Montana and home field advantage in the playoffs

[UNH Fanboi]

Today I was browsing the FCS playoff results and noticed a couple of somewhat interesting trends in Montana's playoff results that might be old news to Montana fans, but could be interesting to others.

(All stats since 1978 unless otherwise indicated):

1. Montana is 24-6 in home playoff games.

2. Montana is 1-7 in away playoff games (This does not include neutral-site championship games, in which they are 2-4). Their first road victory came against James Madison last year.

3. During Montana's current 16-year playoff streak, they've had home field advantage in the first round 14 out of those 16 years. During that span they went 9-5 at home and 0-2 on the road. They haven't had been outside of Montana in the 1st round since 1998.

4. Montana is 15-1 in quarterfinal and semifinal games at home. The only loss was to UMass in 2006. They are 1-4 in quarterfinal and semifinal games on the road.

Apologies if the stats are off by a game or two, but I'm pretty sure they are correct.

Maybe someone who is even more bored than I can figure out how all other home teams have fared in the playoffs.

[uofmman1122]

I'm not entirely positive on this, but even though the 1-7 away record looks bad, I don't think we've lost more than 1 or 2 away playoff games be more than 10 points.

Also, our first championship was against Marshal, AT MARSHAL.

The fact that some people still seem to think that game was at a neutral site just baffles me. xnonono2x

[UNH Fanboi]

I'm not entirely positive on this, but even though the 1-7 away record looks bad, I don't think we've lost more than 1 or 2 away playoff games be more than 10 points.

Also, our first championship was against Marshal, AT MARSHAL.

The fact that some people still seem to think that game was at a neutral site just baffles me. xnonono2x

Didn't realize that. So they're 1-3 at neutral fields and 2-8 on the road.

[CrunchGriz]

In the I-AA/FCS playoffs, Montana is:

1. 24-6 at home
2. 2-8 on the road
3. 1-3 at a neutral site

Which means that they win 80% at home and lose 80% away, and are one game from being even on a neutral field.

Doesn't sound statistically earth-shattering no matter how you slice it.

Playoff teams win a very large majority of the games (70%? 80%? Not sure of the exact percentage, but somewhere in there); Montana's games have simply mirrored this.

I checked the numbers a while back, and the surprising thing about them is the margin of victory averages--Montana wins by a substantially higher margin than they have lost. Again, I don't have the numbers handy (it's late), but I could dredge them up.

For instance, they're definitely not invincible at Wash-Griz, but teams that have come away with a playoff win there have almost always squeaked it out:

1993: Delaware by 1
1999: Youngstown State by 3
2003: Western Illinois by 3 in double OT
2006: Massachusetts by 2
2007: Wofford by 1

The only exception to this is the 2005 two touchdown Cal Poly win in the first round at Wash-Griz.

Many of the Grizzlies' playoff wins at Wash-Griz, on the other hand, have been annihilations:

1995: 70-14 over Stephen Austin
45-0 over Georgia Southern
48-0 over Eastern Kentucky
1996: 70-7 over Troy State
48-3 over Nicholls State
44-14 over East Tennessee
2000: 45-13 over Eastern Illinois
2001: 38-0 over Northern Iowa
2002: 45-14 over Northwestern State
2004: 56-7 over Northwestern State
47-17 over New Hampshire

[Ronbo]

In the I-AA/FCS playoffs, Montana is:

1. 24-6 at home
2. 2-8 on the road
3. 1-3 at a neutral site

Which means that they win 80% at home and lose 80% away, and are one game from being even on a neutral field.

Doesn't sound statistically earth-shattering no matter how you slice it.

Playoff teams win a very large majority of the games (70%? 80%? Not sure of the exact percentage, but somewhere in there); Montana's games have simply mirrored this.

I checked the numbers a while back, and the surprising thing about them is the margin of victory averages--Montana wins by a substantially higher margin than they have lost. Again, I don't have the numbers handy (it's late), but I could dredge them up.

For instance, they're definitely not invincible at Wash-Griz, but teams that have come away with a playoff win there have almost always squeaked it out:

1993: Delaware by 1
1999: Youngstown State by 3
2003: Western Illinois by 3 in double OT
2006: Massachusetts by 2
2007: Wofford by 1

The only exception to this is the 2005 two touchdown Cal Poly win in the first round at Wash-Griz.

Many of the Grizzlies' playoff wins at Wash-Griz, on the other hand, have been annihilations:

1995: 70-14 over Stephen Austin
45-0 over Georgia Southern
48-0 over Eastern Kentucky
1996: 70-7 over Troy State
48-3 over Nicholls State
44-14 over East Tennessee
2000: 45-13 over Eastern Illinois
2001: 38-0 over Northern Iowa
2002: 45-14 over Northwestern State
2004: 56-7 over Northwestern State
47-17 over New Hampshire

Fixed that for ya.

[Bam]

That 1995 team steamrolled EKU & others in the playoffs. Is that there best team ever?

