So is Weber sneaky?

[MrGoodKat]

Hmm? A smaller sample that consists of three of the top four offenses in the BSC vs a larger sample that countermeasures playing those three solid offensive teams. I think that skews their stats in a negative way, don't you?

Yes, games are decided by points. I think that we all know that. Not sure why you're bringing that into the conversation. Teams are evaluated on how well they play offense and defense, and one way to measure that is statistically and by taking into consideration externalities that effect how an individual unit might perform. In this case when you control some of the outliers for all teams, WSU shows well.

Fifth, statistically, in total defense in the BSC is good when considering it includes three of the top four offenses in the BSC. Total defense per game/per play is probably a better way to evaluate how good a defense is than points since points allowed can be directly related to misplays by the offense and special teams. Yards allowed per game/play eliminates those miscues by the offense/STs but can still be negatively affected by the offense/STs even without miscues.

This is exactly what I meant when I said that people just use/ignore OOC stuff to forward whatever narrative they're trying to run with. You want to throw out the FBS OOC games because they make Weber look bad, but you want to include the FCS OOC games because they help the case you're making by couter-measuring their poor performance in BSC play.

Looking at their conference play alone doesn't skew anything. It just shows us who they are relative to the conference they play in. And it turns out, they're real bad.

The reason I brought up that games are decided by points is that you're trying to support your argument with yardage statistics. As I've demonstrated, Weber's defense has given up touchdowns on a few short fields, but the average and the majority have been long scoring drives.

I am a little surprised to meet such a defender of Weber State's defense, but we don't need to go around in circles. We will see what Saturday brings.

He’ll just say it doesn’t mean anything because they’ve only played the good BSC offenses.

What a bizarre hill to plant your flag on.

[TomCat88]

Hmm? A smaller sample that consists of three of the top four offenses in the BSC vs a larger sample that countermeasures playing those three solid offensive teams. I think that skews their stats in a negative way, don't you?

Yes, games are decided by points. I think that we all know that. Not sure why you're bringing that into the conversation. Teams are evaluated on how well they play offense and defense, and one way to measure that is statistically and by taking into consideration externalities that effect how an individual unit might perform. In this case when you control some of the outliers for all teams, WSU shows well.

Fifth, statistically, in total defense in the BSC is good when considering it includes three of the top four offenses in the BSC. Total defense per game/per play is probably a better way to evaluate how good a defense is than points since points allowed can be directly related to misplays by the offense and special teams. Yards allowed per game/play eliminates those miscues by the offense/STs but can still be negatively affected by the offense/STs even without miscues.

This is exactly what I meant when I said that people just use/ignore OOC stuff to forward whatever narrative they're trying to run with. You want to throw out the FBS OOC games because they make Weber look bad, but you want to include the FCS OOC games because they help the case you're making by couter-measuring their poor performance in BSC play.

Looking at their conference play alone doesn't skew anything. It just shows us who they are relative to the conference they play in. And it turns out, they're real bad.

The reason I brought up that games are decided by points is that you're trying to support your argument with yardage statistics. As I've demonstrated, Weber's defense has given up touchdowns on a few short fields, but the average and the majority have been long scoring drives.

I am a little surprised to meet such a defender of Weber State's defense, but we don't need to go around in circles. We will see what Saturday brings.

He’ll just say it doesn’t mean anything because they’ve only played the good BSC offenses.

What a bizarre hill to plant your flag on.

No you don't remove FBS games to support your argument, you remove them to normalize the comparison. If one team plays two solid FBS teams and others either don't play any or just one and that one isn't a solid team, then you get skewed stats.

Also, I didn't keep the OOC FCS games because they make Weber look good. Weber gave up 537 yards to McNeese. Those numbers are still in there.

I don't expect Weber's defense to suddenly start shutting teams down. As I've explained, WSU doesn't play complimentary football as its offense and special teams continually fail in nearly every game they've played. Unless they get help from those two units in simply having them put together an average day (hard to do against MSU's defense and ST cover units), then they aren't going to be able to accomplish much defensively.

