever floats your boat, you can't argue with success...

DJH wrote: I just checked montana schedules from their two title years, and in both cases, they played an FBS team. So, in other words, Montana has NEVER won a national title in a year that they did not play an FBS team.

Now, that is in interesting fact...not enough data to do a real good analysis with...but it is interesting...

AZGrizFan wrote:I posted this on e-griz as a response to a Griz fan insisting we need to play an FBS school to "prepare" for the playoffs. Apparently Talley credited the tough schedule and their FBS game for preparing his team. I wonder what happened in his FIRST 24 years as the head coach?

2009 - Temple; National Champions
2008 - West Virginia; 2nd round loss
2007 - Maryland; home for Thanksgiving
2006 - Central Florida; home for Thanksgiving
2005 - Rutgers; home for Thanksgiving
2004 - None; home for Thanksgiving
2003 - Temple; home for Thanksgiving
2002 - Rutgers; Semifinals loss
2001 - None; home for Thanksgiving
2000 - Rutgers; home for Thanksgiving
1999 - Air Force; home for Thanksgiving
1998 - Pitt; Home for Thanksgiving
1997 - None; 2nd round loss
1996 - Rutgers; 1st round loss
1995 - Navy; Home for Thanksgiving
1994 - None; home for Thanksgiving
1993 - None; home for Thanksgiving

By my count that's TWELVE FBS games they've played since Montana started our 17 year stretch of playoffs. All that preparation has gotten them a total of FOUR playoff appearances, and before this year they'd made it to the semi's exactly ONCE. In that same timeframe the Griz have 17 straight playoff appearances, 7 NC game appearances, 2 National Titles and a slew of semi-final appearances.

I don't know about you, but I DEFINITELY see a connection.

I have to give Talley the nod over you regarding what he is talking about. Appy also stated that their FBS games made them better, and if I recall correctly, you disagreed with their experience as well. What would they know...

DJH wrote:

AZGrizFan wrote:
How so?

You are pulling random stats from the last 20 years, and relating them to things that don't necessarily even correlate, just to further your own opinion.

In this perticular year, nova's coach felt that it helped them prepare for the playoffs. Just because they have never won a title before this year has nothing to do with it.

I just checked montana schedules from their two title years, and in both cases, they played an FBS team. So, in other words, Montana has NEVER won a national title in a year that they did not play an FBS team.

So I guess playing D2's would have the affect of weakening you in that regard then? I mean if playing up toughens you then playing down certainly has to weaken ya right?

3 of our first 5 games in 1995 were against D2's and yet we still won the NC.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

DJH wrote:
You are pulling random stats from the last 20 years, and relating them to things that don't necessarily even correlate, just to further your own opinion.

In this perticular year, nova's coach felt that it helped them prepare for the playoffs. Just because they have never won a title before this year has nothing to do with it.

I just checked montana schedules from their two title years, and in both cases, they played an FBS team. So, in other words, Montana has NEVER won a national title in a year that they did not play an FBS team.

So I guess playing D2's would have the affect of weakening you in that regard then? I mean if playing up toughens you then playing down certainly has to weaken ya right?

3 of our first 5 games in 1995 were against D2's and yet we still won the NC.

I do think that playing better opponents makes you better, and playing weaker opponents doesn't necessarily help. But neither of those things on their own are enough to determine a teams fate.

BlueHen86 wrote:

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: So I guess playing D2's would have the affect of weakening you in that regard then? I mean if playing up toughens you then playing down certainly has to weaken ya right?

3 of our first 5 games in 1995 were against D2's and yet we still won the NC.

I do think that playing better opponents makes you better, and playing weaker opponents doesn't necessarily help. But neither of those things on their own are enough to determine a teams fate.

I don't have a problem with the reasoning at all. The specious reasoning used as far as that being the reason that one team or a group of teams is better prepared to win the title seems pretty off to me since it is only a fraction of what it takes. It should not bear the brunt of the reason that a team wins or loses in the playoffs but it can be the main reason, or a big part of the reason that a team doesn't even get to the playoffs to make a run.

