Online Now 852

Wolverine247 Board

The place for discussion on the Michigan Wolverines

On this Board 578
Record: 2671 (1/26/2013)

Online now 853
Record: 7264 (3/12/2012)

Reply

Big 2, Little X - how I missed you so

  • SpartanRocky said...

    Says the man who has a half-naked gnome throwing up the finger and a user name which contains no vowels . . .

    Anyways, Dantonio isn't using MSU as a platform to get a better job; this is his last stop. All the stuff you say about building the foundation is good and I think Hoke is a legitametly good coach. I have no doubt that MSU - UM is going to be a very competitive rivalry going forward.

    That said, you guys should probably win the conference (or the division) under Hoke before you proclaim that all is back to the Big 2, Little 10. Niether UM or tOSU played in the CCG last year, and it's impossible for both to meet in that game in '12.

    In terms of recruiting, UM and tOSU have outrecruited Iowa and Wisconsin pretty much every year of the last decade. I know UM has outrecruited MSU every year over that time span. You'll know how good these classes are once they start playing. Before that, it's pure speculation. Many would have though that the 2008 UM class would have been part of a group that won a ton at UM; 17 4-stars, more 4-stars than were brought in in this last cycle for the Wolverines.

    http://rivals.yahoo.com/footballrecruiting/football/recruiting/commitments/2008/michigan-29;_ylt=Atpf6JmYLbrTMYo_j8.0PQZJPZB4

    Is your '12 class going to shake out the same way? Unlikely, but the point is that high recruiting rankings alone don't guarantee future success.

    I see a lot of you guys pointing to the 2008-2010 classes and their ranking. The problem with that is you're neglecting the lack of coaching. RRs defensive staff was inept, plain and simple and it's the main reason he's not here anymore. That is no longer the case and you only have to look at what they did with that defense last year.

    The 2012 recruiting class has little to do with our optimism. It's the coaching those players will get that will be the difference.

    signature image signature image signature image

    MSU isn't a very good football program.. takes year of consistent winning to get to that level. - copemoney 1/22/13

    Due51

  • Due51 said...

    I see a lot of you guys pointing to the 2008-2010 classes and their ranking. The problem with that is you're neglecting the lack of coaching. RRs defensive staff was inept, plain and simple and it's the main reason he's not here anymore. That is no longer the case and you only have to look at what they did with that defense last year.

    The 2012 recruiting class has little to do with our optimism. It's the coaching those players will get that will be the difference.

    Coaching can't be disregarded; you're right. Attrition is the other major factor with those groups (and the reason you were able to pull 25 kids this year). On a side note, I love that Big 10 schools are going with 4-year scholarships; it just seems like the right thing to do. It's also going to limit the # of 25 man classes going forward, which in turn limits the ability of UM and tOSU to drastically out-recruit the other Big 10 schools. It's still a very classy move that all Big 10 schools should support.

    The defense was much better last year, no doubt. You guys also led the nation in fumble recoveries, something that is unlikely to continue going forward. More improvement is needed, especially on the DL. That's the position that I'm going to be watching more than any other on that D; losing 3 SR starters is tough. If Mattison and Co. can get that unit playing close to their '11 level, that'd be impressive. By '13 that unit should be fine, but I think both lines are going to have rough patches in '12.

    To be clear, I do NOT think that that'll be Hoke's fault. RichRod left you guys with a gaping hole in your OL classes and his ability to ID quality DTs started and ended with Mike Martin. I don't think DL struggles this year is an indictment of your coaching staff and it's a "win-only" situation; either the DL performs "meh" and the next group of guys take their lumps (which pays off in '13) or your D-staff really is an elite group and has them playing with no drop-off.

    Back to the Big 2, Little 10 . . . with divisional play, the Big 10 kind of really screwed over tOSU and UM. By guaranteeing you guys play every year, it means that each team is taking a conf. loss on the last game of the season. Unless you're both 7-0 going in, there's a solid chance that an L will knock you out of the CCG. Given that it looks like the Legends is going to be much tougher than the Leaders, this would affect UM more than tOSU.