They're fifth in total defense in the BSC in FCS-only games and that includes playing three of the top four offenses in the league. The other teams that have played three of the top four are Idaho State, Northern Colorado and Cal Poly, which has played all four. Even when you don't remove the FBS games, Weber is ahead of Cal Poly and Idaho State, they're just one spot behind UNC and would be ahead of them if you take out the FBS games.

[TomCat88]

Could it be that those teams are ranked high on offensive stats because they’ve played bad teams like Weber? UM’s starters killed them, Sac went over their average rushing yards per game by 100 yards and 2 YPC, UC Davis was right at their average, PSU was right at their average, and UM was 70 over their average only because they’ve played backups early.

That’s not a sign of a good defense. A good defense holds teams under their averages. You can try whatever reasoning you want, but none of it holds up. Weber is bad. Bad on offense, bad on defense, bad overall.

Again, you're skipping over a key variable: a team's defense can look bad if its offense and STs are bad. They're not stand-alone entities. They rely on each other to a certain degree.

WSU's offense is arguable the worst in the BSC and its STs aren't far behind. This is where the 1983 MSU comparison, which many of you should be able to understand if you were around during that era. MSU's 1983 defense was very good, yet MSU went 1-10. Nearly every player on the '83 defense was back the next year and that unit carried MSU to the national title. One of the things the '83 team was missing was a QB like Kelly Bradley. The OL was also vastly improved.

[MrGoodKat]

Hmm? A smaller sample that consists of three of the top four offenses in the BSC vs a larger sample that countermeasures playing those three solid offensive teams. I think that skews their stats in a negative way, don't you?

Yes, games are decided by points. I think that we all know that. Not sure why you're bringing that into the conversation. Teams are evaluated on how well they play offense and defense, and one way to measure that is statistically and by taking into consideration externalities that effect how an individual unit might perform. In this case when you control some of the outliers for all teams, WSU shows well.

Fifth, statistically, in total defense in the BSC is good when considering it includes three of the top four offenses in the BSC. Total defense per game/per play is probably a better way to evaluate how good a defense is than points since points allowed can be directly related to misplays by the offense and special teams. Yards allowed per game/play eliminates those miscues by the offense/STs but can still be negatively affected by the offense/STs even without miscues.

This is exactly what I meant when I said that people just use/ignore OOC stuff to forward whatever narrative they're trying to run with. You want to throw out the FBS OOC games because they make Weber look bad, but you want to include the FCS OOC games because they help the case you're making by couter-measuring their poor performance in BSC play.

Looking at their conference play alone doesn't skew anything. It just shows us who they are relative to the conference they play in. And it turns out, they're real bad.

The reason I brought up that games are decided by points is that you're trying to support your argument with yardage statistics. As I've demonstrated, Weber's defense has given up touchdowns on a few short fields, but the average and the majority have been long scoring drives.

I am a little surprised to meet such a defender of Weber State's defense, but we don't need to go around in circles. We will see what Saturday brings.

He’ll just say it doesn’t mean anything because they’ve only played the good BSC offenses.

What a bizarre hill to plant your flag on.

No you don't remove FBS games to support your argument, you remove them to normalize the comparison. If one team plays two solid FBS teams and others either don't play any or just one and that one isn't a solid team, then you get skewed stats.

Also, I didn't keep the OOC FCS games because they make Weber look good. Weber gave up 537 yards to McNeese. Those numbers are still in there.

I don't expect Weber's defense to suddenly start shutting teams down. As I've explained, WSU doesn't play complimentary football as its offense and special teams continually fail in nearly every game they've played. Unless they get help from those two units in simply having them put together an average day (hard to do against MSU's defense and ST cover units), then they aren't going to be able to accomplish much defensively.

They're fifth in total defense in the BSC in FCS-only games and that includes playing three of the top four offenses in the league. The other teams that have played three of the top four are Idaho State, Northern Colorado and Cal Poly, which has played all four. Even when you don't remove the FBS games, Weber is ahead of Cal Poly and Idaho State, they're just one spot behind UNC and would be ahead of them if you take out the FBS games.

