A lot of people said, "you guys don't belong here,.."

[WyomingGrizFan]

I'm confused by the above quoted statement that serves as the Title of this new topic thread. It appears on sportsnetwork.com and I have seen it in a newspaper article as well, but it is a quoted statement by the Ricmond Football Team Head Coach Mike London.

Again: A lot of people said,..."You guys don't belong here."

Now, just where is the substance to the utterance? The Final Poll for last year (2007) SportsNetwork for FCS has Richmond ranked fifth. About a month ago Richmond was ranked as high as third. They finished their regular season campaign with a 9 - 3 record. Now ranked seventh, before the FCS Playoffs began. Granted, coming in third in their South Division of the CAA (Colonial Athletic Association) amongst five teams involved in the 2008 FCS Playoffs but where is the credibility to this statment?

I for one don't see it. I can easily ascertain where the Richmond Football Team is one of sixteen teams invited to the 2008 FCS (I-AA) Playoffs with a 9 - 3 record being ranked in the Top Ten. The statement really perplexes me. Can someone please enlighten me where there might be a shred of evidence backing up such a claim. As I say, I don't see it.

[Ronbo]

And they've been favored in every playoff game except App. State. Give me a huge break. The Coach is graspng at straws to motivate the team.xlolx

[Bettina90]

Well, either he's lying or using as motivation or both.


Or he could be talking in general with regard to Richmond's size, lack of transfers (ahem), Private school, etc.




I don't disagree with what you are saying it seesm like an odd quote and the article kind of addressed that by pointing out the fact they were ranked #1 this year. But who knows what precise context London said/meant it in.

[Syntax Error]

Can anyone name all the columnists who picked UR to beat #2 App St then #3 UNI on the road?

I completely hear what he is saying and it's true.

[MacThor]

Can anyone name all the columnists who picked UR to beat #2 App St then #3 UNI on the road?

I completely hear what he is saying and it's true.

No, but I can name a few who said how weak the lower half of the bracket was, practically giving ASU a bye into the NC game.

[GrizFanStuckInUtah]

No, but I can name a few who said how weak the lower half of the bracket was, practically giving ASU a bye into the NC game.

I can see how one might take it that way. I think most people were just surprised by all the teams in the top half. That was how I would have meant it to sound anyways.

[Eight Legger]

As recently as four weeks ago, almost everyone on this board said Richmond didn't even deserve to be in the playoffs with a loss to W&M. I think London is certainly justified in saying what he said if he wanted to. (For the record, and as I said before that game, we would have been in regardless of what happened that day.)

I'd also say almost no one gave us much of a chance to win at App, and there were a lot of doubters at UNI.

[Ronbo]

Can anyone name all the columnists who picked UR to beat #2 App St then #3 UNI on the road?

I completely hear what he is saying and it's true.

The columists mean squat. When a team is favored it comes from Las Vegas. They are the experts. xnodx


The Spiders were favored against EKU, they were underdogs at App. State, they were 4 point favorites against UNI, and they are 1 point picks this Friday.

[MacThor]

The columists mean squat. When a team is favored it comes from Las Vegas. They are the experts. xnodx


The Spiders were favored against EKU, they were underdogs at App. State, they were 4 point favorites against UNI, and they are 1 point picks this Friday.

Yeah I don't think London was telling his kids about Vegas oddsmakers.

[Bettina90]

Wait, the Griz have won their conference 11 years straight?


You guys must really sweat the October and November games.

[fencer24]

When you are the Griz, you sweat every game.

[Bettina90]

I suppose so. But 11 straight years? Are their wheelchairs involved on the other side ever?

[Tod]

I suppose so. But 11 straight years? Are their wheelchairs involved on the other side ever?

Yes. Be sure to bring a dozen or so for your team Friday. ;)

[Bettina90]

Hey, they may need them, and Montana may roll, but winning your conference 11 years in a row with one NC to show for it? Says all there needs to be said for the conference battles that rage on this board. And they can die with peeps admitting that, compared to other teams in FCS, they get a bye to the playoffs, if not a seed. From that point on they earn what they get.

