I just read in the newspaper (macomb daily) that MSU was predicted to finish 3rd in the big ten... wtf?
I understand they have an easy schedule, but doesn't they fact that they're, like, not good have anything to do with it?
Last year I had all this "Javon Ringer is leading/will lead the spartans to the top of the big ten" stuff shoved down my throat. Now that he's gone, along with many other players including the qb, it turns into "Well the spartans did lose ringer but it won't affect them THAT much, I don't think they will drop at all in the big ten standings." Seriously?
IIRC, Wisconsin almost/should have beat MSU in EL. They lose PJ Hill, MSU loses Javon Ringer. Considering they play in Madison this year, I don't think it would be unreasonable to pick Wisc over them. How is Iowa not predicted to finish better than them? Illinois is also another candidate to finish above them. In my personal opinion I think that Michigann will be better, but I guess having them lower can be justified by 2008 and our schedule.
At the risk of being repetitive, I just can't get over how much everyone wanted to hype up ringer last year, and now that he's gone it won't even affect them...