Bobcat fans I salute you!!

[kmax]

Now that I've killed both threads. I'm going to leave you guys alone because it plain to me cat fans really can't handle losing to the Griz on a yearly basis. Good luck next year since you don't have a QB and only have 5 scholorships to hand out.

Might want to check your facts again smarty pants.

[crazycat]

I'm sensing a reluctance to answering this question. So I think I know the answer.

I'll answer your question if you answer my question about the cats giving up the playoff win last year without Jefferson and the coke dealing CB that the Bozo PD let play all year.

No you can go first. You're a guest here, afterall.

[catamaran]

I'm sensing a reluctance to answering this question. So I think I know the answer.

I'll answer your question if you answer my question about the cats giving up the playoff win last year without Jefferson and the coke dealing CB that the Bozo PD let play all year.

No you can go first. You're a guest here, afterall.

as you saw in the 'brawl' last year...Jefferson had really cooled off by the end of last year and Beach was coming into his own at the end

[crazycat]

Now that I've killed both threads. I'm going to leave you guys alone because it plain to me cat fans really can't handle losing to the Griz on a yearly basis. Good luck next year since you don't have a QB and only have 5 scholorships to hand out.

Oh no, no, don't feel so bad. I think my question killed the thread, since no one wants to answer it. That inaction is pretty telling.

[Grizlaw]

Oh no, no, don't feel so bad. I think my question killed the thread, since no one wants to answer it. That inaction is pretty telling.

Oh is it? And what does it tell you, exactly...that the Griz fans who post here would rather win with thugs than lose with players with better character? I suppose it would tell you that, if that was the message you were trying to get out of it.

Or, let me offer an alternative: remember a few posts ago, when tampa was accusing you of setting arbitrary "rules" and "parameters" to try to frame debates in your favor? Well, your question in this thread is Exhibit A. You may not be doing it intentionally, but by setting up a completely unrealistic "all-or-nothing, either-or" scenario, you are, again, stacking the deck in favor of your own argument. And, as usual, while I am perfectly willing to discuss issues with you, I am not going to follow you right down the garden path that you're trying to lead us down.

Let me give you the real answer to your question: yes, I would rather have a losing team that has good character than a winning team that's full of thugs...and if I were willing to suspend logic and reality and accept your premise that it really is an "either-or" scenario, then I would answer accordingly. But we both know that that is not the case, which is why your question is ludicrous.

Sorry if that's not the answer you were looking for, but it is my honest answer.

[crazycat]

Oh no, no, don't feel so bad. I think my question killed the thread, since no one wants to answer it. That inaction is pretty telling.

Oh is it? And what does it tell you, exactly...that the Griz fans who post here would rather win with thugs than lose with players with better character? I suppose it would tell you that, if that was the message you were trying to get out of it.

Or, let me offer an alternative: remember a few posts ago, when tampa was accusing you of setting arbitrary "rules" and "parameters" to try to frame debates in your favor? Well, your question in this thread is Exhibit A. You may not be doing it intentionally, but by setting up a completely unrealistic "all-or-nothing, either-or" scenario, you are, again, stacking the deck in favor of your own argument. And, as usual, while I am perfectly willing to discuss issues with you, I am not going to follow you right down the garden path that you're trying to lead us down.

Let me give you the real answer to your question: yes, I would rather have a losing team that has good character than a winning team that's full of thugs...and if I were willing to suspend logic and reality and accept your premise that it really is an "either-or" scenario, then I would answer accordingly. But we both know that that is not the case, which is why your question is ludicrous.

Sorry if that's not the answer you were looking for, but it is my honest answer.

Actually I thought it was obvious that the topic had boiled down to a discussion between Savage and I, so I posed the question to him. I wasn't expecting anyone else to try to answer it. So when they responded, but didn't answer I then found it telling.

But I can see your point from the way you framed your response. However, I think the proper, and easy, answer is that you'd rather have a 7-4 season without all the problems and distractions. It's a tough call, I'll admit, but you're bound to have a bad season eventually (hard to believe even for me), so why not for the sake of this hypothetical situation have it be this year? Seems like an easy out for you. (I wrote this before I saw what your answer is in that 3rd paragraph).

The answer you gave is exactly what I wanted to hear. I'd feel the same way if I were in your boat.

[GrizinWashington]

"Here's the 2-0 to Grizlaw...

Swung on and BELTED, deep to left center fieeeld......GET OUT THE RYE BREAD AND THE MUSTARD THIS TIME, GRAMMA; IT IS GRAAAAAND SALAMI TIME!!!'


(Dave is just the best!!)

[cats2506]

All I'm wondering now is with Russum, Quinn and Coleman playing pretty big roles on your team (Russum and Quinn were 1st All-Big Sky), just how much has that taken away from your winning? Not that this would've happened, but would you rather have a 7-4 record and not be in the playoffs without them? Were they worth it?

That doesn't make any sense. If, as you say, we wouldn't be 7-4 with their absence, their presence doesn't make them worth anything.

But, if instead we would've been 7-4 without them, then yes to Quinn and Rassum. No to Coleman.

OK. Allow me to try that again.

Which would you prefer:

A) 11-0 and No. 3 seed with Russum, Quinn and Coleman on the team.
or
B) 7-4 and no playoffs without Russum, Quinn and Coleman.

You said B) wouldn't have happenned in the absence of Rassum, Quinn, and Coleman.

I didn't mean to.

How's this? "If" you had gone 7-4 w/o R, Q, and C, would you have preferred that over going 11-0 with R, Q and C and all the negativity they bring to the table?

Do the Griz beat the cats or lose to the cats?

I knew that one game makes or breaks your season

[AlphaGriz1]

I just have one question for cat fans, since I forgot the answer.

What's it like to lose?

