Facts Vs. Narrative

[cats2506]

If the season just started two weeks ago and UM had defeated SDSU and USD the first two games the way they did and MSU had defeated Yale and SFA the way they did, then you'd have to think that the Griz are playing better than the Cats.

If you're a Cat fan, you can take solace in the fact that MSU didn't look all that great against Oregon or SDSU and yet it still went undefeated the rest of the way, won the BSC and is in the nat'l semis. The Cats also didn't look all that great against Mercyhurst or Cal Poly, but they looked great in the games right after that.

It's been interesting this year because people have been in a big hurry to write MSU off or discount the success it's had.

After the Cats lost the first two games, it was a rebuilding year. (I'm on a "was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?" roll here).

Then I recall EWU was the worst team in the league when MSU beat them, but the Eagles proceeded to win their next three games.

Then the Cats were going to lose to NAU and fell behind 7-0 and it was over except they scored the next 34 points and then NAU wasn't good anymore even though they went into the last game of the season with a shot at making the playoffs.

Then MSU was going to struggle at UNC because the Bears had the best pass defense in the conference until Lamson threw for over 300 yards on them.

And then someone said Weber State has a good defense and MSU put up 66 on them.

Then MSU had to play the top two teams in the BSC the last two games but got a lucky Pick6 from Dowler to pull out those games.

Now -- two games after beating UM in Missoula -- MSU isn't playing very good and UM is playing great.

What next?

I don't know what's next Tom. You lost me at "the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor"
How can I trust anything you wrote after that? Your grasp of history is

It’s right on par with your grasp of classic movies!

Oh oh what am I missing here

[damnyoutuesday]

If the season just started two weeks ago and UM had defeated SDSU and USD the first two games the way they did and MSU had defeated Yale and SFA the way they did, then you'd have to think that the Griz are playing better than the Cats.

If you're a Cat fan, you can take solace in the fact that MSU didn't look all that great against Oregon or SDSU and yet it still went undefeated the rest of the way, won the BSC and is in the nat'l semis. The Cats also didn't look all that great against Mercyhurst or Cal Poly, but they looked great in the games right after that.

It's been interesting this year because people have been in a big hurry to write MSU off or discount the success it's had.

After the Cats lost the first two games, it was a rebuilding year. (I'm on a "was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?" roll here).

Then I recall EWU was the worst team in the league when MSU beat them, but the Eagles proceeded to win their next three games.

Then the Cats were going to lose to NAU and fell behind 7-0 and it was over except they scored the next 34 points and then NAU wasn't good anymore even though they went into the last game of the season with a shot at making the playoffs.

Then MSU was going to struggle at UNC because the Bears had the best pass defense in the conference until Lamson threw for over 300 yards on them.

And then someone said Weber State has a good defense and MSU put up 66 on them.

Then MSU had to play the top two teams in the BSC the last two games but got a lucky Pick6 from Dowler to pull out those games.

Now -- two games after beating UM in Missoula -- MSU isn't playing very good and UM is playing great.

What next?

I don't know what's next Tom. You lost me at "the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor"
How can I trust anything you wrote after that? Your grasp of history is

It’s right on par with your grasp of classic movies!

Oh oh what am I missing here

Lmao I literally watched this movie last night

[rfischer94]

I'm hearing a lot of happy talk and narrative spinning coming out of Missoula the last few days. Things like this:

"The Griz have flipped a switch since the first Brawl."

"The Griz were just over-confident last time."

"The homefield isn't as big of a deal anymore since the road team won in November."

"It's super hard to beat a team twice in one season."

"All the pressure is on MSU because they're favored."

But what I'm not hearing are any objective arguments. So here are some examples:

1) The Cats just beat this Montana team three weeks ago in their home stadium, where they rarely lose.

2) Brent Vigen is 39-2 in Bozeman, winning 95% of his games at home (two OT losses, one to NDSU and one to SDSU).

3) Under Vigen, the Cats have played a team twice in a season on two occasions, sweeping both times (and winning by bigger margins in round 2).

4) UM has one road playoff win in their history as a program.

5) This UM team has not played in a road environment that is even remotely close to what they will face on Saturday.

6) The Griz haven't won in Bozeman since Rob Ash was the head coach, over ten year ago.

7) Hauck 2.0 has not won in Bozeman, period-- he's lost by 34, 34, and 23.