[UNIFanSince1983]

Location, Location, Location...Montana, UNI and other west teams are just playing the cards they are dealt. We all can't be located on the east side of the country. Sorry there aren't as many good FCS programs out west. Would you prefer Montana play in the CAA so you have to travel and maybe not quite have the budget you do now so they could prove to you how good they are year in and year out?

And Montana has 2 total National Championships and has been there 6 times (including this year). And if you are wondering only one of their championship losses was to a vaunted CAA team.

There is no doubt the CAA is the best overall conference, but don't say there are all terrible teams in the Big Sky or MVC.

Sorry to take this off topic. Now go back to discussing whether or not Richmond was told they don't belong there.

[Silenoz]

Hey, they may need them, and Montana may roll, but winning your conference 11 years in a row with one NC to show for it? Says all there needs to be said for the conference battles that rage on this board. And they can die with peeps admitting that, compared to other teams in FCS, they get a bye to the playoffs, if not a seed. From that point on they earn what they get.

(A lot of) you CAA fans are OBSESSED with your conference xlolx

What's next, chanting "CAA CAA CAA" at your games ala the SEC?

[Bettina90]

No, I am just legitimately surprised that a team has won their conference 11 straight times. Call me dumb.

[Bettina90]

[QUOTE=UNIFanSince1983;1263439]Location, Location,
There is no doubt the CAA is the best overall conference, but don't say there are all terrible teams in the Big Sky or MVC./QUOTE]








I never did. Why would you say that? I only said that there is only one real dog in the fight in each conference, and their conference record supports that, as does the record in the playoffs.

[UNIFanSince1983]

That is quite outrageous. I mean the best UNI could do was win the conference 7 years in a row. Might have been more, but the coach left and the one we hired was so enamored with offense that he forgot about playing defense.

[UNIFanSince1983]

I apologize for my earlier rant. I just get tired of the talk about how our conferences aren't any good.

[GrizFanStuckInUtah]

I apologize for my earlier rant. I just get tired of the talk about how our conferences aren't any good.

I prefer to let them think that, at least until Saturday xthumbsupx xreadx xpeacex

[Bettina90]

Your team is very, very good.

[Bettina90]

Ugh, that was meant for UNIfansince1983 and all Griz fans.

[Syntax Error]

When a team is favored it comes from Las Vegas. They are the experts.For a minute there I thought you were serious that people that try to sucker you out of your money any way they can think of, are FCS experts!
http://www.amoeba.com/dynamic-images/blog/Sarah/pee-wee.jpg

xsmiley_wix

[GolfingGriz]

I suppose so. But 11 straight years? Are their wheelchairs involved on the other side ever?

Say what you will, but from what I've seen the best team we have played this year has been Weber. That includes that CAA team that beat u guys at home...

[AshevilleApp2]

(A lot of) you CAA fans are OBSESSED with your conference xlolx

What's next, chanting "CAA CAA CAA" at your games ala the SEC?

Richmond fans did that in Boone. xnodx

[AshevilleApp2]

As recently as four weeks ago, almost everyone on this board said Richmond didn't even deserve to be in the playoffs with a loss to W&M. I think London is certainly justified in saying what he said if he wanted to. (For the record, and as I said before that game, we would have been in regardless of what happened that day.)

I'd also say almost no one gave us much of a chance to win at App, and there were a lot of doubters at UNI.

Please find the thread where people said Richmond didn't deserve to be in the playoffs.

[MacThor]

Please find the thread where people said Richmond didn't deserve to be in the playoffs.

There were plenty of playoff prediction threads, prior to the W&M game, that excluded UR from the playoffs. Chuck Burton, CSN's main FCS writer, had UR out of the playoffs every week after the JMU loss until the W&M game. Most everyone said that W&M/UR game was a play-in game. I think Eight Legger is right; even if UR lost that game, they would have taken Maine's spot (with head-to-head wins over Maine & Elon).

