Comparing Michigan and MSU

[hungry]

Mitch[/color]]I get that but if you lose you shoud lose nothing? Ranked the same, be in front of every team you beat?

said this in the other thread but ya...i think BCS rankings should be locked after the regular season. Its ridiculous any other way you look at it. If they dont lock the rankings then they should at the LEAST make the other teams in the division play that week. 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3 and so on. To be able to sit on your ass and get rewarded for not even making it to your championship game is bush league lol.

What a dumb idea. The #1 team in the nation loses 49-14, but still makes the NC game...great idea.

 

[dipchit02]

That is what I love UM plays 8 home games every other year depending on whether ND is home or away and this is the ONLY year I hear MSU complain about it. I did not realize that MSU had 8 home games last year but I like that even more. UM will only have 6 home games next year but I bet MSU fans will not give them any credit or that either.

 

[redandguilty]

Red, one thing that the statistics can't quantify is the Ohio* situation

MSU played Ohio early in the year with a fresh Braxton Miller and Joe Bauserman splitting reps. Ohio didn't have Posey, Brewster, or Herron. Part of the reason that Ohio did so well against Michigan is that it was finally at full strength and that Braxton Miller got better as the year went on.

That's a good point too.

 

[redandguilty]

When you have a stadium like Michigan Stadium, you should play 8 games a year there. It's too bad Michigan can't have all their games there.

 

[Monster]

Mitch[/color]]Plus tougher schedule and a better record. Case closed.

They beat 1 top 25 team all year....1. Ans that with them having an unprecedented 8 home games lol...EIGHT! Whatever computer came up with that being a tougher schedule needs to explode.

well....your Conference schedule was tougher since you had wisky and we didnt'. OOC though....Youngstown State, Florida Atlantic, and CMU had a combined 10 wins and our OOC has 4 bowl teams. That's the difference.

 

[hungry]

That is what I love UM plays 8 home games every other year depending on whether ND is home or away and this is the ONLY year I hear MSU complain about it. I did not realize that MSU had 8 home games last year but I like that even more. UM will only have 6 home games next year but I bet MSU fans will not give them any credit or that either.

Yep. There is a year coming up that mIchigan has to go to UConn, but most of the time, they get 8 home games every other year. MSU doesn't do that too often, because more schools will come to Michigan without the promise of a return game than will do that for MSU.

 

[mhughes0021]

said this in the other thread but ya...i think BCS rankings should be locked after the regular season. Its ridiculous any other way you look at it. If they dont lock the rankings then they should at the LEAST make the other teams in the division play that week. 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3 and so on. To be able to sit on your ass and get rewarded for not even making it to your championship game is bush league lol.

What a dumb idea. The #1 team in the nation loses 49-14, but still makes the NC game...great idea.

a dumb idea is not having most of the nation play an then there be movement in the rankings. fucking dumb. by the way....the number 1 team blew out georgia in their game....wtf are you talking about?

 

[wolverine304]

He was giving an example of your way is also flawed

 

[jh1spartanfan]

Monster [/color]]

They beat 1 top 25 team all year....1. Ans that with them having an unprecedented 8 home games lol...EIGHT! Whatever computer came up with that being a tougher schedule needs to explode.

well....your Conference schedule was tougher since you had wisky and we didnt'. OOC though....Youngstown State, Florida Atlantic, and CMU had a combined 10 wins and our OOC has 4 bowl teams. That's the difference.

Here's what annoys about that argument. In the computers that makes a difference, but in reality, neither MSU nor UM would lose to EMU, WMU, SDSU, FAU, YSU, CMU. MSU had ND in South Bend and UM had them at home. So, I'd still argue MSU's OOC was harder, despite what the numbers say. For both teams the only realistic loseable game was against ND and MSU played them on the road and UM played them at home.

 

[tsmith7559]

UM played 10 bowl eligible teams in the regular season....MSU 7. Dont dismiss a team like Western or SDSU. MSU first game against YSU might have been different if it was against Western. Playing bowl eligible teams means you cant have a let down at all.

Bowl eligible schedule
UM: 8-2
MSU: 5-2

 

[wolverine304]

Monster [/color]]

well....your Conference schedule was tougher since you had wisky and we didnt'. OOC though....Youngstown State, Florida Atlantic, and CMU had a combined 10 wins and our OOC has 4 bowl teams. That's the difference.

Here's what annoys about that argument. In the computers that makes a difference, but in reality, neither MSU nor UM would lose to EMU, WMU, SDSU, FAU, YSU, CMU. MSU had ND in South Bend and UM had them at home. So, I'd still argue MSU's OOC was harder, despite what the numbers say. For both teams the only realistic loseable game was against ND and MSU played them on the road and UM played them at home.

This makes no sense. If this was the case, boise and tcu wouldn't get shit about playing an easy schedule.


