Its still 8 days awaynativecat wrote:this thread is full of the mildest cat/griz smack i have ever heard
Top 10 things Griz fans should bring to Griz/Cat in Bozo
Moderators: rtb, kmax, SonomaCat
- catamaran
- BobcatNation Hall of Famer
- Posts: 3802
- Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2005 1:31 pm
-
- BobcatNation Hall of Famer
- Posts: 3305
- Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 2:04 pm
- Location: Floral Park, NY
That's true, but if you're saying the game was as competitive as the score indicated because the Cats had a chance to score at the end, then you also have to keep in mind that the Griz also had chances to put more points on the board that they didn't capitalize on. Remember, the Griz advanced to the Cats' 3-yard line at the end of the first half, and elected to go for it on 4th down instead of kicking a fg. If they kick a fg there (or had they scored a TD), the game would have been out of reach in any event.John K wrote:I would have to disagree with you about the game last year. If you will recall, we still had an excellent opportunity to take the lead with maybe 2-3 minutes remaining. If I remember correctly, we got to about the 20, but unfortunately just couldn't get the go-ahead score on 4 tries from there.
More importantly, though, the reason I think the game was more one-sided than the score indicated is because the Cats' offense just didn't really do anything all day. You had one scoring drive (most of which came on one long pass play), and other than that, the Griz defense completely dominated the game. Even the Cats' scoring opportunity at the end of the game was the result of a turnover -- yeah, your offense "advanced" to our 20-yard line, but the Cats started that possession on about the UM 40. The Griz offense wasn't great either, but we did outgain you by almost 200 yards, and we controlled pretty much every other statistic as well.
I work as an attorney so that I can afford good scotch, which helps me to forget that I work as an attorney.
-
- BobcatNation Team Captain
- Posts: 483
- Joined: Sat Aug 21, 2004 7:48 pm
- Location: Helena, Montana
Ohhhhhh, why don't you just shut your trap?!Grizlaw wrote:That's true, but if you're saying the game was as competitive as the score indicated because the Cats had a chance to score at the end, then you also have to keep in mind that the Griz also had chances to put more points on the board that they didn't capitalize on. Remember, the Griz advanced to the Cats' 3-yard line at the end of the first half, and elected to go for it on 4th down instead of kicking a fg. If they kick a fg there (or had they scored a TD), the game would have been out of reach in any event.John K wrote:I would have to disagree with you about the game last year. If you will recall, we still had an excellent opportunity to take the lead with maybe 2-3 minutes remaining. If I remember correctly, we got to about the 20, but unfortunately just couldn't get the go-ahead score on 4 tries from there.
More importantly, though, the reason I think the game was more one-sided than the score indicated is because the Cats' offense just didn't really do anything all day. You had one scoring drive (most of which came on one long pass play), and other than that, the Griz defense completely dominated the game. Even the Cats' scoring opportunity at the end of the game was the result of a turnover -- yeah, your offense "advanced" to our 20-yard line, but the Cats started that possession on about the UM 40. The Griz offense wasn't great either, but we did outgain you by almost 200 yards, and we controlled pretty much every other statistic as well.

-
- Golden Bobcat
- Posts: 8657
- Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 11:04 am
- Location: Great Falls MT
I guess that we will have to "agree to disagree" on this, because I still say that the 2006 game was MUCH more competitive than 2005. I will agree with you that in 2004, the Griz won convincingly. But, if you want to go back even further, using your logic, our victory in 2003 was also more lopsided than the final score of 27-20, since our lead was 27-10 midway through the 4th quarter, with your two late scores making it seem closer than it was. However, you had the ball late in the game, potentially one play away from tying the game....just like we were potentially one play away from winning the game last year. The one key difference, however, is that you never got anywhere close to our 20 on your last couple of possessions in the 2003 game.Grizlaw wrote:That's true, but if you're saying the game was as competitive as the score indicated because the Cats had a chance to score at the end, then you also have to keep in mind that the Griz also had chances to put more points on the board that they didn't capitalize on. Remember, the Griz advanced to the Cats' 3-yard line at the end of the first half, and elected to go for it on 4th down instead of kicking a fg. If they kick a fg there (or had they scored a TD), the game would have been out of reach in any event.John K wrote:I would have to disagree with you about the game last year. If you will recall, we still had an excellent opportunity to take the lead with maybe 2-3 minutes remaining. If I remember correctly, we got to about the 20, but unfortunately just couldn't get the go-ahead score on 4 tries from there.