8 ) The betting line opened with MSU favored by 5.5 points.

I am guessing that behind all the bluster and bravado, Griz fans are pretty scared about what's likeliest to happen on Saturday. If they're not, they aren't paying attention.

This is an outstanding post and I'm going to use it for talking points with Tootell today when we go live on Nuanez Now at 4 p.m. Not kidding, I love it!

In case you didn't see this -Ryan Tootell on several of these subjects
https://open.spotify.com/episode/4KeFvz ... 77d09c4f71

Maybe I missed something but what I took from this podcast:

Yes, those are stats - no they don’t matter.
- Missoula got better and the cats got worse (not that the competitor was better than what they had over the hill). SFA was far and above better than sdsu and usd - which did get acknowledged but then went on to say the cats weren’t playing better?? We easily beat SFA
- home field doesn’t matter much because we’ve played this year? I don’t get this
- the home record was played off as doesn’t matter much (39-2) because the competition I guess?
- Bobby is the better coach and this team is significantly better than what they were in the last meetings because Bobby is back
- the griz made a bunch of mistakes and still made it a close game (no mention that we left points on the field and also could have scored on the last drive).

I appreciate the content but honestly nothing seemed to be “important” unless it was a Gris thing.
-

Everything, everywhere is like this. Did no one see Gilman yank Brott’s facemask on the long TD? The Cats are getting zero respect in the media. At least the LUCKY blocked FG and pick 6 were legal plays. The UC call against Eiden was another bad call. The guys helmet was already off his head and that probably cost us 4 points cuz it was going to be third and nine. ??????

Not to mention that if therather obvious penalty is called, all other things held equal, Gilman had a rather pedestrian day.

[TomCat88]

If the season just started two weeks ago and UM had defeated SDSU and USD the first two games the way they did and MSU had defeated Yale and SFA the way they did, then you'd have to think that the Griz are playing better than the Cats.

If you're a Cat fan, you can take solace in the fact that MSU didn't look all that great against Oregon or SDSU and yet it still went undefeated the rest of the way, won the BSC and is in the nat'l semis. The Cats also didn't look all that great against Mercyhurst or Cal Poly, but they looked great in the games right after that.

It's been interesting this year because people have been in a big hurry to write MSU off or discount the success it's had.

After the Cats lost the first two games, it was a rebuilding year. (I'm on a "was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?" roll here).

Then I recall EWU was the worst team in the league when MSU beat them, but the Eagles proceeded to win their next three games.

Then the Cats were going to lose to NAU and fell behind 7-0 and it was over except they scored the next 34 points and then NAU wasn't good anymore even though they went into the last game of the season with a shot at making the playoffs.

Then MSU was going to struggle at UNC because the Bears had the best pass defense in the conference until Lamson threw for over 300 yards on them.

And then someone said Weber State has a good defense and MSU put up 66 on them.

Then MSU had to play the top two teams in the BSC the last two games but got a lucky Pick6 from Dowler to pull out those games.

Now -- two games after beating UM in Missoula -- MSU isn't playing very good and UM is playing great.

What next?

I don't know what's next Tom. You lost me at "the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor"
How can I trust anything you wrote after that? Your grasp of history is

It’s right on par with your grasp of classic movies!

Oh oh what am I missing here

Lmao I literally watched this movie last night

This post, and the responses to it, has been the most satisfying thing I've written all year. Be it on here or for Skyline.

Glad to have brought a moment of levity to this game and this week. All of those things are what I heard someone say as the season rolled along. No biggy, I just wish they'd come back and say they got it wrong before they go on to their next bad take.

My only disappointment is that no one picked up on the line about Weber State's defense.

[MrGoodKat]

If the season just started two weeks ago and UM had defeated SDSU and USD the first two games the way they did and MSU had defeated Yale and SFA the way they did, then you'd have to think that the Griz are playing better than the Cats.

If you're a Cat fan, you can take solace in the fact that MSU didn't look all that great against Oregon or SDSU and yet it still went undefeated the rest of the way, won the BSC and is in the nat'l semis. The Cats also didn't look all that great against Mercyhurst or Cal Poly, but they looked great in the games right after that.

It's been interesting this year because people have been in a big hurry to write MSU off or discount the success it's had.

After the Cats lost the first two games, it was a rebuilding year. (I'm on a "was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?" roll here).

