Is MSU football overrated?

Submitted by WolverineEagle on
2008 was a resounding success for MSU football--or so they would have you believe.The Spartans won 9 games and went to a January 1st bowl for the first time since the Clinton Administration. They won in Ann Arbor for the first time since 1990--and this time they didn't need to cheat!

Based on that success, many predict great things for MSU football.Behind the awesome aeronautical show put on by  Kirk "Kissin" Cousins and Keith "Can you spare a brotha a" Nichol and the famously fiercesome Spartan defense, MSU will once again have the privilege of being some SEC's team warmup for spring practice on the 1st of January.

Alas, the numbers paint a different portrait.  MSU--a power running team--gained 1692 yards on 511 carries for a not-so-impressive 3.3 ypc. MSU averaged 130.2 per game with the departed Jevon Ringer accounting for about 90% of that.

Conversely, the illustrious Spartan defense gave up 1852 yards on 450 carries for a healthly(for the opposing offense)4.1 average. MSU gave up 142.5 yards per game on the ground.A defense that gives up 4 yards per carry? Duffy would spin in his grave over such numbers!

In terms of pass defense/offense, MSU fares better. Statistically, the Spartans and their opponents were awash. MSU averaged 213.2 per game whereas they gave up 213.4. Still, giving up 213 yards per game through the air is not all that impressive, especially when you considered how much yardage the Spartans gave up on the ground.

In terms of total yardage, the Spartans were actually OUTGAINED by their opponents,355.8 to 343.5. This accomplished in one of the weakest years in Big Ten history and the likes of EMU, Florida Atlantic, and a Charlie Weis coached Notre Dame team.

It really is remarkable to see how much hype a team that was outgained by its opponents in what was a terrible year for the Big Ten, is receiving. Apparently, no one watched any of MSU's games because they were every bit as average as the numbers indicate. That is hardly a surprise because Mark Dantonio was average at Cincinnati as well.

His record at Cincinnati was an astounding 18-17! Simply awesome!(tongue planted firmly in cheek)

Sam the Eag...Er, I mean Mark Dantonio has accomplished a whole lotta mediocrity in his coaching career. In his 5 seasons as a HC coach http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Dantonio Dantonio has yet to lose less than 4 games in a season,He has lost 5, 7,5,6, and 4. He has lost 5 or more in 4 of those seasons. Yet, we are  lead to believe that this is the man who will lift MSU to heights it hasn't seen since the heydey of George Webster and Bubba Smith.

Perhaps MSU will finally, FINALLY, take that step from perennial also ran to legitimate Big Ten title contender. Perhaps, but not likely. I have a hard time seeing a man who openly mocks a student athlete and the dominant program instate as being the guy to lift MSU from its 40 year doldrums.Little from his past as a head coach, indicates that MSU will be anything more than the 4-5-6-7th best team in the conference.

Comments

formerlyanonymous

August 25th, 2009 at 10:08 PM ^

I'm going to reply to you rather than this guy's post as that would just "upvote" him. So don't take this as directed to cpt20.

I hate this post. Many negatives.

[insert joke about obsession]
[insert bow down INSULT REDACTED]

EDIT: Ok, on second thought, I don't hate it. That's too harsh. I hate that we are having so many MSU related threads. It makes me angry this one exists despite its excellent points. It was a good post, so don't feel like I'm necessarily focusing my hate on you, but instead the population at large.

Post about MICHIGAN. Not [TEAM REDACTED]

Maize_and_Drew

August 25th, 2009 at 11:01 PM ^

I think a lot of newcomers to MGOBLOG got their start on other message boards. Before I found MGOBLOG, I was on the CBS boards. While there's quite a few good people over there, it gets out of control in a hurry, and quickly becomes a troll-fest. Some people bring that same mentality over here before they're quickly slapped into submission.

What I like about this board is that it's usually Michigan related, and it's always full of well informed Michigan fans. (And virtually troll free) I can't say that about any other message board I've been on.