Amazing scoop.

[TomCat88]

This kind of thing crosses over from sport to sport. In 1990, the Minnesota Twins were one of the best hitting teams in MLB. They were fifth in batting average. They finished last in their division. Late that season they called up pitcher Scott Erickson and in the off-season they added pitcher Jack Morris. They went from the worst team in the AL to winning the World Series. They went from 21st to 9th in ERA.

Often teams don't have to overhaul their entire lineup. Just a one or two areas that aren't pulling their weight. It literally happens in a couple sports every year. Maybe not getting the ultimate prize, but vast improvement overall.

[JoeCatsJoe]

I wonder who is trying harder to justify a shaky position: Tomcat, or oldgriz?

[94VegasCat]

I wonder who is trying harder to justify a shaky position: Tomcat, or oldgriz?

I’m starting to gather that Tom is trying to generate conversation. I don’t think he truly believes all this nonsense.

Well done sir.

[JoeCatsJoe]

I wonder who is trying harder to justify a shaky position: Tomcat, or oldgriz?

I’m starting to gather that Tom is trying to generate conversation. I don’t think he truly believes all this nonsense.

Well done sir.

If so, hats off to a masterful job

[TomCat88]

I wonder who is trying harder to justify a shaky position: Tomcat, or oldgriz?

I’m starting to gather that Tom is trying to generate conversation. I don’t think he truly believes all this nonsense.

Well done sir.

That's funny because I'm often wondering if everyone has DM'd each other and decided mess with me.

It's true, I do try to generate conversation.

So, if we look past those two things, I think there may be a word definition phenomena or semantic discord. I referred to the WSU defense as good. Is my definition of good dissimilar with others? In this case, is my definition skewed by past experiences?

On the latter question, I've had a lot of experience observing teams that, while they didn't have a good W-L record, were still good teams, however, they were missing a key player, or they had bad luck/timing.

The first time I saw this was in late 1972. The Minnesota Vikings acquired QB Fran Tarkenton. He was hailed as the missing cog for a Vikings' team that had dominated the NFL, defensively, the previous three years. With Tarkenton, the Vikings were expected to breeze to the Super Bowl in 1972. That didn't happen. The Vikings fell to 7-7 losing five games by a FG or less. Pundits picked Green Bay to win the NFC Central in 1973. Bud Grant posted the 1972 results of those games on each players dressing room door in fall camp. His way of letting them know that they weren't a bad team, just didn't have good luck or timing? The next year (1973) the Vikings went to the Super Bowl and were a force the next five years in the NFC.

So, I thought that 1972 team was good. Is that not a correct or understandable conclusion?

Based on that experience, I also thought that the 1983 MSU defense was good. They went 1-10, but I remember following them and it seemed like they were in games at halftime because the defense kept it close but then they wore down in the second half, and they only had two games decided by less than a TD. The previous year they were BSC co-champions. Their lone win in 1983 was 28-8 over UM. Oddly, they scored more points and allowed less points than in any game that season in that win. Mike Godfrey was the QB in 1982, and he was a "good" quarterback. My thought was that MSU's defense was actually good, but it didn't get any help from the offense and that if MSU could develop a good QB, it'd be back in business.

In 1990, the Twins had the worst record in the AL. Yet I thought they could hit well despite not producing a lot of runs or homers and had brought up a good pitcher (Erickson) late in the season. I thought if the Twins could get another good starter to go with Kevin Tapani and Erickson, that Minnesota would be really good. I told one person that I thought the Twins would make the playoffs in 1991 and that guy brings that up to this day just as amazed as he was when the Twins won the '91 Series. In fact, he was in disbelief all season.

Just a couple years ago no one even noticed UC Davis, but I continually contended that Davis was good and picked them to win the BSC in 2023. They were injury plagued that year, however, and I still thought they would be good in 2024. They played to their potential and nearly beat MSU and soundly defeated UM in Missoula before getting to the quarterfinals.