According to you, you should have a refreshed memory after this weekend, right?

Yes, I am not feeling good about this one coming up.


Had to get my shot in while I had the chance. I let youg usy off this weekend so you owe me one!

Nah, you just knew you were outnumbered...by a lot...and most of us weren't exactly in a friendly to the Griz sort of mood post game.

Like I am smart enough to figure out the odds?

The cat women were "extremely friendly" they kept whispering in my ear "there is something really intoxicating about a winner".

I could not tell them they were wrong and making a bad decision after what just happened to their team.

[cats2506]

Oh is it? And what does it tell you, exactly...that the Griz fans who post here would rather win with thugs than lose with players with better character? I suppose it would tell you that, if that was the message you were trying to get out of it.

I'm sure the griz fans would rather have the players with character, but the past year has shown that BH is willing to take the thugs and risk the program to win.

[crazycat]

"Here's the 2-0 to Grizlaw...

Swung on and BELTED, deep to left center fieeeld......GET OUT THE RYE BREAD AND THE MUSTARD THIS TIME, GRAMMA; IT IS GRAAAAAND SALAMI TIME!!!'


(Dave is just the best!!)

Looks like your were seconds late. Robbed at the fence. Game over.

[Grizlaw]

Actually I thought it was obvious that the topic had boiled down to a discussion between Savage and I, so I posed the question to him. I wasn't expecting anyone else to try to answer it. So when they responded, but didn't answer I then found it telling.

Ahh...sorry. I tend to post somewhat sporadically on here -- I'll put up a slew of posts during my "down time" at work, stop posting when I get busy, and then come back later and still think of myself as being "in" the conversation, even though I haven't posted for a while.

I'm sure the griz fans would rather have the players with character, but the past year has shown that BH is willing to take the thugs and risk the program to win.

Yeah, he has made some choices that turned out badly (and that, arguably, he should have known could turn out as they did), although I still think every situation is different. Obviously, I wish we would not have recruited Coleman and his gang, but I still don't think I see Russum and Quinn in the same light -- they all had problems in their pasts, but not all off-field problems are "created equally," as they say.

It'll be interesting to see what happens going forward, to say the least. I'm not in the "Hauck must be fired" camp yet, but I do want to see some changes in the way things are done from a recruiting standpoint in the future.

[crazycat]

Oh is it? And what does it tell you, exactly...that the Griz fans who post here would rather win with thugs than lose with players with better character? I suppose it would tell you that, if that was the message you were trying to get out of it.

I'm sure the griz fans would rather have the players with character, but the past year has shown that BH is willing to take the thugs and risk the program to win.

I didn't say it. Don't look at me.

Good luck with this 2506. I'm sure that somehow your words will be misconstrued and that you have some hidden message that has nothing to with what you said. But at least you didn't preface your comment. So you got that going for ya.

[Grizlaw]

Good luck with this 2506. I'm sure that somehow your words will be misconstrued and that you have some hidden message that has nothing to with what you said. But at least you didn't preface your comment. So you got that going for ya.

Oh, I don't think anyone has accused you of having any "hidden" message in any of your posts -- your messages have always come through pretty loud and clear.

[crazycat]

Good luck with this 2506. I'm sure that somehow your words will be misconstrued and that you have some hidden message that has nothing to with what you said. But at least you didn't preface your comment. So you got that going for ya.

Oh, I don't think anyone has accused you of having any "hidden" message in any of your posts -- your messages have always come through pretty loud and clear.

Now, now.

Anyway here's to both programs staying clean and, er, sober into eternity.

[Grizlaw]

Good luck with this 2506. I'm sure that somehow your words will be misconstrued and that you have some hidden message that has nothing to with what you said. But at least you didn't preface your comment. So you got that going for ya.

Oh, I don't think anyone has accused you of having any "hidden" message in any of your posts -- your messages have always come through pretty loud and clear.

Now, now.

Anyway here's to both programs staying clean and, er, sober into eternity.

Cheers to that.

And with this post, I'm going to sign off for a couple days. I'm on my way out the door for a friend's birthday party, and then I get to go home and pack so I can catch a 6:00 am flight to Montana for Thanksgiving. So, Happy Thanksgiving to all (if I don't post again before then...which I may).

[Eastcoastgriz]

Oh is it? And what does it tell you, exactly...that the Griz fans who post here would rather win with thugs than lose with players with better character? I suppose it would tell you that, if that was the message you were trying to get out of it.

I'm sure the griz fans would rather have the players with character, but the past year has shown that BH is willing to take the thugs and risk the program to win.[/quote]

I don't think so. Had Bobby known there were going to be problems, he would have not take thise kids.

[AlphaGriz1]

Oh is it? And what does it tell you, exactly...that the Griz fans who post here would rather win with thugs than lose with players with better character? I suppose it would tell you that, if that was the message you were trying to get out of it.

I'm sure the griz fans would rather have the players with character, but the past year has shown that BH is willing to take the thugs and risk the program to win.[/quote]

I don't think so. Had Bobby known there were going to be problems, he would have not take thise kids.

He knew about Coleman and Shelton and viola' they were on the team, guess that blows your credibility out the window.

[cats2506]

Oh is it? And what does it tell you, exactly...that the Griz fans who post here would rather win with thugs than lose with players with better character? I suppose it would tell you that, if that was the message you were trying to get out of it.

I'm sure the griz fans would rather have the players with character, but the past year has shown that BH is willing to take the thugs and risk the program to win.[/quote]

I don't think so. Had Bobby known there were going to be problems, he would have not take thise kids.

He knew about Coleman and Shelton and viola' they were on the team, guess that blows your credibility out the window.

Thanks AG, I think there are others that he took the risk with too, but have worked out so far.

[AlphaGriz1]

No problem, you can only hide the facts if your a "True Griz Fan".