Case for provincialism

[GrizzlyBill]

I so much dislike the fact that so few 2010 Griz recruits are home grown, that I have spun off into irrationality. I'm all for regional pride. The game means so much more when you know relatives of many of the players. As nice as it has been to win so much the past several years, it was all the sweeter for the names of kids from Havre, Butte, Colstrip, Libby, Kalispell, Drummond being discussed on this board year after year.

So now we gotta go recruit in California? I'm all for regionalism, even provincialism. I want to see how good our kids from Sidney, Browning, Darby can do against you hillbillies in Boone in a couple years, or in Lake Charles. I'd like to see a change in the rules laid by the Montana State Board of Regents to the effect that the majority of schollies offered by state funded colleges go to citizens of Montana.

If this turns out to be a real downward trend in the fraction of home grown Griz, I may be tempted to become a Bobcat fan—assuming they don't do the same thing. And—It's not that I don't like you guys from Delaware or Texas or California; Hell, it's a great honor to play you guys, but it's just more fun to root for my home boys.

[TexasTerror]

A lot of schools recruit the majority of their players in state.

SHSU has had until recent year 100% Texas players. In the last few, we've extended into Oklahoma and Kansas some - particularly Oklahoma for some big OL.

A state where talent at the Div I level is lacking, such as a Montana or South Dakota, would have a troubling time with restrictions compared to a school in Texas, Florida, California or even Ohio...

Why penalize kids from other states who are Div I worthy by giving their spot to someone from a "home state" situation who isn't?

[GrizzlyBill]

A lot of schools recruit the majority of their players in state.

SHSU has had until recent year 100% Texas players. In the last few, we've extended into Oklahoma and Kansas some - particularly Oklahoma for some big OL.

A state where talent at the Div I level is lacking, such as a Montana or South Dakota, would have a troubling time with restrictions compared to a school in Texas, Florida, California or even Ohio...

Why penalize kids from other states who are Div I worthy by giving their spot to someone from a "home state" situation who isn't?

Purely personal reason. Like I said, I just like to see the home boys play. I'm not saying 100% of the schollies, just a majority, maybe just 51%. If a kid from Texas wants to play for Montana, that's great, but he's gotta beat out the Montana kids.

My beef is that it becomes too much like the pros, where everyone is all in the same bit pool of talent. How can it be "me against you" when they're all us? Say what?

[uofmman1122]

If this turns out to be a real downward trend in the fraction of home grown Griz, I may be tempted to become a Bobcat fan—assuming they don't do the same thing.Don't let the door hit you on the way out. xrolleyesx

I love seeing fellow Montana kids getting recognition just as much as anyone else, but come on...

If you're going to threaten to become a Bobcat fan after ONE class is a little low in Montana kids, then we won't miss you. I bet you'd be the same type of fan that stops going if we went 6-5. xcoffeex

If you want to cheer for a team of Montana kids, cheer on Carrol or Tech. It's irrational to think any D-1 team can always be competitive with nothing but in-state players, especially in a state like Montana.

[GrizzlyBill]

Don't let the door hit you on the way out. xrolleyesx

I love seeing fellow Montana kids getting recognition just as much as anyone else, but come on...

If you're going to threaten to become a Bobcat fan after ONE class is a little low in Montana kids, then we won't miss you. I bet you'd be the same type of fan that stops going if we went 6-5. xcoffeex

If you want to cheer for a team of Montana kids, cheer on Carrol or Tech. It's irrational to think any D-1 team can always be competitive with nothing but in-state players, especially in a state like Montana.

I'm in no club with you, dude. I just like football, and the Griz have been playing some of the sweetest brand of the game for over a decade, but I don't want to see us become a "win-at-all-cost" program.

I got a degree from UM, but my taxes also support the Bobcats. Why should you care who I root for? You must think it matters.

[Proud Griz Man]

Some years Montana will get more, some years less in-state recruits. Add on some talented walk-ons from Montana and everything will work out well. xnodx

[JohnStOnge]

I so much dislike the fact that so few 2010 Griz recruits are home grown, that I have spun off into irrationality. I'm all for regional pride. The game means so much more when you know relatives of many of the players. As nice as it has been to win so much the past several years, it was all the sweeter for the names of kids from Havre, Butte, Colstrip, Libby, Kalispell, Drummond being discussed on this board year after year.

Yeah, it's a balance. My team, McNeese, is an extremely "local" team. I remember back when Florida Atlantic made the semis in 2003 there was talk about how "local" the Owls were due to their location near Miami. I did a comparison and found that the average distance from campus for a McNeese player's home town was shorter than the average distance for a FAU player. Typically, better than 95 percent of McNeese's players have been from within 200 miles of Lake Charles. And that was true when they made it to two national title games. They did it with local players.

In 2009, only one of McNeese's 95 players on its roster was from a home town more than 200 miles from Lake Charles. And that one was from 205 miles away in Slidell, Louisiana. I kind of like it that way even if it means they haven't quite gotten over the top and won a national championship game. They have, as far as I'm concerned, shown that they can at times compete with the best in I-AA/FCS using players taken almost exclusively from within a 200 mile radius of campus. It kind of contributes to the regional pride thing.