That's just a few examples, perhaps now you can see why I'm looking for and often seeing teams that I think are good before they are.

I also like to make the statement before it happens rather than wait until it happens and say, "I knew they were going to be good this year. I knew it all along!"

In WSU's case they have a tradition of having good defenses. They still have their DC, Joe Dale, from when Jay Hill was there. So, I think once WSU gets a functional offense, that WSU's defense will be that much more effective. We'll see what happens the rest of this year and next year, not that I think anyone will say I was right if they do make a big leap in 2026.

So, my definition of good isn't based on the Webster's definition. It's been molded by past experience in being able to see my definition of good before it is good in a Webster's or mainstream sense.

[msugr8]

What the heck? Tomcat, can you even sleep at night? You sure have lots of interesting brain waves igniting in your noggin.

[TomCat88]

What the heck? Tomcat, can you even sleep at night? You sure have lots of interesting brain waves igniting in your noggin.

[coachouert]

Cats will be wearing military camo uniforms this weekend for military appreciation game.

That’s because Veterans Day is on next Tuesday. It should be America’s biggest, most celebrated holiday.
That’s cool. I hope local businesses get involved.

[wbtfg]

Cats will be wearing military camo uniforms this weekend for military appreciation game.

That’s because Veterans Day is on next Tuesday. It should be America’s biggest, most celebrated holiday.
That’s cool. I hope local businesses get involved.

#Sneaky

[Bobcat80]

Cats will be wearing military camo uniforms this weekend for military appreciation game.

That’s because Veterans Day is on next Tuesday. It should be America’s biggest, most celebrated holiday.
That’s cool. I hope local businesses get involved.

#Sneaky

Is that even legal?...I mean, nobody will be able to see them on the field!! I'll see myself out.

[AFCAT]

Cats will be wearing military camo uniforms this weekend for military appreciation game.

That’s because Veterans Day is on next Tuesday. It should be America’s biggest, most celebrated holiday.
That’s cool. I hope local businesses get involved.

#Sneaky

Is that even legal?...I mean, nobody will be able to see them on the field!! I'll see myself out.

If they ever get a game in Boise, they should wear these. However, they may not be able to see each other.

[RICO CAT]

We should be able to ‘sneak-up’ on Weber in this camo. I just hope Lamson can find his receivers wearing this. What ever happened to the U.S. Flag Cathead ? I thought those were pretty cool looking.

[damnyoutuesday]

Yeah I'm not a big fan of camo or flag designs on sports uniforms. Looks way too busy and never looks good IMO

Big fan of the "Cats" script helmets tho. Would love to see those and the gold shell version get worn more

[kcatz]

We should be able to ‘sneak-up’ on Weber in this camo. I just hope Lamson can find his receivers wearing this. What ever happened to the U.S. Flag Cathead ? I thought those were pretty cool looking.

MSU no longer allows the flag inside the logos (based on a licensing conversation this week).

I hope they bring it back. It's my favorite

[rfischer94]

Cats will be wearing military camo uniforms this weekend for military appreciation game.

That’s because Veterans Day is on next Tuesday. It should be America’s biggest, most celebrated holiday.
That’s cool. I hope local businesses get involved.

Those are...unpleasant to look at.

[TomCat88]

Yeah I'm not a big fan of camo or flag designs on sports uniforms. Looks way too busy and never looks good IMO

Big fan of the "Cats" script helmets tho. Would love to see those and the gold shell version get worn more

I wish whoever paid for them would've donated the money to the outfit from Big Sky (unless that group and other veteran groups wanted MSU to do this). It's a solemn day. The tradition is to do something for veterans that directly impacts them. There's a business in Helena that does free or greatly discounted oil changes for veterans on Veteran's Day. Some businesses (Applebee's and BWW) give free meals. These are the types of things that everyone should be doing for veterans. I'd like to see the holiday expanded for the week or a month, like Black History month. JMHO