PaulVB

August 25th, 2009 at 10:45 PM ^

It's a very hackish, should I say, Enlightened Spartan style. Seeing those along with the topic (can we all just stop talking about MSU) made me want to pull this, but there were stats and analysis, so I'll just register that this is acceptable, but not a model worthy of emulation.

foreverbluemaize

August 25th, 2009 at 11:12 PM ^

To the OP I recently wrote in a MGOBOARD entry that basically said the same thing with the exception of the fact that I used pure speculation and a few "what ifs". I did not use things like facts or statistics and I must say that you did a much better job. My main point was that Sparty beat the historically worst team that we ever produced and that if we had been a typical UM team they would not have beaten us. If that were the case they would not have played on Jan 1. All in all I think your article was good and I am glad I read it. And to answer your queston Yes the other posters beat me to death about being tired of hearing about MD and Sparty.

jtmc33

August 25th, 2009 at 11:34 PM ^

This was a legit MSU post.
Obsessing about "them" anytime there is the tiniest story about Sparty... bad.
A good, legit, post that would be taken seriously if it was exactly the same info on Illinois, Iowa, or Wisconsin... good. that should be the standard regarding MSU posts

Stop fearing Sparty and the attention they are getting... the ship will right itself soon enough

formerlyanonymous

August 25th, 2009 at 11:37 PM ^

I don't think it has anything to do with potential sea of change. I think it has to do with the 16 threads posted about [TEAM REDACTED] in 3 days last week. Most of them were either pointless or a bunch of hypotheticals. All of this lead to the same rehashed insults. We are giving [TEAM REDACTED] more coverage than they deserve from a Michigan site, at least in my e-pinion.

I don't disagree that this post has merit in its thoughts and intention. That's why I made sure to include the edit in my comment above. It's a good post, it just is ill-timed, if not slightly off topic.

mikefromaa

August 25th, 2009 at 11:48 PM ^

Certainly the local press is hyping Moo U as serious contenders for the big ten title, and those expectations are unrealistic. Michigan State had a nice little year, mostly because of the horrid state of the big ten. Both they and Northwestern went 9-4 if that tells you anything. 9-4 against a big ten that(correct me if I am wrong) did not have a single top 25 win(is that the first time that has happened?). Both MSU and NW lost their quarterbacks and talented halfbacks, so aside from not having an automatic loss to Ohio State the two programs should have similar expectations. If you want to compare with UM head to head(assuming MSU's players could gain admission and stay elegible) Cousins, Cironi and Greg Jones would probably start for Michigan. That is 3 out of 22 players. With that said if Cironi is healthy after his shoulder surgery he is a significant advantage at left tackle.
Nationally though, I think most people have them just outside the top 25, which in truth seems like a reasonable expectation. We'll know a lot more when CMU comes to town Sept 12. Lefevour is no joke and their entire defense is back.

formerlyanonymous

August 25th, 2009 at 11:58 PM ^

I think you are selling they and NU short on their teams last year. They had experienced talent. Their records weren't that high just because the BigTen was down.

I don't disagree with your thoughts on [TEAM REDACTED] this year though. Time will tell.

MGrad

August 26th, 2009 at 1:32 AM ^

Not if you use it as a mat, and put it in front of your door, and wipe your feet on it. It suits this purpose quite well, in fact, and I rate such things highly.

It is, however, if you try to use it as a reflective mirror to judge yourself. You hold it up, stare at it and see nothing but a dirty mat, even if you comb your hair differently and grow a mustache for Michigan.

The King of Belch

August 26th, 2009 at 1:35 AM ^

That it does seem really dumb to talk aout your biggest rival outside of Ohio State so much. Wow, how weird that UM fans would discuss Michigan State? In state rival, big time compeition for in state recruits, they are the new media darlings of the SE Michigan media, they are apparently in much better shape to compete with Michigan on and off the field, hmmmm

Yup, absolutley NO reason to discuss MSU at all! Especially during the down time of the off season!