    I know UM won't trade The Game for anything, but in years when Iowa and/or MSU miss tOSU, PSU and Wisky (like MSU does in '13 and '14), those 2 schools are going to be very real Big 10 CCG players without needing otherworldly teams. Toss in Nebraska, and I can see those 4 Legends schools trading CCG appearances regularly. That makes it hard for any 1 program to stay on top for long, UM included.

    tOSU has pretty much been given a gift of timing; not only did they hire a high level coach, they made that big splash at the same time their 2 main division rivals (PSU and Wisky) are undergoing major changes. It wouldn't surprise me to see Ohio State be in 5 of the next 7 CCGs.

    This post was edited by SpartanRocky on 2/6/2012 at 10:16 AM

    Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.

    SpartanRocky

  • Jandy said...

    You do realize that you're only strike against MSU is something that affects just 1 game on their schedule, right?

    I could have also based it on you guys losing to a fairly average Nebraska team, and barely beating Wisconsin on a hail mary play. shrug

    otwp12

  • otwp12 said...

    I could have also based it on you guys losing to a fairly average Nebraska team, and barely beating Wisconsin on a hail mary play. shrug

    You realize that describes your L to Iowa and your W over ND?

    Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.

    SpartanRocky

  • SpartanRocky said...

    It wouldn't surprise me to see Ohio State be in 5 of the next 7 CCGs.

    And .. 2 of the next 3 NC games. ;-)

    sgatch

  • SpartanRocky said...

    You realize that describes your L to Iowa and your W over ND?

    We didn't lose to Iowa by 21 and at least we beat ND.

    otwp12

  • otwp12 said...

    We didn't lose to Iowa by 21 and at least we beat ND.

    Iowa was also a much worse team than Nebraska and MSU beat wisconsin . . . . so what's the point?

    Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.

    SpartanRocky

  • SpartanRocky said...

    Iowa was also a much worse team than Nebraska and MSU beat wisconsin . . . . so what's the point?

    Care to explain your great performance against Minny? No you won just like we won against Notre Dame. Btw Rocky you may wanna look up the term "Hail Mary" a 16 yd pass into 1 on 1 coverage does not constitute as one.

    MichaelHardenII

  • MichaelHardenII said...

    Care to explain your great performance against Minny? No you won just like we won against Notre Dame. Btw Rocky you may wanna look up the term "Hail Mary" a 16 yd pass into 1 on 1 coverage does not constitute as one.

    1. It was a simple let down game after the most brutal 4 game stretch on any B1G team's schedule. How does an average win have any relevance whatsoever?
    2. If UM misses that one play, the game is over and they lose. If MSU misses the hail mary, they go into overtime, at home.

    But your really missing the point of Rocky's statement, which is that losing @Nebraska and "barely beating Wisconsin" are terrible reasons for why MSU will not be successful in the future.

    This post was edited by Jandy on 2/6/2012 at 10:05 PM

    Jandy

  • IU had trouble with the gophers as well...

    Swarty

  • Jandy said...

    1. It was a simple let down game after the most brutal 4 game stretch on any B1G team's schedule. How does an average win have any relevance whatsoever?
    2. If UM misses that one play, the game is over and they lose. If MSU misses the hail mary, they go into overtime, at home.

    But your really missing the point of Rocky's statement, which is that losing @Nebraska and "barely beating Wisconsin" are terrible reasons for why MSU will not be successful in the future.

    The play before I could understand saying was lucky. Gallon never should of been that open, but a fade with one on one coverage gets thrown 2-5 times a game. That's far from "lucky."

    MichaelHardenII

  • MichaelHardenII said...

    The play before I could understand saying was lucky. Gallon never should of been that open, but a fade with one on one coverage gets thrown 2-5 times a game. That's far from "lucky."