[JohnStOnge]

I want to see how good our kids from Sidney, Browning, Darby can do against you hillbillies in Boone in a couple years, or in Lake Charles. I'd like to see a change in the rules laid by the Montana State Board of Regents to the effect that the majority of schollies offered by state funded colleges go to citizens of Montana.

I think that's interesting but I don't think it should be an "in state" thing. Make it a distance thing. For instance: McNeese near the Louisiana/Texas border. Houston is about the distance from Lake Charles as Baton Rouge is and closer than New Orleans. Beaumont and Port Arthur are about as close as Lafayette.

If you went to requiring that schools limit recruiting to their own metro area Sam Houston State would become a juggernaught because it's in the Houston metro area. Georgia State would be the next juggernaught on the horizon.

Believe me, you would not want to try to compete with a school that draws its players exclusively from the Houston or Atlanta metro areas if your school draws its players exclusively from the Missoula, Montana metro area.

[ngineer]

Only an issue for state universities that are seen 'carrying the flag' for a state or a region of a state. Lehigh used to have 90% of its players come from eastern PA and NJ when I was in school. Now only about 50%. This past year, Lehigh's roster had players from 17 different states.

[Syntax Error]

I so much dislike the fact that so few 2010 Griz recruits are home grown, that I have spun off into irrationality. I'm all for regional pride. The game means so much more when you know relatives of many of the players. As nice as it has been to win so much the past several years, it was all the sweeter for the names of kids from Havre, Butte, Colstrip, Libby, Kalispell, Drummond being discussed on this board year after year.

So now we gotta go recruit in California? I'm all for regionalism, even provincialism...

Agreed. xhurrayx xnodx :) Localities matter in college football.

[DG Cowboy]

Two comments:

1. Didn't Montana have a stud from in-state this year (MM), who had to walk-on to get a scholarship? Isn't that what you are saying?

2. UNH beat McNeese bad, and many of the key players were from California and others from outside New England contributed heavily as well.

So I agree with you Griz Bill and Johnstonge. A school has to make choices and live with them, whatever they might be.
It really ticks me off that colleges don't develop American tennis players as well. They have 80% of the roster from other countries.

[DFW HOYA]

Only an issue for state universities that are seen 'carrying the flag' for a state or a region of a state. Lehigh used to have 90% of its players come from eastern PA and NJ when I was in school. Now only about 50%. This past year, Lehigh's roster had players from 17 different states.

However, you cannot compete consistently without a local base. Take a look at the roster of the PL's southern-most member, with zero D.C. kids, three from Maryland and four from Virginia (not all of whom are even close to D.C). That's seven kids playing HS ball within 100 miles of the university, and only one in this year's recruiting class.

[GrizzlyBill]

Two comments:

1. Didn't Montana have a stud from in-state this year (MM), who had to walk-on to get a scholarship? Isn't that what you are saying?

2. UNH beat McNeese bad, and many of the key players were from California and others from outside New England contributed heavily as well.

So I agree with you Griz Bill and Johnstonge. A school has to make choices and live with them, whatever they might be.
It really ticks me off that colleges don't develop American tennis players as well. They have 80% of the roster from other countries.

Yeah, yeah--- Exceptions abound. I knew my rant was just that. Still, the local base of talent, augmented by outside blood of those who may just want to come here and join us, makes for a team a fan can get emotional behind. I really don't see where the fan base is (beyond the campus and alumni) for those "national" schools that really don't have a localized core.

Anyway, this was not at all a call for general rule change. Just a tempest in my teapot here in western Montana.

[Grizzaholic]

I so much dislike the fact that so few 2010 Griz recruits are home grown, that I have spun off into irrationality. I'm all for regional pride. The game means so much more when you know relatives of many of the players. As nice as it has been to win so much the past several years, it was all the sweeter for the names of kids from Havre, Butte, Colstrip, Libby, Kalispell, Drummond being discussed on this board year after year.

So now we gotta go recruit in California? I'm all for regionalism, even provincialism. I want to see how good our kids from Sidney, Browning, Darby can do against you hillbillies in Boone in a couple years, or in Lake Charles. I'd like to see a change in the rules laid by the Montana State Board of Regents to the effect that the majority of schollies offered by state funded colleges go to citizens of Montana.

If this turns out to be a real downward trend in the fraction of home grown Griz, I may be tempted to become a Bobcat fan—assuming they don't do the same thing. And—It's not that I don't like you guys from Delaware or Texas or California; Hell, it's a great honor to play you guys, but it's just more fun to root for my home boys.


That is your post.

[Bogus Megapardus]

However, you cannot compete consistently without a local base. Take a look at the roster of the PL's southern-most member, with zero D.C. kids, three from Maryland and four from Virginia (not all of whom are even close to D.C). That's seven kids playing HS ball within 100 miles of the university, and only one in this year's recruiting class.


I really don't see where the fan base is (beyond the campus and alumni) for those "national" schools that really don't have a localized core.


Montana is larger than most nations. D.C. could fit into a typical Montanan's back yard.

[MplsBison]

NDSU has had a problem trying to get high school players from out of region to stay with the program and be contributors.

It may be too much of a shock for them in the change in climate and culture.

[GrizzlyBill]

That is your post.