[HensRock]

There's a bit of self-fulfilling proficy going on here also.
Consider the fact that in years when the Griz were very good, they were rewarded with a seed (or in the past, a high seed) which kept them at home.
In years where they were good enough to make it in to the playoffs, but not great enough for a seed, they got sent packing in the second round or third round.

So it's these "marginal" teams that were responsible for the 1-7 road record.

[89Hen]

Which means that they win 80% at home and lose 80% away, and are one game from being even on a neutral field.

Doesn't sound statistically earth-shattering no matter how you slice it.

Playoff teams win a very large majority of the games (70%? 80%? Not sure of the exact percentage, but somewhere in there); Montana's games have simply mirrored this.
First off, not sure I follow the last part... 50% of the games are won and 50% of the games are lost. National Champions win 100% of the games that year. The runner-up wins 75%. Semifinalist losers win 66%. Quarterfinalists losers win 50%. First round losers win 0%. Add them all up and it's 50%.

But 80% win percentage at home and 20% on the road is fairly significant IMO. If that were the trend for all teams, you'd have something, but I don't think that's the case.

For compairson sake, since it's easiest for me to find and probably most similar to Montana, look at UD home and away in the playoffs.

L @ EKU
W Colgate
W @ LaTech
L EKU (neutral)
W @ W&M
L ArkSt
L @ Furman
L JMU
W Samford
W @ LaMonroe
L @ Marshall
W @ Montana
L @ Marshall
W Hofstra
L @ McNeese
L @ Marshall
W Hofstra
W Georgia Southern
L McNeese
W Portland State
W Lehigh
L Georgia Southern
W Southern Illinois
W Northern Iowa
W Wofford
W Colgate (neutral)
W Lafayette
L @ W&M
W Delaware State
W @ Southern Illinois
W @ Northern Iowa
L Appalachian State (neutral)

By my count that's:
6-7 on the road = .462
12-4 at home = .750
1-2 neutral = .333

Home is similar but .20 v .46 is quite a difference IMO. The home percentage is to be expected because UM and UD always play first round games at home, which are generally easier than facing a team that is good enough to win a first round game. The road record of Montana is very significant IMO. xpeacex

BTW, for all those people that complain about UD playing home playoff games.... 13 away games. How many other teams have played that many?

[89Hen]

There's a bit of self-fulfilling proficy going on here also.
Consider the fact that in years when the Griz were very good, they were rewarded with a seed (or in the past, a high seed) which kept them at home.
In years where they were good enough to make it in to the playoffs, but not great enough for a seed, they got sent packing in the second round or third round.

So it's these "marginal" teams that were responsible for the 1-7 road record.

xnodx xnodx xnodx

[Silenoz]

xnodx xnodx xnodx
I'd say the marginal teams are the ones who lost most of our first round games. Yes, the 2005 team sucked big time. No argument there

[Green26]

Montana has had a very good home field playoff record, and playing at home is certainly an advantage for the Griz. In addition to just playing at home (and the other team having to travel a long distance), the large noisy crowd sometimes plays a significant role, and the occasionally chilly or windy weather can impact teams from a southern/warmer climate.

Back when all teams were seeded, weaker, i.e. bottom 8, teams went on the road. That probably explains some of the road losses, because Montana's weaker teams were on the road.

Now that only the top 4 teams are seeded, and the other homes games are determined primarily on economics, this has caused two things. First, when Montana is seeded, Montana is assured of multiple home games as they advance in the playoffs (this nothing new). Second, in years when Montana has had a weaker team, it means that the opponent may be higher quality (but still have to come to Montana due to Montana's bid/stadium/attendance). Thus, the stronger team has prevailed even tho they were on the road.

I agree that the 80-20 stat seems to be fairly significant.

[CrunchGriz]

First off, not sure I follow the last part... 50% of the games are won and 50% of the games are lost. National Champions win 100% of the games that year. The runner-up wins 75%. Semifinalist losers win 66%. Quarterfinalists losers win 50%. First round losers win 0%. Add them all up and it's 50%.

But 80% win percentage at home and 20% on the road is fairly significant IMO. If that were the trend for all teams, you'd have something, but I don't think that's the case.

For compairson sake, since it's easiest for me to find and probably most similar to Montana, look at UD home and away in the playoffs.

L @ EKU
W Colgate
W @ LaTech
L EKU (neutral)
W @ W&M
L ArkSt
L @ Furman
L JMU
W Samford
W @ LaMonroe
L @ Marshall
W @ Montana
L @ Marshall
W Hofstra
L @ McNeese
L @ Marshall
W Hofstra
W Georgia Southern
L McNeese
W Portland State
W Lehigh
L Georgia Southern
W Southern Illinois
W Northern Iowa
W Wofford
W Colgate (neutral)
W Lafayette
L @ W&M
W Delaware State
W @ Southern Illinois
W @ Northern Iowa
L Appalachian State (neutral)

By my count that's:
6-7 on the road = .462
12-4 at home = .750
1-2 neutral = .333

Home is similar but .20 v .46 is quite a difference IMO. The home percentage is to be expected because UM and UD always play first round games at home, which are generally easier than facing a team that is good enough to win a first round game. The road record of Montana is very significant IMO. xpeacex

BTW, for all those people that complain about UD playing home playoff games.... 13 away games. How many other teams have played that many?