If you look at the final four (or four seed) predictions by just about everyone who follows the FCS, you'd find JMU, ASU, Weber St, Villanova, Montana, SIU and UNI. Maybe Cal-Poly. That's half the field discussed as possibilities for the final four....and Richmond wasn't part of the discussion. Almost as if.........they didn't belong.

The ASU-Richmond "who will win" poll was 2-1 in favor of the Mountaineers. Those people thought ASU belonged in the final four, not UR.

[AshevilleApp2]

There were plenty of playoff prediction threads, prior to the W&M game, that excluded UR from the playoffs. Chuck Burton, CSN's main FCS writer, had UR out of the playoffs every week after the JMU loss until the W&M game. Most everyone said that W&M/UR game was a play-in game. I think Eight Legger is right; even if UR lost that game, they would have taken Maine's spot (with head-to-head wins over Maine & Elon).

If you look at the final four (or four seed) predictions by just about everyone who follows the FCS, you'd find JMU, ASU, Weber St, Villanova, Montana, SIU and UNI. Maybe Cal-Poly. That's half the field discussed as possibilities for the final four....and Richmond wasn't part of the discussion. Almost as if.........they didn't belong.

The ASU-Richmond "who will win" poll was 2-1 in favor of the Mountaineers. Those people thought ASU belonged in the final four, not UR.

My question was in response to the quote from a UR fan that people on this board claimed four weeks ago that Richmond didn't deserve to make the playoffs, not the final four. Still waiting to see that.

[MacThor]

My question was in response to the quote from a UR fan that people on this board claimed four weeks ago that Richmond didn't deserve to make the playoffs, not the final four. Still waiting to see that.

The UR fan you quoted said that AGS posters claimed if UR lost to W&M they didn't deserve a bid. Again, go back to any playoff prediction thread, and you will see that most considered the UR/W&M game a play-in game. So any poster that had "UR/W&M winner" in their bracket met that criteria.

Besides, this is completely off-topic re: Mike London's quote. If Wofford had upset the two seeds in their half of the bracket on the road to reach the NC game, and Ayers had said "people thought we don't belong here" would you be nitpicking nearly this much? Sheesh.

[AshevilleApp2]

The UR fan you quoted said that AGS posters claimed if UR lost to W&M they didn't deserve a bid. Again, go back to any playoff prediction thread, and you will see that most considered the UR/W&M game a play-in game. So any poster that had "UR/W&M winner" in their bracket met that criteria.

Besides, this is completely off-topic re: Mike London's quote. If Wofford had upset the two seeds in their half of the bracket on the road to reach the NC game, and Ayers had said "people thought we don't belong here" would you be nitpicking nearly this much? Sheesh.

Show me the thread and I'll agree. xnodx

As far as London's quote, I'd agree that not many expected UR to advance this far. I'd agree with Mike Ayers saying that as well if Wofford had advanced as far. This is assuming the context of advancing to the finals.
If either coach had claimed that people didn't think they should make the playoffs, I'd call bulls#@t.

I don't blame any coach for trying to motivate his team with the disrespect card. Good luck in the game.

[MacThor]

:)

15. Richmond (8-3, 8-1 CAA)
The Games: at W&M (11/22)

Outlook: An elimination game with the Tribe, the winner heads to the post season.


There are several posts in that thread that describe the W&M/UR game as a play-in.

[uofmman1122]

:)

There are several posts in that thread that describe the W&M/UR game as a play-in.Richmond won...I don't see your point.

The way I see it is both Richmond and W&M deserved to be in the playoffs, but only one was going to make it, and it came down to the winner of that game. Just because you call a game a "play-in" game doesn't mean that you think Richmond doesn't belong.

[AshevilleApp2]

:)

There are several posts in that thread that describe the W&M/UR game as a play-in.

Great. Thanks!

[trouthunter]

This is why I LOVE the FCS, and loathe FBS. Think you have a better team--prove it on the field.