So Grizzaholic, do you think it is irrational for me to place higher value on having more local talent on the field than in contending for the NC EVERY season? If so, then I think you are missing the point of the game. Would you want to field a team entirely of big, fast rounders that far ranging scouts "locate" anywhere and everywhere? (We have the NFL for that.) Is the object to win every game? No, it is to play the best game. I say it is to field a team we can connect with, and who represents us where we live?

[ngineer]

However, you cannot compete consistently without a local base. Take a look at the roster of the PL's southern-most member, with zero D.C. kids, three from Maryland and four from Virginia (not all of whom are even close to D.C). That's seven kids playing HS ball within 100 miles of the university, and only one in this year's recruiting class.

I fully agree that having a 'local' base is important. For Montana that is the whole state. For Lehigh getting kids within a two hour drive is important, but the problem, now is getting admitted. With the SAT's rising in the overall class, the pool has had to be widened to a national scope.

[Grizzaholic]

So Grizzaholic, do you think it is irrational for me to place higher value on having more local talent on the field than in contending for the NC EVERY season? If so, then I think you are missing the point of the game. Would you want to field a team entirely of big, fast rounders that far ranging scouts "locate" anywhere and everywhere? (We have the NFL for that.) Is the object to win every game? No, it is to play the best game. I say it is to field a team we can connect with, and who represents us where we live?

Going a little overboard are we?

That the Griz got 3 instate recruits this year doesn't bother me one bit. If that is all the state of Montana had to offer, or the UM had to offer in the way of degrees for said student/athletes, that is fine. If that is all the state had to offer and all we needed in said areas it is fine. That we had to look elsewhere to fill in other areas, you are all pissy about?! Grow up a little. I am sure next year there will be some other needs that the UM football program will fill from the INSTATE RECRUITS.

If you are all upset over a college football team not including enough local kids to your liking then that is one way to go though life. If you honestly think that a team entirely, or 90%+, made up of kids from MT can compete nationally you might need to do some learnin' on the situation.

Couple quick questions for ya:

What do you think of local kids that leave the state to play elsewhere in the country? Do you look down on them for leaving YOU behind to chase their dreams elsewhere instead of their hometown? What about a local kid that doesn't get a full ride to play football but he can get one from Chandon St, or Dixie St, or ( fill in D-II school here ) or even ISU or perhaps EWU? Do you look down on players that choose other colleges because the courses and degrees are not offered in Missoula or Bozeman? Or what about a recruit that chooses Bozeman over Missoula because he wants to be an engineer?

[Grizzaholic]

One more. Do I wish that the team was made up of 100% kids from MT, YES I DO.

DO I think it is a rational thought or that they would be able to compete nationally, NO I DON'T.

(Perhaps if the very best the state had to offer and construct 1, ONE, team with no MSU, UM, Carroll, etc....just one team to play the country)

[DJOM]

The case for provincialism is very compelling. Two problems. Coaches want to win. Fans want to win. College football has turned into a business at most institutions of higher learning. If a coach is not winning, he is typically replaced regardless of where he recruited his players from. At last count there are roughly 37104 high schools in USA and only 245 colleges that play D1 football. In order to compete, those colleges recruit nationally according to measurables. Sadly, in my opinion, being a local kid does not trump a 4.4 forty.

[Mattymc727]

Two comments:

1. Didn't Montana have a stud from in-state this year (MM), who had to walk-on to get a scholarship? Isn't that what you are saying?

2. UNH beat McNeese bad, and many of the key players were from California and others from outside New England contributed heavily as well.

So I agree with you Griz Bill and Johnstonge. A school has to make choices and live with them, whatever they might be.
It really ticks me off that colleges don't develop American tennis players as well. They have 80% of the roster from other countries.

If UNH were to mostly recruit instate, we never would come close to a winning record, trust me, i played NH high school football....

[Grizzaholic]

I know you haven't had time to respond to the last questions Bill, but how about this to add on to my last post.

If you want a roster full of Montana kids, why not root for Carroll or another MT NAIA school? By saying you would become a Bobcat fan, is that because you want to spite UM? They don't have many more kids from Montana than the U does. Just saying. I didn't go look up the numbers, but I am sure someone, a Bobcat fan probably, will have the ratio's for UM and MSU in homegrown talent.


Didn't mean to step on UofMman's post.

[uofmman1122]

No worries, dude. xlolx

[GrizzlyBill]

What do you think of local kids that leave the state to play elsewhere in the country? Do you look down on them for leaving YOU behind to chase their dreams elsewhere instead of their hometown? What about a local kid that doesn't get a full ride to play football but he can get one from Chandon St, or Dixie St, or ( fill in D-II school here ) or even ISU or perhaps EWU? Do you look down on players that choose other colleges because the courses and degrees are not offered in Missoula or Bozeman? Or what about a recruit that chooses Bozeman over Missoula because he wants to be an engineer?

I know you haven't had time to respond to the last questions Bill, but how about this to add on to my last post.

If you want a roster full of Montana kids, why not root for Carroll or another MT NAIA school? By saying you would become a Bobcat fan, is that because you want to spite UM? They don't have many more kids from Montana than the U does. Just saying. I didn't go look up the numbers, but I am sure someone, a Bobcat fan probably, will have the ratio's for UM and MSU in homegrown talent.