It'd be like saying since tcu beat wisconsin, so they'd win the big 10.

 

[Monster]

Monster [/color]]

well....your Conference schedule was tougher since you had wisky and we didnt'. OOC though....Youngstown State, Florida Atlantic, and CMU had a combined 10 wins and our OOC has 4 bowl teams. That's the difference.

Here's what annoys about that argument. In the computers that makes a difference, but in reality, neither MSU nor UM would lose to EMU, WMU, SDSU, FAU, YSU, CMU. MSU had ND in South Bend and UM had them at home. So, I'd still argue MSU's OOC was harder, despite what the numbers say. For both teams the only realistic loseable game was against ND and MSU played them on the road and UM played them at home.

didn't MSU lose to CMU a few years ago? And we lost to app state. So your argument holds no water. There's a huge difference in talent between WMU and Youngstown State and Florida Atlantic.

 

[hungry]

What a dumb idea. The #1 team in the nation loses 49-14, but still makes the NC game...great idea.

a dumb idea is not having most of the nation play an then there be movement in the rankings. fucking dumb. by the way....the number 1 team blew out georgia in their game....wtf are you talking about?

Its called a hypothetical, one that probably happens a lot. You are proposing that they freeze the bcs standings before the CCG's. It is entirely possible that a #1 or #2 gets beaten badly in a conference championship and under your proposal would then still go onto play in the NC game. That would be dumb.

I know, let's freeze the bcs standings when it pleases some fans and not freeze it other times.

 

[deathroh]

said this in the other thread but ya...i think BCS rankings should be locked after the regular season. Its ridiculous any other way you look at it. If they dont lock the rankings then they should at the LEAST make the other teams in the division play that week. 2 vs 2, 3 vs 3 and so on. To be able to sit on your ass and get rewarded for not even making it to your championship game is bush league lol.

What a dumb idea. The #1 team in the nation loses 49-14, but still makes the NC game...great idea.

Yep, a 35 point loss would just be ridiculous. Sure, the current system has awarded a 28 point loser in the past, but thank god hughes' rule won't be adopted, and we can avoid seeing a 35 point loser in the game.

 

[hungry]

What a dumb idea. The #1 team in the nation loses 49-14, but still makes the NC game...great idea.

Yep, a 35 point loss would just be ridiculous. Sure, the current system has awarded a 28 point loser in the past, but thank god hughes' rule won't be adopted, and we can avoid seeing a 35 point loser in the game.

I know its happened the one time, but its rare. Hughes' rule would make it happen more often and when #2's lose, too.

 

[deathroh]

I know, just messing. I do think it's unfair sometimes when the losers get penalized, but I really don't think there's anything you can do.

 

[mhughes0021]

You can make everyone play an equal amount of games. Or you can stop the rankings prior to the champ games. Atleast im giving solutions to an obvious problem. All you guys are doing are being homers lol. Again, im a michigan fan moreso than an msu one....but I realize theres a major problem when a team gets penalized for going to a campionship game. And hey doofus....go find me how many times in the entire history of the ncaa the #1 team lost by 35 on the final week. That hypothetical is like saying michigan could lose to saginaw valley by 42 so they should never get a bcs game...

 

[deathroh]

It's actually a fine hypothetical, and I brought up an example (2003). Sorry, but your rule change is dumb. You can't disregard the biggest game of the season for 10-12 teams when determining who should make the championship game. I'm all for no conference championship games, but that isn't happening.

 

[redandguilty]

If you were #1, and you couldn't be penalized, you'd have some strong motivation to bench your star players in the conf. championship game. Imagine if your whole offense centered on 1 guy that tended to get banged up and you're going to the national championship game, win or lose...

 

[hungry]

You can make everyone play an equal amount of games. Or you can stop the rankings prior to the champ games. Atleast im giving solutions to an obvious problem. All you guys are doing are being homers lol. Again, im a michigan fan moreso than an msu one....but I realize theres a major problem when a team gets penalized for going to a campionship game. And hey doofus....go find me how many times in the entire history of the ncaa the #1 team lost by 35 on the final week. That hypothetical is like saying michigan could lose to saginaw valley by 42 so they should never get a bcs game...

Fine, just for you, i'll change the hypothetical. The #2 team in the nation loses by 7 in their conference championship game and the #3 team in the nation wins by 21 in their game. Who should be #2 and go to play for the national title?

These games count. The Sugar Bowl is just another bowl. The Outback is just another bowl. After the NC game and the Rose Bowl, these bowls are pretty much the same, to me anyway. The conferences split all bowl money equally, so its not like one will get more money. Florida is a fine destination, just as fine as New Orleans. There aren't many recruits that are sitting there thinking, "well, dang, if MSU had gotten to the Sugar Bowl, then I would've chosen MSU, but since they're not, I'm going to go to Michigan." I don't see what all the crying is about.