More importantly, though, the reason I think the game was more one-sided than the score indicated is because the Cats' offense just didn't really do anything all day. You had one scoring drive (most of which came on one long pass play), and other than that, the Griz defense completely dominated the game. Even the Cats' scoring opportunity at the end of the game was the result of a turnover -- yeah, your offense "advanced" to our 20-yard line, but the Cats started that possession on about the UM 40. The Griz offense wasn't great either, but we did outgain you by almost 200 yards, and we controlled pretty much every other statistic as well.
-
- Golden Bobcat
- Posts: 8657
- Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 11:04 am
- Location: Great Falls MT
One more point....the 2006 game went down to the wire. The outcome was still very much in doubt, with only a couple of minutes remaining. That was certainly not true of the 2005 game.John K wrote:I guess that we will have to "agree to disagree" on this, because I still say that the 2006 game was MUCH more competitive than 2005. I will agree with you that in 2004, the Griz won convincingly. But, if you want to go back even further, using your logic, our victory in 2003 was also more lopsided than the final score of 27-20, since our lead was 27-10 midway through the 4th quarter, with your two late scores making it seem closer than it was. However, you had the ball late in the game, potentially one play away from tying the game....just like we were potentially one play away from winning the game last year. The one key difference, however, is that you never got anywhere close to our 20 on your last couple of possessions in the 2003 game.Grizlaw wrote:That's true, but if you're saying the game was as competitive as the score indicated because the Cats had a chance to score at the end, then you also have to keep in mind that the Griz also had chances to put more points on the board that they didn't capitalize on. Remember, the Griz advanced to the Cats' 3-yard line at the end of the first half, and elected to go for it on 4th down instead of kicking a fg. If they kick a fg there (or had they scored a TD), the game would have been out of reach in any event.John K wrote:I would have to disagree with you about the game last year. If you will recall, we still had an excellent opportunity to take the lead with maybe 2-3 minutes remaining. If I remember correctly, we got to about the 20, but unfortunately just couldn't get the go-ahead score on 4 tries from there.
More importantly, though, the reason I think the game was more one-sided than the score indicated is because the Cats' offense just didn't really do anything all day. You had one scoring drive (most of which came on one long pass play), and other than that, the Griz defense completely dominated the game. Even the Cats' scoring opportunity at the end of the game was the result of a turnover -- yeah, your offense "advanced" to our 20-yard line, but the Cats started that possession on about the UM 40. The Griz offense wasn't great either, but we did outgain you by almost 200 yards, and we controlled pretty much every other statistic as well.
-
- Golden Bobcat
- Posts: 8657
- Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 11:04 am
- Location: Great Falls MT
- MashTun
- 2nd Team All-BobcatNation
- Posts: 1473
- Joined: Fri Mar 30, 2007 5:42 pm
- Location: Near the fridge...
I'd have to agree the griz played the better game in 2006. I don't know that I could say it was dominating performance, but they played the better game.Grizlaw wrote:True, the 2005 game was not as close as the score indicated...but if you want to make that argument, let's also not forget that (1) UM also dominated last year's game more than the score indicated, and (2) UM's win in 2004 was somewhat of a blowout both on the scoreboard (38-22, with MSU getting a garbage TD with about 5 mins left), and on the stat sheet.MashTun wrote:12. Remind the fiz fans that one game doesn't constitute a 'streak'.GrizinWashington wrote:11. Practice how to console cat fans by saying things like, "Don't worry, you'll get 'em next year.... Or perhaps 17 years from now, but don't worry, you'll get 'em!".
And if I remember the 2005 game it was a SPANKING, not nearly as close as the score showed.
It boiled down to a 1 big play game in the end, after how many 6 or 8 turnovers total between both teams?