MGoBlog Fan

August 26th, 2009 at 1:52 AM ^

on whether you mean overrated by the 10-2 prognosticators (probably) or the 7-5 prognosticators (not likely). I for one think they are rated just about right at 4th in the Big Ten due to a cake schedule and not facing two of the teams that racked up almost 800 combined yards (Cal and Ohio State), replacing them with Montana State and Illinois.

Irish

August 26th, 2009 at 3:11 AM ^

93% of their offense has graduated,
ND will have broken their back 2 weeks previously if Wisconsin hasn't breathed life into them in between games, and even if they have, UM will be in good position to deliver a KO

Irish

August 26th, 2009 at 4:43 PM ^

Give me one thing that I should be worried about with MSU

Is it the brand new starting QB that couldn't find a way of out seating the magnificent Hoyer last year? Or the RBs which were so prolific they got 50 total touches over 13 games last year? Or maybe it will be the momentum MSU carries after massive games of CMU and Montana state?

DoctorWorm

August 26th, 2009 at 8:09 PM ^

One thing? How about six things? Like, six in a row in South Bend? Does that concern you at all? How about chubby Charlie on the sidelines eating a burger while his acclaimed Irish drop one to the mighty Orangemen of Syracuse? How about your emu of a quarterback that finally managed to play a decent game against perennial powerhouse Hawaii in a bowl game neither team should've been in? You don't need anything to be worried about in MSU. You've got enough to be worried about on your own side of the ball.

Keith Nichol is a transfer from Oklahoma. Must not be good, he couldn't beat out this nobody named Sam Bradford for the starting job. Kirk Cousins, when he saw the field, looked far better than Hoyer, and has stats to back that up. Larry Caper and Edwin Baker, two freshmen, are leading the pack to start at running back. Most true freshmen didn't see many snaps at the college level last year. And hey, if you had an NFL-caliber back, wouldn't you play him as often as you could? Not that you would know the feeling of having a good running game; the three points ND managed to score in last year's game is a testament to that.

Do you really want to bring up strength of schedule here? Nevada. Navy. Purdue. Washington. Washington State. Uconn. Stanford. You sit on a throne of delusion.

And I hate to be redundant, but hey, I'm almost obligated.

PaulVB

August 26th, 2009 at 10:39 AM ^

I'm just hoping for some sort of flag planting again. That was a pretty awesome SPARTY what? Moment.

Also, seeing Maroney try to plant a flag in field turf was an amusing distraction after the first loss to the Gophers in my lifetime.

redcedar87

August 26th, 2009 at 7:28 AM ^

This is a great example of statistics not really telling the story.

"In terms of total yardage, the Spartans were actually OUTGAINED by their opponents,355.8 to 343.5. This accomplished in one of the weakest years in Big Ten history and the likes of EMU, Florida Atlantic, and a Charlie Weis coached Notre Dame team."
MSU outgained (and most importantly, beat) all three of the teams you list here. They are irrelevant to your argument.

http://www.msuspartans.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/2008-2009/msu-nu.html
MSU-NU game stats:
NU outgains MSU 459-297 and loses by 17. Why is that? Oh yeah... because total yardage completely ignores things like "field position" and MSU's excellent defensive plan that forced NU to throw 61(!) short passes and resulted in two picks.

The two blowout losses skew the stats even further. Your superficial analysis of total yardage reveals very little real information. Remember, there are three types of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics.

As far as Dantonio's record, he took Cinci from the C-USA to the Big East. Again, superficial "analysis" of his overall record ignores the transition year when they first joined the Big East. And you should know about coaches getting a free pass in a transition year (zing!).

save_me_forcier

August 26th, 2009 at 11:19 AM ^

"MSU outgained (and most importantly, beat) all three of the teams you list here. They are irrelevant to your argument."

So MSU outgained EMU,FAU, and ND, yet were still outgained by their opponents overall? That means that MSU was out-gained by an even bigger margin vs. all the big ten teams (aka decent-good teams) they played. More evidence that they were an average team in a weak big ten.