[DTSpider]

I think that this also is in reference to many of the guys on the team. We have 2 walk-ons who are now starters, one of which asks the coaches at both Georgetown & Davidson if he could join the team there and they said that they didn't have a spot for him. You have many other guys whose only scholarship offer was from Richmond.

[GrizFanStuckInUtah]

I think that this also is in reference to many of the guys on the team. We have 2 walk-ons who are now starters, one of which asks the coaches at both Georgetown & Davidson if he could join the team there and they said that they didn't have a spot for him. You have many other guys whose only scholarship offer was from Richmond.

That is FCS football in general though. Lots of kids that fBS schools pass up.

[MacThor]

Georgetown and Davidson are not FBS schools.

[Silenoz]

Hell, they barely qualify as FCS schools. Which was his point :p

[GATA]

As recently as four weeks ago, almost everyone on this board said Richmond didn't even deserve to be in the playoffs with a loss to W&M. I think London is certainly justified in saying what he said if he wanted to. (For the record, and as I said before that game, we would have been in regardless of what happened that day.)

I'd also say almost no one gave us much of a chance to win at App, and there were a lot of doubters at UNI.

Nonsense. Richmond was a 9-3 team. Nobody thought that richmond didn't belong in the playoffs...now Maine...they didn't belong...

However, I didn't expect Richmond to go into Boone and beat App State, but I also didn't expect a 7-0 turnover swing. They also stepped up big time and beat UNI at home. As far as I'm concerned, they're legit.

Richmond has a great chance to be only the second private school (the first being furman) to win a national championship because they run the football, play great defense, and DON'T TURN THE BALL OVER.

The game this friday should be fun to watch.

[GATA]

Richmond won...I don't see your point.

The way I see it is both Richmond and W&M deserved to be in the playoffs, but only one was going to make it, and it came down to the winner of that game. Just because you call a game a "play-in" game doesn't mean that you think Richmond doesn't belong.

Yeah that doesn't make any sense at all. If Richmond/W&M was a play-in game and Richmond won...doesn't that mean that everybody agrees that Richmond belongs in the playoffs and W&M doesn't? And isn't that what happened?

Richmond fans are just grasping for that "us against the world" mentality. That crap is played out. I swear to god every year (whether it's pro sports or college) you have some team trying to play that card...it's garbage and it's overused.

The type of team that play the "us against the world" card would be South Carolina State. If they had made the National Title game I would agree COMPLETELY that nobody thought SC State should be there...but Richmond? who went 9-3 in the self-proclaimed "greatest conference ever in FCS history"? Please...

[MacThor]

Yeah that doesn't make any sense at all. If Richmond/W&M was a play-in game and Richmond won...doesn't that mean that everybody agrees that Richmond belongs in the playoffs and W&M doesn't? And isn't that what happened?

Richmond fans are just grasping for that "us against the world" mentality. That crap is played out. I swear to god every year (whether it's pro sports or college) you have some team trying to play that card...it's garbage and it's overused.

The type of team that play the "us against the world" card would be South Carolina State. If they had made the National Title game I would agree COMPLETELY that nobody thought SC State should be there...but Richmond? who went 9-3 in the self-proclaimed "greatest conference ever in FCS history"? Please...

The discussion was about posts made on this board PRIOR to the Richmond/W&M game....when most predictions had Richmond on the outside looking in, even at 8-3. At the time, they were the 4th place team in the CAA South. And a quick look in the archives at CSN or AGS will find Richmond on the outside. The announcers at the UNI game even said so....they had to win every game since 4-3 just to make the field.

I swear, nitpickers on this board want proof that such-and-such was said "four weeks ago" that is irrelevant to the topic of the thread, then when the proof is provided, a different nitpicker will attack that post out of context.

Mike London's quote had nothing to do with whether UR belonged in the playoffs. But it is fair to say that they were not in any discussion about teams in the national championship.

[mtgrizfankb]

Montana has been called over rated all year. Richmond has been not been reconized as who they really are all year. We both got here by being the 2 best teams in the country when it matters. Nobody is overlooking anyone. Its going to be a interesting ball game. both teams were told we dont belong here. and you know what WE ARE HERE....and to the comment about montana winning 11 conf. in a row. thats cause we are GOOOD. 6 times to the champ game. and 16 straight playoff apperences.

