Late to the board, as the 2nd half of this "B1G Classic" just started, but sports TV options are limited right now. This one has to be the biggest win of the year, right? To me, OSU seemed bigger at the time but based on what each has done since, this one was impressive.
Would love to get a rubber match with either in the B10 tourney...
Texas A&M may be stealing MSU's DC, Narduzzi. Kevin Sumlin has been authorized to spend some big time $$ on a DC and Narduzzi is apparently at the top of his list.
I'll be happy if Narduzzi gets the job. Good for A&M, bad for MSU.
AP Top News at 3:35 p.m. EST
Michigan State University athletic director Mark Hollis made an announcement earlier today that is leaving many University of Michigan fans scratching their heads.
“I read a compelling article by the thoughtful and fair-minded columnist of the Detroit Free Press, Drew Sharp, in which he decried the inequity of Michigan receiving a BCS bowl invitation instead of Michigan State,” offered Hollis. “Frankly, after carefully considering his arguments, I was forced to agree with his assessment.”
Hollis went on to describe a subsequent conversation with Michigan athletic director David Brandon about rectifying the situation and placating the frustration of Mr. Sharp. “I told David that I had a great idea,” stated Hollis. “Why don’t we send our players to the Sugar Bowl to play the Hokies and dress in your uniforms and you can send your players to Florida and play Georgia dressed as Spartans. That’ll fix everything.”
Hollis then added, “Brandon told me, ‘Sure Mark. Okee-Dokee,’ but I couldn’t really tell if he was being sarcastic. So we’ve taken the initiative and sent a bus with our uniforms over to Ann Arbor to hopefully cement the deal.”
When asked later, Mr. Sharp stated, “While I appreciate the effort put forth by the Michigan State athletic director, his remedy doesn’t go far enough. This inequity is akin to a civil rights violation. I think the University of Michigan should be forced to pay monetary damages and impose recruiting limitations on themselves. They should also seriously consider dramatic reductions in practice time next season while vacating any 2012 wins they are fortunate enough to realize.”
Player reaction to the role reversal from the two teams was mixed. The Wolverine players were unanimously against the concept whereas nearly all of the Spartans were anxious to don the classic maize and blue uniforms. “It will be, like, major cool to wear the uniform of the school I wasn’t smart enough to get into,” offered one Spartan on the condition of anonymity.
(NOT from AP)
Is it just me or is Michael Rosenberg correct on his article. He claims MSU has to lose for Michigan to win the division.
I thought if there was a three way tie, that Michigan would win on overall record as Nebraska and MSU would each have two losses. Am I wrong here, does it go to big 10 record first and that's what would put MSU in with a three way tie.
I still can not believe what happened last night. I am thinking the one good thing that came out of that is it made us look better losing to a good MSU team. I am thinking that this will play to our advantage in the BCS right? Of course, Michigan is going to need to win out and Sparty is going to have to lose 2 games for the BCS standings and all that other stuff to come into play
So after reading the board the past couple of days, I have a faint sense that people are unhappy with the loss to State and believe that something (in this case, Denard's passing arm and/or illicit love triangle with both Tacopants and Taquittoshorts) should be blamed. And while I understand the sense of anger with losing to the Spartans for the 4th straight time, I don't understand this patholigical desire to blame a TEAM's failure to win on a single player and, even worse, propose some half-cocked remedies like replacing Denard with Devin Gardner.
I get that it sucks to lose to a rival, especially one as mind-boggling annoying as MSU, and the way the team lost (with all of the personal fouls and rough tactics by the MSU defense) certainly didn't help. But sometimes teams just lose because the other team beat them, because players struggled or failed to perform, and it isn't because one player "cost" them the game. Yes, Denard struggled throwing the ball, but the whole offense failed to perform up to task. The offensive line was unable to open up consistent running lanes or provide a suitable pocket for Denard to work out of, and the RBs were never able to generate consistent positive yardage (a problem we have seen all year). The WRs, while certainly open at times, also dropped a couple of very catchable balls that would have extended drives (the Roundtree one jumps to mind, and I believe Koger also dropped a close one, amongst others). The defensive line was unable to create much of a pass rush against a mediocre State line, and the LBs failed to stop up cutback lanes and tackle MSU's running backs before they could get going. The defensive backfield, while solid at times, were also guilty of poor tackling that allowed MSU WRs to score near the goalline as well as extend drives. And the coaches made a number of questionable decisions on both sides of the ball, sometimes leaving players in positions where they could not succeed.
My point here is that the TEAM lost that game, and that's okay. It happens. Denard is a part of that team, but to lump the blame on his shoulder after what he has done these past two years is offensive. He had a bad game; so did Fitz, Smith, Hemingway, Martin, Demens, Borges, Hoke, etc. The TEAM lost, and hopefully the rest of the year the TEAM will win. But I don't hear people calling for Rawls to get more carries, for Schofield to replace Lewan, or for Campbell to replace Heininger full-time. I want this TEAM to win because it is a fun bunch and they have been through so much these past 4 years. But as a fanbase we need to accept that losses happen sometimes not because a single player "failed", but because the TEAM just didn't perform. And that's okay as long as they get better.