In response to paragraph 1 (from your earlier post): No, I didn't mean to imply restriction of any kind on where any kid might choose to play or go to school. But, come on; 3 out of 16 (or around that)!? I'm disappointed in that. I just hope it is not part of a trend. I would be very happy if at least half the roster were in-state. Your points are well taken.

Hey, I take my beating. Being a Griz or Bobcat is not really the big deal for me. I like good football. Why does it have to be personal? Leave all that on the field back when we played. These kids deserve our support and, when they excel, our admiration—whatever team they are on. My threat to become a Cat fan was idle. Although it is conceivable that a school administration could really ruin it for me. That's what provoked my initial tirade. Are you sure a decision was not handed down from the AD/Prez office to step up out-of-state recruiting in an effort to get even more speed/size/skill?—knowing it would bump some good Montana prospects. I hope not.

[Grizzaholic]

In response to paragraph 1 (from your earlier post): No, I didn't mean to imply restriction of any kind on where any kid might choose to play or go to school. But, come on; 3 out of 16 (or around that)!? I'm disappointed in that. I just hope it is not part of a trend. I would be very happy if at least half the roster were in-state. Your points are well taken.

Hey, I take my beating. Being a Griz or Bobcat is not really the big deal for me. I like good football. Why does it have to be personal? Leave all that on the field back when we played. These kids deserve our support and, when they excel, our admiration—whatever team they are on. My threat to become a Cat fan was idle. Although it is conceivable that a school administration could really ruin it for me. That's what provoked my initial tirade. Are you sure a decision was not handed down from the AD/Prez office to step up out-of-state recruiting in an effort to get even more speed/size/skill?—knowing it would bump some good Montana prospects. I hope not.

I always support MT kids wherever they might go. Be it here, MSU, Florida, Europe, wherever. I am fine with it.

Not to poke the fire, but if it doesn't matter where the kids play why does it matter that they must play IN STATE? If they are playing, they are playing and you can follow, cheer, root them on. Right?

I don't remember saying anything on what the AD does/doesn't do. Nor do I remember supporting said decisions.

I would highly doubt that the O'Day would tell the coach to recruit out of state and not give a look at local talent. And for you to toss that out there with no link, story, press release, is not that great a play, IMO.

[AAadict]

No choice for Hens. Usually only a handfull of players from Delaware. Rare when they start. We just wait to find QB's at FBS schools who are unhappy as back ups. I'm liking it since it gave us Andy Hall (Georgia Tech), Sonny Riccio (Missouri), Pat Devin (Penn State), and a guy by the name of Flacco who was not good enough to start at Pitt.

[TheValleyRaider]

I fully agree that having a 'local' base is important. For Montana that is the whole state. For Lehigh getting kids within a two hour drive is important, but the problem, now is getting admitted. With the SAT's rising in the overall class, the pool has had to be widened to a national scope.

I think it depends on the definition of "local"

For Lehigh, local recruiting is good, because of the strength of HS football in the area. CNY produces some nice talent, but nothing of that volume. We need inroads elsewhere

I think what we're really getting at, at least in terms of smaller private schools like ours, is that we need the "pipelines," places we can consistently go and have success when it comes to recruiting players xtwocentsx

[Bogus Megapardus]

We have kids from Georgia, Texas, Louisiana, Kansas, Colorado, California - can Montana be too far off?

[ngineer]

We have kids from Georgia, Texas, Louisiana, Kansas, Colorado, California - can Montana be too far off?

We had a great wrestler from Montana a few years back, Matt Ruppel, who won the NCAA championship at 190 lbs, as a junior. He went 37-0-1 and had a 4.0 GPA!! Unfortunately, the following year he was diagnosed with a congenital spine problem and could not defend his title.

[DG Cowboy]

If UNH were to mostly recruit instate, we never would come close to a winning record, trust me, i played NH high school football....

And there is nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying every school has to have their recruiting focus, whatever is best for them. It is frustrating to see local guys make it somewhere when they weren't recruited by home schools, however. UNH would be hard pressed to be competitive with just New England recruits even. The numbers aren't there. McNeese recruits mainly from Houston to Mississippi because the numbers are there.

[Mattymc727]

And there is nothing wrong with that. I'm just saying every school has to have their recruiting focus, whatever is best for them. It is frustrating to see local guys make it somewhere when they weren't recruited by home schools, however. UNH would be hard pressed to be competitive with just new England recruits even. The numbers aren't there. McNeese recruits mainly from Houston to Mississippi because the numbers are there.

I know, you make excellent points, I just wanted to expand upon why perhaps Montana needs to reach out to other regions, If the instate player talent isnt good enough to keep you competitive then you have to reach out. Perhaps Montana is just taking it to the next level so they can win the title. UNH had to a long time ago

[Uncle Rico's Clan]

From what I have heard, this year was a down year for Montana athletes. Matt Miller of Capital was the best recruit and he ended up at Boise St. A lot of the football talent in Montana this year are kids who are not seniors. So the Griz did the best they could with the in state talent and went looking elsewhere to fill in needed positions. Even Carroll had a high percentage of out of state athletes get scholarships, I think i remember reading in the Missoulian that 4 of Carrolls 8 schollies went to out of state kids.