Then I recall EWU was the worst team in the league when MSU beat them, but the Eagles proceeded to win their next three games.

Then the Cats were going to lose to NAU and fell behind 7-0 and it was over except they scored the next 34 points and then NAU wasn't good anymore even though they went into the last game of the season with a shot at making the playoffs.

Then MSU was going to struggle at UNC because the Bears had the best pass defense in the conference until Lamson threw for over 300 yards on them.

And then someone said Weber State has a good defense and MSU put up 66 on them.

Then MSU had to play the top two teams in the BSC the last two games but got a lucky Pick6 from Dowler to pull out those games.

Now -- two games after beating UM in Missoula -- MSU isn't playing very good and UM is playing great.

What next?

I don't know what's next Tom. You lost me at "the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor"
How can I trust anything you wrote after that? Your grasp of history is

It’s right on par with your grasp of classic movies!

Oh oh what am I missing here

Lmao I literally watched this movie last night

This post, and the responses to it, has been the most satisfying thing I've written all year. Be it on here or for Skyline.

Glad to have brought a moment of levity to this game and this week. All of those things are what I heard someone say as the season rolled along. No biggy, I just wish they'd come back and say they got it wrong before they go on to their next bad take.

My only disappointment is that no one picked up on the line about Weber State's defense.

I caught that when I read it last night and it LOL’d me.

[cats2506]

If the season just started two weeks ago and UM had defeated SDSU and USD the first two games the way they did and MSU had defeated Yale and SFA the way they did, then you'd have to think that the Griz are playing better than the Cats.

If you're a Cat fan, you can take solace in the fact that MSU didn't look all that great against Oregon or SDSU and yet it still went undefeated the rest of the way, won the BSC and is in the nat'l semis. The Cats also didn't look all that great against Mercyhurst or Cal Poly, but they looked great in the games right after that.

It's been interesting this year because people have been in a big hurry to write MSU off or discount the success it's had.

After the Cats lost the first two games, it was a rebuilding year. (I'm on a "was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?" roll here).

Then I recall EWU was the worst team in the league when MSU beat them, but the Eagles proceeded to win their next three games.

Then the Cats were going to lose to NAU and fell behind 7-0 and it was over except they scored the next 34 points and then NAU wasn't good anymore even though they went into the last game of the season with a shot at making the playoffs.

Then MSU was going to struggle at UNC because the Bears had the best pass defense in the conference until Lamson threw for over 300 yards on them.

And then someone said Weber State has a good defense and MSU put up 66 on them.

Then MSU had to play the top two teams in the BSC the last two games but got a lucky Pick6 from Dowler to pull out those games.

Now -- two games after beating UM in Missoula -- MSU isn't playing very good and UM is playing great.

What next?

I don't know what's next Tom. You lost me at "the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor"
How can I trust anything you wrote after that? Your grasp of history is

It’s right on par with your grasp of classic movies!

Oh oh what am I missing here

Lmao I literally watched this movie last night

This post, and the responses to it, has been the most satisfying thing I've written all year. Be it on here or for Skyline.

Glad to have brought a moment of levity to this game and this week. All of those things are what I heard someone say as the season rolled along. No biggy, I just wish they'd come back and say they got it wrong before they go on to their next bad take.

My only disappointment is that no one picked up on the line about Weber State's defense.

I have to admit that I thought WSU's defense was better than they were too.

[WalkOn79]

If the season just started two weeks ago and UM had defeated SDSU and USD the first two games the way they did and MSU had defeated Yale and SFA the way they did, then you'd have to think that the Griz are playing better than the Cats.

If you're a Cat fan, you can take solace in the fact that MSU didn't look all that great against Oregon or SDSU and yet it still went undefeated the rest of the way, won the BSC and is in the nat'l semis. The Cats also didn't look all that great against Mercyhurst or Cal Poly, but they looked great in the games right after that.

It's been interesting this year because people have been in a big hurry to write MSU off or discount the success it's had.

After the Cats lost the first two games, it was a rebuilding year. (I'm on a "was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?" roll here).

Then I recall EWU was the worst team in the league when MSU beat them, but the Eagles proceeded to win their next three games.

Then the Cats were going to lose to NAU and fell behind 7-0 and it was over except they scored the next 34 points and then NAU wasn't good anymore even though they went into the last game of the season with a shot at making the playoffs.

