CFN says MSU should be heading to Rose Bowl

Submitted by M-Wolverine on

College Football News, and Pete Fiutak, both regularly taken to Fisking here, think MSU should be making a Rose Bowl run, and at minimum should be Top 3 in the Big Ten. *snicker*

Schedule, development, down Big Ten, Michigan still "head over skis" (WTF??), blah blah blah.

If you want to take apart the reasoning-

http://cfn.scout.com/2/986698.html

supersweet

July 28th, 2010 at 9:32 AM ^

Isn't this the guy that said the deceased Notre Dame recruit was going to make a big impact this year?

And I guess they can go to the Rose Bowl to watch us win.

Go Blue!!!!!!!!

Logan88

July 28th, 2010 at 9:32 AM ^

If you review the last couple of years of CFN.com's articles on MSU and UM, you will see a VERY noticeable bias on the part of Fiutak toward MSU. I'm not sure what the genesis of his dislike for UM is, but it is pretty obvious that he really doesn't like UM.

 

NOTE: Before anyone offers up a smart-a** comment about tin-foil hats or conspiracy theorists, please note that I do NOT think that all media types are anti-UM. Fiutak's own words support my claims...just read his stuff and it will be pretty obvious.

maizenbluenc

July 28th, 2010 at 9:35 AM ^

I really wish Tate had eaten the ball on that last pass in OT last year, and then we kicked a FG on 4th down. I think the shock of the tie, and then just some points on the board would have inflated our defense, and put the hex on Sparty's brain enough to do the trick.

GoMBlue

July 28th, 2010 at 9:36 AM ^

They do have that POS schedule going for them, they don't play osu and didn't last year...but I still like to see my state fan friends being happy with a 6 and 6 season. Aim low state fans aim low.

wlubd

July 28th, 2010 at 9:41 AM ^

I think Sparty could be heading to the Rose Bowl.

Question is though, which bank are the players going to knock off in order to afford flight, hotel and tickets?

BlockM

July 28th, 2010 at 9:57 AM ^

I'll be surprised if they get to the Rose Bowl, but it doesn't seem out of the question. The article definitely overestimates the quality of the team, IME, but not vastly. If one of OSU, Iowa, and Wisconsin bombs, and the other two lose at most 1 game, they could both go to BCS bowls and allow MSU to slip into the rose.

wildbackdunesman

July 28th, 2010 at 10:03 AM ^

I agree it wouldn't be impossible for MSU to make the Rose Bowl -- no Ohio State on their schedule and not that tough of an out of conference schedule.

If one of OSU, Iowa, and Wisconsin bombs, and the other two lose at most 1 game, they could both go to BCS bowls and allow MSU to slip into the rose.

Isn't there still a rule in place that doesn't allow 3 teams from the same conference to make a BCS bowl?  MSU would have to finish 1st or 2nd to make the Rose Bowl.

BlockM

July 28th, 2010 at 10:13 AM ^

That could be. I'm not really all that up to date on the BCS rules. Researching this sounds much more fun than working, so I'll go find out unless someone else knows for sure off the top of their head.

EDIT: You're right, in almost all cases. http://www.bcsfootball.org/news/story?id=4819597

No more than two teams from a conference may be selected, regardless of whether they are automatic qualifiers or at-large selections, unless two non-champions from the same conference are ranked No. 1 and No. 2 in the final BCS Standings.

Not sure that exception would ever happen, but it's there nonetheless.

wildbackdunesman

July 28th, 2010 at 12:23 PM ^

Not sure that exception would ever happen, but it's there nonetheless.

Next to none.  You would need the following to happen.

  1. MSU to go 8-0 and out right win the BigTen and lose 1 or 2 games in OOC.
  2. 2 B10 teams, let's say OSU and Iowa to both go 11-1 (7-1 in the B10).
  3. No other good college team to do better than 11-1.
  4. Voters would have to want to see a rematch between OSU and Iowa in the national championship game, voting the two teams #1 and #2, rather than let someone else take a shot at the #1 team.