Sorry about the confusion...it was late. I meant "home teams win the vast majority...", obviously.

[89Hen]

Sorry about the confusion...it was late. I meant "home teams win the vast majority...", obviously.
NP. I wonder what the actual number is though. I think you may be surprised. When I have a minute I will see if I can come up with it.

[yorkcountyUNHfan]

UNH has 4 wins in 7 trips to the playoffs (91,94,04 thru 08)
.571 wins/playoff

1-3 at Home (.250)
3-4 Away (.429)
4-7 over all (.363)

[UNH Fanboi]

There's a bit of self-fulfilling proficy going on here also.
Consider the fact that in years when the Griz were very good, they were rewarded with a seed (or in the past, a high seed) which kept them at home.
In years where they were good enough to make it in to the playoffs, but not great enough for a seed, they got sent packing in the second round or third round.

So it's these "marginal" teams that were responsible for the 1-7 road record.

That's definitely true.

What I found interesting about these stats is not necessarily that Montana is "bad" on the road, but that they have the fortunate and tremendous advantage of being nearly guaranteed a home playoff game in the first round (and almost always a home game in which the opposing team has to fly in, to boot), and often beyond. And on top that, they almost never have to play an east coast team in the first round. Now I don't want to turn this into an East vs. West war, but there's really no denying that the competition in the east is more difficult. The last team from west of the Mississippi to win a championship other than Montana is Montana St. in 1984.

Now certainly Montana has earned a lot of those home games by getting a seed, but they also have the benefit of playing in an easy conference and having a relatively easy route to an attractive looking 11-1 or 10-2 record every year. And even if they aren't good enough to earn a seed, they will still almost always get a home game because of their attendance and the role of money in the process. I certainly can't blame them for taking advantage of the situation, but I think it highlights a big unfairness in the current system. There are some teams who pretty much have to get a seed in order to get any home playoff games, whereas Montana is pretty much guaranteed home game almost every year, and is often matched against weaker non-east coast competition in the 1st round.

[UNH Fanboi]

UNH has 4 wins in 7 trips to the playoffs (91,94,04 thru 08)
.571 wins/playoff

1-3 at Home (.250)
3-4 Away (.429)
4-7 over all (.363)

Yeah, a weak defense and heavy reliance on passing doesn't add up to much of an advantage in NH in November.

[89Hen]

That's definitely true.

What I found interesting about these stats is not necessarily that Montana is "bad" on the road, but that they have the fortunate and tremendous advantage of being nearly guaranteed a home playoff game in the first round (and almost always a home game in which the opposing team has to fly in, to boot), and often beyond. And on top that, they almost never have to play an east coast team in the first round. Now I don't want to turn this into an East vs. West war, but there's really no denying that the competition in the east is more difficult. The last team from west of the Mississippi to win a championship other than Montana is Montana St. in 1984.

Now certainly Montana has earned a lot of those home games by getting a seed, but they also have the benefit of playing in an easy conference and having a relatively easy route to an attractive looking 11-1 or 10-2 record every year. And even if they aren't good enough to earn a seed, they will still almost always get a home game because of their attendance and the role of money in the process. I certainly can't blame them for taking advantage of the situation, but I think it highlights a big unfairness in the current system. There are some teams who pretty much have to get a seed in order to get any home playoff games, whereas Montana is often guaranteed home game almost every year, and is often matched against weaker non-east coast competition in the 1st round.
I have found my AGS soulmate. xsmiley_wix :p

[Gil Dobie]

2001: 38-0 over Northern Iowa


WOW xoopsx

[Gil Dobie]

There's a bit of self-fulfilling proficy going on here also.
Consider the fact that in years when the Griz were very good, they were rewarded with a seed (or in the past, a high seed) which kept them at home.
In years where they were good enough to make it in to the playoffs, but not great enough for a seed, they got sent packing in the second round or third round.

So it's these "marginal" teams that were responsible for the 1-7 road record.

Exactly what I was thinking xthumbsupx

[Bill Hanson]

That's definitely true.

What I found interesting about these stats is not necessarily that Montana is "bad" on the road, but that they have the fortunate and tremendous advantage of being nearly guaranteed a home playoff game in the first round (and almost always a home game in which the opposing team has to fly in, to boot), and often beyond. And on top that, they almost never have to play an east coast team in the first round. Now I don't want to turn this into an East vs. West war, but there's really no denying that the competition in the east is more difficult. The last team from west of the Mississippi to win a championship other than Montana is Montana St. in 1984.