The short simple answer is the easiest for some to wrap their heads around. A reasoned outlook like yours is mcuh easier to take account of than the simpleton answers for me however.

Ask any player on the 2005 ASU squad about our late season game against LSU and they will tell you that game gave them confidence. Sure, they didn't win, but they were in the game until the starters for App were pulled going into the 4th (down 14-0). Every player on that team said that game showed them what they were made of, and showed them that they could compete with anyone. Of course, in 2006, ASU was taken down by a poor NC State team in the first game of the season. No App fan left Carter-Finley that day believing that the coaching staff had a real game plan to win the game (probably the most pissed off I've been leaving a game in the last 5 years). I'm not going to mention 2007, or what that FBS game meant to ASU.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

BlueHen86 wrote:
I do think that playing better opponents makes you better, and playing weaker opponents doesn't necessarily help. But neither of those things on their own are enough to determine a teams fate.

I don't have a problem with the reasoning at all. The specious reasoning used as far as that being the reason that one team or a group of teams is better prepared to win the title seems pretty off to me since it is only a fraction of what it takes. It should not bear the brunt of the reason that a team wins or loses in the playoffs but it can be the main reason, or a big part of the reason that a team doesn't even get to the playoffs to make a run.

The short simple answer is the easiest for some to wrap their heads around. A reasoned outlook like yours is mcuh easier to take account of than the simpleton answers for me however.

If Montana played a lot of D2 teams, got into the playoffs and lost in the first round every year, then I might see some merit in the strength of schedule argument. But the Griz have won 3 playoff games each of the last two years, including a win over App. St. (I doubt anyone would question their playoff readiness). The Griz regular season schedule is not a problem for them, the BSC schedule adaquately prepares them for the playoffs.

BlueHen86 wrote:

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote: I don't have a problem with the reasoning at all. The specious reasoning used as far as that being the reason that one team or a group of teams is better prepared to win the title seems pretty off to me since it is only a fraction of what it takes. It should not bear the brunt of the reason that a team wins or loses in the playoffs but it can be the main reason, or a big part of the reason that a team doesn't even get to the playoffs to make a run.

The short simple answer is the easiest for some to wrap their heads around. A reasoned outlook like yours is mcuh easier to take account of than the simpleton answers for me however.

If Montana played a lot of D2 teams, got into the playoffs and lost in the first round every year, then I might see some merit in the strength of schedule argument. But the Griz have won 3 playoff games each of the last two years, including a win over App. St. (I doubt anyone would question their playoff readiness). The Griz regular season schedule is not a problem for them, the BSC schedule adaquately prepares them for the playoffs.

Thank you, that's all I'm saying and I'm glad there are some out there that work with a full deck.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

BlueHen86 wrote:
If Montana played a lot of D2 teams, got into the playoffs and lost in the first round every year, then I might see some merit in the strength of schedule argument. But the Griz have won 3 playoff games each of the last two years, including a win over App. St. (I doubt anyone would question their playoff readiness). The Griz regular season schedule is not a problem for them, the BSC schedule adaquately prepares them for the playoffs.

Thank you, that's all I'm saying and I'm glad there are some out there that work with a full deck.

Ursus A. Horribilis wrote:

DJH wrote:
You are pulling random stats from the last 20 years, and relating them to things that don't necessarily even correlate, just to further your own opinion.

In this perticular year, nova's coach felt that it helped them prepare for the playoffs. Just because they have never won a title before this year has nothing to do with it.

I just checked montana schedules from their two title years, and in both cases, they played an FBS team. So, in other words, Montana has NEVER won a national title in a year that they did not play an FBS team.

So I guess playing D2's would have the affect of weakening you in that regard then? I mean if playing up toughens you then playing down certainly has to weaken ya right?

3 of our first 5 games in 1995 were against D2's and yet we still won the NC.

I'm not saying it helps/hurts either way. I'm simply pointing out that the stats AZ used for his logic are ridiculous, and make no sense. Especially considering that the exact opposite applies to his own school.

If nova's coach thinked it helped his team this year, than it did.