Yes, yes we all know you won 9 games and beat teams like NW. However you claim that you won because of your "excellent defensive plan" forced them to throw 2 picks... So you are saying that it is more likely your defense was so excellent that they gave up 459 yds to a mediocre NW team, but forced 2 ints and a fumble. It isn't more likely that you just couldn't stop NW and got lucky on a couple mistakes by their qb and a fumble (which have been shown to be more a random fucntion of luck than anything). I know MSU's turnover margin was nothing crazy, but it is the timing of those turnovers that really affects the outcomes of games. MSU's turnovers in the games vs PSU and OSU had absolutely no effect on their record.

I know you are going to counter with "But we are just disciplined and we don't fumble in close games!!!!" Sure, and Mike Hart was notorious for never fumbling the ball, but go watch the highlights from the Capital One Bowl in 2008.

Bottom Line, MSU was not very good last year and was a mistake here and there (ie. wisconsin handing you the game in EL) from being 6-7 or 7-6. Furthermore, MSU looks to be significantly worse this year and without another indordinate amount of luck, will be no higher than 7-6 and probably worse, even with the easy schedule.

That being said, we are less than two weeks away from the season and you witnessing for yourself that MSU is not a good team, and I understand you are merely here trying to convince yourself that season statistics don't matter. I also would like to apologize to my fellow UM fans for donating this much space on MGOBLOG to some random/mediocre school an hour away, and also to myself for wasting 10 minutes of my life.

redcedar87

August 26th, 2009 at 1:35 PM ^

"So MSU outgained EMU,FAU, and ND, yet were still outgained by their opponents overall? That means that MSU was out-gained by an even bigger margin vs. all the big ten teams (aka decent-good teams) they played. More evidence that they were an average team in a weak big ten."

Sure, if you believe that yards are more important than wins.

"So you are saying that it is more likely your defense was so excellent that they gave up 459 yds to a mediocre NW team, but forced 2 ints and a fumble. It isn't more likely that you just couldn't stop NW and got lucky on a couple mistakes by their qb and a fumble (which have been shown to be more a random fucntion of luck than anything)."

Sure, if you really believe that interceptions are random. I don't. Sounds like you didn't even watch the game...

"Bottom Line, MSU was not very good last year and was a mistake here and there (ie. wisconsin handing you the game in EL) from being 6-7 or 7-6. Furthermore, MSU looks to be significantly worse this year and without another indordinate amount of luck, will be no higher than 7-6 and probably worse, even with the easy schedule."

UM was a mistake (e.g. Wisconsin pick six) away from being 2-10. Your point? I'd rather be "lucky" to get 9 wins than "lucky" to get 3.

You think MSU will finish worse than 7-6? I would take that bet any day.

In reply to by redcedar87

save_me_forcier

August 26th, 2009 at 3:04 PM ^

I'm sure you believed that Minnesota was also great last year when they were 7-2 despite being outgained by opponenets. The only difference between MSU and them is that Minnesota's luck caught up to them at the end of last season. MSU's will catch up sometime during this season, especially w/o ringer and hoyer (Kirk Cousins played BEHIND Hoyer last year so any Hoyer insults can be passed down to Cousins).

redcedar87

August 26th, 2009 at 5:16 PM ^

Now I know you're joking... that is a terrible argument. Minnesota was entirely a fraud. Their best win was against an inconsistent (5-7) Illinois.

MSU beat four of the five Big Ten teams that beat Minnesota last year and finished with two more wins. MSU was clearly head and shoulders above Minnesota.

save_me_forcier

August 26th, 2009 at 6:19 PM ^

Kudos on bringing up another similarity between the two: lack of quality wins.

The only thing remotely close to a quality win on MSU's resume is @home vs Iowa, and you needed 2 Iowa fumbles to even do that. This brings me back to my original point: If you have to count on a +2 fumble advantage to squeak by a slightly above-average team at home (which turns out to be your only solid win), you aren't/weren't as good as your 9-4 record indicates.

