KC is Van Helsing

[AZGrizFan]

And since we all know that'll never happen, the ECB can continue because their lame ass theory never gets tested. Weber beats Cal Poly, Montana beats Weber, and we go ANOTHER year without a western team able to get past Montana. Meanwhile, east coast teams get DSU, Fordham, etc.

Boy, you keep stepping in it. Since regionalization started in 2001, the Big Sky would have been set to play themselves in the second round only twice with last year being the only time it's actually happened.

I said nothing about BSC teams playing each other...you did.

[putter]

And since we all know that'll never happen, the ECB can continue because their lame ass theory never gets tested. Weber beats Cal Poly, Montana beats Weber, and we go ANOTHER year without a western team able to get past Montana. Meanwhile, east coast teams get DSU, Fordham, etc.

Boy, you keep stepping in it. Since regionalization started in 2001, the Big Sky would have been set to play themselves in the second round only twice with last year being the only time it's actually happened.

good point, however, if they keep putting the west teams up against each other how can these schools prove themselves against the almighty eastern teams? I would have loved to see how Poly, Weber and the Griz did last year against other teams...may not have won but they deserve to have the chance rather then playing each other again.

[SunCoastBlueHen]

All I can say is that you know Delaware fans are not happy with the prospects of the current season when the same old, tired off-season arguments are drummed up after week four.

[AZGrizFan]

Boy, you keep stepping in it. Since regionalization started in 2001, the Big Sky would have been set to play themselves in the second round only twice with last year being the only time it's actually happened.

good point, however, if they keep putting the west teams up against each other how can these schools prove themselves against the almighty eastern teams? I would have loved to see how Poly, Weber and the Griz did last year against other teams...may not have won but they deserve to have the chance rather then playing each other again.

My point exactly. Only 5 teams West of the Mississippi got into the playoffs last year. Then they all play each other in the first round (Except UNI, which us Westerners hardly consider a "western" team). So, regionalization actually MAKES the ECB argument for them...they get cupcakes in the first round from the weak AQ conferences (Villanover getting Colgate, Richmond getting EKU), while the few West Coast teams beat each other and eliminate the eventual competition.

The fact that Montana has been the team that advanced out of the west doesn't correlate with their argument that the rest of the West sucks balls and couldn't beat any of the East Coast teams in the playoffs...the two arguments are not connectd, but they continue to try and connect them.

[89Hen]

FIFY!

Uh, no, you didn't. Last time I checked Boise and Nevada are LONG gone from the BigSky. Note a few posts above I mention that AZ is still trying to live off them, I guess you are too. Also, 1984 is a few more than 20 years ago.

[89Hen]

Really. So all the CAA teams have the same winning percentage in their playoff games as they do in their regular season?

If the Griz couldn't beat them in the playoffs, what makes you think they could beat them in the regular season?

[AZGrizFan]

FIFY!

Uh, no, you didn't. Last time I checked Boise and Nevada are LONG gone from the BigSky. Note a few posts above I mention that AZ is still trying to live off them, I guess you are too. Also, 1984 is a few more than 20 years ago.

I made no mention of Boise or Nevada.

[89Hen]

My problem Col, is that the NCAA is a POS and doesn't run its one and only football championship like it should. It should seed 16 teams and let it run.

FWIW putter, even when the field was seeded 1-16 the NCAA finagled (sp?) the bracket so a Delaware or Montana would somehow always find themselves in the top 8 so they'd host at least one game.

[BlueHen86]

FIFY!

Uh, no, you didn't. Last time I checked Boise and Nevada are LONG gone from the BigSky. Note a few posts above I mention that AZ is still trying to live off them, I guess you are too. Also, 1984 is a few more than 20 years ago.

1.25 score to be exact, but if you round it down...

[89Hen]

Uh, no, you didn't. Last time I checked Boise and Nevada are LONG gone from the BigSky. Note a few posts above I mention that AZ is still trying to live off them, I guess you are too. Also, 1984 is a few more than 20 years ago.

I made no mention of Boise or Nevada.

You're right. I morphed two threads. My apology. But I know you think about Nevada.

[89Hen]

And since we all know that'll never happen, the ECB can continue because their lame ass theory never gets tested. Weber beats Cal Poly, Montana beats Weber, and we go ANOTHER year without a western team able to get past Montana. Meanwhile, east coast teams get DSU, Fordham, etc.

I said nothing about BSC teams playing each other...you did.

Baloney on that one though. You absolutely implied the west teams always meet early and that it's Montana who always knocks them out. Simply not true.

