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

[Newbomb Turk]

Now this is a thread that can use a squirrel discussion.......

[Jamie H]

Don't you get the irony in you claiming others are cherry picking when you only want to focus on one single game.

Which is easily trumped by either the Iowa results or the head to head. Take your pick.

That doesn't explain even 1% what the hell Houston has to with any of this. Houston didn't play anyone. Nebraska played you and won 24-3, and also played in the Big Ten conference. How are the two teams even remotely related???? Does this go back to 2009 again somehow?

[Jamie H]

What MSU fans don't get is the irony of using their victory over Michigan as the basis for a "neener-neener we're better than you" conversation while at the same time pretending that Nebraska has no right to do the same thing to them despite a more dominating win. That's just classic. But not as funny as either the "we won the game last year so that means we're better this year" or the "one of our losses wasn't a Big Ten loss so it doesn't count" argument.

[Masspartan]

Sure they do. I'm not contending MSU is somehow this super team that was jobbed with an undefeated season or anything.

But generally when I compare two teams, I tend to put a little more weight on the game that featured both teams playing against each other. That you keep trying to deflect from that head-to-head matchup tells me you know it too.

MSU > Michigan; maybe not much, and next year is a whole new season, but for right now, it's still the truth, no matter how much you hate it and want to pretend it isn't.

QFT

[Masspartan]

Personally I think UM beats State at state if the game was played today. To my eyes, the State game woke the team up to how physical the game is in the big ten. They played much better after the state game than before.

Fitz averaging 135 ypg in the five weeks after the game seems to bear that out a little.

of course you do. lol.

[Masspartan]

Yet anytime I bring up Nebraska, every single MSU fan refuses to admit they are the better team. I wonder why that is?

hey Phucknutz ... before I respond to any of you nonsensical posts answer 1 question.

Is IOWA better than Michigan?

[SeattleLionsFan]

Of course coaches agree with me. Writers agree with you. The only one claiming that one team would win 70% of the time is brook.

You assholes couldn't beat Central 70% of the time.

[Jamie H]

hey Phucknutz ... before I respond to any of you nonsensical posts answer 1 question.

Is IOWA better than Michigan?

Wow, "Phucknutz". Apparently I'm chatting with a middle-schooler. Does your mommy know you are on the internet during school-hours?

[Masspartan]

Now this is a thread that can use a squirrel discussion.......

LOL, wut?

[Jamie H]

If Nebraska was better team they would have been the team playing in the BTC game. Same goes for Michigan.

Is this why Notre Dame isn't better than MSU as well? Notre Dame clearly didn't play in the Big Ten Title Game. Losers.

[nhwbrooklyn]

That doesn't explain even 1% what the hell Houston has to with any of this. Houston didn't play anyone. Nebraska played you and won 24-3, and also played in the Big Ten conference. How are the two teams even remotely related???? Does this go back to 2009 again somehow?

When you are purposely obtuse would it do anyone any favors to hold your hand and walk through this? Would you listen to anything that you don't want to hear?

If you think UofM is equal to MSU right now go right ahead. That is what a UofM homer should think.

[nhwbrooklyn]

Of course coaches agree with me. Writers agree with you. The only one claiming that one team would win 70% of the time is brook.

You assholes couldn't beat Central 70% of the time.

Yes I think MSU would beat UofM 70% percent of the time in a neutral setting.

Do I think that reflects how much better MSU is than UofM? No. Because the style and player matchup favors MSU. I see MSU as clearly being a little better than UofM overall this year. It's a perfectly rational position to have.

[Jamie H]

No no, please tell me--what the hell does Houston have to do with Nebraska? I'm not being obtuse. There really is absolutely no comparison between the two teams on any level, so I'm dying to know what convoluted argument you are trying to use them for.

Houston lost 1 game, to Sothern Mississippi, by the same amount (21) that you lost to Nebraska. Are you actually trying to argue that Houston is better than Southern Mississippi??? You're not going to find many people to back you up, except maybe among Virginia Tech fans who are probably still claiming they are better than Clemson.

[Jamie H]

Yes I think MSU would beat UofM 70% percent of the time in a neutral setting.

Do I think that reflects how much better MSU is than UofM? No. Because the style and player matchup favors MSU. I see MSU as clearly being a little better than UofM overall this year. It's a perfectly rational position to have.

Yes, perfectly rational for a blind homer.

[nhwbrooklyn]

Houston shows you a piece of the bigger picture, in that a team that didn't play as hard of a schedule with less significant victories shouldn't be rewarded. You are hyper fixated on the leading piece of support you have for your position. Why? Because you don't want to hear anything else that doesn't support your position and look at the whole picture.

How long before you make a post not centered on MSU's loss to Nebraska? I'm guessing it doesn't happen.