I don't really care to continue this conversation though... so enjoy the next couple weeks before history repeats itself yet again.

redcedar87

August 26th, 2009 at 11:03 PM ^

"The only thing remotely close to a quality win on MSU's resume is @home vs Iowa, and you needed 2 Iowa fumbles to even do that. This brings me back to my original point: If you have to count on a +2 fumble advantage to squeak by a slightly above-average team at home (which turns out to be your only solid win), you aren't/weren't as good as your 9-4 record indicates."
http://www.msuspartans.com/sports/m-footbl/stats/2008-2009/iowa-msu.html
Points off of turnovers:
MSU: 6
Iowa: 7
So... Iowa was lucky that they lost by 3 instead of 4?

MSU was exactly as good as their 9-4 record... they lost to PSU and OSU in conference, who both finished with more wins. They also beat the two other conference teams with nine wins. How, exactly, is that not as good as indicated?

I will enjoy the next several weeks, and I also look forward to history repeating itself in South Bend. Thanks for the reminder.

Tater

August 26th, 2009 at 7:57 AM ^

..erodes my favorite argument against trolls. I always point out that they are trolling a UM site because UM is more relevant than their favorite school. I would hate to contribute to giving [expletive deleted] relevance.

So, I am going to allow the posters here at mgoblog to evolve my opinion to one where I now agree that UM fans should not help contribute to the would-be renaissance of [expletive deleted].

Thank you for helping me change my opinion.

Elno Lewis

August 26th, 2009 at 9:07 AM ^

to insult and defile Sparty....but, I have to say ever since Kirk Gibson ran thru the goalposts I do have soft spot in my heart for them. I mean, how can that be anything but awesome?

caw caw!

Now go ahead and flame me, peckerwoods!

StephenRKass

August 26th, 2009 at 10:00 AM ^

Won't diss or neg the op. Won't make an inflammatory statement about "obsessions" of some UM fans with MSU.

But I do think that those of you who live in-state read and care a lot more about MSU than those of us not in Michigan do. Sometimes I wonder if local journalists write stories about MSU and their "success" just to pull UM fans' chain.

I understand the MSU fan wanting to see their school improve. The answer is that obviously, it is too soon to tell.

However, at this point, I am a Michigan fan. I just don't care that much about State, at least as regards football. I'm not afraid of them, but I don't feel the need to put them down or keep them down. Other than a review the game before, I really don't need to read about them. Other than who wins the battle for the likes of Gholston, I don't care who they are recruiting. They will do what they will do. If and when it happens that they improve and are a legit national power, we will know.

Now, if State could lure a major coach (someone like Carroll or Meyer,) if they had a recruiting budget twice what Michigan spends, if they had several years of being ranked in the top three of Big Ten teams in recruiting, with significant numbers of four and five star recruits, if they had demonstrably better facilities, if the had a span of several years of being clearly competitive with OSU, PSU, ND, & UM, as well as in bowl games I would begin to pay attention.

I don't see any of these things happening quickly, although it isn't impossible. If enough State alumni want to spend enough money, it could happen. But that's a big if. iirc, someone at Oklahoma State is pumping huge sums of money into their program. Hasn't bought success yet. Football success is not something easy to establish.

I remember the days prior to MSU having basketball success. They certainly had some success with Heathcoate (sp?) and Magic Johnson. But since then, State has had sustained success under Izzo, and now, to the best of my knowledge, have a pipeline of recruits, good national cred, great facilities, along with a good coach. This could certainly happen in football. My guess, however, is that in terms of funding, recruiting enough good players, etc., etc., it is much more challenging to get established in football than in basketball.

To sum up and respond to OP: they're prob. overrated. This season will show us a lot, but we don't know yet.

I Wrote a 4 Wo…

August 26th, 2009 at 10:05 AM ^

Why is this man not murdered with his thread deleted. It's obviously an obsession that must be dealt with because it's too much. I'm forced to read it and I'm sick of reading about MSU.

If you can't read things for what they're worth, please know this was sarcasm.