Now certainly Montana has earned a lot of those home games by getting a seed, but they also have the benefit of playing in an easy conference and having a relatively easy route to an attractive looking 11-1 or 10-2 record every year. And even if they aren't good enough to earn a seed, they will still almost always get a home game because of their attendance and the role of money in the process. I certainly can't blame them for taking advantage of the situation, but I think it highlights a big unfairness in the current system. There are some teams who pretty much have to get a seed in order to get any home playoff games, whereas Montana is pretty much guaranteed home game almost every year, and is often matched against weaker non-east coast competition in the 1st round.

xoopsx xcoffeex

[89Hen]

WOW xoopsx
We may have to look up UNI's away record. Hens beat them 37-7 in 2003. xeyebrowx

[Gil Dobie]

We may have to look up UNI's away record. Hens beat them 37-7 in 2003. xeyebrowx

Double WOW xoopsx

[Fear the Bird]

We may have to look up UNI's away record. Hens beat them 37-7 in 2003. xeyebrowx

The Snow game!! :D

[100%GRIZ]

PLAYOFFS - You kidding me , PLAYOFFS!!!

[Bam]

I like it.. I think EKU's coach Hood could say the same thing this past week.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qwq7BYOnDrM

[Silenoz]

That's definitely true.

What I found interesting about these stats is not necessarily that Montana is "bad" on the road, but that they have the fortunate and tremendous advantage of being nearly guaranteed a home playoff game in the first round (and almost always a home game in which the opposing team has to fly in, to boot), and often beyond. And on top that, they almost never have to play an east coast team in the first round. Now I don't want to turn this into an East vs. West war, but there's really no denying that the competition in the east is more difficult. The last team from west of the Mississippi to win a championship other than Montana is Montana St. in 1984.

Now certainly Montana has earned a lot of those home games by getting a seed, but they also have the benefit of playing in an easy conference and having a relatively easy route to an attractive looking 11-1 or 10-2 record every year. And even if they aren't good enough to earn a seed, they will still almost always get a home game because of their attendance and the role of money in the process. I certainly can't blame them for taking advantage of the situation, but I think it highlights a big unfairness in the current system. There are some teams who pretty much have to get a seed in order to get any home playoff games, whereas Montana is pretty much guaranteed home game almost every year, and is often matched against weaker non-east coast competition in the 1st round.

I don't know about that. We rarely got a MEAC, Patriot, or OVC opponent, all of whom have been pretty bad in the playoffs the last 15 odd years or so. Southland teams haven't fared well @Montana, but I wouldn't call their conference champion weak.

[GannonFan]

I don't know about that. We rarely got a MEAC, Patriot, or OVC opponent, all of whom have been pretty bad in the playoffs the last 15 odd years or so. Southland teams haven't fared well @Montana, but I wouldn't call their conference champion weak.

To be fair, haven't you only played the Southland champ twice? NW St in '04 was a co-champ and McNeese in '06 (a very down year for the Southland) was a champ. Other times, you've been playing the second place team. And for some years, the Southland was only a 6 team conference meaning there wasn't a lot of depth there. Just sayin.

[CrunchGriz]

NP. I wonder what the actual number is though. I think you may be surprised. When I have a minute I will see if I can come up with it.

Someone here on AGS looked it up a while back and if I'm not mistaken it was 70% (or thereabouts).

So home teams winning 80% of the time in Montana's playoff games is not terribly out of line with the norm.

I'd also venture that any team that either wins a first-round playoff game or loses in the first round by two scores or less has shown that they belong in the playoffs; i.e., they've shown that they're competitive. At least it is difficult to argue that they have conclusively proven that they don't belong.

So the only Montana team in UM's current streak of 16 playoff seasons that didn't belong is the 1998 team, which lost on the road to Western Illinois 52-9 in the first round--and that Montana team was the Big Sky Conference champ, so by definition they belonged as an auto-bid conference winner.

Every other team of the 16 either won at least a first round game or lost in the first round by two touchdowns or less (in fact, all of the first-round losses [besides Cal Poly in 2005, see below] were by 5 points or less). If you cut the "marginal" margin down to a single touchdown, then you could say that the 2005 team was marginal as a two-touchdown loser to Cal Poly in the first round.

[Shellin]

To be fair, haven't you only played the Southland champ twice? NW St in '04 was a co-champ and McNeese in '06 (a very down year for the Southland) was a champ. Other times, you've been playing the second place team. And for some years, the Southland was only a 6 team conference meaning there wasn't a lot of depth there. Just sayin.

Definitely fair. I just don't think it is reasonable to say that we get to play "easier" opponents in the first round. I wouldn't argue that Montana first round opponents are more difficult either, as you've pointed out.

[srgrizizen]

I'm pretty sure the NCAA is inclined to give Montana a home game if they can possibly rationalize it because of the guaranteed gate. But the implication that the Griz are only successful at home is far-fetched. Under the current system, all road games are against higher seeded opponents, and all non-NC years end in a loss for all playoff teams, so a weaker road record is practically guaranteed. Moreover, it was suggested that UM's home field advantage is exaggerated because of the distance teams must travel to Missoula. Well, guess what? The same argument applies when Montana DOES get sent on the road! How often do East Coast teams have to fly to their playoff opponents? Not to mention the fact that Chattanooga, by Montana distance standards, is like a home game to half of the CAA and most of the South.