    The word "luck" was never brought up until you mentioned it.

    Jandy

  • Jandy said...

    The word "luck" was never brought up until you mentioned it.

    Hail mary and luck go hand in hand better luck next year.

    MichaelHardenII

  • MichaelHardenII said...

    Hail mary and luck go hand in hand better luck next year.

    But overtime and luck don't...

    Jandy

  • Jandy said...

    But overtime and luck don't...

    Pot meet kettle.
    roflmao

    This post was edited by MichaelHardenII on 2/6/2012 at 10:47 PM

    MichaelHardenII

  • MichaelHardenII said...

    Pot meet kettle. roflmao

    Right, okay, let me sum it up here.

    So MSU beat Wisconsin on a hail mary but even if they missed that alleged "lucky" play they still would have had a chance in overtime.

    While UM beat Notre Dame on a common endzone fade route as time expired.

    Therefore, it is unfair to compare these two b/c MSU won on a play that has a low success rate even though they didn't need it to win and UM won on a play with a normal success rate even though they HAD to have it to win?

    Jandy

  • Jandy said...

    Right, okay, let me sum it up here.
    While UM beat Notre Dame on a common endzone fade route as time expired.

    Therefore, it is unfair to compare these two b/c MSU won on a play that has a low success rate even though they didn't need it to win and UM won on a play with a normal success rate even though they HAD to have it to win?

    1. Wrong time didn't expire 2. We won by 4 meaning a td wasn't needed either.

    What other bs are you gonna try making up?

    MichaelHardenII

  • MichaelHardenII said...

    1. Wrong time didn't expire 2. We won by 4 meaning a td wasn't needed either.

    What other bs are you gonna try making up?

    1. Touche. I apologize, I had remembered thinking it was do or die, which obviously wasn't the case.
    2. Again, I'm sorry. You make a good overall point; had the pass not worked, UM could have kicked a field goal to tie the game, thus sending it into overtime.

    Not trying to make things up, just evidently misremembered.

    Jandy

  • Jandy said...

    1. Touche. I apologize, I had remembered thinking it was do or die, which obviously wasn't the case.
    2. Again, I'm sorry. You make a good overall point; had the pass not worked, UM could have kicked a field goal to tie the game, thus sending it into overtime.

    Not trying to make things up, just evidently misremembered.

    Fair enough.

    cheers

    MichaelHardenII

  • MichaelHardenII said...

    Fair enough.

    cheers

    Record this moment...

    cheers

    Jandy

  • Jandy said...

    Record this moment...

    cheers

    Hahaha it isn't something you see everyday.

    MichaelHardenII

  • MichaelHardenII said...

    Hahaha it isn't something you see everyday.

    Love how we're in agreement and friendly on one thread while still going at it on others.

    lol

    It is what it is.

    Jandy

  • SpartanRocky said...

    That said, you guys should probably win the conference (or the division) under Hoke before you proclaim that all is back to the Big 2, Little 10. Niether UM or tOSU played in the CCG last year, and it's impossible for both to meet in that game in '12.

    How about sparty wins a BCS Bowl, now wait, actually plays in a BCS Bowl before they start giving advice.

    xxmgobluexx

  • xxmgobluexx said...

    How about sparty wins a BCS Bowl, now wait, actually plays in a BCS Bowl before they start giving advice.

    Try beating MSU in the '10s before you get all uppity about BCS bowl appearances.

    Michigan State does not and will not run the 3-4 defense.

    SpartanRocky

  • SpartanRocky said...

    Try beating MSU in the '10s before you get all uppity about BCS bowl appearances.

    The season is more than one game. Something MSU fans haven't figured out yet. Get to BCS Bowl first sparty. lol

    Edit: You and your ilk banned people for less than what you just posted. Keep staying above the fray rock, I would expect nothing less than hypocrisy from you.

    This post was edited by xxmgobluexx on 2/7/2012 at 9:21 AM

    xxmgobluexx