[putter]

My problem Col, is that the NCAA is a POS and doesn't run its one and only football championship like it should. It should seed 16 teams and let it run.

FWIW putter, even when the field was seeded 1-16 the NCAA finagled (sp?) the bracket so a Delaware or Montana would somehow always find themselves in the top 8 so they'd host at least one game.

That is true, the almighty dollar still ruled, even back then and UD and Montana had the attendance. That said, I still think that the NCAA has addressed the issue with demanding that host schools meet a minimum bid and I can only imagine that their bean counters figured out the cost to the NCAA of running the playoffs.

[native]

good point, however, if they keep putting the west teams up against each other how can these schools prove themselves against the almighty eastern teams? I would have loved to see how Poly, Weber and the Griz did last year against other teams...may not have won but they deserve to have the chance rather then playing each other again.

My point exactly. Only 5 teams West of the Mississippi got into the playoffs last year. Then they all play each other in the first round (Except UNI, which us Westerners hardly consider a "western" team). So, regionalization actually MAKES the ECB argument for them...they get cupcakes in the first round from the weak AQ conferences (Villanover getting Colgate, Richmond getting EKU), while the few West Coast teams beat each other and eliminate the eventual competition.

The fact that Montana has been the team that advanced out of the west doesn't correlate with their argument that the rest of the West sucks balls and couldn't beat any of the East Coast teams in the playoffs...the two arguments are not connectd, but they continue to try and connect them.

Good point in that the West has no AQ cupcakes!

Ought to just get rid of regionalization, as already suggested in other posts! By the way, what year did regionalization begin?

[native]

I made no mention of Boise or Nevada.

You're right. I morphed two threads. My apology. But I know you think about Nevada.

But I did bring it up. You're the one who set 20 years as the parameter, 89Hen. The Big Sky has been around and produced champions for a long time. As dominant as the CAA is now, it has not been dominant over a very long period of time.

Also, I noted but did not count MSU's 1984 semifinal victory in my correction of your post.

[ChickenMan]

There has been a lot of 'opinion' tossed about regarding the relative strength of the Big Sky and the 'western' teams.. but that's all it is.. opinions and conjecture. And you know what they say about opinions. But the 'fact' is until some western school other than Montana makes an actual playoff run.. something that hasn't been accomplished in 10+ years.. the questions will remain legitimate.

[89Hen]

The Big Sky has been around and produced champions for a long time. As dominant as the CAA is now, it has not been dominant over a very long period of time.

The Big Sky produced champions a long time ago (with the exception of UM) and a couple of those champions moved on. I thought we're talking about the strenght of the conferences today, not 15-20+ years ago.

Maybe you don't know the Yankee/A10/CAA timeline. JMU and W&M only joined in 1993 and that's about when the conference as a whole started improving. Prior to UD and Richmond joining in 1986, it was the UMass and little sisters show. UD and UR came on board, then Nova, finally JMU, W&M, Hofstra and Towson. The conference as a whole was mediocre at best. 1998 with UMass's NC was kind of a break out year. Since then, most of the teams have improved substantially.

[89Hen]

Good point in that the West has no AQ cupcakes!

A couple first round games in the last 10 off the top of my head...

UNH @ Georgia Southern
Maine @ McNeese
Maine @ Appalachian State
SIU @ Delaware
Furman @ Villanova
Richmond @ Youngstown
Hofstra @ Furman

Sure there are some cupcake first rounders, but not all. BTW, the CAA teams won all of the above.

[AZGrizFan]

There has been a lot of 'opinion' tossed about regarding the relative strength of the Big Sky and the 'western' teams.. but that's all it is.. opinions and conjecture. And you know what they say about opinions. But the 'fact' is until some western school other than Montana makes an actual playoff run.. something that hasn't been accomplished in 10+ years.. the questions will remain legitimate.

And my point is that not being stronger than Montana doesn't mean they're not "strong". They'd beat more than 1/2 the teams in last year's playoffs, but got paired together instead.

Alas, we shall never know. And being a Griz fan, I'm fine with that.

[AZGrizFan]

Really. So all the CAA teams have the same winning percentage in their playoff games as they do in their regular season?

If the Griz couldn't beat them in the playoffs, what makes you think they could beat them in the regular season?

Answer my question first. Then I'll answer yours.