CalifExile

July 28th, 2010 at 10:36 AM ^

You have to be the champion - who missed out on the championship game because "two non-champions from the same conference are ranked No. 1 and No. 2 in the final BCS Standings."

JeepinBen

July 28th, 2010 at 10:41 AM ^

which would mean 3 undefeated big ten teams (Lets say, OSU, M, and MSU... which already isn't possible) end the year. Let's say Michigan and OSU are 1 and 2 in the BCS rankings, and MSU is 3. but, for whatever reason in the Big Ten rankings MSU is #1, then M, then OSU. 

In this case, Michigan and OSU would play in the BCS Natl Champ Game, while MSU would play in the Rose Bowl. 

I don't think this is possible for a majority of reasons (teams play eachother, etc.) But it could conceivably happen if we had 3 teams finish at 11-1, beating each other in a rotation (M beats OSU, OSU beats MSU etc.) but yeah, this scenario ain't happening without every other team in college football losing LOTS of games

wildbackdunesman

July 28th, 2010 at 12:34 PM ^

But it could conceivably happen if we had 3 teams finish at 11-1, beating each other in a rotation (M beats OSU, OSU beats MSU etc.) but yeah, this scenario ain't happening without every other team in college football losing LOTS of games

That would not count either, because in that situation all 3 would be considered co-conference-champions.  The catch where a conference can get 3 teams into BCS bowls is when the national championship game, #1 and #2 teams are both "non-conference-champions" from within the same conference.

If that situation happened only the top two ranked B10 teams would get in.

wildbackdunesman

July 28th, 2010 at 9:57 AM ^

According to CFN, position grades:

Quarterbacks: MSU 8 > UofM 6.5

Runningbacks: MSU 7.5 = UofM 7.5

Recievers: MSU 7.5 > UofM 7

Offensive Line: MSU 7 < UofM 7.5

Defensive Line: MSU 7 > UofM 6.5

Linebackers: MSU 9 > UofM 7

Secondary: MSU 6 < UofM 7

Special Teams: MSU 8 > UofM 6

 

I am a little surprised that our secondary and linebackers are both graded above our defensive line.  I realize that we lost Brandon Graham, but I like the people that we have returning up front.  Also I think Cousins and Tate are pretty comparable, not the glaring disadvantage the grading system shows for us.

Not a Blue Fan

July 28th, 2010 at 11:57 AM ^

While I certainly don't have  anything to say about the numbers themselves, the rankings do seem reasonable for the most part (in an ordinal sense, anyway). Which specific parts look so egregiously incorrect? It's pretty hard to argue with the defensive comparison (much as you might not like it, MSU's DL and LB's are pretty good). The QB comparison is a little silly, but not too horrible. I think it's a fair-ish comparison, honestly.

The team record predictions are the  wonky part, if you ask me.

BiSB

July 28th, 2010 at 12:43 PM ^

It's the rankings within the Michigan squad. Michigan's D-line is going to be the strength of the defense, and CFN has them ranked lower than both our linebackers and secondary(!!!).  I think most observers would place quarterback as a stronger position (certainly moreso than running back, linebackers, and secondary), and CFN has them as the weakest position group.

BiSB

July 28th, 2010 at 4:47 PM ^

And you are correct; they are not brain scientists.

My thought is simply that if they are using their assessments of various position groups to help determine various teams' prospects for a successful season, and those assesments are hilariously uninformed, I don't place much faith in the end result.

snowcrash

July 28th, 2010 at 11:19 AM ^

As I understand their rating system, 7 is about average for a BCS-league team. Their ratings for MSU look reasonable, although I might put their OL at 6.5. But those ratings don't translate to a Rose Bowl unless they're assuming that MSU will get really lucky in close games.

They have our QB and DL (our strongest position groups outside the OL) way too low, as both should be 7.5 or even 8.