Too nerve wracking that many turnovers. Of course I can 'self-medicate' it is Cat/griz weekend

"Without question, the greatest invention in the history of mankind is beer. Oh, I grant you that the wheel was also a fine invention, but the wheel does not go nearly as well with pizza." - Dave Barry
-
- BobcatNation Hall of Famer
- Posts: 3305
- Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 2:04 pm
- Location: Floral Park, NY
I think we could probably go back and forth on this for the rest of our lives if we wanted to. To me, it just never seemed like the Cats were really in the game last year -- even when they were leading, I never had much doubt that the Griz would come back. The Cats' offense just couldn't put anything together.John K wrote:One more point....the 2006 game went down to the wire. The outcome was still very much in doubt, with only a couple of minutes remaining. That was certainly not true of the 2005 game.John K wrote:I guess that we will have to "agree to disagree" on this, because I still say that the 2006 game was MUCH more competitive than 2005. I will agree with you that in 2004, the Griz won convincingly. But, if you want to go back even further, using your logic, our victory in 2003 was also more lopsided than the final score of 27-20, since our lead was 27-10 midway through the 4th quarter, with your two late scores making it seem closer than it was. However, you had the ball late in the game, potentially one play away from tying the game....just like we were potentially one play away from winning the game last year. The one key difference, however, is that you never got anywhere close to our 20 on your last couple of possessions in the 2003 game.Grizlaw wrote:That's true, but if you're saying the game was as competitive as the score indicated because the Cats had a chance to score at the end, then you also have to keep in mind that the Griz also had chances to put more points on the board that they didn't capitalize on. Remember, the Griz advanced to the Cats' 3-yard line at the end of the first half, and elected to go for it on 4th down instead of kicking a fg. If they kick a fg there (or had they scored a TD), the game would have been out of reach in any event.John K wrote:I would have to disagree with you about the game last year. If you will recall, we still had an excellent opportunity to take the lead with maybe 2-3 minutes remaining. If I remember correctly, we got to about the 20, but unfortunately just couldn't get the go-ahead score on 4 tries from there.
More importantly, though, the reason I think the game was more one-sided than the score indicated is because the Cats' offense just didn't really do anything all day. You had one scoring drive (most of which came on one long pass play), and other than that, the Griz defense completely dominated the game. Even the Cats' scoring opportunity at the end of the game was the result of a turnover -- yeah, your offense "advanced" to our 20-yard line, but the Cats started that possession on about the UM 40. The Griz offense wasn't great either, but we did outgain you by almost 200 yards, and we controlled pretty much every other statistic as well.
Here's one stat from the game that I think is pretty telling (this is available on Montanagrizzlies.com, but there's no way to link to it ): If you look at both teams' possessions from last year's game, the Cats had 15 possessions, but only reached Griz territory on five (and that includes their last possession, which started in Griz territory). UM, on the other hand, had 16 possessions, and reached MSU territory on ten of them (which also includes one possession that started in MSU territory). The Cats only had the ball inside the Griz 30-yard line twice, vs. 6 times inside the MSU 30 for UM. Does that not sound like domination?
You keep going back to the fact that MSU had a scoring opportunity at the end of the game, but by that logic you also have to consider UM's lost scoring opportunities throughout the game (a lost fumble at MSU's 18-yard line, a lost fumble at the MSU 21-yard line, a missed FG, and the possession at the end of the first half that ended at the MSU 3-yard line. If the Griz had converted even just one of those opportunities, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
At the end of the day -- I don't know if UM dominated MSU more thoroughly last year than MSU dominated UM in 2005 or not -- the games were similar, and to make an argument either way would require more hair-splitting than I have the energy for right now. But I definitely think the point is debatable.
I work as an attorney so that I can afford good scotch, which helps me to forget that I work as an attorney.
