U of M thread (in the Lions Forum) :)

[Masspartan]

UM (at home) beat the two teams that we lost two (on the road) ... true. Why don't you just ignore that fact that we beat the team (on the road) that you lost to ... and for the 4th consecutive year beat ... well U-M.

If you honestly think that U-M was a better football team in 2011 than MSU ... then seek help.

[Masspartan]

Who said anything about that? But by your "one game means everything" logic, you have to admit that Nebraska is clearly better than MSU right? And you have to admit that Michgian is clearly better than Nebraska right?

So how do you rectify all 3 of those statements? They can't all be correct. It is impossible. And that doesn't even get into the fact that by that logic, Notre Dame is clearly betten than MSU as well.

except .. I've never said 'one game means everything'. I'm saying that combine 11-1 in 2010 ... plus 10-2 in 2011 and 4 consecutive years of beating U-M and then it's pretty easy to say State is better than U-M in football right now.

[Jamie H]

You said MSU was clearly better than Michigan, based on one game played at MSU. What else are you basing it on? MSU got blown out by two teams Michigan beat. so you clearly aren't looking at the whole season. Anyone looking at the full season would say the teams were pretty equal, with Michigan State winning a good game played in East Lansing. You would expect the home team to win a game where the teams are relatively similar in strength.

Both MSU and Michigan were great at home, and less than great away from home.

[froot loops]

I guess you win on that point, yes Michigan with its priviledge under the old system would have gotten a Cotton Bowl bid over 4 teams in the top 10 ranked ahead of them because of ability at the bix office.

pANDs

People talk about drawing power in college football like it was 4th unit on the team. Is there any other sport in which this is a factor? College football must be a lot less popular than we think if the Sugar Bowl can't sell tickets without an SEC team there. In no way shape or form does Va. Tech deserver a Sugar Bowl bid. When you soil yourself twice against Clemson, that should eliminate you.

[Masspartan]

again, that isn't what I said ... I said the Spartans have beaten U-M four consecutive years .... 1 .. maybe 2 years could be an outlier. But 4?

Again .... tell me by what logic U-M can claim to be a better team than State?

[SeattleLionsFan]

At least Clemson is ranked. Can't say the same for the Irish.

[SeattleLionsFan]

As soon as you can tell me what relevance the win three years ago has on who's better?

[froot loops]

What does Notre Dame have to do with anything?

[Masspartan]

Just for the record ..... last 4 year regular season standings.

2011
State 10-2 (7-1)
U-M 10-2 (6-2)

2010
State 11-1 (7-1)
U-M 7-6 (3-5)

2009
State 6-6 (4-4)
U-M 5-7 (1-7)

2008
State 9-3 (6-2)
U-M 3-9 (2-6)

Big 10 records over the last 4 years ....

State ... 24 - 8.
U-M ... 12 - 20

[Jamie H]

Yeah, what the hell does ANYTHING that happened last year have any bearing on this years teams? Michigan didn't even have the same coach.

Rodriguez sucked as a coach, and his teams sucked. Rodriguez could barely manage to beat the likes of Indiana and UMass. I don't see how any of that has anything to do with this year.

If Michigan and MSU played on a neutral field, I'd expect the line to be pretty much a pick-'em. MSU was the better team in East Lansing, no doubt. That doesn't mean they were clearly a better team all season. If they were clearly better, we wouldn't have paradoxes like MSU > UM > Nebraska > MSU.

I'm not playing favorites here. I'm pretty positive ND would have beaten us in South Bend. And god forbid if we had had to play OSU in Columbus. Home field matters, and I think both MSU and Michigan proved that to extremes this season. Both were undefeated at home, yet struggled at times away from home.

[Jamie H]

What does Notre Dame have to do with anything?

You lost to Notre Dame. You can't choose to not count that as a loss just because they aren't in the Big Ten. Especially when you are talking to another team that acutally beat Notre Dame.

Crowing about having less Big Ten losses than Michigan when both teams are 10-2 is pretty silly. Sure, it got you into the Big Ten title game. Good for you. That doesn't make the ND game just vaporize.

[SeattleLionsFan]

Also MSU>UM>ND>MSU

[froot loops]

You lost to Notre Dame. You can't choose to not count that as a loss just because they aren't in the Big Ten. Especially when you are talking to another team that acutally beat Notre Dame.

Crowing about having less Big Ten losses than Michigan when both teams are 10-2 is pretty silly. Sure, it got you into the Big Ten title game. Good for you. That doesn't make the ND game just vaporize.

WTF are you talking about?

Here is what SLF said:

At least Clemson is ranked. Can't say the same for the Irish.

What in the fuck does that have to do with what the hell you are talking about?

[Masspartan]

I'm not a lawyer, but I'd argue it's establishing precedent.

State beat the team you lost to ... at their place.
U-M beat the the teams we lost to ... at home.
State beat U-M in their head to head meeting.
State finished 7-1 in the Big 10 with a tougher schedule
U-M finished 6-2 in the Big 10 with a softer schedule

please help me find any LOGIC that would dictate U-M > State in 2011.

[Jamie H]

Just for the record ..... last 4 year regular season standings.

Just for the record, what the hell do 2008, 2009 and 2010 have to do with this season? Do you really think beating Michigan the past 3 season is some sort of accomplishent? Jesus every team with a pulse beat us. Losing to us would have been an abject embarassment. That's why Rodriguez is no long the coach.