Then MSU was going to struggle at UNC because the Bears had the best pass defense in the conference until Lamson threw for over 300 yards on them.

And then someone said Weber State has a good defense and MSU put up 66 on them.

Then MSU had to play the top two teams in the BSC the last two games but got a lucky Pick6 from Dowler to pull out those games.

Now -- two games after beating UM in Missoula -- MSU isn't playing very good and UM is playing great.

What next?

I don't know what's next Tom. You lost me at "the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor"
How can I trust anything you wrote after that? Your grasp of history is

It’s right on par with your grasp of classic movies!

Oh oh what am I missing here

"Forget it, He's on a roll"

[coloradocat]

"It's super hard to beat a team twice in one season."

How hard is it if in the first game you went on the road and won and the second game is at home? This is the question that doesn't really get asked or answered. The original premise is faulty to begin with but it really falls apart when you add in the context of the actual situation we are in.

[TomCat88]

"It's super hard to beat a team twice in one season."

How hard is it if in the first game you went on the road and won and the second game is at home? This is the question that doesn't really get asked or answered. The original premise is faulty to begin with but it really falls apart when you add in the context of the actual situation we are in.

Correct. I suspect that most of the cases involve a team that isn't as good as its opponent winning at home, then losing to the better team on the road later in the season. The next most common is the lesser team winning on the road (Vikings-Bears), then losing at home (Vikings-Bears). As you're pointing out: I bet it's rare that the lesser or equal team loses at home and then wins on the road.

[BlueAndGoldNation]

"It's super hard to beat a team twice in one season."

How hard is it if in the first game you went on the road and won and the second game is at home? This is the question that doesn't really get asked or answered. The original premise is faulty to begin with but it really falls apart when you add in the context of the actual situation we are in.

Correct. I suspect that most of the cases involve a team that isn't as good as its opponent winning at home, then losing to the better team on the road later in the season. The next most common is the lesser team winning on the road (Vikings-Bears), then losing at home (Vikings-Bears). As you're pointing out: I bet it's rare that the lesser or equal team loses at home and then wins on the road.

This is what Google AI came up with when asked that same question...

"Statistically, you have a strong edge: factoring in the typical ~58% home win rate in football (American) plus the momentum/familiarity from winning the away game, your probability of winning the home rematch is significantly higher than 50%, often leaning towards 60-70% if both teams are average(same strength), but depends heavily on team strength and how much the home advantage (travel, crowd, refs) helps. Beating the same team twice in a season is harder (around coin-flip in college), but home field advantage makes the rematch much more likely to favor the home team.

Key Factors at Play:
Home Field Advantage (HFA): This is huge in football, with home teams winning around 57-58% of the time in the NFL, and some data showing better home performance in both offense and defense.

The "Beat the Same Team Twice" Factor: Historically, it's tough to beat the same opponent twice in one season (closer to 50/50), but the home team usually wins that rematch more often than not.

Team Strength: If the home team is strong and the away team is weak, the HFA adds even more to the probability. If they are evenly matched, the HFA is the deciding factor.

A Simplified Example (Using Percentages):
If two average teams played, the home team might have a 58% chance to win (just HFA).

If you beat them away, you've shown you're at least equal. Now at home, your chances might jump to 60-65%+, especially if you're the better team overall.

In short: The home crowd, familiarity with your own stadium, and the opponent's travel all boost your chances, making it highly probable you'll win, despite the general difficulty of beating the same team twice."

[OldGriz]

If the season just started two weeks ago and UM had defeated SDSU and USD the first two games the way they did and MSU had defeated Yale and SFA the way they did, then you'd have to think that the Griz are playing better than the Cats.

If you're a Cat fan, you can take solace in the fact that MSU didn't look all that great against Oregon or SDSU and yet it still went undefeated the rest of the way, won the BSC and is in the nat'l semis. The Cats also didn't look all that great against Mercyhurst or Cal Poly, but they looked great in the games right after that.

It's been interesting this year because people have been in a big hurry to write MSU off or discount the success it's had.

After the Cats lost the first two games, it was a rebuilding year. (I'm on a "was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?" roll here).

Then I recall EWU was the worst team in the league when MSU beat them, but the Eagles proceeded to win their next three games.

Then the Cats were going to lose to NAU and fell behind 7-0 and it was over except they scored the next 34 points and then NAU wasn't good anymore even though they went into the last game of the season with a shot at making the playoffs.