[AshevilleApp2]

Georgetown and Davidson are not FBS schools.

NITPICKER! :p

[I-AA Fan]

I would just let it go, it makes them feel better. A point to rally around. Just an FYI, not trying to brag, just make a point:

for Youngstown:

1991: 3 losses (made final)
1992: 2 losses, 1 tie (made final)
1993: 2 losses (made final)
1994: 0 losses (made final)
1997: 2 losses (made final)
1999: 2 losses (made final)

You do not have to have any set # of losses to make the final. A set number of losses to make it into the field ...yes. That is why you play the games. Okay so Richmond would not top the AP poll ...so what?

[WyomingGrizFan]

O.K. So now I think I understand. The notion reverts back prior to the Richmond and William & Mary game wherein some believed, as previously stated on this thread, that it was perhaps a 'play-in' type game. At least, some people may have considered it as such, although richmond, if they had lost, would have been 8 - 4 then and still on the bubble, so to speak.

So, if William & Mary had won instead, and Richmond was on the bubble with an 8 - 4, so to speak, then the context of the statement..."some people believing that we don't belong" (into the field of sixteen teams) becomes a little more apparent. O.K. I can see that, to a limited extend, I guess. Thanx.

[Syntax Error]

listen to Chase say the same thing about the Griz on CSN WAVES.

[MacThor]

O.K. So now I think I understand. The notion reverts back prior to the Richmond and William & Mary game wherein some believed, as previously stated on this thread, that it was perhaps a 'play-in' type game. At least, some people may have considered it as such, although richmond, if they had lost, would have been 8 - 4 then and still on the bubble, so to speak.

So, if William & Mary had won instead, and Richmond was on the bubble with an 8 - 4, so to speak, then the context of the statement..."some people believing that we don't belong" (into the field of sixteen teams) becomes a little more apparent. O.K. I can see that, to a limited extend, I guess. Thanx.

Um, no. Let's make this as simple as possible so you can understand.

The national title game discussion was pretty much along the same lines as the ESPNU selection show:
50% App St.
30% JMU
5% Montana
5% UNI
10% spread among potential darkhorses Villanova, SIU, Weber St. and Cal Poly.

Nobody was talking about Richmond. It was as if "they didn't belong."

[MacThor]

NITPICKER! :p

touche. :)

[MacThor]

listen to Chase say the same thing about the Griz on CSN WAVES.

Ha! That is classic!

Perhaps for WyomingGrizFan and Ronbo, Chase can explain how "Nobody Expected Us to Really Even Be In the Playoffs."

[Shellin]

Ha! That is classic!

Perhaps for WyomingGrizFan and Ronbo, Chase can explain how "Nobody Expected Us to Really Even Be In the Playoffs."


I do think that pretty much all Griz fans had us still making the playoffs this year, but not even the most optimistic had us with only 1 loss in the regular season and making it to the national championship game. With all of the excellent players we lost off of last years team pretty much everyone thought we would lose to Cal Poly and Eastern Washington, then potentially Weber/NAU/MSU and finish the regular season with 3 or 4 losses and barely squeak into the playoffs. Needless to say this season has definitely been a pleasant surprise.

[uofmman1122]

Um, no. Let's make this as simple as possible so you can understand.

The national title game discussion was pretty much along the same lines as the ESPNU selection show:
50% App St.
30% JMU
5% Montana
5% UNI
10% spread among potential darkhorses Villanova, SIU, Weber St. and Cal Poly.

Nobody was talking about Richmond. It was as if "they didn't belong."Oh, I see.

As if they didn't belong. So far Spider fans and coaches are the only ones saying they didn't belong. And even then they're just saying that people implied it. xlolx

It seems there's nothing that's going to convince you otherwise. I know I thought Richmond belonged in the playoffs well before the last week of the season. I realize that it's the whole angle of trying to say that Richmond proved people wrong, and most teams try to feed off of this.