[soccerguy315]

You should be a fan of your TEAM. Not individual players. When those players come from wherever, to wear the jersey of your school on the football field, they are representing that school with everything they have. Do you think the kids on your team from Montana play harder than the kids who aren't from Montana?

Your coaches are doing everything they can to represent your school as best as possible on the football field, and you wish they would stop doing that?

The name on the front of the jersey is more important than the name on the back. ($1 to Herb Brooks)

[CrazyCat]

I think both MSU and UM should be very proud in the number of MT kids playing Div.I football considering the population of the state and neither would be playing at this level if they were to only use MT kids.

[MplsBison]

You should be a fan of your TEAM. Not individual players. When those players come from wherever, to wear the jersey of your school on the football field, they are representing that school with everything they have. Do you think the kids on your team from Montana play harder than the kids who aren't from Montana?

Your coaches are doing everything they can to represent your school as best as possible on the football field, and you wish they would stop doing that?

The name on the front of the jersey is more important than the name on the back. ($1 to Herb Brooks)

So would it have been acceptable for the "Miracle on Ice", team USA to have won using Canadian players?

Name on the front, right?

[uofmman1122]

So would it have been acceptable for the "Miracle on Ice", team USA to have won using Canadian players?

Name on the front, right?If that were the case, then what's the point of the Olympics?

Apples to oranges.

[BearIt]

One of the issues to consider in this discussion in regard to Montana is the distance from the school. As everyone knows, MT is a big state. We have one "local" MT star on the team named Shan Shillinger from Baker, MT. Baker is 566 miles from Missoula.

As a comparison, Spokane, WA is 198 miles from Missoula and Seattle is 476 Miles from Missoula.

It is great to see MT kids on the roster, but I have no problem with having a large number of regional recruits from Idaho, WA, and Wyoming. If you look at the actual community of Missoula it definately has way more in common with Coeur D'alene and Spokane than it does with Baker.

[MplsBison]

If that were the case, then what's the point of the Olympics?

Apples to oranges.

It's apples to apples.

Name on front: Montana => Montana kids are local, kids from other states aren't

<=>

Name on front: USA => USA players are local, players from other countries aren't

[MplsBison]

One of the issues to consider in this discussion in regard to Montana is the distance from the school. As everyone knows, MT is a big state. We have one "local" MT star on the team named Shan Shillinger from Baker, MT. Baker is 566 miles from Missoula.

As a comparison, Spokane, WA is 198 miles from Missoula and Seattle is 476 Miles from Missoula.

It is great to see MT kids on the roster, but I have no problem with having a large number of regional recruits from Idaho, WA, and Wyoming. If you look at the actual community of Missoula it definately has way more in common with Coeur D'alene and Spokane than it does with Baker.

Right, same thing for NDSU.

We typically recruit from our region: ND, SD, MN, WI and lately we've been getting into NE, IA and IL.


But TX, CA, FL, etc. are most definitely out of region. Completely different culture and climate.

[Mattymc727]

Right, same thing for NDSU.

We typically recruit from our region: ND, SD, MN, WI and lately we've been getting into NE, IA and IL.


But TX, CA, FL, etc. are most definitely out of region. Completely different culture and climate.

Im not sure if culture and climate are a huge factor, UNH recruited kids from California, Florida, South Carolina, and Colorado. Talk about a different culture and climate for those kids playing in New Hampshire. It might have more to do with connections to former coaches, cost of recruiting, and comfortability with the pool of players

[uofmman1122]

It's apples to apples.

Name on front: Montana => Montana kids are local, kids from other states aren't

<=>

Name on front: USA => USA players are local, players from other countries aren'tSo only kids from Miami can play for the U? Only kids from Denver can plat at Denver U? Only James Madison can play for James Madison? xlolx

I guess if that were the case, Florida and Florida State would always wreck Miami, what with the bigger selection of players. Cal would probably be the best team in California, too.

That being said, Spokane kids are more local to the University of Montana than Billings kids, or Havre kids, or Sidney kids.

I'm all for pride in your home state, but expecting a school like Montana to recruit only in-state kids is ridiculous. It's even more outrageous to assume that out of state kids can't feel the same pride for Montana that Montana kids do.

[MplsBison]

So only kids from Miami can play for the U? Only kids from Denver can plat at Denver U? Only James Madison can play for James Madison? xlolx

I guess if that were the case, Florida and Florida State would always wreck Miami, what with the bigger selection of players. Cal would probably be the best team in California, too.

That being said, Spokane kids are more local to the University of Montana than Billings kids, or Havre kids, or Sidney kids.

I'm all for pride in your home state, but expecting a school like Montana to recruit only in-state kids is ridiculous. It's even more outrageous to assume that out of state kids can't feel the same pride for Montana that Montana kids do.

Yes, it is ridiculous. I did not say that Montana should only have MT kids on the team, nor that any team should only have local kids on the team.

I was just pointing out the validity in saying that MT kids are local to a Montana state public school in the same way the US athletes are local to the US team.

[BearIt]

Over 50% of the team is from Montana and about 75% of the team is from the region. I see nothing wrong with over half the team being from Montana. That still makes it a Montana team in my book.

[CrazyCat]

Over 50% of the team is from Montana and about 75% of the team is from the region. I see nothing wrong with over half the team being from Montana. That still makes it a Montana team in my book.