-
- Golden Bobcat
- Posts: 8657
- Joined: Mon Jun 11, 2007 11:04 am
- Location: Great Falls MT
The point may be debatable (although not in my completely unbiased and logical mind), but one thing we can probably both agree on, is that none of this is terribly relevant, since the bottom line is that a win is a win, whether by the Cats or the Drizzlies....and whether it is by one point or 50. So....see you on 11/17.Grizlaw wrote:I think we could probably go back and forth on this for the rest of our lives if we wanted to. To me, it just never seemed like the Cats were really in the game last year -- even when they were leading, I never had much doubt that the Griz would come back. The Cats' offense just couldn't put anything together.John K wrote:One more point....the 2006 game went down to the wire. The outcome was still very much in doubt, with only a couple of minutes remaining. That was certainly not true of the 2005 game.John K wrote:I guess that we will have to "agree to disagree" on this, because I still say that the 2006 game was MUCH more competitive than 2005. I will agree with you that in 2004, the Griz won convincingly. But, if you want to go back even further, using your logic, our victory in 2003 was also more lopsided than the final score of 27-20, since our lead was 27-10 midway through the 4th quarter, with your two late scores making it seem closer than it was. However, you had the ball late in the game, potentially one play away from tying the game....just like we were potentially one play away from winning the game last year. The one key difference, however, is that you never got anywhere close to our 20 on your last couple of possessions in the 2003 game.Grizlaw wrote:That's true, but if you're saying the game was as competitive as the score indicated because the Cats had a chance to score at the end, then you also have to keep in mind that the Griz also had chances to put more points on the board that they didn't capitalize on. Remember, the Griz advanced to the Cats' 3-yard line at the end of the first half, and elected to go for it on 4th down instead of kicking a fg. If they kick a fg there (or had they scored a TD), the game would have been out of reach in any event.John K wrote:I would have to disagree with you about the game last year. If you will recall, we still had an excellent opportunity to take the lead with maybe 2-3 minutes remaining. If I remember correctly, we got to about the 20, but unfortunately just couldn't get the go-ahead score on 4 tries from there.
More importantly, though, the reason I think the game was more one-sided than the score indicated is because the Cats' offense just didn't really do anything all day. You had one scoring drive (most of which came on one long pass play), and other than that, the Griz defense completely dominated the game. Even the Cats' scoring opportunity at the end of the game was the result of a turnover -- yeah, your offense "advanced" to our 20-yard line, but the Cats started that possession on about the UM 40. The Griz offense wasn't great either, but we did outgain you by almost 200 yards, and we controlled pretty much every other statistic as well.
Here's one stat from the game that I think is pretty telling (this is available on Montanagrizzlies.com, but there's no way to link to it ): If you look at both teams' possessions from last year's game, the Cats had 15 possessions, but only reached Griz territory on five (and that includes their last possession, which started in Griz territory). UM, on the other hand, had 16 possessions, and reached MSU territory on ten of them (which also includes one possession that started in MSU territory). The Cats only had the ball inside the Griz 30-yard line twice, vs. 6 times inside the MSU 30 for UM. Does that not sound like domination?
You keep going back to the fact that MSU had a scoring opportunity at the end of the game, but by that logic you also have to consider UM's lost scoring opportunities throughout the game (a lost fumble at MSU's 18-yard line, a lost fumble at the MSU 21-yard line, a missed FG, and the possession at the end of the first half that ended at the MSU 3-yard line. If the Griz had converted even just one of those opportunities, we wouldn't be having this conversation.
At the end of the day -- I don't know if UM dominated MSU more thoroughly last year than MSU dominated UM in 2005 or not -- the games were similar, and to make an argument either way would require more hair-splitting than I have the energy for right now. But I definitely think the point is debatable.
-
- Golden Bobcat
- Posts: 7992
- Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 6:30 pm
- ImagineSanta
- 2nd Team All-BobcatNation
- Posts: 1076
- Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 1:59 pm
- Location: 59102
- Billings_Griz
- Golden Bobcat
- Posts: 4637
- Joined: Thu Jan 26, 2006 1:01 pm
- Location: Flatlands
-
- Golden Bobcat
- Posts: 7992
- Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2005 6:30 pm
- bobcatmaniac
- 1st Team All-BobcatNation
- Posts: 1864
- Joined: Thu Jan 06, 2005 4:25 pm
- Location: big sky country