On second thought, here's the record holders in playoff winning percentage:

Highest winning percentage
(Min. 10 Games Played)
Marshall#............................................................. 23-6 .793
Ga. Southern...................................................... 38-10 .792
Youngstown St. ............................................... 25-7 .781
Boise St.#.............................................................. 8-4 .667
Appalachian St. ................................................ 21-13 .618
Montana.............................................................. 27-17 .614
Arkansas St.#...................................................... 6-4 .600
Stephen F. Austin............................................. 6-4 .600
Delaware.............................................................. 19-13 .594
Massachusetts................................................... 10-7 .588
Nevada#............................................................... 9-7 .563
UNI.......................................................................... 18-14 .563
Furman................................................................. 17-14 .548

You've got to go a LONG ways down that list before you find a CAA team.

[89Hen]

Answer my question first. Then I'll answer yours.

On second thought, here's the record holders in playoff winning percentage:

Highest winning percentage
(Min. 10 Games Played)

That looks like a list of days gone by. Marshall, Boise, Ark St... SFA? They're really relevant in I-AA.

As for your question, I'm not sure what you're getting at. I know that when UMass won their National Championship they were .700 vs CAA (A10) teams in the regular season and obviously 1.000 in the playoffs.

The interesting thing is that if the Griz DID play a CAA regular season schedule, their playoff percentage would go up. Think about it.

[AZGrizFan]

Answer my question first. Then I'll answer yours.

On second thought, here's the record holders in playoff winning percentage:

Highest winning percentage
(Min. 10 Games Played)

That looks like a list of days gone by. Marshall, Boise, Ark St... SFA? They're really relevant in I-AA.

As for your question, I'm not sure what you're getting at. I know that when UMass won their National Championship they were .700 vs CAA (A10) teams in the regular season and obviously 1.000 in the playoffs.

The interesting thing is that if the Griz DID play a CAA regular season schedule, their playoff percentage would go up. Think about it.

Here's a hint: Delawhere is batting .662 against the conference, but only .594 in the playoffs. And you have absolutely NO proof that your last statement is anything more than conjecture.

[AZGrizFan]

Answer my question first. Then I'll answer yours.

On second thought, here's the record holders in playoff winning percentage:

Highest winning percentage
(Min. 10 Games Played)

That looks like a list of days gone by. Marshall, Boise, Ark St... SFA? They're really relevant in I-AA.

As for your question, I'm not sure what you're getting at. I know that when UMass won their National Championship they were .700 vs CAA (A10) teams in the regular season and obviously 1.000 in the playoffs.

The interesting thing is that if the Griz DID play a CAA regular season schedule, their playoff percentage would go up. Think about it.

And in 1995 and 2001 the Griz were 1.000 in the playoffs as well. What's YOUR point?

Honestly, and I wish I could get someone to nut up and answer this question: What's it like being a fan of a team in which you have to glom onto OTHER team's success because yours sucks 3 out of every 5 years?

[ChickenMan]

And my point is that not being stronger than Montana doesn't mean they're not "strong". They'd beat more than 1/2 the teams in last year's playoffs, but got paired together instead.

That may have happened last year.. but it hasn't happened much prior to that. Since the 2000 season here's the playoff records of the non-Griz western schools...

'00 - UD 49 PSU 14
'01 - SHS 34 NAU 31
'02 - McNeese St 21 MSU 14
'03 - UNI 35 MSU 14
'03 - NAU 35 McNeese St 3
'03 - Florida Atlantic 48 NAU 25
'04 - EWU 35 SIU 31
'04 - SHS 35 EWU 34
'05 - UNI 41 EWU 38
'05 - Cal Poly 35 Montana 21
'05 - Texas St 14 Cal Poly 7
'06 - MSU 31 Furman 13
'06 - ASU 38 MSU 17
'07 - EWU 44 McNeese St 15
'07 - ASU 38 EWU 35
'08 - Weber 49 Cal Poly 35
'08 - Montana 24 Weber 13

as you can see.. only in two years ('05/'08) has the Big Sky or west coast school been eliminated by another.

[ChickenMan]

And in 1995 and 2001 the Griz were 1.000 in the playoffs as well. What's YOUR point?

that Griz were also unbeaten in league play as well. When UMass won the title .. they were the 3rd place team in the A10/CAA.

[89Hen]

Here's a hint: Delawhere is batting .662 against the conference, but only .594 in the playoffs. And you have absolutely NO proof that your last statement is anything more than conjecture.

.880 > .571 compared to .662 > .594?

I'm no math major but I think the delta is about 450% different.

Thanks ONCE AGAIN for arguing my side.

As for the last statement, keep thinking about it and it may come to you why it's more than conjecture.