What if it was 40% ?

[GrizzlyBill]

So only kids from Miami can play for the U? Only kids from Denver can plat at Denver U? Only James Madison can play for James Madison? xlolx

I guess if that were the case, Florida and Florida State would always wreck Miami, what with the bigger selection of players. Cal would probably be the best team in California, too.

That being said, Spokane kids are more local to the University of Montana than Billings kids, or Havre kids, or Sidney kids.

I'm all for pride in your home state, but expecting a school like Montana to recruit only in-state kids is ridiculous. It's even more outrageous to assume that out of state kids can't feel the same pride for Montana that Montana kids do.

Several posters have made some excellent counterpoints to my original gripe about the slim Montana fraction of 2010 recruits. 40%, 50%, 90%? I am not arguing for a number threshold, but I still prefer a regional/local identity to my college sports team. As I have said before, leave the universal talent pool approach to the pros.

[GrizzlyBill]

Im not sure if culture and climate are a huge factor, UNH recruited kids from California, Florida, South Carolina, and Colorado. Talk about a different culture and climate for those kids playing in New Hampshire. It might have more to do with connections to former coaches, cost of recruiting, and comfortability with the pool of players

The reason I like keeping a regionality in college football is that it is fun to see whether better players/teams come from different parts of the country. It's just more fun that way. Of course it has been proven over and over that the East Coast (meaning CAA) is far superior;).

If much of the talent on the Griz is from California, then for me it takes something away from our game with Cal Poly or Sac State—or at least, it would add an element of interest the other way. That is why our playing App St or McNeese is so much fun: region against region.

[BearIt]

It looks like Grizzlybill is going to get his wish. The AD is proposing to mandate more scholarships be given to in state kids:

http://www.montanakaimin.com/index.php/articles/article/athletic_department_considering_trimming_scholarsh ips/843

"With budget cuts and rising fixed costs, the University of Montana athletic department is struggling to find money for the next fiscal year and is considering dropping the number of out-of-state scholarships available..."

The article also discusses move up/down as options

[GrizzlyBill]

It looks like Grizzlybill is going to get his wish. The AD is proposing to mandate more scholarships be given to in state kids:

You probably didn't realize I was so influential! I didn't either.

[Ronbo]

Yes, Montana can go Division II and save a ton of cash by offering only 36 in state scholarships. Western State, Fort Lewis, Central Washington, Western Oregon, Northeast Central New Mexico State here we come, look out!

[CopperCat]

Don't let the door hit you on the way out. xrolleyesx

I love seeing fellow Montana kids getting recognition just as much as anyone else, but come on...

If you're going to threaten to become a Bobcat fan after ONE class is a little low in Montana kids, then we won't miss you. I bet you'd be the same type of fan that stops going if we went 6-5. xcoffeex

If you want to cheer for a team of Montana kids, cheer on Carrol or Tech. It's irrational to think any D-1 team can always be competitive with nothing but in-state players, especially in a state like Montana.

I think there would be a noticeable lack of a crowd at the last home game (not Cat-Griz of course) if the griz went 6-5.

And last I checked, some of dUMb's best players in recent memory were products of the Montana athletic machine. Hilliard (Kalispell), Biermann (Hardin) are two that come to mind.

[MplsBison]

Yes, Montana can go Division II and save a ton of cash by offering only 36 in state scholarships. Western State, Fort Lewis, Central Washington, Western Oregon, Northeast Central New Mexico State here we come, look out!

I like the part though where he was like "we can go DII or we can go FBS". Yeah those are obviously equivalent ways to put the AD in the black! LOL

[Ronbo]

Looks like some shady accounting going on. Main Hall seems to be stealing revenue from the AD Dept.

Posted by 84griz at eGriz.com


It will be interesting to see what happens with the athletic department budget once Dennison retires. It seems like all of these charges that the athletic department pays come direclty from main hall and King George.

I looked at the numbers between U of M and MSU for 2004-2005 when the Indy Star newspaper had there NCAA financial data base and the differences were staggering. For that year there was almost a $5,800,000 difference between U of M and MSU in ticket sales and athletic contributions. Yet U of M pays it's coaches less than MSU by $150,000, pays less in recruiting costs by almost $100,000, pays less in student aid by $500,000 which are all direct athletic expenses.

But then U of M pays less in "Direct Institutional Support" to the athletic department by almost $1.1 million and charges the athletic department $1.1 more for facilities maint., $1 million higher for "Game Expenses" (U of M football game expenses are $744,000 vs. MSU football game expenses are $40,000) and $300K more for "support salaries".

The combined total of these differences of; more revenue for U of M tickets and contributions, with less direct expenses for coaches salaries, recruiting, combined with less direct support from U of M and higher expense charges for facilities, game expenses and support salaries adds up to betwenn a $9 to $10 million dollar difference between U of M and MSU.

I guess my point in this whole rant is that what O'Day is talking about is a "budget" problem because of all the bull**** charges from main hall and it's underfunding of athletics. Have you heard any of this budget problem talk from the MSU AD, I have not.

After all that U of M athletics showed net revenues over expenses at a positve $2,653,000 vs. MSU $270,000. Where did the $2.6 million go, certainly not into the 2005-2006 athletic budget.