I understand the argument that Montana might get to the playoffs so often in part because of weaker competition, but the implication that they then win only because they are at home is absurd.

[UNH Fanboi]

I understand the argument that Montana might get to the playoffs so often in part because of weaker competition, but the implication that they then win only because they are at home is absurd.

I would never suggest that they only win because they are at home. They obviously had some great teams over the past 16 years.

What I'm saying is that the current system gives them more than their fair share of home games, and they probably have a couple of extra wins as a result.

[GannonFan]

...Moreover, it was suggested that UM's home field advantage is exaggerated because of the distance teams must travel to Missoula. Well, guess what? The same argument applies when Montana DOES get sent on the road! How often do East Coast teams have to fly to their playoff opponents?

Well, UD's been on the road 13 times in the playoffs, and 2 of them have been at W&M. That's the only bus trip. The other 11 times were flights.


...Not to mention the fact that Chattanooga, by Montana distance standards, is like a home game to half of the CAA and most of the South.


A little hyperbole, don't you think, at least on the CAA front? The closest school to Chatty is JMU - just a mere 7 hours away from Chatty at about 500 miles. Richmond last year was 9 hours away and almost 600 miles. UD is 12 hours away from Chatty at 700 miles. I think UMass, who's also been to Chatty, is over 1000 miles away from Chatty. I've never heard of a home field advantage being given to teams that are ~10 hours away from where the game's being played. Would you consider Denver a home game for Montana since it's in that ballpark?

[GoCats91]

We may have to look up UNI's away record. Hens beat them 37-7 in 2003. xeyebrowx

UNI
Home 14-4
Away 4-9
Neutral 0-1

They do have some bad losses on the road including 3 times at Marshall but have also lost in OT twice and by 3 at Montana on a missed FG at the end. The average loss on the road is 17.7 points. They have played 13 road games just like Delaware. They are also 6-3 against current CAA teams but I don't think they have ever beat a SoCon team though they have only played one of them at home.

[furpal87]

Okay, for argument's sake someone who has time take the Top 20 teams in playoff games (still in FCS or not), and do a comparison for all of them in home and road games. Let's see how many are closer to Montana or Delaware. I'd be very curious to see what the differences and similarities are.

[putter]

Whole ball of wax...

FCS (I-AA): 40 Games
(24-16: 22-6 home; 1-8 road, 1-2 neutral)
1982 at Idaho L 21-7
1988 at Idaho L 38-19
1989 Jackson State W 48-7
Eastern Illinois W 25-19
at Georgia Southern* L 45-14
1993 Delaware L 49-48
1994 Northern Iowa W 23-20
McNeese State W 30-28
at Youngstown State* L 28-9
1995 Eastern Kentucky W 48-0
Georgia Southern W 45-0
Stephen F. Austin* W 70-14
at Marshall$ W 22-20
1996 Nicholls State W 48-3
E. Tennessee State W 44-14
Troy State* W 70-7
at Marshall$ L 49-29
1997 at McNeese State L 19-14
1998 at Western Illinois L 52-9
1999 Youngstown State L 30-27
2000 Eastern Illinois W 45-14
Richmond W 37-17
Appalachian State* W 19-16, OT
vs. Georgia Southern$ L 27-25
2001 Northwestern St. W 28-19
Sam Houston State W 49-24
Northern Iowa* W 38-0
Furman$ W 13-6
2002 Northwestern State W 45-14
at McNeese State L 24-20
2003 Western Illinois L 43-40, 2 OT
2004 Northwestern State W 57-7
New Hampshire W 47-17
Sam Houston State* W 34-13
vs .James Madison$ L 31-21
2005 Cal Poly L 35-21
2006 McNeese State W 31-6
Southern Illinois W, 20-3
UMass* L 19-17
2007 Wofford L, 23-22
2008 Texas State W, 31-13
Weber State W, 24-12
at James Madison* W, 35-27
vs. Richmond$ L, 24-7
Despite all the bashing, the teams Montana has lost to in the playoffs, whether at home or on the road were all quality teams that year. nothing to be ashamed of as sometime you have to give credit to the other team..

[GrizFanStuckInUtah]

Whole ball of wax...