If it makes you and your team feel better that you proved people wrong after they allegedly didn't think you belonged in the playoffs, then whatever makes you feel better. Truth is you proved you belong, and that's all that matters.

And sure, some Montana fans, coaches, or players might say the same thing, but I would disagree with them. I knew we were good enough and belonged in the playoffs at 8-4, let alone 11-1.

I think the best way to sum it up is that no one in either fanbase (Richmond's or Montana's) expected to get as far as their teams have, but for either to claim that people said or thought they didn't belong in the playoffs is just silly. I really think your coach meant the former when he said that, as in most people might not have thought they belonged in the NC game, let alone the Semis, but you could say that for both teams. xpeacex

[WyomingGrizFan]

Um, no. Let's make this as simple as possible so you can understand.

The national title game discussion was pretty much along the same lines as the ESPNU selection show:
50% App St.
30% JMU
5% Montana
5% UNI
10% spread among potential darkhorses Villanova, SIU, Weber St. and Cal Poly.

Nobody was talking about Richmond. It was as if "they didn't belong."

Now I understand seemingly a little better. The context of the statement was in response to some Media types discussion of the chances of who so ever would be considered the most likely to be in the FCS Championship Game, when it rolled around. This discussion not taking Richmond seriously enough to even be bothered with then, apparently. Not 'belonging' in the Media-hype determination that shows who the 'real' experts are of the FCS. Even though these discussions failed to consider that AP Polls are opinions that have failed the test in previous years.

For instance, upsets have happened and the notion 'any given saturday' does somehow apply. That the best sixteen teams are invited that 'should' equitably be paired #1 vs. #16, #2 vs. #15, #3 vs. #14, etc. in place of the current 'only' four teams seeded instead of eight and the disallowance of geographical matchups (wasn't there a Cal Poly / Weber St match-up most recently paired 'only' because of regional considerations?...as well as the Southland Conference always seemingly having to go through Missoula all the time just based on 'regional' considerations?) in order to decide the champion on the field in place of regional bias both by fans, media and officials.

Such upsets noted in the past then that this media discussion apparently overlooked, in order to convey an attitude that Richmond 'did not belong in the discussion' seems very uneducated and malicious in intent, or so it seems; at least enough to have overlooked the fact that James Madison won all four of their games on the road on their way to the 2004 championship. A mere cursory research can easily deliver a couple games wherein the Big Sky Conference was involved. Say, 27 November 2004, when 8 - 3 (at the time) Eastern Washington defeated the No. 1 ranked Southern Illinois in the first Round on their home field, 35 - 31. Another time when 8 - 3 Northern Arizona defeated No. 1 ranked McNeese St. 35 - 3, 29 November 2003.

I most sincerely hope that these media types aren't as well the FCS Selection Committee. If so, I'm hardly going to consider them a national icon at the present moment. Though seemingly some do regard themselves as such.

[MacThor]

Care to take a crack at Chase Reynolds' "Nobody expected us to really even be in the playoffs?" That's a lot more specific than what Mike London said.

[uofmman1122]

Care to take a crack at Chase Reynolds' "Nobody expected us to really even be in the playoffs?" That's a lot more specific than what Mike London said.Well, if you go back to the very beginning of the season, he'd be right. Some people were thinking 8-4 as a best-case scenario.

I didn't, though. I was confident we could do better than that, and I actually did expect to make the playoffs. Considering the two teams, I'd say Montana's title appearance came from further out in left field than Richmond, considering Montana lost what, 18 starters? All but 3 starters on defense? Both kickers? Arguably the #1 RB in Montana history?

I'd wager to guess (because I can't find any info on your losses from last year) that you didn't lose nearly as much from your Semifinal team last year.

But like I said, it doesn't really matter either way.

Both teams are here, and I'd rather be concerned about one of them (namely the Griz:D) proving that they are a champion this Friday. I think everyone can agree that's a lot more important than this pissing contest. xlolx