I told my wife that this next year we are taking our annual donations to the Business School and School of Education and giving it to the athletic department because sooner or later they will get it anyway.

I wonder if the athletic department will have to pay for King George's $75K raise that he is supposed to get this summer right before he retires?

FYI, here is the Indy Star NCAA Database site if you want to look it up:
http://www2.indystar.com/NCAA_financial_reports/

[CopperCat]

Now that I read that article, I am reminded of the guy who embezzled a whole bunch of cash from UM a few years back, his name escapes me at the moment. Maybe that case isn't closed just yet.......

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Provincialism can never work simply due to the laws of supply and demand. In the past, provincialism was fine since there were a large supply of football-playing college-aged kids who either wanted to remain local or had no choice but to remain local. Big supply, lower demand.

Nowadays, however, there are many more colleges who sponsor football and a dizzying number of options on where to go. In addition, the world is smaller: in the 1950s, the thought of a Florida recruit playing up in New Jersey would have been rare if not ludicrous, whereas now it's commonplace. Add to that the incredible requirements to play Division I football these days, and there simply aren't enough athletes to fill all the spots. (Make those schools private instead of public, with high academic standards, and you basically have no choice but to recruit coast-to-coast. Smaller (or constant) supply, extremely high demand.

[soccerguy315]

So would it have been acceptable for the "Miracle on Ice", team USA to have won using Canadian players?

Name on the front, right?

USA is not ALLOWED to use Canadian players...

Montana is allowed to use football players from wherever they want...

If you want to pass a law that football programs should only be allowed to have players from their own state, then fine. But that is not the rule, and to suggest handicapping your own team to meet some false sense of reality is not beneficial.

[soccerguy315]

Yes, it is ridiculous. I did not say that Montana should only have MT kids on the team, nor that any team should only have local kids on the team.

I was just pointing out the validity in saying that MT kids are local to a Montana state public school in the same way the US athletes are local to the US team.

US olympic athletes can only be recruited by THEIR national team. Football players can be recruited by anyone.

It would be like if you could recruit anyone, from any country, to be on your olympic team, but you chose to only recruit people from your country.

[DJOM]

reminds me of the "public" v "private" high school debate raging in Illinois. "Private" schools can recruit players from within a 30 mile radius of their school. "Public" high school kids have to go to school in their district. Private schools naturally tend to have "better" programs as a coach can "recruit" young men to fill every position--regardless of where they live. Conversely, a "public" high school coach gets to play whoever gets off the bus. If he has 30 wide receivers---well, he has to make do. Same thing applies here. I still believe there is nation wide recruiting because the pressure to win; i.e., money---salaries, promotions, etc.; is so great.

[GrizFoo]

UM has and will continue to get significant numbers of MT kids on every level of scholarship as well as walkons.
So far this year seems to have a smaller crop of MT kids on scholarship but it is also a year where there was a coaching change. Hauck and Paulson both being very knowledgeble and having tons of MT contacts was a plus.
This staff will have their own contacts and foster them allowing UM to get the best MT kids.

[Grizzaholic]

Not really football related but I am just wondering out loud whether GrizzlyBill will be posting on the travisty of Grizzly Basketball about the latest two kids, last year a girl from Missoula Big Sky and this year a guy from I think CMR that both went to Stanford to play basketball....Lost athletes. I wonder if he is freaking the _______ out right now because they didn't stay in MONTANA and play for one of the local schools, but instead chose to chase their dreams and play for another school.

[JohnStOnge]

Provincialism can never work simply due to the laws of supply and demand. In the past, provincialism was fine since there were a large supply of football-playing college-aged kids who either wanted to remain local or had no choice but to remain local. Big supply, lower demand.

Nowadays, however, there are many more colleges who sponsor football and a dizzying number of options on where to go. In addition, the world is smaller: in the 1950s, the thought of a Florida recruit playing up in New Jersey would have been rare if not ludicrous, whereas now it's commonplace. Add to that the incredible requirements to play Division I football these days, and there simply aren't enough athletes to fill all the spots. (Make those schools private instead of public, with high academic standards, and you basically have no choice but to recruit coast-to-coast. Smaller (or constant) supply, extremely high demand.

All that may be generally true but the difficulty of winning with "local" talent is a source of pride for me when it comes to McNeese State. No, the Cowboys haven't yet gotten over the top and won a national championship. But they've clearly had teams that had a shot. And, though they've laid eggs recently in the playoffs, they've still shown that they can compete on a national level. For instance, when you look at how they've done against programs that did win national titles in the 2000s, during the same decade they were 2-1 against Georgia Southern, 1-1 against Montana, 1-2 against Western Kentucky, 1-1 against Villanova, and 1-0 against Appalachian State. Going by memory but something like that.

To illustrate what they're doing, look at their game at Appalachian State last year. They clearly had the athletes to be competetive. Yet only one player on their roster came from more than 200 miles from their campus; that one from 205 miles. A third of Appalachian State's roster (34 of 103) came from farther than that from Boone. The average distance for a McNeese player's home town from Lake Charles was 89 miles. The average for Appalachian State was 174. Appalachian State players came from as far as 889 miles away from Boone (straight line distances from http://www.indo.com/distance/ ).