FCS (I-AA): 40 Games
(24-16: 22-6 home; 1-8 road, 1-2 neutral)
1982 at Idaho L 21-7
1988 at Idaho L 38-19
1989 Jackson State W 48-7
Eastern Illinois W 25-19
at Georgia Southern* L 45-14
1993 Delaware L 49-48
1994 Northern Iowa W 23-20
McNeese State W 30-28
at Youngstown State* L 28-9
1995 Eastern Kentucky W 48-0
Georgia Southern W 45-0
Stephen F. Austin* W 70-14
at Marshall$ W 22-20
1996 Nicholls State W 48-3
E. Tennessee State W 44-14
Troy State* W 70-7
at Marshall$ L 49-29
1997 at McNeese State L 19-14
1998 at Western Illinois L 52-9
1999 Youngstown State L 30-27
2000 Eastern Illinois W 45-14
Richmond W 37-17
Appalachian State* W 19-16, OT
vs. Georgia Southern$ L 27-25
2001 Northwestern St. W 28-19
Sam Houston State W 49-24
Northern Iowa* W 38-0
Furman$ W 13-6
2002 Northwestern State W 45-14
at McNeese State L 24-20
2003 Western Illinois L 43-40, 2 OT
2004 Northwestern State W 57-7
New Hampshire W 47-17
Sam Houston State* W 34-13
vs .James Madison$ L 31-21
2005 Cal Poly L 35-21
2006 McNeese State W 31-6
Southern Illinois W, 20-3
UMass* L 19-17
2007 Wofford L, 23-22
2008 Texas State W, 31-13
Weber State W, 24-12
at James Madison* W, 35-27
vs. Richmond$ L, 24-7
Despite all the bashing, the teams Montana has lost to in the playoffs, whether at home or on the road were all quality teams that year. nothing to be ashamed of as sometime you have to give credit to the other team..

So where the Marshall games a neutral or an away game?

It is a good point you bring up. I mean is it really that hard to think that loosing in the playoffs would be that bad of a loss? I mean they would be a top 16 team and it would be AGS. xpeacex

[89Hen]

Someone here on AGS looked it up a while back and if I'm not mistaken it was 70% (or thereabouts).

So home teams winning 80% of the time in Montana's playoff games is not terribly out of line with the norm.
FWIW, I didn't think the 80% number was the extrordinary number. It was the 20% for a team that wins 80% at home. Usually to be 20% on the road requires you to be <=50% at home. xpeacex

[89Hen]

but the implication that they then win only because they are at home is absurd.
2-8... not completely absurd. That's a pretty big stat.

[Bill Hanson]

2-8... not completely absurd. That's a pretty big stat.

Griz fans, hell, every fan West of the Mississippi, just concede that 89Hen is right and you are wrong. It will make it all easier.

[CrunchGriz]

Whole ball of wax...

FCS (I-AA): 40 Games
(24-16: 22-6 home; 1-8 road, 1-2 neutral)
1982 at Idaho L 21-7
1988 at Idaho L 38-19
1989 Jackson State W 48-7
Eastern Illinois W 25-19
at Georgia Southern* L 45-14
1993 Delaware L 49-48
1994 Northern Iowa W 23-20
McNeese State W 30-28
at Youngstown State* L 28-9
1995 Eastern Kentucky W 48-0
Georgia Southern W 45-0
Stephen F. Austin* W 70-14
at Marshall$ W 22-20
1996 Nicholls State W 48-3
E. Tennessee State W 44-14
Troy State* W 70-7
at Marshall$ L 49-29
1997 at McNeese State L 19-14
1998 at Western Illinois L 52-9
1999 Youngstown State L 30-27
2000 Eastern Illinois W 45-14
Richmond W 37-17
Appalachian State* W 19-16, OT
vs. Georgia Southern$ L 27-25
2001 Northwestern St. W 28-19
Sam Houston State W 49-24
Northern Iowa* W 38-0
Furman$ W 13-6
2002 Northwestern State W 45-14
at McNeese State L 24-20
2003 Western Illinois L 43-40, 2 OT
2004 Northwestern State W 57-7
New Hampshire W 47-17
Sam Houston State* W 34-13
vs .James Madison$ L 31-21
2005 Cal Poly L 35-21
2006 McNeese State W 31-6
Southern Illinois W, 20-3
UMass* L 19-17
2007 Wofford L, 23-22
2008 Texas State W, 31-13
Weber State W, 24-12
at James Madison* W, 35-27
vs. Richmond$ L, 24-7
Despite all the bashing, the teams Montana has lost to in the playoffs, whether at home or on the road were all quality teams that year. nothing to be ashamed of as sometime you have to give credit to the other team..

putter: The totals at the top are incorrect. They don't include the 2008 games, and they count the two Marshall games as neutral. Corrected numbers:

(27-17: 24-6 home; 2-8 road, 1-3 neutral)

[bostonspider]

Now Richmond has only played 15 playoff games, but their record is:

1-0 Neutral (1.00)
4-2 Home (.667)
4-4 Road (.500)

[Silenoz]

Griz fans, hell, every fan West of the Mississippi, just concede that 89Hen is right and you are wrong. It will make it all easier.

Wow

[Bill Hanson]

Wow

Wow what?

[Silenoz]

Didn't we have this same exact (or close enough) thread several weeks ago? Or maybe a month. Where Griz fans defend our team, and everyone else tries us to convince us we're not as good as we like to think? We're going in circles here

[Bill Hanson]

Didn't we have this same exact (or close enough) thread several weeks ago? Or maybe a month. Where Griz fans defend our team, and everyone else tries us to convince us we're not as good as we like to think? We're going in circles here

Me thinks 89Hen likes to rile up everyone on the West Coast as much as possible. It usually only takes a post or two and everybody is hooked and feels the need to post some sort of rebuttle.