Then MSU was going to struggle at UNC because the Bears had the best pass defense in the conference until Lamson threw for over 300 yards on them.

And then someone said Weber State has a good defense and MSU put up 66 on them.

Then MSU had to play the top two teams in the BSC the last two games but got a lucky Pick6 from Dowler to pull out those games.

Now -- two games after beating UM in Missoula -- MSU isn't playing very good and UM is playing great.

What next?

MSU isn’t playing very good? LOL. Sandbagger extraordinaire!

What next? Here’s what’s next:

The Cats are favored in this game for good reason. The Cats will probably win. However, IF the Griz defense executes at the level they exhibited against SDSU & USD, and IF the Griz win the turnover battle, AND, IF the Griz succesfully complete one trick play, the Griz win. That’s a lot of ifs. It’s why the Cats are rightly favored. But if the Griz do it, then they’re the better team.

If we assign a 50% probability to each condition you mentioned, and all of them must evaluate to true in order for the grizzlies to win, then that means they have exactly 12.5% chance of winning this Saturday.

confusing them with basic math

Who be confused?

[catatac]

Yes OG, we're on the same page here since you were wondering. Cats won round 1, were the best team on that day. If the Griz win round 2 Saturday, I'll concede they were the best team on that day. That would result in a dead even tie, 1-1 for the year.

[onceacat]

"It's super hard to beat a team twice in one season."

How hard is it if in the first game you went on the road and won and the second game is at home? This is the question that doesn't really get asked or answered. The original premise is faulty to begin with but it really falls apart when you add in the context of the actual situation we are in.

Exactly. The Cats already achieved the tougher of the two tasks. They were 2-3 point favorites in Panda land (about a 55% chance of winning) but they are 5-6 point favorites at home (65-70% chance of winning)

First game was basically a coin flip, and the cats came up heads. (It was really a 2 score game, not as close as the score indicated). Now, with all the advantages of playing at home, it's not nearly as difficult.

Another interesting point, from Sam Herder: No home team has lost a semi final game since 2016.

[Cledus]

"It's super hard to beat a team twice in one season."

How hard is it if in the first game you went on the road and won and the second game is at home? This is the question that doesn't really get asked or answered. The original premise is faulty to begin with but it really falls apart when you add in the context of the actual situation we are in.

Also, with the original premise it always seems to be implied the loser of the first game watches the game film, and learns what they can improve on but the winner of the first game doesn't watch the game film and keeps everything the same since it was a winning formula the first time.

[iaafan]

In 2022, the gris beat cal poly 57-0 and EWU 63-7 at home right before Cat-gris. Then…

[kwcat]

"It's super hard to beat a team twice in one season."

How hard is it if in the first game you went on the road and won and the second game is at home? This is the question that doesn't really get asked or answered. The original premise is faulty to begin with but it really falls apart when you add in the context of the actual situation we are in.

Formula? Are you saying there is math involved! Or just chemistry! Lol.

Also, with the original premise it always seems to be implied the loser of the first game watches the game film, and learns what they can improve on but the winner of the first game doesn't watch the game film and keeps everything the same since it was a winning formula the first time.

[Prodigal Cat]

"It's super hard to beat a team twice in one season."

How hard is it if in the first game you went on the road and won and the second game is at home? This is the question that doesn't really get asked or answered. The original premise is faulty to begin with but it really falls apart when you add in the context of the actual situation we are in.

I very well could have missed one but i've only found 2 instances where a team won away during the season and then lost the rematch at home in the playoffs looking back to 2010.
NDSU/Ill St this year
NDSU/USD 2023
I will say both of these games were much further apart, months not weeks, so that plays a significant role in that the teams had time to get better or get worse.

There are significantly more instances of the winning team winning the rematch but these all had the home team winning and was played in the same stadium. There are four instances just in the last few seasons.
'24 MSU/Idaho and SDSU/NDSU (there are several more of these in the previous years of the same team winning both games,'12,14,18,22)
'22 MSU/Weber

In 2019 Weber lost badly to UM in Missoula but got revenge in the playoffs and won at home. In 2016 the Jacks won the regular season matchup in Fargo but the Bison won in the playoffs again in Fargo.

"It tough to beat a team twice" really doesn't have a ton of facts behind it at least in this context.