The point isn't to criticize Appalachian State. The Mountaineers have three national titles and McNeese has zero. Some on the McNeese board argue that McNeese needs to expand its recruiting area to get over the top. But, still, the Cowboys have shown that they can be good enough at times to have a shot to beat anybody in I-AA/FCS using players almost exclusively from their own back yard...players that are all from within maybe a 3 hour drive of campus.

And this year, the McNeese recruiting class' most "distant" recruit came from a town (Madisonville, LA) 182 miles from Lake Charles.

[Syntax Error]

All that may be generally true but the difficulty of winning with "local" talent is a source of pride for me when it comes to McNeese State. No, the Cowboys haven't yet gotten over the top and won a national championship. But they've clearly had teams that had a shot. And, though they've laid eggs recently in the playoffs, they've still shown that they can compete on a national level. For instance, when you look at how they've done against programs that did win national titles in the 2000s, during the same decade they were 2-1 against Georgia Southern, 1-1 against Montana, 1-2 against Western Kentucky, 1-1 against Villanova, and 1-0 against Appalachian State. Going by memory but something like that.

To illustrate what they're doing, look at their game at Appalachian State last year. They clearly had the athletes to be competetive. Yet only one player on their roster came from more than 200 miles from their campus; that one from 205 miles. A third of Appalachian State's roster (34 of 103) came from farther than that from Boone. The average distance for a McNeese player's home town from Lake Charles was 89 miles. The average for Appalachian State was 174. Appalachian State players came from as far as 889 miles away from Boone (straight line distances from http://www.indo.com/distance/ ).

The point isn't to criticize Appalachian State. The Mountaineers have three national titles and McNeese has zero. Some on the McNeese board argue that McNeese needs to expand its recruiting area to get over the top. But, still, the Cowboys have shown that they can be good enough at times to have a shot to beat anybody in I-AA/FCS using players almost exclusively from their own back yard...players that are all from within maybe a 3 hour drive of campus.

And this year, the McNeese recruiting class' most "distant" recruit came from a town (Madisonville, LA) 182 miles from Lake Charles.

I remember being at the 2002 champ game and kind of expecting McNeese to take it. Expanding the recruiting base is a natural these days. Others come and cherrypick your prospects, retribution time.

[DG Cowboy]

McNeese and Villanova 1-1? Refresh me on the other game besides the 2002 playoff. I can't place it.

[GrizzlyBill]

Not really football related but I am just wondering out loud whether GrizzlyBill will be posting on the travisty of Grizzly Basketball about the latest two kids, last year a girl from Missoula Big Sky and this year a guy from I think CMR that both went to Stanford to play basketball....Lost athletes. I wonder if he is freaking the _______ out right now because they didn't stay in MONTANA and play for one of the local schools, but instead chose to chase their dreams and play for another school.

Absolutely! They should have to play with an iron ball chained to their ankles for even considering to leave Montana! Traitors!

[GrizzlyBill]

Not really football related but I am just wondering out loud whether GrizzlyBill will be posting on the travisty of Grizzly Basketball about the latest two kids, last year a girl from Missoula Big Sky and this year a guy from I think CMR that both went to Stanford to play basketball....Lost athletes. I wonder if he is freaking the _______ out right now because they didn't stay in MONTANA and play for one of the local schools, but instead chose to chase their dreams and play for another school.

I repeat: It is a matter of pride. As John St. Onge says, we like to root for the home boys. If some come from afar to play for us, or some home boys go away, it's not that big a deal. Kids like Chase Reynolds, Marc Mariani, Lex Hilliard, etc. are bigger draws to the games for being from the area.

[Grizzaholic]

I repeat: It is a matter of pride. As John St. Onge says, we like to root for the home boys. If some come from afar to play for us, or some home boys go away, it's not that big a deal. Kids like Chase Reynolds, Marc Mariani, Lex Hilliard, etc. are bigger draws to the games for being from the area.

So you changed your stance?????

[JohnStOnge]

McNeese and Villanova 1-1? Refresh me on the other game besides the 2002 playoff. I can't place it.

No, I messed up on that one. At least I think so. I just typed numbers quickly without looking things up like I normally like to do.

[JohnStOnge]

I remember being at the 2002 champ game and kind of expecting McNeese to take it. Expanding the recruiting base is a natural these days. Others come and cherrypick your prospects, retribution time.

I don't know if I considered it a lock but I knew they were playing a team they were capable of beating since they did that by 38-13 during the regular season. Anyway, I think that McNeese team actually had a tight end from Washington State. Other than that, though, it was the same kind of thing. Scott Pendarvis, John Paul Jones, B.J. McNutt, Roderick Royal, Keith Smith, B.J. Sams, Vick King, Luke Lawton...all those guys came from within that 200 mile zone. Actually from within about 40 miles of I-10 from Houston to New Orleans.

It could be that it's getting tougher with new programs popping up and others being resurrected. I think it's likely Southeastern Louisiana has hurt McNeese's recruiting. In fact I know of one case in which a defensive end from Baton Rouge verbally committed to McNeese then switched to Southeastern. And now Lamar is starting its program up again. Texas San Antonio will add another competitor in the Houston area.

[GrizzlyBill]

So you changed your stance?????

Not at all.