[uofmman1122]

Road playoff games:

1982 at Idaho L 21-7
1988 at Idaho L 38-19
1989 at Georgia Southern* L 45-14
1994 at Youngstown State* L 28-9
1995 at Marshall$ W 22-20
1996 at Marshall$ L 49-29
1997 at McNeese State L 19-14
1998 at Western Illinois L 52-9
2002 at McNeese State L 24-20
2008 at James Madison* W, 35-27

The way I see it, take out the wins and the losses to the eventual national champion, and you have this:

1982 at Idaho L 21-7
1988 at Idaho L 38-19
1997 at McNeese State L 19-14
1998 at Western Illinois L 52-9
2002 at McNeese State L 24-20

Not to mention in both '97 and '02, McNeese was the national runner up.

It's not like we're a fumbling mess of fail whenever we leave Washington Grizzly Stadium.

2-8 looks bad, but when you look closer it's really not terrible. I'd certainly wish it was better, but we went into #1 JMU last year and handed them their asses, so hopefully it's the start of a better trend.

Also, for what it's worth, we'd have won these games handily even at the other team's stadium:

1989 Jackson State W 48-7
1995 Eastern Kentucky W 48-0
Georgia Southern W 45-0
Stephen F. Austin* W 70-14
1996 Nicholls State W 48-3
E. Tennessee State W 44-14
Troy State* W 70-7
2000 Eastern Illinois W 45-14
Richmond W 37-17
2001 Sam Houston State W 49-24
Northern Iowa* W 38-0
2002 Northwestern State W 45-14
2004 Northwestern State W 57-7
New Hampshire W 47-17
2006 McNeese State W 31-6

[crossfire07]

has anyone else had Montana and Montana State at home for a playoff game back to back?

[WyomingGrizFan]

Montana also (has) the benefit of playing in an easy conference and having a relatively easy route to an attractive looking 11-1 or 10-2 record every year.

It's interesting then that at the present time the Big Sky has five out of their eight members ranked over on sportsnetwork.com in the top 35 in the FCS. With UM @ #3, there's #15, #21, #29 & #35. Granted, not the best of years by any strectch of the imagination, but not really all that bad either, considering the total amount of former I-AA, now FCS, teams, must be over a hundred or thereabouts, eligible for ranking purposes.

Besides, it wasn't all that long ago that a couple fellow Big Sky teams were in the Playoffs and had to travel to the #1 ranked team and they came away with a win. This in 2003 and 2004. Both years UM defeated NAU (59-21) and EWU (31-28) on the road; both of which were sent to play those Number One teams in the First Round in the Playoffs respectively. Needless to say, UM could have conceivably have done the same thing. On the road as well. Against the Number One rated Team. First Round. Sometimes it's just a matter of perspective in place of skewering a bunch of statistics.




100 % of me agrees with the above post.

[Tod]

It's interesting then that at the present time the Big Sky has five out of their eight members ranked over on sportsnetwork.com in the top 35 in the FCS. With UM @ #3, there's #15, #21, #29 & #35. Granted, not the best of years by any strectch of the imagination, but not really all that bad either, considering the total amount of former I-AA, now FCS, teams, must be over a hundred or thereabouts, eligible for ranking purposes.

Besides, it wasn't all that long ago that a couple fellow Big Sky teams were in the Playoffs and had to travel to the #1 ranked team and they came away with a win. This in 2003 and 2004. Both years UM defeated NAU (59-21) and EWU (31-28) on the road; both of which were sent to play those Number One teams in the First Round in the Playoffs respectively. Needless to say, UM could have conceivably have done the same thing. On the road as well. Against the Number One rated Team. First Round. Sometimes it's just a matter of perspective in place of skewering a bunch of statistics.




100 % of me agrees with the above post.

Nine teams in the Big Sky.

[AshevilleApp2]

Didn't we have this same exact (or close enough) thread several weeks ago? Or maybe a month. Where Griz fans defend our team, and everyone else tries us to convince us we're not as good as we like to think? We're going in circles here

National Championships

Montana 2
Delaware 1

[Poker Alan]

Well, UD's been on the road 13 times in the playoffs, and 2 of them have been at W&M. That's the only bus trip. The other 11 times were flights.



A little hyperbole, don't you think, at least on the CAA front? The closest school to Chatty is JMU - just a mere 7 hours away from Chatty at about 500 miles. Richmond last year was 9 hours away and almost 600 miles. UD is 12 hours away from Chatty at 700 miles. I think UMass, who's also been to Chatty, is over 1000 miles away from Chatty. I've never heard of a home field advantage being given to teams that are ~10 hours away from where the game's being played. Would you consider Seattle a home game for Montana since it's in that ballpark?

FYP, Seattle is about 7-8 hours, Denver is near twice as far from Missoula. Oh, and for pro sports, Seattle is considered Montana's home team ... Talk about being tired of the Seahawks being shoved down our throats...

[GannonFan]

National Championships

Montana 2
Delaware 1

Hmm, I seem to remember UD having about 5 more than that number - football did exist before 1979 and DII then wasn't what DII is now. Back then, it was I-AA football, just under a different name (like how FCS is a different name than I-AA). xthumbsupx

[griz8791]

Didn't we have this same exact (or close enough) thread several weeks ago? Or maybe a month. Where Griz fans defend our team, and everyone else tries us to convince us we're not as good as we like to think? We're going in circles here

This discussion occurs weekly here during football season, and more often than that if somebody thinks Montana fans are getting out of line.

xreadx

[Silenoz]

Hmm, I seem to remember UD having about 5 more than that number - football did exist before 1979 and DII then wasn't what DII is now. Back then, it was I-AA football, just under a different name (like how FCS is a different name than I-AA). xthumbsupx
Football didn't exist until 1986

[WyomingGrizFan]

Nine teams in the Big Sky.

Ooops!!! My apologies to Northern Colorado. Eight got stuck in my mind somehow.
Just goes to show that statistics sometimes can be manipulated to back up just about any argument if ones' slick enough; without double-checking the facts.

Now 100 % of me agrees with my above postings. After double-checking my facts that is.

[Proud Griz Man]

First off, not sure I follow the last part... 50% of the games are won and 50% of the games are lost. National Champions win 100% of the games that year. The runner-up wins 75%. Semifinalist losers win 66%. Quarterfinalists losers win 50%. First round losers win 0%. Add them all up and it's 50%.

But 80% win percentage at home and 20% on the road is fairly significant IMO. If that were the trend for all teams, you'd have something, but I don't think that's the case.

For compairson sake, since it's easiest for me to find and probably most similar to Montana, look at UD home and away in the playoffs.

L @ EKU
W Colgate
W @ LaTech
L EKU (neutral)
W @ W&M
L ArkSt
L @ Furman
L JMU
W Samford
W @ LaMonroe
L @ Marshall
W @ Montana
L @ Marshall
W Hofstra
L @ McNeese
L @ Marshall
W Hofstra
W Georgia Southern
L McNeese
W Portland State
W Lehigh
L Georgia Southern
W Southern Illinois
W Northern Iowa
W Wofford
W Colgate (neutral)
W Lafayette
L @ W&M
W Delaware State
W @ Southern Illinois
W @ Northern Iowa
L Appalachian State (neutral)

By my count that's:
6-7 on the road = .462
12-4 at home = .750
1-2 neutral = .333

Home is similar but .20 v .46 is quite a difference IMO. The home percentage is to be expected because UM and UD always play first round games at home, which are generally easier than facing a team that is good enough to win a first round game. The road record of Montana is very significant IMO. xpeacex

BTW, for all those people that complain about UD playing home playoff games.... 13 away games. How many other teams have played that many?

That is only because you play those cream-puff Eastern teams. xlolx

Can you write some longer posts? Somehow, I think of you when I hear that ooma internet telephone advertisement with "The Talker".xnodx;)

[89Hen]

Can you write some longer posts? Somehow, I think of you when I hear that ooma internet telephone advertisement with "The Talker".xnodx;)
Hey, it's only long because of the format. :p

[Proud Griz Man]

Hey, it's only long because of the format. :p

xlolx;)xthumbsupx

I joined this board (an earlier version) in 2002 just to respond to your post. Same topic, but seven years have passed.

[Grizaholic17]

It is a known fact that the Griz are usually awarded a seed because they win the conference and usually get that home game because we draw the crowds even on thanksgiving weekend. Nothing new in that.

The Griz beating JMU at JMU was monumental for us...because as seen, we don't do well on the road in the playoffs. Interesting to see what teams do.

[89Hen]

xlolx;)xthumbsupx

I joined this board (an earlier version) in 2002 just to respond to your post. Same topic, but seven years have passed.
Well tell the Griz to do something about it and win a couple more road games so we can put this thing to bed. :p

[purplepeopleeaterv2]

It is a known fact that the Griz are usually awarded a seed because they win the conference and usually get that home game because we draw the crowds even on thanksgiving weekend. Nothing new in that.

The Griz beating JMU at JMU was monumental for us...because as seen, we don't do well on the road in the playoffs. Interesting to see what teams do.

Which is NO easy feat mind you. JMU was something like 36-4 since '03 at HOME............well until this year xnonono2x

[AshevilleApp2]

Hmm, I seem to remember UD having about 5 more than that number - football did exist before 1979 and DII then wasn't what DII is now. Back then, it was I-AA football, just under a different name (like how FCS is a different name than I-AA). xthumbsupx

I can't agree. Division 1 split in 1978 into the current configuration. Since then Delaware has one championship under a playoff system. You have to compare apples to apples. xthumbsupx